Conditional Use (Regular) - Pasco Land and Cattle Co, LLC/Skyway Towers/Verizon Wireless - 155 Foot Above-Ground-Level (AGL) Monopole Wireless Communications Facility (WCF) in an AR-1 Agricultural-Residential District - Central Pasco County - On the North Side of Green Willow Run, Approximately 2,000 Feet East of Quail Hollow Boulevard File Number PDD24-CU02
What the county recorded
Staff recommendation
Approval with Conditions
DispositionContinued
Approved to continue the item to the November 14, 2023 Board of County Commissioners Meeting at 1:30 p.m.in Dade City by a roll call vote.
The source document
The county’s agenda for Board of County Commissioners, Oct 10, 2023
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
The county’s minutes for Board of County Commissioners, Oct 10, 2023
The published PDF, as served by the county. This item is one entry in it.
What was said
Machine transcription of 53m of recording, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 80% of 279 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
Aye. Item P eighty four.
PD Four was advertised in the Tampa Bay Times on August 23, 2023.
Denise
Fernandez Planning and Development. Item P84 is PDD 24 CE02. As my team brings up the PowerPoint, this is a conditional use request for a 155-foot above-ground level monopole wireless communication facility, which will consist of a 150-foot wireless communication facility with a five-foot lightning rod in an AR agricultural residential district. The applicant is Pasco Land and Cattle Company. LLC Skyway Towers, LLC Horizon Wireless. As stated is a conditional use for 155-foot
above-ground level monopole wireless communication facility in an AR-1 district with a future land use classification of Res 1. The proposal is a 150-foot wireless communication facility with a five-foot lighting rod, which will be suitable for the co-location of three additional carriers. So you'll have four carriers, the anchor tenant, and three additional carriers. It's proposed to be located along the southwestern area of the property. Within a 6,400 square foot fenced compound area, which is part of an overall 10,000 square foot leased area. The property is located on the north side
of Green Willow Run, approximately 2,000 feet east of Quail Hollow Boulevard. It's in central Pasco County.
The subject property zoning is AR1 agricultural residential district that is surrounded by the north to the north, south, the east by AR1 and a portion of the west has AR agricultural residential districts. Surrounding land use is Res1 to the south, east and west and Khan Conservation to the north.
Access to the overall site is from Greenwillow Run. Access to the wireless communication facility compound area is through a 30-foot wide access and utility easement which is located off of Green Willow Run. This is providing the context of the area. To the north you have Tampa Bay Water and Southwest Florida Water Management District-owned parcels. Just please note that the subject property is approximately 160 acres. So to the north of the subject property, not of the actual site. To the south,
you have the agricultural, residential, rural areas of Tampa Highland. To the east you have Estate Residential Westwood Estates subdivision, and to the west you have Quail Run Estates.
This is the site plan showing the mock proposed monopole with the the anchor tenant at the top of the monopole showing the lightning rod which is five feet and then showing three additional carriers which are required. Actually they're going one additional carrier above what's required under the land development code for co-location.
The application comes to you with a recommendation of approval with condition. You do have some objections, which are included in your packet. The first objection, the property owner, is located approximately 3,500 feet northwest of the location of the wireless communication facility. Your second objector is located approximately 1,200 feet southeast of the wireless communication facility. facility location and the third objector is located over 3,500 feet southwest of the wireless communication
facility location. I'm here for any questions and the applicant is here as well.
Any questions for the app for Denise?
Nope.
Tiny says as far as when you just mentioned the uh locations of it. As far as the site location, it's a pretty big parcel.
It's a really large parcel. It's located in the southwesternmost. I kind of have that yellow little dot where it's kind of located. Um it's approximately a hundred feet from the south um boundary of the parcel. That's where the compound area will be located.
So right here.
So the the objectors where they're coming from, northwest and southwest?
Um so I think some of them are here, so one one of the objectors is up in this area over here. Another objector is sorry, off of this the two others are off the map.
They're not even in this context now.
Okay.
But you do have some folks here who may not have written a letter of opposition of objection that would like to speak on the matter.
Is there an applicant here?
The applicant is here, yes.
Okay. Would the applicant like to speak?
Thank you.
Hi, good afternoon. James Johnston with Shutzen Bowen, three hundred South Orange Avenue in Orlando on behalf The applicant. Uh we appreciate um
and you have been sworn?
I have been sworn.
Thank
you. Um we appreciate uh Ms. Hernandez uh working with her and her thorough staff report. Um I have with me Bill Compton who's with Verizon RF and also Harold Timmins who's with TEP who did the site acquisition. We're here to answer questions. We appreciate staff support. We're agreeable to the conditions of approval. Um and the I I'd like to point out That the code requires an outside independent consultant to review this for the county
who also found that it was needed in recommended approval as well as the Planning Commission recommended approval. So we are here to answer questions, but we'd ask for your support on approving this conditional use permit and just ask for some time to come back if there are comments from the public.
So I'll ask you a quick but as far as the site location, uh you've got in the south west part of your property. Is that the best location for it with what's around it?
Well well, I I mean again when you're you're doing a cell tower site it's you know where um it works from a landowner perspective. You got you have to find a willing landowner plus um where they want it on the property. This property also has significant wetlands and floodplain issues, so it's located in an area that is um on upland. It is in that southwest corner, but it is in an area of uplands and there is a significant tree
trees around it, so it is set back 100 feet and there will be uh existing trees that will remain as buffer both on that south and west side as well as on the balance of the property.
Okay. Any questions?
Uh okay. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Uh so this is a public hearing. Anyone here to speak to this item?
Anybody signed up?
There
is
no one signed up. No one signed
up, but if the people want to speak, please come forward.
When you come to the podium remember name and address and let us know if you've been sworn. Thank you.
Paul Fermani, suite 102-27251 Wesley Chapel Boulevard, 33544. I have been sworn. I moved from the urban sprawl of uh Hillsborough County, Carrollwood, to rural Pasco County. Place that I thought would be ideal for my children and my family. so that we could I'm speaking obviously in opposition to this 150-foot poll in our community because the applicant,
it has saddle wood written all over it. This is for future homes that have yet to be built, and saddlewood If Saddlewood wants better cell phone reception because ours is just fine, stick it in the middle of Saddlewood, not in the middle of Quail Hollow. And by the way, I live in Quail Hollow estates. I have three lots. One of them is contiguous to the 200-acre parcel that this pole has been stuck on. And
we cherish what Quail Hollow is. It's a sanctuary from development, from urban sprawl.
We like the unsullied scenery. We like looking at the red-shouldered hawks and the deer. My children enjoy riding their horses on the trails of the Wellfields. We bought a home in the middle of a swamp on a dead-end road for a reason so we could escape.
The urban spot. So now we have an out of state Oh no. applying to an out of state corporation so Verizon can get a leg up on ATT and stick this as a constant reminder to us That the corporations and the out-of-state owners and the builders and the developers want to sell what I have been living there for thirty-one years. As a voter. And there's a taxpayer.
So I deeply object. We don't even have a homeowners association, so there's nobody there to tell us the size and the color. Of our mailbox.
We've already suffered enough because the sound would swim Tampa Bay Water. They shifted the water drainage from away from Saddlewood directly across all three of my properties.
I don't want to be a victim. of overdevelopment anymore.
We are sick and tired, the homeowners of Quell hollow. We don't want
A car wash on every corner. We don't want cookie-cutter homes on zero lot lines. We want to be left alone. So I urge you to vote against this proposal. Thank you.
Good afternoon. I'm my name is Stephanie LeFieux and I am a um homeowner. We've bought our land back in ninety six. I have not been sworn in. Okay.
So
if
you're behind you, have you been sworn in as well?
If you have not been sworn in, please raise your right hand. If anybody else is gonna speak. Okay. Uh do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, so help you God. Yes. Okay. Okay.
Would you name an address and then thank you? Thanks.
My name is Stephanie LeFieu, and our address is [address removed]. Um where this proposed tower is supposed to be is my walking path. Uh we built and we bought in '96, built in 08. We've raised our family there, continue to enjoy there. This would be
Something that will definitely lower our land values, our property values. There's health concerns. I am a realtor. I know that it would. It's unsightly. Um The deer are running out of places to roam. It would definitely be a Something to lessen our values. Um It would make sense to have this more in a commercial area. The grove is not very far from our community. It could be better along the interstate area toward the grove where
people are not enjoying life from the quiet where we live now. All right. So much development of the homes are going on in the area and I to a certain degree welcome it because it's my line of work. However, this antenna will definitely lower our values and is a health concern and we are not for it. Um it's not good for wildlife and the people that live in our community. So I vote no. I would hope that you will be thinking about what the people here where we live
and what our opinion is, we say no. Thank you.
What was your address again?
[address removed]. Thank you. I'm a one road away away from it, across the street. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Hello, my name is Cynthia Ellier. I live at [address removed]. And have you been swarm? Have you been Swarm Man? Yes, I have. Thank
you.
Um I would like to point out that the individuals that own that piece that's outlined in red also own an almost identical piece to the right or west of, excuse me, east of that. So they have a total of over 300 acres. for them to decide to put it in the south west corner where it impacts so many people. I don't understand. I do ride in that area. I know there's a lot of area that is wetlands, but
that is not the only spot there. that can be built upon. Um, I moved out here, well, on Quail Hollow. in the Cuhalo area over thirty years ago. This would be just such an impact on on our property. It um
I I noticed that it was called Saddlewood uh proposal. You know, if if they want it, please put it over closer to Saddlewood. There's three hundred acres there. I know I'm not allowed to bring up health concerns. I know I'm not allowed to bring up losing all of my honeybees to this.
You you
can bring up
anything you want to bring up. I'm
sorry, can you hear me? Well it'll be shot down so I'll keep my three minutes going. Um I have contacted and I I might be in error, but I believe the Verizon gentleman said that he had contacted any sort of historic impact from a seminal Indian aspect. Um I've been in contact with the, what is his title?
Tribal Historic Preservation Office with Seminole Indians. There's a lot of artifacts in that area, a great many artifacts. They're in the process of checking it out or We'll be checking it out. They have not done so yet. I believe at the last meeting we were at I believe the gentleman said that they had already gone through those steps. As far as uh Mr Miller is concerned, he has not heard from them. So I think that from a historic
standpoint and considering Pasco County does have, what's it called, Historic Preservation Ordinance. I think we really should value a little bit of what potentially is on that land. And like I said, I've been out there for over 30 years and I know that there is a great many artifacts. I know that someone tribe is interested in checking on it. And I know I really don't want to see that on my horizon. as soon as I get up every morning. Thank you for your time. Please vote no one on this. Thank you.
I have these written in. Okay. The name and address. Oh yes, my name is Merle Ferrani. Um I'm at [address removed]. Um I had actually written a a letter, I wasn't listed I guess, um, to uh Commissioner Weightman. Um so I'll just kind of reiterate some of my concerns. Um the yellow dot is looks quite a bit farther north. It's only um the fence is fifty foot off of the. and the tower itself is a hundred foot. There are so many residents around there that don't have
a choice. If they wanted to sell, they're going to lose value on those homes because the people moving in will either ask for a lower price because of this visual eyesore, um, but they get that choice. They get to say, well it's worth the money, I'll I'll take that piece of property. The people that are there now won't get that choice. It's just being we're just being Told essentially that it's necessary and that it's going to go in because the property has owners that are out of state and it doesn't affect them at all. And then Verizon, there
are several people that said that we have coverage need, and then they put up in the presentation really great-looking maps. However, There are no streets shown on those maps. It's just a nice green, you know, kind of uh X that shows this increased coverage in that area. So when I went and fit the scale to it and everything, that was part of what I showed to Commissioner Weightman. Um There's barely anything additional. to that area
that gets additional coverage. There's already um a tower that we get coverage from just off of fifty four. And then Saddlewood is mostly covered by uh it's just west of I seventy five. There's a tower there as well. The only tower the only coverage benefit is um not even the majority of let's see it was Wookiee. Woodleaf, Woodleaf Boulevard. It doesn't extend the entirety of Woodleaf, so if it benefits Westwood, I can understand that. It doesn't get all of Westwood. If it went more
northeast in that property where some of these people wouldn't have to see it every day and lose value on their homes and on their quality of life, because we all moved out there because there's this conservation land to the north. We were hoping that that would mean it wasn't going to be developed further. There's the Cypress Creek Preserve extends down to the west as well. We were safe on that side. There's a lot of wetlands to the east. We thought we would be safe on that side. We made those choices for how we want to live our lives. And then Shenandoah, which is
a majority of Saddlewood, isn't covered at all. It's covered by the one that's on Sedgeway Boulevard to the west of I-75. So I don't think that the benefit outweighs the cost for those of us that are already there, that have been there for so long. Um and I think it's strange that on the the map it didn't show any of the streets that would benefit it. When you look at it, it's like wow, it's gonna be so much more green. That makes sense. And then you see the border and it barely covers two streets because those are the only two streets that could stand
the benefit. I just don't think that this is a good fit. And just for a quantity of towers to go into Florida rather than quality, I don't think is Horizon standard either. There's three hundred acres. Perhaps you could go more northeast. And that's it. I appreciate your time. Thank you.
Hello. My name is Kathy Vance and I live at [address removed] on my property. And
you've been sworn, correct?
Pardon
me? You have been sworn, correct? You have been sworn? Yes. Thank you.
Um my property borders the west side. We have twelve and a half acres there. The way the um tower is going to be it's fifty feet from my property line. I also own a acre in front of that, which is on Green Willow, and so it'll be a hundred feet from there. I'm gonna have to look at this thing every day. Um I know that we can't object on so many things. I um I
wrote to Commissioner Weightman uh when we first found out about it. And um the letter I received back from his associate um assistant said that, well, because of FCC rules we couldn't object because of um health reasons or a few other things. Um, and I'm not objecting to that. I know chances are it's going to be improved. However, he
has over three hundred acres. I have lived there since nineteen eighty-five, and I know a lot of the area there floods. In fact, where they're talking about putting it is right in front of excuse me, a cypress head. So the other side that isn't shown on the map that he owns would be a much better fit for. There's nobody there. There's nobody gonna have to be looking at it. And so I would hope that you
would take everything we've all said into consideration and vote no on this. Thank you.
Thank
you.
Hi. I'm Tim Dunniffan. I live at [address removed], which is right across the street from the proposal. I don't think sir, you've been sworn.
Yes, ma'am. You've been sworn. Okay, thank you.
I don't really think any of us are really against the tower going up. It's just where it's being placed. With 300 acres, you'd think they could move it somewhere that would please everyone, everyone would be happy in the neighborhood. He lives in St. Louis and I think it's all about the money. Where the proposed site is now it'd be easy access for them to get in and out whereas they don't want to build it. on a different location where it won't bother anybody 'cause it's gonna take a lot more money
and get a road and Get everything going there. But I still don't really know who it's gonna benefit. When I have frontier 5G works just fine. I have no problem with cell service, internet service. So I don't know who they're building it for. There's no one there. And why would it matter if it's placed on the opposite side of the proposed site, away from the neighborhoods, away from my friends and neighbors? I
came here 21 years ago to build equity in my house. And I've learned that this takes like 20% equity away when you go to sell it. In my comments, if I were going to sell my house, I don't think I'd have that as a feature. thousand feet across the streets of cell tower. I don't think that would help me. But Still really don't know uh who this is gonna benefit. But if I had 300 acres and didn't even live around here I think I'd want everyone
to be happy and Not have an eyesore built in the middle of a The neighborhood is uh So pristine and nice. Have some eyes or sticking out there. Uh just wouldn't be attractive. And with that much land you think that uh they could sure re reposition it somewhere else.
And not to mention all the other different things with the health conditions and Just seeing lights and stuff at night and we moved out there to be in a quiet neighborhood and not have lights and towers and stuff you know going over us and I suppose they have three other positions that three other companies can come in and put add to it? Well they're just saying the one for Verizon. Well if other companies
come in there and wanna build, well they're just gonna have to add on to the tower, right? They're gonna make it even bigger and more of an eyesore than it would be initially. So I sure hope you guys can understand. If you lived in the community, you wouldn't want it there either. Please uh Thank you for listening and I I hope you can get it moved to somewhere else or Say no. Thank you.
And those here to speak to item P eighty four. They want WebEx.
No, sir.
I'm going to close public comment. Back to staff first.
Tina, early we a I asked earlier about the location site. Um and I'm just looking like why would it be fifty foot away from a home when you when you could go to the Northern part and the eastern part. Especially nobody knows the acreage beside that. Any reason we didn't look at that or did we?
No, we did not look at that.
moves from this phase when it comes in for the preliminary site plan they're gonna want to look at it and uh they want to have a f full wetland delineation as well of the site.
Right. Mike could someone pull up on uh map on pages and we'll kinda look at the topo and look at the uh wetlands out there. Denise, what's a normal setback from a hundred and five fifty five foot pole?
Um the regular the setback according to Land Development Code 1002 basically states that the setbacks are based on the zoning district within which they're located. So um and you're you're looking at a tier three, which is a conditional use. Um so the setbacks for AR-1 district are and they're measured from the fence compound area, 50 from the front, uh 25 from each side, and 50 from the rear, and then of course uh whatever requirements would be from any. Wetland Line.
Are we propo are we prohibited by federal government regulations on expanding that number?
We we do not. You're you're ba we you can add any condition that you would like to add regarding the setbacks. If you want greater setbacks, those but I will say that their site plan does show greater setbacks than a twenty foot five foot side setback.
So I don't know I'll go by the one lady so she was fifty feet away, but I think it's something we need to l take a take a look at. Um
where did they say they were fifty foot from a home?
One of the one of the residents.
Uh I I think I think the the person said fifty feet possibly from their property line. I don't think they said from a home.
Okay.
So the wetlands are pretty much those those three red dots that are there.
And the and the yellow, um those are category one, the yellow, and then the the uh the red is category three. According this is just giving us a guide. This does this is not the actual wetland delineation.
Okay, so it it could go to that northern part and to the east. There's no well in there.
Okay. Any other questions for staff?
Right. Let's bring the applicant up.
We've heard the concerns. Everyone says they get reception service, so why would you pick that location and could you could you move it? Would you move it?
Um Again, you know. I represent Verizon and And this is a landowner question where we've been guided to by the landowner to make it work. We did look at other sites around and typically what happens when you're looking for uh a new tower site, which by the way is always the second option you look to co-locate if you can. But if you um have to do a new tower to to provide the coverage. Um You get a
search ring and then you send out notices to potential properties in the search ring. And so we did look at other properties as well. This was I think the only um only uh response where we could go. There's no tower closer than 1.25 miles away. And so then within the landowner, then you know you also have factors like where the landowner would like to see it on the property, as well as factors like the wetlands
floodplain trying to locate it where we don't have to have, you know, a Driveway going all the way back to get to it. Um so this is the the lease area where Verizon has the lease to go. And to move it would essentially require excuse me, s uh uh starting over, excuse me.
Is the land order with you today? I'm sorry? Is the land order with you today?
I do not think I'm lending with you today.
Yeah.
Okay. All right. I don't know about the board, but I would I would rather have them take a look at a different site on this property. Um I don't mind continuing it and bringing it back if they can go do the research.
Do you show your overlay of coverage?
Yes, we do have that. That was part of our application. I do have a Verizon RF uh person here. I mean I mean one thing I could throw out uh too because we obviously heard the concerns I mean we could go instead of a monopole, a monopine to try to take care of uh some of the visual concerns for the tower as an alternative.
So I've I've been dropping a pin on the street. It looks like it's a heavily wooded lost. Are you keeping that vegetative barrier on
your property? I mean the only the only um area that will be you know there the lease area the lease area is a hundred foot by a hundred foot and then within there the actual tower compound will be eighty feet by eighty feet. So that's where the tower and the equipment would be located. Other than that, the balance of the mature tree canopy will stay um you know, around that tower site.
Did you come prepared to show what that might look like with someone walking down the street?
I think we did submit um we did submit uh as part of our application.
Yes.
Um I do
It's very very heavily wooded.
So those woods could disappear. If they do it.
Uh does your does your lot go to the front and you're keeping a buffer or you're just buying that 40-40 or eight?
Well we're leasing and it doesn't. There is the tower is actually a hundred feet back from the property line. And so there will be um you know the compound will be with a vinyl fence, it will be landscape, but then also surrounding that um will be um the exact Existing true canopy that's on the safe.
But the but the owner could come in and clear that canopy out and then it's a different story. That's that's what we're trying to
Yeah.
Move forward here.
I mean those are some pictures taken from the road. You can see the one in the middle shows um the the existing trees surrounding it and one on the left and right um show like the view from the road uh and those trees obviously would remain because the tower is a hundred feet back
from the road. Are you buying that property and putting it in the back or is some but
We are l Verizon is leasing the hundred by hundred foot area.
So you're leasing a hundred foot area and you're putting the tower
Well how how far back? Because you said it's eighty by eighty, so twenty feet?
It's in the middle of the eighty by eighty foot area, but I'm saying the actual pinpoint location of the tower is a hundred feet. set back into the lot. How about seventy five feet from the west boundary.
Okay, so uh I'm sorry, I have a a really bad case of tonight's we're not so it's hard for me. Um so your tower, your land is a hundred and feet And your tower's gonna be How many feet back from the road? I know what you're saying that is it
it would be a hundred feet back from the property line, so even more you
know,
there's some part of the right of way between the road and so it'll probably be from the northern edge of the road 120 feet.
And you will so there will always be this buffer in the front? That's what we're trying to find out.
Yes, so um once it passes this section we're gonna come in it'll they'll come in for a preliminary site plan and they will be subject to those specific setbacks and the requirements that are stated on the conditions of approval which include that they have to buffer the actual compound area regardless of whether there's um th there's uh uh tree canopies or whatever unless they specifically ask for an alternative standard to use the tree canopy. But based on the application that I have in front of me, they are actually
going to do buffering additional to What's surrounding them anyway?
Well no one would see that buffering if they're not taking the other buffering out. I would prefer that they keep all the trees between the street and the
and I think as a I mean I I think as a condition of approval you could add that those you know the the existing landscaping remain on the west and south of um of the tower Outside of the specific eighty by eighty foot compound area.
So that's th in that case I don't think you would see it from the road because you're that those trees would be blocking your view. Um also to put it further back in the property, they'd have to get power to it. They'd have to build a road. So I mean I don't know that property but Well it and
I
think that was one of
the things
is the And the coverage wouldn't be there for the for the community.
Let's look at that coverage map if we could.
Yeah. Mm. And I guess are some of these things in sight.
Why don't we show me something?
It's a weird eye.
well that they said that our our engineer agreed with their their engineers. Yeah.
I again I can have Bill Compton come up from Verizon RF to explain better, you know, the the coverage needs. Because it's not just when you deal with coverage like this, it's coverage and capacity and all the towers work together and help offload each other. And so this is needed for both of those.
We we recently been through super few cell tower things and we've seen coverages where we're putting a tower here because we're trying to get coverage around there, so that's what I'm looking for. Especially when these people say they have coverage.
But um more and more things are going on the internet, you know, the wireless.
Well and it's uh someone's explained it to me previously that it's you know you have coverage and capacity and so the coverage is like do you have a street out in front of you? Yes. But if it's filled with traffic, you know, you get on it and you don't move very fast. So you also need the capacity to increase, add the level. Exactly, you know, to increase the capacity and make it better.
Right, but is this the best location as far as we're concerned? The I mean we we've got an industrial park at over at Overpass in seventy five, that's got a sixty eye foot, eighty fo eight eighty eye foot building. Wouldn't be probably a factor in that area there. But here, you're right next to a residence, it's fifty feet away from the property.
If you think you have an RF design for it. Yeah.
We're we're bringing up your coverage. Oh, yeah.
Commissioner Oakley. I think the the issue is seeing the tower. If you didn't see the tower it wouldn't be an issue at all. I mean but They've got if they move it back then I'd be okay with it but back where these res won't be seeing it every time they walk into their house. I don't think
they'll
see it, the tree
canopies. Well and and I think the other thing is we we have residents in you know who have you know spoken in front of it and then also back behind so you move it back you actually get it closer to other residents. And so it's kind of one of those things where you know, it it is gonna be 150 feet tall, uh, but you know, when you're down on the ground, it's not the same perspective I think as what you think. And again, I I I do think we would be willing to go uh monopine
design, you know, to fit in with the surrounding, you know, what's in that surrounding area to try to make it blend in better.
So let's get back to the coverage issue. Thank you.
Yeah, you
can see it from far away, but not see.
Mm-hmm. William Compton. William Compton from Verizon Wireless address is seventy seven oh five East Telecom Parkway, Tampa, and I have been sworn in. Thank you.
Um you tell me. So R X
for D. That's what Denise said.
So I'm looking before you uh change that slide.
I'm gonna ask you the question after the very bottom of that slide that was just up there talked about if this is not allowed to happen, it won't allow us to r resolve capacity issues in the area. So I'm gonna have you address that after we get look at the coverage.
We're gonna get to the cover the actual coverage slides now.
So our our our wonderful Nemesis COVID really expanded upon a problem that Horizon Wireless was having before that, which is a lot of our traffic is moving into the more residential areas. A lot of people, more people are working from home. They're using our service for their internet service. They're taking calls, uh work calls from home, doing video calls from home, that kind of stuff. So a lot more of our traffic has moved into the residential areas. Areas, that's why you're seeing a lot more sites, new towers being proposed in those residential areas. And
the reason for that is the capacity, like said before. So a lot of people are saying in the crowd that are saying that there's existing coverage, and that is true. The problem is as Mr. James there has said before, there's there's coverage and there's capacity. And the reason why we're here today is not for coverage. We we know that there's coverage out there. We drive our our network all the time. But we also have to look into the future and we have to look at what the capacity situation is on the existing sites that cover those
areas. And the exponential growth that we're seeing in those residential areas is what's driving us to build sites like this. Verizon doesn't just build sites because they want to. very um elaborate process inside Verizon to to allocate the funds to do sites like this. Um this is over a half million to three quarter million dollar investment from Verizon Wireless in infrastructure to build these sites, so it's not something we do just because we want to. Trust me, I I would love if we could do all the paperwork I have
to do to justify these things. That's my job as a traffic engineer as well. So we're out here to Try and get ahead of the problem. I'm glad the customers right now for Verizon are saying they don't have any coverage and capacity issues that they're seeing seeing right now. We're here to be ahead of that. We don't want them to have those coverage and capacity issues in the future. So speaking to the maps, the map up on the screen right now, I believe that's the yeah that's the existing coverage. So you can see the green areas are what we're predicting is the signal level. is provides
what we call um what we call it um reliable coverage. Sorry, have a mental block there. So those are reliable areas. So the the signal level there would get you in inside a building because we know most most of our coverage, most of our capacity comes from in building. Not many people are working outside They're not sitting at their computer out on the Out in the yard, they're actually inside the house. So we're having to overcome the the sheet metal roofs, the uh low E-glass that they're putting in that new houses, that kind of stuff that's makes it much harder for us to penetrate
into the buildings with our RF signals. So again, that this is the existing coverage. And then with the new site, what that does is it not only provides new coverage, but any of the area that it covers that was covered previously by the existing site. Yeah. So the people that are over on I-75 that are right underneath that site on sev I-75, they're gonna get uh improved service there because now that site's not having to cover the customers all the way out into the quail hollow and the west side of Saddlewood. community. That's
the reason why we build these sites.
There's a there's a lot of usage along that road that's going up.
Yeah, and and there's a lot of information that that goes into those internal
So the matchup. So after seventy five.
Well seventy five is to the right on the screen.
What's the sweat here?
Seventy five's to the right of the screen, right?
Oh yes, to the right. It's where that right is
where's
where's Old Pasco Road?
Right inside it.
Yeah, well have you not phone on on that room?
No, so so what I'm tell so so as I said earlier, if you took this pole and moved it to the right It's getting it closer to that whole surface he's trying to fix anyway. But it's also
getting closer to existing Verizon facilities which again these are all designed to help offload from each other. And so it's kind of a balancing act between the different sites. And
I bet you if you put that yellow dot over just the side it's probably re real close to even with those two blue dots. It's not a big difference. And it's away from the homes.
Are you putting five G over there yet? Or do you know those little ones that go every They've got one little road now. Small cell? Are you coming in on Old Pasco with small cells?
Not at this point, no. We're not there's not enough site density, enough user user density along that road. Small cells, because of all the trees and the dense trees in the area, they don't get very far off the road. So we do that more in like the Miami type morphologies. Downtown Tampa has small cells.
We have one little road.
Yeah. We ha we have some out there. It just has to be a lot enough density of people Please put some in Trinity.
So as I look at this here, right to the right of that, you still get a good amount of red that's open.
Yes, and most of that area is the the east side of that large parcel that the the landowner owns. It's not even developed. So we're not interested in covering that area. That's not where our usage is coming from. There there's there's additional information that that Verizon gets from our our our users that we cannot share in in a in a in a public forum as as such. Um it's it's customer proprietary network information. Basically it shows where our users are actually using the the the services and we get to look at those maps and see where the actual usage
is coming from. And this site does meet the requirements to offload enough traffic to get us into the future. um for the sites in the surrounding area.
Do we have a clear picture of the previous slide and can we put them up side by side?
Skills.
Impressive.
That one. No I think you have it.
So that cell tower goes up, I don't see a lot of change except to the right. So moving that pole to the right. It's not still not gonna hurt the coverage, it's gonna cover it. Everything else to the side from over there you're not gonna change much anyway. I don't I don't see any harm with moving it to the right. With less people.
Uh I I mean I again I would say this i is an RF issue and design issue. You're third party independent consultant who reviewed it and said there is a need and there is a need in this location.
Need or not, from what you're showing me from where this map clears out the red to the side, I don't see any difference to it. I mean I don't I don't think it would hurt you at all by moving it to to the side because you're still gonna still you might even get better coverage from the people that are over there anyway.
I I mean I I appreciate your comment but again I I think this is This is an engineered design system that's been proposed by engineers, reviewed by engineers as being appropriate.
And has opposition from residents. So at this point in time I'm not going to support it. I'd rather have you go back, work with the residents, work with your engineers, and work with the landowner so if you can move it to the side. Are
you saying for him to move it to the right side of that property? I'm
saying to the right. There's less people over there. There's more room. You can go up to the north. And I don't think it's gonna hurt
us. Looking looking at the at Google Maps, there's some.
Let's go. Let's go pull the property map up again. Thank you very much. You did a great job getting those double screens. That was perfect.
So I don't know if you can see the houses
So where you can you lower that? So right now it's on the left side over here. Actually. Where's it? I think it's over there.
And they also own the parcel. Oh, is that a wetland?
Calgary two.
So they can't go up so the
So if you put it up that top right, you're gonna be a less further away from all these people.
Top right, we are
Well, this property.
Up there. And access is what?
Is that a roadway that runs all the way up there? Dirt Road?
Yeah. Okay, I'm lining up there.
So they even have access up there. Oh I think that's a good thing. I'd rather them go back and take a look at this.
I'll say from an RF standpoint, the further you put us away from people, the the harder it is for us to cover those people. Th there there's a reason why we try and be near people is to cover them.
Your maps don't justify it. I don't see me I don't I I see the improvement of your coverage is all to the right side anyway. From what you just showed. Let me just add the maps up side by side. So if I b my moving it over there, it's probably not gonna change much of that. It might even get you better coverage from what you're showing right there. But I want you to go take a look at it. I'd like to continue this unless you go take a look at it and bring it back to us.
Right. And and that's fine. I mean if that's the the
That's that's mine, but I'm only one of five votes.
Jair Seth Weightman.
Commissioner Weightman.
Hey, thank you for the presentation. I appreciate everybody who reached out. I gotta reach out to the office. Uh
I'm not typic I'm not opposed historically consistently to sell to cell sites, to cell coverage is the way that we communicate in today's world. Um it's it's it's necessary. Um there's a lot of room here and uh there's a lot happening up down Alaska Road, especially with Like we coming in. everything else go wrong there. I'd hate to see
a cell tower not go in. We have communities that that are very nearby that are really urging to have cell signal put in there. That way they can they can hold their signals. If there's a way those golfers figure out a way to make this work, I meet this morning. Yeah.
Yeah, maybe. How much how much is coming this way?
Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Weightman. And and and to your point to Old Pasco Road, this gets it closer to Old Pasco Road. So when that developer does come in, it actually helps them. Uh and again, I'm not okay. I know we need cell towers. I just want to make sure we pick the best location. And if you're supportive to make the motion to continue, I'm sure the vote would support you.
Uh How how quickly can we get get back? Because there's there's always, you know, the growing cow like ours, there's always trees. I think she was saying
November fourteenth.
November
fourteenth,
November fourteenth. Okay. Commissioner Weightman, they said they can bring it back November 14th to us. And I think that would give them time to meet with the residents as well as setting up their new maps and be able to show us what they could do.
Yeah don't I'm I'm not for them giving up. I want to give up. No no I don't
I don't want to give up either.
So uh I'm going to continue the island and Uh uh appreciate appreciate y'all working working through this a little bit a little bit longer.
Thank you. The Commissioner's motion would be to continue to November 14th or at 130 at or as soon thereafter as say may be heard.
And I I'll second that in discussion.
Okay.
I I'm gonna agree with Commissioner Weightman and you know we've seen this lots of times um that people don't want a cell tower. They say they're fine, but But uh we heard that from the residents of Starkey Ranch. But you you cannot make a phone call from the library. uh Starkey T L C you can't. Um When
they get overloaded it happens.
You can't make you d I drop calls driving down Starkey Boulevard. My mother in law, who's now in hospice at at Watermark down the street, you have to walk outside to talk to call the nurse to come in. Um it's these are these are very serious issues. A lot of people don't even have line land lines anymore. So We have to be mindful of um making sure we have our grid. And listen, I help write that self-tower ordinance. I'm not a you know, I Shell
towers aren't the prettiest thing, but but they're necessary. I I I do question the hundred fifty five feet. I mean is that that so if it was lower it w it would be administrative? So what is the height that we go for um administrative approvals?
So administrative approvals really to a certain extent not only have to do with height but also has to do with the way it's camouflaged and it depends on uh the land use. Um And also administrative approval. So like for example, an administrative approval for something like this would probably be a unipoll and you've received commentary that those do not work for cell tower companies anymore because of overheating, because of size of their equipment, etcetera. Um I think something in the future that we really need to do is look at um one
zero zero two uh wireless communications facility, that section of the code because a lot of things in there are are a little bit outdated. Outdated yeah.
Right. All right, so we have a motion. Commissioner Weightman?
At that point, I want to go down.
But we will get it. So uh Mr. Andes is more we look at the natural you know like what's the call this project that looks like you know a lot of pines and
How we think uh. Yeah. I I can go I can go a long, long way since leading the depth of what we can call it.
Yeah, I think and I think we could cover that and maybe even committee reports we can talk about a little bit more. But uh we have a motion to continue and uh to November fourteenth. Gentlemen, I appreciate the willingness to go work uh with it and if you can work on the camouflage too, great. But uh call the role.
All right, District One, Commissioner Oakley. District two, Commissioner Weightman. Aye. District three, Commissioner Starkey. Aye. District four, Commissioner Bradford.
District 5 Chairman Mariano.
Aye. Motion to continue. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.