Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEmail to request to tableTom, We can submit your request, but it would be up to you if you think you would need someone present. Teresa From: Johnson, Thomas H. Jr. [mailto:TJohnson@nexsenpruet.com] Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 11:41 AM To: Teresa Byrd; rick@cityscapegov.com; Jay Sikes Cc: jill.house@americantower.com; 'LACAVA, DAVID J'; HOWARD, STEPHEN M (ATTCINW); Liz Hill; Michael Queenan Subject: RE: 368-336 - CityScape Recommending 199' / Design = 300' [IWOV-NPRAL1.FID50080] Thank you Teresa. Do we need to have anyone present to present the request? From: Teresa Byrd [mailto:tbyrd@harnett.org] Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 11:27 AM To: Johnson, Thomas H. Jr.; rick@cityscapegov.com; Jay Sikes Cc: jill.house@americantower.com; 'LACAVA, DAVID J'; HOWARD, STEPHEN M (ATTCINW); Liz Hill; Michael Queenan Subject: RE: 368-336 - CityScape Recommending 199' / Design = 300' [IWOV-NPRAL1.FID50080] Hey Tom, We will be glad to forward your request to the Board of Adjustment Monday August 12, 2013. This email is sufficient as your request to table your application until the September 9, 2013 meeting. Should you have any other questions, please let us know. Teresa Byrd Planner I & Clerk BOA From: Johnson, Thomas H. Jr. [mailto:TJohnson@nexsenpruet.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 5:22 PM To: rick@cityscapegov.com; Jay Sikes; Teresa Byrd Cc: jill.house@americantower.com; 'LACAVA, DAVID J'; HOWARD, STEPHEN M (ATTCINW); Liz Hill; Michael Queenan Subject: RE: 368-336 - CityScape Recommending 199' / Design = 300' [IWOV-NPRAL1.FID50080] Rick, Jay and Teresa, Thank you for Rick’s report and input. We’d like to have some time to review and consider the report. That being the case, we’d like to continue this hearing until the September meeting to allow us the time for our additional review. Do you need for me to send a formal letter or will this request be sufficient? Thank you for your consideration of our request. Tom From: Rick Edwards [mailto:rick@cityscapegov.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 12:49 PM To: Johnson, Thomas H. Jr. Cc: jill.house@americantower.com; 'LACAVA, DAVID J'; Jay Sikes; Teresa Byrd Subject: RE: 368-336 - CityScape Recommending 199' / Design = 300' [IWOV-NPRAL1.FID50080] Tom, As an RF engineer for decades I know that height above all is important. And not even additional power will compensate for height, especially regarding handsets returning communications back to the tower. The County has developed regulations that they feel is in the best interest of the citizens, and they weigh each application to best compensate needs and results. In this situation there is a reasonably large neighborhood directly across the street from the proposed site, and what you are proposing would require a 24/7 lighted tower. There is a procedure within the ordinance to allow for a variance and increased height. That was not provided. Even if it was my conversations with County staff stands firm the height will only be approved at 199 feet and they feel such an approval will not stop network development and the County meets their obligations. The County has asked me to request you make that change. Rick Richard L. Edwards CityScape Consultants Direct: 561-558-2808 Toll Free 877-438-2851 Ext 103 From: Johnson, Thomas H. Jr. [mailto:TJohnson@nexsenpruet.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 10:12 AM To: rick@cityscapegov.com Cc: jill.house@americantower.com; LACAVA, DAVID J Subject: FW: 368-336 - CityScape Recommending 199' / Design = 300' [IWOV-NPRAL1.FID50080] Importance: High Rick, Attached is more detail on AT&T’s justification for the requested height. Please review and let me know your thoughts. If it will help, you, me and Dave can have a call to discuss. I have also requested information on the Micro tower site. I was not aware of the situation until your e-mail but will provide more details once I receive them. Thanks, Tom From: LACAVA, DAVID J [mailto:dl2246@att.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 7:32 AM To: HOWARD, STEPHEN M Cc: CHOWDHURY, SHOHEL; Jill House; Johnson, Thomas H. Jr.; JONES, JERRY O; TYSON, ROGER L; KALLOLICKAL, SAJU; LILES, DAVID L Subject: RE: 368-336 - CityScape Recommending 199' / Design = 300' Good Morning The candidate for 368-336 is on the west side of the ridge whereas the new developments are towards north and east. 195’ misses a lot of the homes we want to cover. 300’ is strongly preferred. 250’ is the bare minimum we would go with here. I have attached a comprehensive deck and a quick summary below, which shows the 1) residential areas that would be compromised with a 195’ rad center and 2) corresponding 195’ prop plot. Thanks, Dave *** CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION *** The information contained in this message may contain legally privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or duplication of this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by telephone or email immediately and return the original message to us or destroy all printed and electronic copies. Nothing in this transmission is intended to be an electronic signature nor to constitute an agreement of any kind under applicable law unless otherwise expressly indicated. Intentional interception or dissemination of electronic mail not belonging to you may violate federal or state law. *** IRS CIRCULAR 230 NOTICE *** Any federal tax advice contained in this communication (or in any attachment) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending any transaction or matter addressed in this communication. ￿￿￿룿ꦰ