BOA Minutes 09/28/2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment September 28, 2006 Page 2 Mr. Billerbeck asked the applicant to come forward. Ms. Anne Hoctor, RGP Tower Group LLC, 2141 Alternate A 1 A South, Jupiter, Florida came forward. Ms. Hoctor explained that there is a cell tower located in the area that could accommodate additional carriers, however, the property has been deemed contaminated by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the land cannot be disturbed. Ms. Hoctor said that the proposed 130 foot tower would accommodate four additional carriers that need coverage in the area. Ms. Hoctor said the proposed tower would be located at the rear of the site and would not be visible from the right-of-way. Ms. Hoctor reviewed the location of the tower as it related to the adjacent properties. Ms. Hoctor explained that the conservation easement is in perpetuity and nothing can be constructed in the easement. She said the property was deeded to St. John's River Water Management District for mitigation for other property. Ms. Hoctor said the tower is needed in the area. She said there is residential and a County retention pond to the and a conservation area to the south. Ms. Hoctor said the intention of the large setbacks is to protect residential uses. She said there are no residential uses near the cell tower. Mr. Charles Senzee, Planner, reviewed the background information and the analysis of the request, provided in his memorandum to the Board of Adjustment, dated September 28,2006 (a copy is on file in the Community Development Department). Mr. Senzee said the variance application does not meet any of the criteria for granting the variance; therefore, City staff cannot support the request. He said if the Board of Adjustment chooses to grant the variance requested for BA 06-12, for the property located at 1548 Seminola Boulevard, to allow a 352-foot encroachment into the southern separation requirements and a 10514 .foot encroachment into the eastern separation requirements, the motion should be based upon the staff report dated September 20, 2006, the Board of Adjustment's findings of fact and conclusions, the property site plan (Exhibit B) dated August of 2006, and the conditions stated in the staff report which were: 1. The variance shall only pertain to locating the communication tower as shown in accordance wrth Exhibit B. 2. The communication tower shall meet all other site development criteria. 3. Conditional use approval must be obtained from the Planning and Zoning Commission. 4. The project must be submitted for site plan review by the Development Review Committee. 5. A building permit for all structures on the property shall be obtained from the City's Building Safety Bureau within 120 days of the approval by the Board of Adjustment and a final inspection shall be approved within 120 days of the issuance of the building permit.