Conditional Use (Regular) - Pasco Land and Cattle Co, LLC/Skyway Towers/Verizon Wireless - 155 Foot Above-Ground-Level (AGL) Monopine 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 PEG24-CU02

53:48Item P fifty nine was published in the Tampe Times on June twenty-sixth, twenty twenty-four, and by affidavit of certified mailings and site postings.

53:56Item P59 is PEG24CU02. This is for a conditional use for 155-foot above-ground level modifying wireless communications facility in an AR-1 agricultural residential district. It's under the name of Pasco Land and Cattle Company, LLC, Skyway Powers, LLC, Verizon Wireless. Again, proposes 155-foot above-ground level. Which consists of a 150-foot wireless communication facility with a five-foot lightning rod. It

54:26is going to be a monopine design, and it's going to be suitable for the co-location of three additional carriers. And then with the anchor tenant, that would be a total of four carriers. This is proposed to be located along the southwestern portion of the property within a 6,400. square foot fence compound area, 10,000 square foot leased area. The overall site is 160 acres and it is located in central Pasco County on the north side of Green Willow Run, approximately 2,000 feet east

54:56of Quail Hollow Boulevard. This is the site location in central Pasco County.

55:04It is uh not located in the urban service area and it's also not within any of the rural areas.

55:11This is showing the surrounding zoning. The current zoning is AR-1 Agricultural Residential District. Same to the east, to the south. There is a parcel that is zoned AR to the west, and the other parcels that are zone AR12 to the west and AC Agricultural District to the north. Future land use is RES One to the south, east, west, and then conservation to the north, which

55:41is consistent with that some of this area is within an ecological planning unit.

55:50This is the site access. So the access to the overall site is from Green Willow Run to the compound lease area will be provided with a 30-foot wide ingress and egress and access easement and utility easement. And that's going to be located off of Green Willow Run. This is the surrounding area again showing you where portions of the property are within the ecological planning unit. The yellow dot in that section showing where the general location of the facility and the fence

56:20compound, which is approximately the to the comp to the fenced area, will be 50 feet, and to the actual tower location would be about 114 feet from the front. Property like This is the prior site plan, so we've kind of gone through this process from December of last year. So originally the site was proposed as a monopole, which basically has the antenna showing outside and the tower, the actual mast located

56:50within the center portion of the fence compound area. The application was modified in December of of uh late December of last year uh to actually uh be a um monopine and for the actual antenna structure of the mast to be located within the northeastern portion of the compound.

57:13Part of the application requirements is for the applicant to show photo simulations, which are basically where a an actual balloon is floated in the air and it would show what the location would look like before without the wireless communication facility and then after with the wireless communication facility. So they're required to submit four photosimulations. This is a photo simulation. The left of course is without the wireless communication facility. The right is with the wireless wireless communication facility. This

57:43is if you're standing right in front of the actual parcel. So it's facing north towards the tower location from Green Willow Run. The second photo simulation is facing east towards the proposed tower location from Green Willow Run. As you can see on the left, you know, you don't see the actual monopine. On the right, the monopine is peeking up over the vegetation, existing vegetation that's in that area.

58:11Third photo simulation is facing northeast towards proposed tower and that location is from Green Willow Run and again without and with. And then the fourth photosimulation is facing west towards the proposed tower location from Green Willow Run.

58:29On this application, and it has been included in the record, there are several letters of objection. There's also several ex-party communications that are objections, and also several ex-party communications from the applicant. In addition, I did provide to the clerk's office, those were submitted to me just yesterday and the day before. Before I'm sorry, last week after the agenda was due, I

59:00have ex-party communications from Commissioner Yeager from both objectors and from the applicant. So those have been submitted to the clerk's office. With all our wireless communications facilities, these are reviewed by our outside consultant, which is Omnicom Consulting. Group, the outside consultant did agree with the radio frequency assumptions of the application and stated

59:30that we should recommend approval based on RF radio frequency information. So this comes to you with a recommendation of approval with conditions as included in your agenda packet from both the plan. and Economic Growth Department and the Planning Commission. And I'm here if you have any questions.

59:49Mr. Chairman Mariano. Yes, sir. Uh Denise, I uh uh can you put up the demonstration as far as what the coverage improvements were

59:56will be? I believe the applicant will have that in in his presentation. Okay. The the the actual radio frequency package that comes from them.

1:00:11You satisfy hearing from Africa.

1:00:16That's their data, so uh I'd let them I'd let them present it.

1:00:21Okay. So this is a public hearing and uh applicant uh come forward and present?

1:00:44Name and address.

1:00:45Uh good afternoon. James Johnston with Shutzung Bowen, three hundred South Orange Avenue uh in Orlando, three two eight oh one on behalf of the applicant that I had submitted.

1:00:56And you have been sworn?

1:00:57I have been sworn,

1:00:58yes sir. Thank you.

1:01:08Uh and again, good afternoon. Um I know we're all other than Commissioner Yeager, I know uh you're all familiar with this project. Um I think this is the third hearing we have come in front of you with. Um and so uh first I want to say thank you to Denise and staff uh for all their help uh through this process. Uh also I want to let you know I have with me Harold Timmins, who's with TEP and is the site acquisition consultant

1:01:39for this project.

1:01:43And I'm not gonna spend much time on this uh 'cause Denise did such a good job um pointing out uh or covering the request. I will note that this tower will be owned by Skyway Towers with Verizon Wireless as the anchor tenant and that um

1:02:02The new tower is being proposed because there are no existing towers or structures in Verizon's area of need on which the antennas could be located. Closest tower is 1.25 miles away.

1:02:17And as Denise uh outlined, we first came before you on October tenth. There was a um request at the time to continue the matter uh from the board to allow the applicant to look Or to check with the property owner to see if it was possible to relocate their site on uh the property. We did check with the property owner at that time and they did not want to amend the lease and change the lease area. After the January 9th hearing, we again

1:02:47checked with the property owner uh after the deadlock and um again they were uh did not want to amend the lease. And to be thorough on this, we checked again before this hearing just to make sure and again uh they did not want to amend the lease. So we are here with uh what was the original application. Um and so uh we did make changes as Denise started to outline uh from the original

1:03:18proposal uh uh in December. And these were done again within what we could control. Obviously as I just mentioned, you know, we could not move the site within the parent parcel, so we had to look at it at what we could do. Um To try to address some of the board concerns and neighbor concerns as best as we could. First, we changed it from a mono pole to a mono pine to be more consistent with the surrounding area. We moved the tower to the northeast corner

1:03:48of the lease area, as far away from the closest property lines as we could do under our lease. Again, we know it's not a huge move, but again, there's What we could control and what we could do. We created a no uh clearing buffer area within the lease compound around the compound. We also changed the driveway angle so instead of coming straight on it comes in at an angle because there are significant trees along the frontage and this would provide less

1:04:18view of the actual compound with the angled driveway because there will be trees in front and back. And we located it on the property on the uplands, which minimizes environmental impacts, as is favored by Pasco County Code. These are, as Denise showed, these are the current plans you can see on the top left, the angled driveway, the landscaping around the tower compound. At the top right, how the tower was

1:04:49moved to the northeast corner and at the bottom the monopine design.

1:04:56We also, after the October hearing, based on comments or concerns from the neighbors about uh reductions to property values, we um had a uh MAI certified appraiser prepare a report which is um I know part of the record was submitted back in January. Um And the extensive study uh found or concluded that uh market evidence consistent consistently shows no impact

1:05:26on market value of properties based on proximity to a communication tower. Study included he spoke with the Pasco County uh property appraiser's office. They did not take proximity uh to a communication tower into consideration in assessing property value. Yeah.

1:05:44And then I think importantly, uh taking a look at the code. Um your code recognizes the importance of communication towers as necessary infrastructure by allowing them in all future land use designations as either permitted or by conditional use.

1:06:03Importantly, it does not restrict towers or or some codes will not permit towers within certain residential districts and things like that. Your code does not. Um your code also encourages the use of existing towers or structures if available, as uh in the reports they were not available, so um That is why we do a new tower or we're proposing a new tower. Um It encourages towers to be located and designed to minimize adverse

1:06:33visual impact. Again, we've located on a vacant, heavily wooded property, designed it as a monopine. Your code recognizes that just because a tower can be viewed does not necessarily mean an adverse visual impact. That's in section 1002.1.a and 1002.7.b.1.a. Your code also includes detailed tower development standards, which must be met and are met by our application. Um

1:07:04it uh as far as the location standards for towers, um again recognizing the likelihood of some adverse visual impacts and allows them so long as on balance they're not overwhelming. And that is in section one thousand two point seven, point B, point one point A.

1:07:25Uh and so again, I don't wanna spend too much time on this, but as far as tower design, your code development standards, um We have to indicate that no co-location is available, which we did. The new tower needs to provide for co-location, which it does. It's designed to minimize visual adverse visual impacts. It meets your setback requirements and provides required screening and landscaping. It's a monopine design. Your code considers mitigated tower types to have less

1:07:55adverse visual impacts in the tree. tree type is a recognized um mitigated tower type. It will accommodate three additional users. The compound is enclosed by an opaque ground fence with landscaping. Temeat code has an engineered fall zone of 50 feet, so in the unlikely event the structure was compromised it would remain on the parent parcel. There will be access from Green Willow

1:08:26One, as I showed, the angled driveway will help reduce the view of the compound from the road. There was an FAA determination of no hazard to air navigation, and there is no lighting required for this tower. And so I'm gonna skip over these. These are just showing the property in general. Um We're going to get in the property showing along Green Willow Run with a close-up of the property in the middle. And

1:08:57Verizon need uh Verizon RF documentation was submitted outlining the need for the tower at the proposed height in this area. No existing tower as mentioned. Um it's always our first choice to co-locate instead of having to go through the process of permitting a new tower. Um it's designed to deal with existing and future coverage and capacity needs in the area, and we'll also help. To offload Verizon facilities in the surrounding area. The improved service promotes health safety

1:09:27and welfare, we believe, in the surrounding area, with over 80% of 911 calls now being made from wireless devices, improves E911 phase two, and also there are certain Pasco County first responders, including the sheriffs who utilize Verizon services. And again, these are these are in your packet. This is the Verizon, I think Commissioner Oriana getting to what you were talking about. Um this is from excerpts from the Verizon RF documentation that was submitted.

1:09:58It shows these are the sites, Verizon sites in the surrounding area. I will note that they are all taller than what is being proposed with this tariff. Uh unfortunately with uh wireless communications you need to be uh in proximity to where the need is and that is what we're dealing with here. Here uh are the maps uh Commissioner Mariano that I believe you were referencing and we can come back to and talk to you about those Um I I do think it's

1:10:28important as Denise mentioned that your code recognizes the complexity of a tower application, the RF situation, and so for tier three reviews it requires an outside third party expert. Uh the county did hire one who reviewed, analyzed, and evaluated the application for compliance with the code, the recommended approval of the conditional use and it determined There were no existing towers or structures in the needed area, and it agreed with Verizon's RF coverage maps that the tower will significantly

1:10:58improve Verizon's coverage in the area of need. For property selection, uh Verizon uh has a search ring and then uh it has a tower company that then goes out and looks for potential properties within that search ring. And they reached out to 11 different properties, received two responses, and we ended up with this one as the one that Verizon selected as the most appropriate to resolve their issues. And I know I'm running out of the way. of time so I just will quickly show

1:11:28obviously we have wetlands and floodplains significantly in that area which these maps show uh that we're trying to avoid on the um on the property and your code in uh includes uh minimizing environmental impacts And so just in conclusion, we've been through this uh and we've gone through it with staff, staff and the outside experts recommended approval. So has uh the Planning Commission and we will just uh ask for your consideration on this conditional

1:11:59use matter today. Appreciate it. Yeah.

1:12:04Can you back to can you go back to the coverage map?

1:12:06Yep.

1:12:10So your your top the map on the top right shows what the coverage is before you put the cell tower in.

1:12:16Correct.

1:12:17Next the one down below it shows the improvement.

1:12:21Correct. And again this is just one bane. of um you know the different bands that serve power so this is one band, the AWS band, and it is showing what's been improved. And I know your comment doesn't look like it does much in the area, but again, um I think your Outside expert did his own. He doesn't rely on this, as you can see in his report, he does his own RF uh analysis and study and has determined

1:12:52there is the need there.

1:12:54So with that determination uh and I agree with you, there very is very little improvement on the area, but there is some. So when I look at the big area to the north, you've got a tremendous amount of potential that could be improved if the tower is north. Did you guys ever draw a map to show if you've got the northern part of the same property on this property what that coverage area would look like?

1:13:16Uh no, because when the property owner would first approach the property owner when the property owner said they would not allow us to move the lease area on that property.

1:13:25Okay. So the property owner didn't want to give you different property options than what he owned, even though we could go substantially up, which would be going far away from a lot of residents that are there objecting to this. Um When I look at our documentation on page four of ten, it says coverage of the need to expand wireless service into an area that ha either has no service or bad service. The request the service often comes from customers. the information I see with my documentation I got from residents

1:13:55is there doesn't seem to be a big coverage issue to those people.

1:13:59Right.

1:14:00Let me just con keep on going. Um And it says a good s capacity cell site needs to be in the center of user population. uh which would ensure even traffic distribution. You guys are so far to the south, you're not capitalizing on this tower as best it could be if l if it was located to the north. Now I know you are a l limited to what you can find, but clearly This is not in the center where a coverage area would really benefit people. So now we're gonna have to put more towers out there than we'd have to if

1:14:30we located them better. Um neighborhood meeting again from all the information I saw in the neighborhood meetings, they're not looking for better coverage. They say good they've got good coverage. So for that reason I still have the same issues I had with it.

1:14:43No, I and I understand that Commissioner, I appreciate that, but again I would say we don't undertake this effort. To do this, if there's not a need, you know, now and based on you know future need, because this is all mapped out as an interrelated system. And again, it's not just that coverage that you see there, it's the offloading from the other towers. It improves the entire system, not just that immediate area.

1:15:07Right. But if I'm going to locate a tower, I want to put the lim the most limited amount of tower. as I can out there to maximize coverage. We you guys have selected, even if it was only your choices, whatever, it is not the optimum place to put it. So it's not the if it's not the optimum place to put it, I can't support what I see in front of me.

1:15:27I I appreciate that but I do rely on the actual RF engineers who design these systems as to where towers are needed and will work.

1:15:35If an engineer was to look at this and have the complete flexibility, where would he probably put this tire tower?

1:15:41I I don't know, not an RF engineer.

1:15:42Let me tell you what I see just as a layman. When I see this map, when I see the tower right where it is right now. With n with no coverage and I see the tower just with the minimal impact. I'm gonna say just a layman, you're not picking they're not pi putting in the right spot. Clear as can be to me.

1:15:58I appreciate your opinion. Okay, any other questions?

1:16:03So it says a public hearing. Is anyone uh signed up for this item?

1:16:07I don't have anyone signed up and there is no one on WebEx for this item.

1:16:11Is anyone in the audience wish to speak

1:16:12to this item?

1:16:15Yeah

1:16:16I gave him five minutes.

1:16:20You have five minutes, sir.

1:16:23Thank you, Chairman Mariano.

1:16:24Name and address.

1:16:25For the record Paul Favani, 27251 Wesley Chapel Boulevard, suite 102, Wesley Chapel, 33544, I had beats Warworth.

1:16:36Before we start the timer, matter of housekeeping, I've been asked to put on the record who I represent as their spokesperson and counsel, having been retained by them. They are the following, the Ellie Fermani, [address removed], the Donafan family, [address removed]. the Porn L. Vance family, [address removed], Brenner Sumter at [address removed], the Lemusca

1:17:07family, [address removed], Mara Ricci, excuse me, Doctor Mara Ricci and Brett Gaboardi, uh [address removed] who actually have three properties on the corner of Green Willow and Quail Hollow Boulevard, very close to the proposed town. And last uh myself, I I do repres uh own property on Quail Run Drive. The actual address is protected by state statute. I'd be glad to provide that prior.

1:17:38Thank you.

1:17:40First of all, we are not against cell phone towers. They are a necessary evil in today's society for 911 purposes and other purposes. We are against the placement of the tower in our residential community. We understand the constraints of the Telecommunications Act, Telecommunications Act of 1996. There are only certain things that you can consider. But even the federal law states that Land Development

1:18:11Code does allow municipalities to deny construction permits. When it is based on a reasoned approach, that's Title forty seven, USC, section three three two.

1:18:24And you also pinned a belt. Take into account your own development code, which I will address. So why put it on green row in the middle of the quail hollow community? The coverage is not any better, as Commissioner Mariano pointed out. It's not for Quail Hollow. There are no complaints from Quail Hollow that we have inadequate service. And the 240 acres owned by the applicant, Pasco Cattle Company. It's

1:18:54actually a bunch of doctors out of St. Louis who use it for hunting practices. Well, the deer and the hogs that live on those two hundred and forty acres don't need better service because they don't even have cell phones. The answer isn't exhibit one.

1:19:14This is who has got a benefit, not Quell Hall, not Pader and the Hawks. Saddlewood. a gated community two developments over from us. So why put it why not put it in the middle of their community? They want better cell phone service. Put it in the middle of their gated community and see how they like it.

1:19:40So we look at the land development code. We'll start with 402.3, subsection F, Subsection 2. The proposed use will not adversely affect or contribute to the deterioration of the quality of life or property values of the immediate neighborhood. The petitioner brought in their own expert to say that cell phone towels do not affect The value of the profitable.

1:20:06And as Winston Churchill famously said, there are lies gone, lies in statistics. because if that expert had bothered to read an article by Georgia Southern University. Which I will submit into the record, they would have found that from 2007 to 2016 in the city of Savannah, Georgia, property uh values were lessened by 7.6% because of their proximity to cell phone tax.

1:20:35Just use your common sense. You've got a house worth $400,000 and another house worth $400,000. One has a cell phone tower right next to it, $155 foot. Which house do you think that purchaser is going to purchase? If they're in their right mind, that is.

1:20:57Let's move on to Land Development Code 402.3, Subsection F, Subsection 3. The proposed use is inconsistent with the character of the surrounding area, including the existing land use patents. There is a reason why we see cell phone towers along major thoroughfares. 54, 52, Old Pasco Road, I-75. That's where we expect to see them along with telephone poles and power poles.

1:21:25But they want the placement of cellphone tower on the southwest corner closest to Green Willow. Exhibit two, please.

1:21:37A marks where the land is that they want on the southwest corner. B is also owned. It's another 120. And C actually is land owned by the county, which you could provide to them to get their cell phones out.

1:21:57Orrow 2.3, Subsection F, Subsection 6, the site upon which the conditional use is to be located, has or will have screening and buffering sufficient to prevent interference with the enjoyment of surrounding properties. The petitioner's own unofficial tree report has the highest trees at sixty feet. Those are live oaks. This tower is going to be two and a half times the height of those trees. Sticking out like a sore thumb in our once pristine community. I'm gonna ask for an additional

1:22:27time, probably about a minute, so that uh certain households can be hurting. Many quail home residents have lived in this community for over 30 years, myself included. We bought when Wesley Chapel was Saddlebrook, and the post office. And look what's happened since then. We bought there to escape the urban sprawl. Until now we've enjoyed a sanctuary for the developments

1:22:57and the craziness of development in Wesley Chapel and Pasco County. We chose rural spaces over vibrant places. We don't need Starbucks and a car wash on every corner, We want to enjoy the deer and the red-shouldered hawks and our horses and our pigs and our dairy goats. that we have on our property. We don't want to be looking at a hundred and fifty foot ta tower sticking out like a sore thumb.

1:23:32Could you go to exhibit seven, please? Ha ha ha.

1:23:38Conveniently the petitioner took a photograph that doesn't show the top of the tree. But when Verizon goes back to their corporate offices out of state, when the Tau company goes out to their corporate offices out of state, When the doctors start collecting their lease money out of state in St. Louis, The residents of Quail Hollow will get up every morning and look at Exhibit eight.

1:24:08You tell me that's not a single digit salute to us as a community. And it's not even in our benefit. It's for the benefit. of saddlewood, a gated community. So why are we treated like the red-headed, illegitimate stepchild at the final reunion for the benefit of a community that doesn't give a don about that?

1:24:35I ask that the exhibits that I've uh been shown put in and received and filed for the right.

1:24:41Ms. Chairman Mariano. Quick order do you want also your testimony to be submitted for the record as well?

1:24:47Correct.

1:24:48Over approval? Sega?

1:24:49I'd also ask that the commissioners consider the many, many emails that will be sent in in opposition.

1:24:57I'll be glad to answer any other questions, but okay. Members can be here today because they're working. And that's why it would take me to act as this coach.

1:25:07I have a motion and a second to accept the advance. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Motion passed. Thank you. Thank you.

1:25:17Oh, Judge for Money. Clark.

1:25:19Right

1:25:19here. Clark, sir. Okay. Oh, okay, gotcha.

1:25:24We should make a composite.

1:25:30Okay. Chairman? Yeah. Um This is a cell tower, guys. On your map Does it show where the existing

1:25:41if I if I may, let's call let's close public comment. Oh, yeah.

1:25:51Yeah, I called for

1:25:52those earlier. I would I would call one more time.

1:25:55Is there anyone in the artist wishes to speak to this item? If you're here to come forward. I see no one coming forward. And again, there's no one on WebEx. And there's no one on WebEx. Thank you. Now I'll ask the applicant to please come forward. A rebutton.

1:26:22I've got uh James Johnston again I have been sworn. Uh I'll be very brief. Um Uh I think um if uh Uh Mr. Fernani first talked about the um property values and he referenced an article for Historic Savannah, which I think is a slightly different neighborhood. But even that being said, I would argue it's an article he found on the internet. We had an actual uh study

1:26:53done for this area that looked And did sales comparisons. And so that is the only confident substantial evidence on that question in the labor. Um and then I think as far as the other questions, why they're the towers go, and it's unfortunate sometimes, but they go where there's the need. And there is a need here, as found by, you know, as Verizon found is why they're

1:27:26So I I think that's really all I had. So again, I appreciate all your time and um we'd like your favorable consideration on this. Okay.

1:27:36Mr. Mayor Allen Mr. Johnson I got a question for you. Um well when I saw the presentation of A, B, and C and the county had the property to the side of this land company, uh to the side. You said you would approach and send out emails to everybody. Did you send an email to Pasco County or uh to look and see if we were willing to uh lease our land for a cell tower.

1:28:00No, no, I th I think the representation at the hearing was that we would look to see if we could move it on the property.

1:28:07What I asked you is when you were looking at all your sites for possibility places to go, you said you sent a bunch a bunch of emails or letters. Did you send one to Pasco County for that site that was just shown on the map?

1:28:18That I do not know.

1:28:20Okay. I'm gonna say that I would think that would be a much more appropriate site and that should be something that I I'm willing to go look at for down the road, but We can't do that here. But anything to the north you'd be away from the people you're directly affecting. Now if the other landowner's not willing to do it. I'm going to say that would have been an alternative that I would have approached if I were you guys, especially when we asked you to move the site. as that had come out. But you clearly haven't done that for whatever the reasons are. Maybe the contract is really good the way you've got it set, so be it.

1:28:52That's fine. But again, so I I think to the north was better. I think we were actually one of the ones you could have used in approaching if you didn't. Uh I don't know what to say about that, but Mr. Chairman without

1:29:03without trying to defend the applicant, because that's not my job, but I will say that Verizon in the past has come and asked us for sites and we have said we have to put it out for RFP.

1:29:16Okay.

1:29:16And so they they wouldn't have gotten a one on one can we use your property. It would have had to go on through our procurement process to get on that property. They could have done it. They

1:29:29could have done it. But

1:29:31there's a bigger obstacle than Well

1:29:33yeah, it's not quick no, there's not quick simple and easy. But again, it's something that's out there and with the objections that have been shown with the customers clearly saying there's no problem with the easement.

1:29:41Having been on been through with Several cell companies just wanting to be on our parkland.

1:29:48Yeah, there's

1:29:48no access

1:29:50there's no access to that property that I'm looking at. I'm looking at it at the property appraiser site and you'd have to go through someone's yard to get to access.

1:30:01Mr. White.

1:30:02Can we it up?

1:30:02Mr. White, thank you, Chairman Mariano. Thank you.

1:30:06No. No. I historically support cell towers for all the reasons mentioned historically. I d uh James, if you don't mind come back.

1:30:19So there's cell towers somewhere servicing the Quell Hollow community. And we had a map. I don't know if based on those maps, if you or on your notes or if we could narrow it down, which specific communities these cell towers are in currently that are servicing the folks that live in this area.

1:30:40Well I I

1:30:41Like with the the y on the top left.

1:30:43Yeah.

1:30:43I mean I can't

1:30:45left and I'm sorry you can't uh there's clearly

1:30:48residential units around those other

1:30:49towers

1:30:50that are servicing the folks that live in

1:30:52this area.

1:30:57So those would all be used to help serve that surrounding area. Again this is you know put more you know in the middle there to serve that area where it's located but also offloading the other tower so it improves the entire uh coverage and capacity uh in that whole area.

1:31:17So there are cell towers and other communities near homes that are servicing all the folks that need their correct facilities serviced. Okay. Thank you.

1:31:29We just approved one I think on Spring Road or somewhere in Dade north of Dade City like that. Um so if you could put up Pasco Mapper And go to um

1:31:46Where we where this cell tower's prom being suggested, which is quail hollow. I think it's green green willow. Green willow? Green Willow Green Willow Run, yeah. And then zoom out. And if you follow what they were saying. Um in the upper right corner there, keep going. Keep going. See where the road turns? Um keep okay.

1:32:18I want you to get to the Pasco the parcel owned by Pasco County, which is to your right. Um and now north.

1:32:28No, you got too far. Right? Behind those houses there with that To the right. Right to the right. That one. Click. Go north? north. Jeez. Okay. No, to your right.

1:32:42The other right. There you go. No okay, someone help her. Making me dizzy, I'm gonna have another episode here. No, that's not it. That's not it easy. There you go again. Okay, can we get the information on that?

1:32:55Yeah, County Attorney addressed that.

1:33:01Because this is the one Jack was asking about, I think. Correct. Yeah. So what kind of land is that? Um I didn't see any access to it. Looks like it's just adjacent to the Swift Mud property.

1:33:14Yeah. Uh Denise Hernandez, I'm um again I'm not trying to to to help Mr. Johnson's case, but in this case that that entire parcel is a hundred percent category one wetlands. Yeah, I figured it was something like that. It is.

1:33:27Yeah, um So th that's not possible to put it there.

1:33:33Uh it's all well.

1:33:34Yeah, it's all category one, the entire thing. So, you know, like Commissioner Weightman uh cell towers are a fact of life. Um and I we have we have a comp we have a consultant who's supposed to take a lot of this Uh stuff out of our hands with scientific data. And if there wasn't a need in the area, they would they would say that that this tower

1:34:04did not serve a need and could not go there. Um I hate that it's so tall. Uh I w I I I don't like that it's so tall. That's a big problem for me. And I want him to justify again why it has to be that tall. Um as as and I get that there aren't a lot of houses to the north. I think there are is some land around here that is developable 'cause I remember We had someone proposing a bunch of houses back

1:34:35here somewhere, so It's It's it's it's not that nothing's coming there, but I I know I know that when I'm in Starkey Wilderness Park or in any other of these big um

1:34:48Land masses. There's people hiking, biking, horseback riding, doing things in there And as capacity gets used up on other towers, we need to be sure that there's a emergency issue that they have the ability to call somebody. So, um I know it doesn't look like a lot to the north and you think it's only for the south, but Um I'm I'm gonna be in support of it. They they moved the drive so that it's not as visible from the road by angling that road

1:35:19and putting landscaping all along it, you won't see it from the road. You're gonna see it.

1:35:25Uh

1:35:25from a certain of those locations. Again I I would want to ask again, is there any way we can make it a little lower? Um but th those are my my points. That that our property there is not usable.

1:35:37Okay.

1:35:38Pleasure of the board? I

1:35:41move approval,

1:35:41Chairman. Move what?

1:35:45You move for approval. Second.

1:35:47Okay.

1:35:50Got a got a motion and a second to approve. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Nay. Nay.