The last Public Hearing was October 13 at 7 p.m., in the Library Chambers.

Grievance #1

Cell towers should not be placed near residential areas per the city code 15-1-69-A-2 or p. 197.

The Code states that the purpose and goal of the code is to “encourage the location of towers in non-residential areas.”

Grievance #2

The board should not consider a site when reasonable alternatives exist as per code 15-1-35-E-3-a-2 or p41. The Code states the “board of adjustment shall not grant a variance when: The failure of the owner did not consider other reasonable alternatives which did not require a variance.” 11 reasonable alternatives have been provided to the city.

Grievance #3

For safety reasons the tower should be 125 feet from a home as per code 15-1-69-G-2-d-1 or p.208.

The Code states “Towers must be set back a distance equal to at least one hundred twenty-five (125) percent of the height of the tower from any adjoining lot line, but may be reduced by the commission if the goals of this ordinance would be better served thereby.” There are lots and a residence within 125 feet.

Grievance #4

The tower should not be within 200 feet of a residence per code 15-1-69-G-2-e-1 or p.208. “Separation from all residentially zoned properties areas shall be a minimum of two hundred (200) feet, but may be reduced by the commission if the goals of this ordinance would be better served thereby.”

Grievance #5

The commission already denied the conditional use permit on their first vote Sept 22 at the public hearing. There was a failed vote on Sept. 22, 2-4. This meets the stated purpose of code 15-1-32-G-2 or p. 30 stating that the commission can deny it. There should be no more vote for 1 year per the code. This can be clearly seen in the minutes at 1:11:30 on YouTube.

Grievance #6

There is an adverse and instrusive effect upon property within 300' of the tower breaching code 15-1-32-E -2-3 (2) “There shall be no significant adverse or intrusive effect upon property within three hundred (300) feet of the external boundaries of the subject property as a result of the proposed use, and; (3) The proposed change would not be detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare of the persons or property in the surrounding area, nor to the community in general.” Some have planned investments that are at risk.

Grievance # 7

There shall be no detrimental effect per City Code 15-1-35-E-2-d, “Granting the variance will not have a detrimental effect on the property, adjoining property, the surrounding neighborhood, or the city in general; and...”

Kevin Lowery,

Show Low

(0) comments

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.