Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br />MEETING HELD ON JUNE 16, 1997 <br />0 ( #7 - #22 46 Donald C'u i e r - Continued) <br />Bellows said the rules applying to PCS are different than those of amateur radio operators. <br />He noted PCS structures are not retractable. The applicant's antenna would only be <br />Wended when in use. <br />Bellows said the setback restriction regards failure of the structure. Such failure would <br />most likely occur during stormy weather. The antenna would be retracted at that time as <br />it is not used during stormy weather. <br />Smith was informed that the retraction process did not create excess noise. <br />McMillan questioned whether the antenna height was restricted by trees on the property <br />or surrounding properties. She suggested pruning the trees when informed that the <br />restriction was from trees on the property. The large number of trees present a problem <br />for pruning to satisfy the suggestion. <br />Smith asked what occurs when the property sells. Currier said the antenna would be <br />removed and taken with them. <br />Stoddard was informed by Bellows that the cost of a retractable antenna is 75 -100% more <br />than an unretractable antenna. Bellows said the special rules applying to amateur radio <br />• operators would be negated when the property is sold. <br />Gaffron noted a similar discussion involving an antenna on Woodhill road. He indicated <br />the array of the tower spanned a 25 -30' width. Bellows said the V aluminum tubing <br />creates little visibility and blends in with the sky. The 30' diameter width of the antenna <br />would result in a loss of many trees. <br />Van Zomeren said she would like to review the construction plans with the City's <br />consultant regarding the break -off point of the antenna. The applicant was asked to <br />survey the property for the canopy of trees to know tree interference and hardship. <br />Stoddard moved, McMillan seconded, to approve Application #2246 for a conditional use <br />permit and variances for an accessory antenna subject to the antenna being of a retractable <br />type, at an extended maximum height of 70', located 55.26' from the north property line, <br />with staff review of construction plans and sketch plan of tree canopy provided prior to <br />Council review. <br />McMillan questioned why a sketch plan would be required if located at this height. The <br />plan would assist staff in determining hardship and horizontal effect. <br />Vote: Ayes 3, Nays 1, Lindquist, who did not support the location of the antenna 55.26' <br />from the property line. <br />11 <br />