Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wireless Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves AT&T Potlatch Hill tower permit after court order; requires monopole and screened security fence
Summary
The Kootenai County Board of County Commissioners on March 13 approved CUP22-4430, a conditional use permit for an AT&T wireless facility at Potlatch Hill, with conditions requiring a monopole design and a security-screened perimeter fence.
The Kootenai County Board of County Commissioners on March 13 approved CUP22-4430, a conditional use permit for an AT&T wireless facility at Potlatch Hill, with conditions that the applicant use a monopole (stealth) design and provide a security-screened perimeter fence.
County staff reported they had followed up on board concerns about road access and firefighting water. Staff said the highway district and fire district were not supportive of additional road widening or water improvements; the fire district identified existing hydrants in an adjoining city subdivision and at the corner of Sky Harbor Drive and Potlatch Hill Road as the water sources they would use.
Commissioners discussed design and screening. One commissioner suggested requiring a monopole design to match other facilities and a security screen; staff confirmed a perimeter fence is required by code and that landscaping is expected to provide additional screening. Staff also noted the applicant must submit a preliminary structural analysis; the building official will review any revised monopole structural analysis at the building-permit stage and a new "shot clock" applies to that permit review.
Commissioners were informed that the county previously denied an AT&T application and a court ruled the denial unlawfully prohibited AT&T from closing a significant gap in wireless coverage. The court order, as read into the record, directed the county to issue the requested conditional permit and "grant all other authorizations necessary for construction and operation of the proposed facility," finding denial violated federal telecommunications law as stated in the order.
A motion to approve CUP22-4430 with the conditions of a monopole design and a security-screened fence was made and seconded. The board recorded aye votes from Commissioner Eberline, Commissioner Duncan and Chair Matari and the motion carried.
The approval implements site-specific conditions and does not alter the code requirements for landscaping, fencing, or building-permit review. Commissioners and staff noted public comment had been strongly opposed to the facility in earlier proceedings, and the approval followed the court's instruction that the county must not effectively prohibit siting of the facility.
