Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telecom Monopine topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves 75‑foot monopine cell tower permit with reduced gate setback after industry opposition
Summary
The Enterprise board approved a use permit for a proposed 75‑foot monopine cell tower at a nursery site, granting a reduced gate setback; an SBA Communications representative urged denial or postponement pending investigation of collocation on an existing tower.
Get email alerts on the Telecom Monopine topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Enterprise Town Advisory Board approved a use permit on April 30 for a proposed 75‑foot “monopine” cell tower located on an existing nursery property in the industrial area near Ford Avenue and Lindell Road, granting a minor design waiver for a reduced access gate setback.
Applicant representative Michelle Johnson described a 75‑foot top‑of‑steel monopine (80‑foot top of branches) within an approximately 8‑acre nursery site surrounded by a 9‑foot CMU wall. The application sought a reduced vehicular gate setback from the standard 50 feet to about 42.3 feet; the applicant said moving the site’s perimeter wall to obtain 50 feet would require rebuilding existing wall infrastructure. The applicant said routine maintenance visits would be infrequent — roughly monthly or every 60 days.
SBA Communications representative Mark Albright told the board he had learned of the application only recently and said SBA already operates a tower about 0.68 miles away with available space for collocation. He urged denial or postponement so engineering teams could evaluate whether collocation on the existing tower would meet the applicant’s coverage and capacity needs.
A wireless‑industry representative for the applicant countered that the proposed site addressed localized capacity and coverage gaps east of the SBA tower and said the proposed location would serve Verizon’s capacity needs where coverage degradations exist. The board noted that federal and county rules require applicants to consider collocation and alternative solutions; however, the board’s land‑use review is limited to the site and the waivers before them.
After discussion the board approved UC250247 per staff conditions, including the reduced gate setback and other development standards. The transcript records the SBA representative recommending denial or postponement to allow time for engineering coordination, but the board's motion carried.
