Planning Commission - Special Meeting

We're recording.

That was there long before we had the call.

It's 4.30. I'd like to call the meeting to order. Roll call, please.

Jake Castile. Here. Jim Jackson.

Here.

Pete McGorry.

Here.

David Miller.

Here.

Tom Tucker.

Here.

Connor Whalen.

Here.

Mike Zuloff.

Here. Okay, we're here in a special meeting for an adjudication hearing. Before we start the meeting, I'd like to anyone who is going to testify today, I have to swear you in, so please raise your right hand. And do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God, or under penalty of perjury?

Yes.

Okay.

All right. Thanks, Mr. Chair. So this application was submitted by Fike Design Group on behalf of BAS Broadcasting for property owned by Bayshore Counseling at 1634 Sycamore Line for a conditional use permit pursuant to section 921.02A to construct a new AM radio tower. So here's the zoning map. The subject property is outlined in red. We can see it's split zoned. The front half with the existing office building is zoned general business. And the back half, which is where the tower will be located, is zoned GM for general manufacturing. Here's a location map to show the existing conditions of the site from an aerial perspective. And then here's a few street view photos. The proposed location viewed from Sycamore Line is pretty deep into the property. You have to enter the parking lot to see it. So it's past this fence line, if you can see. And then really, it'll be just a little bit in front of that existing building. That'll be the tower base. So the project summary is essentially to remove the existing 199 foot tall AM radio tower at the current site of 1640 Cleveland Road and replace it with a new 188 foot tall AM radio tower behind the building at 1634 Sycamore line and that comes with some associated site improvements as well. So they're moving about half a mile to the northwest and up in zoning district and therefore allowed intensity.

While you're on this slide, if you don't mind, Mr. Panas, you'll see the existing tower location in that general business district is pretty closely surrounded by quite a bit of residential zoning, the light blue and yellow, whereas where the proposed new location is in a manufacturing district surrounded by business and commercial zoning. Thank you.

So why here per the applicant? They could really only move the tower within a 1.5 mile radius to maintain their current regulatory status with the FCC while also maintaining their current level of service. So the site plan and scope of work, again, it's to install a 188-foot-tall AM radio tower supported by guy wires. The tower we set back about 350 feet from the Sycamore line right-of-way. That's the closest road right-of-way. about 154 feet behind Bayshore's building and as far away as possible from all other existing commercial and manufacturing buildings, which ranges from 148 feet at the shortest to up to 340 feet at the tower's base. And then for related work, we're going to zoom into on the right-hand side. Related work consists of demolishing one vacant commercial building, installing a 15-foot-wide gravel drive connecting more or less to the existing parking lot, the parking lot. We also have a 14 by 20 6 foot tall security fencing around the shed and tower base. Here is a few proposed elevations of course all of this was provided in the packet but just for some visual perspective this is pretty similar to what the this was a required part of the submission and thank you to the applicant for that this just shows that the proposed tower in red with other existing towers within a radius of two miles. so we've got a bit of analysis and it's going to be best for the public record that I go through each one this is not a common type of case that goes before the commission so let's get to it. First standard out of 13, A, the wireless communications tower or other facility as proposed, including any buffer, must be consistent with and not be detrimental to the aesthetic environment of the general area in which it is proposed, including but not limited to all adjacent properties. Staff analysis is that the proposed AM radio tower is located on industrial zone property, surrounded primarily by commercial land uses and set back a generous distance from buildings and the roadway. The buffer the existing mature trees on the property will remain The setback distances zoning surrounding lane uses and lack of lighting on the top Indicate it will not be detrimental to the aesthetic environment during the day or nighttime if it's under 200 feet It doesn't need a bright light on the top. I learned that too The lot in which the telecommunications facility is located shall meet the minimum lot size for the district a wireless Telecommunications tower or other facilities shall not be constructed on a non-conforming lot Staff analysis the subject property meets the minimum lot size for the GM manufacturing district The tower shall be located at a minimum of 200% of the height of the tower from any residential district staff Analysis is that the subject property is located at least that distance which the distance? 200% of the tower height is 376 feet And you'll notice on the right hand side the tower is located at least 600 feet from the closest residential district in orange and the maximum height of the tower shall be 200 feet unless special circumstances are presented. This tower is under 200 feet. Fifth, the tower shall be of a monopole construction unless special circumstances are presented by the applicant. Staff analysis, the proposed tower is not of monopole construction. It's guide wire supports. The applicant The applicant's registered architect explained that the special circumstances are that unlike a cell tower, which are typically monopole, the AM tower itself functions as part of the AM radio wave transmitting system, which is why it has to be held up by guy wires, meaning the guide lattice tower has a fundamentally different engineering purpose than a cell Monopole tower where as I understand that the cell towers the goal is to get the antenna as high up as possible And then they work.

It's it's kind of from the ground up with am Our understanding is the these standards for analysis for conditional uses for these types of facilities were primarily Written and adopted for the regulation of cell towers while the AM tower falls within this and you have to review in this way that's why the language is kind of geared towards a Regulating cell towers. That's what it was written for. But this is not a cell tower. It's an AM tower.

Mr. Chairman. Yes. I'd like to ask Ms. Blair. Is that like expert testimony or are you just paraphrasing to explain?

Staff's understanding to explain the context of the proposal.

Thank you. Okay. Sixth, the tower shall be constructed to accommodate various other companies' antennas, depending on how tall the tower is. Our analysis is that the applicant is not co-locating because, per the applicant's registered architect, AM signals cause too much interference with antennae. Seventh. I'm sorry. I didn't understand that.

I don't either.

Okay, I'll read the whole thing. The wireless telecommunications tower shall be constructed to accommodate at least one additional telecommunication.

With the cause too much interference with the existing use. Right.

No, not the existing use. So the proposed use would cause too much interference with any future companies' antennas. Anybody that would potentially even want to attach to this tower, it mechanically would not work because of the type of technology.

So the code wants, if you build a cell tower, it wants other companies. If AT&T wants to build a tower, they want Verizon to be able to tack onto that tower. So Verizon doesn't build their own tower. Again, it's about selling. But AM can't share a tower with cellular wireless. So this one doesn't need to co-locate according to what they're telling us.

Okay. Because I did some research. Okay. Go ahead.

7 the maximum size of the Wireless telecommunications equipment shelter shall be 300 square feet per shelter in a total of 750 square feet for more than one shelter unless special circumstances are presented We say the proposed equipment shelter will be 120 120 square feet and therefore complies with this requirement 8. The wireless telecommunications equipment shelter shall require a building permit and shall meet all setbacks and height requirements in the zoning district in which it is located. Staff analysis, the applicant will apply for the correct building permit and as proposed the shelter does comply with all applicable yard and height regulations for this zoning district. Ninth, if the wireless telecommunications tower and facility are located on a lot with an existing use, the installation and operation of that tower shall not interfere with the existing use. Our analysis is as proposed, the tower will not interfere with the existing office use. the applicant shall submit a landscaping plan that indicates how the wireless telecommunications tower and associated facility will be screened from adjoining uses staff analysis is that the applicant did not submit a formal landscaping plan however their site plan the base image below that site plan showing all the foliage and our discussion with them all document that the applicant intends to keep as much of the existing vegetation as possible for screening and 11th the applicant shall demonstrate that the wireless telecommunications tower must be located where it is proposed in order to service the applicant service area and why the applicant is not co-locating its facilities on any existing structures of sufficient height within a two mile radius from the proposed facility location Our analysis is the following according to information provided by the applicant the existing site at on Cleveland Road has been sold and the tower must be moved as a condition of that sale and further what we mentioned earlier BAS broadcasting is required by the Federal Communications Commission or FCC to move the tower site no more than 1.5 miles from the current site in order to maintain their existing operations and service area. that the owner of the property is granted an easement or entered into a lease for the proposed facility and that vehicular access is provided to the facility. Our analysis is that the applicant has expressed in writing that they have come to a written agreement for a land of the document is listed as a recommended condition of approval. Last standard of criteria is that a minimum setback of 10 feet from any adjacent public right of way is required for all towers and all shelters and all other related structures. This is approximately 350 give or take linear feet from the nearest public right of way which is sycamore line. Other departments did not have Therefore, staff recommends approval with the following conditions. One, all applicable permits must be obtained through the building department, engineering department, division of planning, and any other applicable agency prior to construction. And two, the owner of the AM radio tower shall furnish copies of the following documentation to the city as required by the ordinance. A, easement or land lease demonstrating the right to use the land in question for this purpose. b certificates of insurance evidencing compliance with section 921.11 limited liability insurance and bonds and c notice of discontinuance of their current tower located at 1640 cleveland road.

Good afternoon, I'm John Fike, an architect for the project 224 East Water Street, Sandusky. For the most part, I think, Planning Department has done a wonderful job of going through this. They ran me through the mill to make sure I got all the answers to their questions. Anybody that knows Mr. Pantus knows he's pretty thorough, and we appreciate his diligence on that. We just received this afternoon, and I got it just about an hour ago, a letter from a neighbor who had some questions on it, and primarily it has to do with radio frequency. and the effects of that. They asked a bunch of questions. In answer to that, Mr. Pannis had given us a section of the code that says here's where everything had been looked at. I pulled that up for some, to answer some of their questions. Primarily they were interested in, hey, if the cell tower is here, or the radio tower is here, what's that effect going to be on us? Well, And they want to know if we could provide studies on what all this has done. The study has been maintained. I got a section of that code section. It's the bulletin that was sent out that basically says extensive reviews and scientific literature relating to RF biological effects have been done. The FCC has adapted their requirements and our work has to go, I mean, we have to comply with FCC requirements. So we're well underneath their maximum allowable for radio towers and so we're pretty confident that any RF effect to any of the neighbors is well, well below the maximum allowed. I could leave this with you if you'd like, just in case the neighbor wants to have some information. The second piece that I pulled out of there is it just says that the FCC authorizing license of devices, transmitters, and facilities that generate RF radiation. It has jurisdiction over the services, and we're required to meet those requirements. So it's just another piece of paper that's in there. With that, I think most of their comments, I think... Whereas I understand where they're coming from. They've got questions. I think the FCC has gone through and has answered all those questions. They just need a chance to adjust them. And I think they would agree that, hey, everything is well within their requirements. You know, I deal with building departments and planning departments all the time. FCC requirements are different. I mean, this is Big Brother looking, and they've got to jump through a lot of hoops to be able to keep their license and keep operating. It's not a real simple, hey, we're a radio station. We're going to broadcast what we want. There's a big, long list of things that they have to comply with and do and have been for 1948.

What's that? 1947. 1947. So...

The BAS, which is the company we're dealing with, has moved their office because that property was for sale. They were very nice and kept it in town. If anybody knows where it is, it's on the corner of Tiffin Ave and Venice Road. They did a lot of work on a building. It's very comfortable. The radio tower is the other piece of that. They couldn't move that out there. It's too far. Their license doesn't cover it. So they had to find a place. They looked at several. This was probably the best, at least in the ones that I've seen. If you've ever driven by there, that place is so overgrown on the fences that you don't know what's back there. Originally, the building up front and these buildings in the back were part of Bacon Construction, which is a big firm that was in business for the longest time. They are out of business, and they sold that. The buildings in the back haven't been used since they left. The building in the front is a nice office. They have no problems with the radio station coming in with the cell tower, or radio tower. I keep on saying cell tower. It smacked my hand. So... And I don't know what the neighbor's use is, but we're almost 200 feet away from them, which is where the tower is going to go. So any effects on them, even at ground level, you'll have a hard time seeing much of this tower. It'll just be the upper portion. The other thing you have to remember is because of the height of the tower, there are no lights on it. The use out here is just a tower. There's an equipment building there. It's nothing that there's someone in there every day. I think they only come in there when they have to do some service work. Other than that, it's basically an unoccupied site. And we're already prepared to take care of the other issues, which is go to the building department, get permits for the work.

Any questions? Did the applicant have to get FCC approval to move the towers?

I can answer that. I don't know because I'm handling foundations, location, getting the planning department to overlook everything and make sure I comply with what they need in the building department next. As far as issues with that... Would you come up?

I have a question for the architect as well. Sure. Go ahead. Ask him first before he goes down.

I'm not going away.

Well, it doesn't matter. I just figured since you were up here, I just wanted some clarification. It says the special circumstance of the situation is that the AM tower itself functions as part of the AM transmitting system. So this is why it needs to be supported by the guys. Could you elaborate? Because I was looking around, and it does seem like the consensus is that guy supported towers are typically better for more rural areas, and then the monopoles are better for small towns and things like that. And so I wondered.

He'll be able to answer that better than I can. I can tell you what I think, but it's his business. He builds towers.

Could you just put in layman's terms then what you mean by the AM tower itself?

You can answer both questions.

Come on up because we're recording.

Might be able to help.

Good afternoon and thank you. My name is David Gates, President and CEO of CZM Communications. I've been in broadcasting since I was 11. I hold all of the FCC licenses necessary to work in this area, including Department of Defense and so forth. We do work with DOD providers, but we don't discuss that information. So let me try and freeform address your concerns because they're legitimate. First document is there's something called OET-65, OET-65, which the FCC put together years ago regarding human exposure. We have to be fully compliant with OET-65, and that's what I was pulling down so that I had it today. When I saw the brief that came in, I went, oh, I'm too loud or too...

You're clipping a little bit too loud.

Too loud, so stand back. So I pulled that down because I thought that would be helpful and that can be entered into the record. It's a federal document. When we apply, and I'm going to get to your question about monopoles in a second, when we apply for a license from the FCC, which we have to do first, means we have to submit for a construction permit and to show that we're submitting for the construction permit we have to show that we have honorable use of the land and things have been cleared and so forth so we we turn that in we have to demonstrate that we are compliant with OET 65 and if you look at the pictures in the presentation and you see the fence The fence there outlines the area where you wouldn't want a family having a picnic. You only want people who are trained to go inside that area. So that's what the fence is all about. Typically ours are in wood as well. So that fence goes up. And then when you license the station, you certify that you have met the compliance requirements that you submitted in the construction permit. with something that we call a license to cover. So there's several steps in that, but all of them are under federal perjury and, you know, you don't screw around with the FCC. So things are compliant there. If I might, the difference between the cellular towers, if this is the cellular tower, you'll see that there'll be what we call sector antennas. They look kind of like that speaker. And there'll be three of them here and three of them here and three of them here. And then there'll be another layer, three of them here, three of them here, three of them here. And it'll be Verizon, AT&T, and whoever else on that tower. Because the cellular frequencies are higher in the band, they can use smaller antennas. And that's what those do up there. And just a little sidebar that's kind of interesting, the reason they use three here and three here and three here is it lets them reuse the frequencies three times. Because they can have a car there, a car there, and some lady calling in from her home on this one. So with those higher frequencies, they can get a lot of antennas there. With AM, which started way back in the 30s and the 40s, right, KDKA and Pittsburgh, the frequencies are so long that the actual tower itself is the antenna. And that's why everything is written that way. Let me also address one other thing. It is possible to build a self-supporting tower. But the safety of the way the towers are designed today is when you have a guide tower, should anything ever happen, ice or whatever, they tend to fold up on themselves. Because the guy wires actually direct the energy down towards the center of the tower. And that's demonstrated time and time again. So there are additional concerns, which is making sure that things are safe. which is to use the guy wire system so if it collapses, it tends to fold on itself. And they actually fold up in pretty compact areas on the rare occasions when they do come down. Let me just stop there. Have I addressed the questions before the committee, and have I raised any other questions that should be covered? Did you use your question answered?

Well, so you're saying that you did have to get permission from the FCC to move that tower?

Yes, yes.

Okay.

And the fact that the land will not be available to us means that we have to find a new location. And then to allow that to serve, and you said it well when you read your, to serve, you know, with the right... the similar service area, we have to be in that one and a half mile area or whatever's been specified in the drawing there. Okay, so you understand the guy wires, how that...

I understand it with regard to it being a safety measure, but I still am not understanding the AM tower itself functions as part of the transmitting system. As you said, it's one large antenna. Yeah. So... I guess, other than the safety.

Do you understand sound waves?

Yes.

Okay. Cellular would be like this big. AM is like this big. And that's why they need the big tower.

Well, that's the height of the tower. I'm talking about why it can't be monoposed. Right. I understand that. Right. So it can't stand on its own?

No, it's not that. Let me say it this way. This might make it clearer. With FM, you'll see that they have those what we call bays up at the top. And the tower is nothing for FM but a support structure. And the same is true with cellular. For all these antennas up here, the actual antennas, the physical antennas up there are really small, by comparison, right? But the tower is just the support structure. Because the frequency is so low, to your example, think of a bass note as being extremely long, or a pipe organ in a church is extremely long. The tower itself needs to be that long to allow the transmitter to make the station come out of the tower. And so actually the tower itself is the antenna unlike all these other aspects where the tower is merely the support structure.

Right, so then you're doing the guy system because the guy wires are simply the support structure.

Yeah, the guy wires hold the antenna up. The support structure. Yeah, well, the guy wires hold the system up with insulators that allow it to be electrically separated from the guy. The guy wires are electrically separated from the tower so the tower can radiate freely, I guess is a good way to say it.

Okay, so the tower could stand on its own, but we need those support structures.

The ones that fold down can't stand on their own. They need the guy wires to keep them straight. There's an old line, and I'll... got this from an engineer one time. He said, you can stack beer cans to the moon as long as you keep them perfectly straight. What happens is structurally, without the guy wires, you don't have the stability in the tower. They actually keep the tower pointed straight up and down so that the energy is concentrated on the tower base.

So what I understand you're saying is it is possible to have it as a monopole, but you prefer to have the guy wire structure. No.

So it's not possible? No, not a monopole. You would have to... A monopole... The monopole will only work for cellular because of what they do with the base. If you want it, it would be outrageously expensive and big, but you could build something that looked like the Eiffel Tower there, I guess.

Right.

But... Because you deal with something called overturning moment.

Because it's not just static loads to just stay there. You have to factor the increased level of wind, and then you have snow, other precipitation.

Yes, I understand needing the structure. I think we've nailed that down. I just seen, as I was reading around that, AM transmitting systems can be built as monopoles and standard AM broadcast towers. are common for a monopole antenna. Now, again, I'm not an expert in this. I just did some general research, so I was prepared for the conversation. So I guess I'm just trying to understand what you're saying is impossible other than needing it for the structure.

Yeah, so I guess you could, in one sense, call an AM antenna a monopole. That's not the custom. The custom is that you would use monopole to refer something to like a flagpole or a cellular tower that's gently tapered. And so it may just be the way the language is used there. In our case, we call it a tower because that's what they've been calling it since 1928, I think.

Mr. Chairman.

Am I answering? I want to get everybody's questions. Anything else that I'm leaving out?

Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have a question for the applicant. So... Not giving testimony. I think we're seeing a lot of inexpert testimony. As a former machine designer, and I understand structural issues, I'm giving testimony. I'm simply stating not an opinion other than I'm convinced that it would be much more expensive to build an un-stayed monopole. My question is, does anybody ever do it? Really quick, like one.

No, not that I know of.

Thank you. Same wattage, yes or no? Same wattage? Same transmittal wattage? Yes or no?

Yes or no to what question on wattage?

Is it the same wattage? Oh, yeah, yeah.

We're not raising the power or anything.

Okay, thank you. Thank you. I'm trying to save you and everybody else some time. Tell me again why you're moving? Does somebody else need the land or?

Yeah, we've lost control of the land.

I see.

So we have to move the tower to preserve the WLAC station.

Thank you. Okay. Last I checked, unless we changed it, we have an ordinance that requires a conditional use or a variance, I think it is, for barbed wire. It was just to not let the town look like a gulag, right?

Yeah, we're not using barbed wire.

What's that? We're not using barbed wire. Okay, well, I'm seeing it in the pictures, but I don't... Okay, no barbed wire, just a fence.

Right, right, that's why I said we'll put up a fence.

In this picture, there's like...

Double barbed wire, right? We had an application for a razor wire, and they said, do you really need that? And they said, well, not really. Okay, whatever. So it was a condition, and all right, good.

So you don't really need... We're not going to use razor wire.

We're not going to use barbed wire. You don't need barbed wire. Okay, good. So guide... Tell me again why... So it's not guide lattices that are incompatible with other uses. It's the fact that it's an AM. Okay, so, and it needs to be vertical because ground plane, whatever. Because we all know, well, some of us know that a long wave antenna might be nothing but a long piece of wire, right? Exactly. You can't do that. You need, your testimony is that you need Needed to be vertical and okay. It's it's it's it's coming together now Place I'm gonna I'm gonna have some comments, but I think you're covering yes on the last page of the application on a

sheet titled of note, the last paragraph, the FM antenna coverage is directly related to the antenna height above ground. The FM antenna usage this replaces is at the top of a similar height tower and reduction in height will degrade the signal performance. What I have heard so far is that this is for AM only and I don't hear anything about also having an FM function, this seems to be inconsistent.

Fair question. Yeah, the current AM stick holds the backup FM for WCPZ. The concern right now is preserving WLEC to represent the community. Oh, thank you so much.

That's the note he was referencing.

So the current plan is to, let me read this just in case there's a... Misunderstanding. Accommodate multiple users. Oh, let's see. Proposed tower designed to accommodate multiple users. You can put an FM antenna on an AM tower in most cases, but the current concern right now is simply to preserve WLEC.

Will there be an FM on the top of this tower to...

I don't know if that's been decided yet or even considered. Because WCPZ has its own main tower that's a totally separate entity. And there may be historic reasons that they kept the FM that was on the legacy WLEC. I don't know. We haven't had a detailed discussion on that at all. So, I mean, you're raising something. Maybe I should have caught it when I got a copy of this thing this morning and was trying to read it quickly in the office before coming over.

I have two. Yes, sir. Can you get electrocuted touching the tower itself?

You couldn't. There's so many things that go into can you get electrocuted. You wouldn't want to touch the tower. Would you get a shock if you touched the tower? Yeah, probably. The good news is it's 1,000 watts and not 50,000. So everything is scaled down. It's a little bit similar, I guess, if you touched your tongue to the battery, a 9-volt battery, would you feel the shock? Yes. Would it kill you? Probably not. If you did it with a pacemaker, would that be stupid? Yeah. Yeah. And I say that because it's how you get shocked. If you've got one hand in your pocket, which Tesla originally taught us to do, you're probably not going to get shocked this way where it hurts you, kills you. If you've got one hand here on the ground and one hand here on the radiating element, you're going to get it through your heart.

If you're not standing in a puddle. I said if you're not standing in a puddle with...

Right, right, exactly. I mean, there's so many variables. It's not something that I would call a major concern. And again, there's a fence that will keep people out. Well, yeah, that was kind of the barbed wire thing.

Honestly, my only concern with the location is that it's not visible around. Currently now, it's visible all around if somebody jumped.

And that's currently what you have on Cleveland Road, correct? A fence around the tower.

Whatever's there is there. The other one was, so what would moving more than 1.5 miles entail? I see that it says you would have to get a new... You mean farther than that?

Yes. It's complicated to explain it, but I'll go through it as I understand it. Originally, all the AM stations were licensed to have proper distances from each other. Ohio is a very interesting state in that due to where the country was in the development of that technology, a lot of the stations in Ohio, and this is true of FM as well, are short-spaced. You couldn't put them in that way today. There was at one point in time more interference than the FCC felt from these stations hitting, their signals hitting each other. So what they did, in their infinite wisdom back in the day, is they gave everybody double the power. So everybody that was 500 watts went to 1,000, everybody that was 1,000 went up. Now you create a problem then, because you cannot, if you go to move a station, you cannot increase interference to any other station. You're not allowed to increase interference. So the way that's been dealt with is you get a very small area in which you can move, where it's presumed that you're not increasing interference. And we used a consultant, Tim Cutforth, out of Denver, who specializes in AM applications. And we used another guy who's retired now, Jack Mulaney, out of Washington, DC. to do those calculations and show that we could be compliant with all the rules as long as we stayed in this narrow area to move. And that's the 1.5? Yes.

So it's not like a hard rule of 1.5?

Right. It's a signal strength calculation that roughly translates to 1.5 miles. One more.

Was there consideration to putting it on the property that you guys are going to be broadcasting out of there?

We looked at everything. And the problem with AM on the size thing is you need what we call a ground plane. You have to put copper down in the ground to make sure that the signal radiates properly. To your point about the antenna, the part that stands up vertically is actually only half the antenna. The other half is the conductive surface that's right around the antenna. So we have ground radials that need to go out. TK and I, and I think John was part of that, although working through TK, we looked at site after site after site. TK and I have driven around the market looking for anything, and we were looking for a place that would be compliant with the city's requirements, both in the letter and also the spirit. And so that's where we found... you know a field that is kind of, to be blunt, kind of overgrown.

So what's the biggest issue with the location you guys are moving to? The house? Close proximity? Is that the only reason it's not going there?

Well, the biggest issue was kind of everything. Because you have to stay in the area. You've got to find a place that's pleasant within the community that would work. I mean, it's not easy anymore. Most of these sites were built back before there was all this development So you're really stuck stuck. The concern for LEC is it provides sports coverage for the local teams. It's known for the farming community across the state because it's got a good signal. And so it's a well-respected operation. And so then you try and preserve that for the community because the FCC license still requires that you serve the community.

Any other? Yes. I got one more.

Okay. I'm going to leave my business card and sort of be entered into the record. And I don't know who to give it to. If there are any questions, I'll be seated here. If there's any follow-up, I'm happy to help.

How long is this going to take?

We're trying to whip the ponies because we lose the land. So we're hopeful to be up and operating. The current discussion time is in the month of November, if not earlier.

Okay, Mr. Chairman, the reason I ask that is, you know, the first question is, what's the rush? Why did we need a special meeting? And it sounds like you've... We lose the land. You're running out of time. It took a while to find a site. You're running out of time. You'll be ready to switch when per plan?

As quickly as we can.

I mean... When do you lose your...

But we lose the land by the end of the year, but we have to have the old tower down and everything stripped off the land by that time. So when I was in TK's office today, he's talking about if we can get it done in October. And then the other thing worth mentioning is obviously the new one goes up before the old one comes down because you've got to keep broadcasting.

The reason is, and you can understand my discomfort because we, you know, It's public hearing, so the public can raise their objections. And we've got a rather complex letter here to digest that I haven't had time to. So I'm hoping we hear from somebody from the public today. I don't know. You'll have their chance, right, Mr. Chairman? Okay, so I'm really, I'd be happy to do another meeting, but I'm kind of loathe to rush this until I can be convinced that the process has been completed. I mean, you're talking about a lease that was written how many decades ago that's ending, right? It's not like this is surprising you, right? I mean, I'm not being harsh, but I'm trying not to be harsh, but it's not like this is surprising you, right?

Well, it feels to me like it's surprising us.

Do you expect that they didn't want to renew it?

I don't know all the details.

Okay, all right.

I'm just trying to understand what...

what the consequences of our decision here.

I think they're big. That's right.

And does it justify not fully hearing from the public? So that's my... But yeah, I think you've answered the question though. Thank you.

I think your concern is valid. And the question is how to get everybody's concerns answered and as promptly as possible. I will say that BAS Broadcasting is operating in good faith. In TK's office this morning, for instance, I was part of a call to the insurance provider because we read the requirements of the community for insurance. Right. And went ahead, TK advanced already, and we've got the certificate of insurance. It's not included in the packet because John didn't even have it. But I've got copies of COI already, and we made sure that the insurance for that property was stepped up to be fully compliant with the city's requirements. So I think in a jammed-up situation, we're trying to do everything we can. And I believe, TK, when did we start the process? May?

Mr. Chairman, I don't have any more questions for the applicant. I will have questions for the staff and maybe the law department.

Thank you. Any other questions?

I have one more question, please, Mr. Chairman. Just for the record, you're not able to collocate because of, what were the reasons?

Oh, you can't, we couldn't find, because you could look for that, could we find another AM station in town that we could try and enter into their antenna? Sometimes that's possible, but in our search and understanding, we didn't find anything like that. WLEC is so unique that it's not like some markets where there's five antennas in a row and you can go to your neighbors.

Okay.

And that would, if we could do that, that would even be more cost efficiently.

Right. So the towers that are already in place, they're cell towers, you're unable to... Yeah, you can't... What happens is you couldn't do it.

I mean, I've never seen it done on a cell tower monopole. But, I mean, maybe somebody...

I was going to say, is it not possible or it hasn't been done, to your knowledge? Just out of curiosity. I don't know which way to answer that.

Okay, that's fine. If it hasn't been done, it's probably not possible because engineers are pretty good at coming up with solutions. And I don't mean that flippantly. I mean that very honestly from my heart.

No, I don't. I just wanted to get some clarification because, again, I was trying to look into some things and it...

was saying that it was possible, but. Let me say one other thing. You know, I first worked for TK as an employee when I was in my 30s. Everything I've seen about the man over the way he's conducted himself, multiple companies over the years, he got a good guy who is just trying to keep the broadcast station on the air and do everything right. And he tells me that all the time. I want to do everything right for this facility and be fully compliant in every regard. I don't see him playing games with modulation percentages. I don't see him playing games financially. I see him as just an honest, clean guy running a broadcast company, trying to keep the local information on the air. And that, to me, that counts as something or I wouldn't be here. So, I'll be over here if you need me.

I have one more question, actually. It's about the landscaping because we didn't bring it up at all. Just my last question was about the landscaping. You said that you intend to keep as much vegetation as possible. Are you going to submit any formal landscaping plan per the code at all? No.

No? Is it not?

You're going to keep it there? Okay. The language was a little ambiguous to me. It said we intend to keep as much as possible. So I just want to clarify that.

The only way you plan on doing it is running in where the fence goes, getting the topsoil out of there, put the shed in, put the base in. The building that's right behind it will come down and

Any other questions? Chairman.

Yes. A couple. Ms. Blair, no site plan approval for this?

It's not required. It's just the conditional use permit and the... Okay.

All right. Conditional use. All right. All right. Any other... Go ahead. Okay. So we're... Okay.

Any other questions? Because otherwise, anybody in the public would like to speak.

Yeah, I had a question. I could have sworn that I didn't find it. I remember inhabited structure in the legislation in the co-location. Am I to understand, number one, is that still in there, the inhabited structure limitation? What's an inhabited structure? Is there no inhabited structure? Is there a...

Is there a... Yes, that's jogging my memory. That is in this chapter, but it refers to, it's the section of the chapter where it's saying, okay, if the property in question is zoned the residential ones then you know then this is the it needs this sort of approval plus this or if it's owned these other ones then it needs conditional are you are you saying it's to clarify are you saying that if if it's an office that's inhabited only by workers during the day that's doesn't that is not correct correct yeah every everything in these standards and criteria that the code has us review specifically talks about the district not the use per se but the zoning district so when we reviewed this the closest residential zoning district was the R2F district approximately 600 feet away to the southwest. Since the requirement was to be at least 200% of the tower height or 376 feet away from that district, it met that standard.

I remember a discussion in a prior application and the issue was distance to an inhabited structure and what what made it inhabited. And it was not a residential use, but it was a structure in which a person might be present. An occupiable structure. Right. And perhaps there is a legal definition of inhabited. Does that mean sleeping in, or does that mean somebody in there? And I don't know if we ever... I don't remember what the outcome of that discussion was.

Okay. That language did not appear in any of the standards I have to review for this application. Okay.

Yeah, Mr. Chairman, I'm a little... Well, anyway, you want to hear from the public.

All right. Anyone else wish to speak?

Okay. Mr. Chairman.

Yep.

Application paper. motion to table for one week pending a special meeting to give us time to absorb the concerns of the citizen here because I only got this an hour ago I actually I it's been moved is there a second please I'll second it's been moved and seconded to postpone for a week

Mr. Chairman, a question on this stuff. Has that letter been put into the record? I'm not remembering anybody even mentioning it other than around the table.

Mr. Hastings. Did you get a copy?

It's been entered in the record as of this evening.

Yes. Okay, I mean, I didn't hear any reference to it on the presentation.

Right, because we received it Monday.

I mean, but did you mention that in your presentation?

I'm just... No, I did not.

Okay, that's kind of my point, and where I'm going with this is I've refrained from engaging in any questions. I happen to have represented these people, not currently, and not on this, but I feel that it's... apparent conflict of interest for me to engage in Question or discussion or voting so I didn't know when to bring that up That's why I was waiting for somebody to mention that this has been put in the record.

Yeah, so for the record a formal letter of objection Was submitted to staff this past Monday, August 31st Is can I ask staff?

Staff question sure quick. Why did we just receive this two hours ago when it was submitted Monday? We have to vote on this today I don't have really an issue with the tower at all, but I'm semi-attempted to vote with Mr. Zuloff here.

I'm not prepared to answer that question, but I would like to point out to the commission that this is an unsworn affidavit. There's no affidavit here. Under our rules, that's why you swear in everybody at the beginning of the meeting that everybody is supposed to be providing testimony. This letter is not testimony.

Thank you. that's true so to answer your question Mr. Whalen I think the only other aspect so we got it Monday why two hours before the meeting right it took me it took it took a couple days to verify the exact specifics that Mr. Hastings just outlined of what the procedure is for this since the very beginning of the letter reads I can't be at the meeting I'm submitting this instead and I happen to talk to this person over the phone a couple times last week so it's not that it was just oh crap I forgot I You know, there was a whole procedure internally that you were not made aware of, and I happened to send it out, yes, a couple hours before, but as a courtesy rather than saying, hey, guys, here's a letter at the meeting.

Can I ask the applicant one more question?

Yes, go ahead.

Is one week going to hurt you guys?

I think we can make that work if we if we could do that is a week too soon for notice Yes, yes need ten days correct correct and letters were sent out That's what the letters being sent out is what prompted this like unsworn testimony. I

Well then really it's just that the letter was just received and there wasn't time for research.

So the question is if this motion passes, first of all, if this motion passes, what would be the earliest we could have a meeting?

Ten days.

If we're required to send the letters out a second time, I don't know that we're required to send the letters out a second time. The code asks us to specifically focus on the the standards of evaluation, which we have done, not to address any specific comment brought up at the meeting. You have to separate the two.

That's true.

I have a question for you, for staff. If we did table it and then the applicant, or not the applicant, the, I guess, community member who had the dissent, they would be able to come to the meeting, hopefully, if their schedule was open, and then it would be... What terminology was it? Sworn testimony. That would give her an opportunity to speak her six-page letter. That was obviously important. If you tabled the meeting, we have her email address. At least let her know, even if you don't have to resend all the letters.

I'd wait to get a legal advice before we do any of that.

Mr. Chairman. Yes. Is it legal for us to, per the Robert's Rules of Order, we're not in order. Per Robert's Rules of Order, is it legal for us to suspend the debate to a specific time, not adjourn, just reconvene at a later time, a later specific time?

I don't think there's a legal distinction. Is this a question?

you know if we if we don't adjourn and then we reconvene at a specific you're going to stay here the whole time. Well, I don't know if we have to is that was the question and no I'm thinking probably not so let's let's just vote on times got a meeting to get to yes, something it's time to let's vote on this and see if we're going to post we didn't get an answer and one one so soon as we could meet. Did we. I mean, assuming we don't have to give additional notice, let me frame it another way. What is the minimum notice time, I don't remember, for a public meeting? Is it one week or two?

There's only minimum notice times when there's an adjudication hearing. What's not clear to me is whether a second iteration of this conversation would count as a hearing that we would legally be required to send notice out for.

That's the hang-up.

And that's something that I would go to my desk tomorrow and ask the law department for their opinion on and not answer live at a meeting.

Mr. Hastings, what do you think? My name's Tom Klein. I'm the owner of BAS Broadcasting. And I'm here to answer any questions that you have as well. But as far as historical issues are concerned, we have a tower on Cleveland Road that is 80 years old with a lifespan of 60. So it has to come down. The hut was a temporary building built back, I'm told, somewhere in the early 60s. We can't repair it anymore. So it came to the conclusion that we had to then move to another location which we're now on tiffin avenue 1640 tiffin avenue still on the city limits and it's a brand new facility if you didn't get a chance to come on during the open house this place is fantastic and we're here to stay If I move that tower any further than where it is, I lose FCC control of that license. It will then go from 1,000 watts to 500 watts during the day and 500 watts or 50 watts at night. Right now I have 1,000 watts during the day and 1,000 watts at night. And that makes for a really big, small-town radio station that goes out 35, 40, 50 miles at night. If I go to 50 watts, you can imagine how far that's going to go. And that's when we're broadcasting all of the high school sports. Anything that we do at night, if it's not at 1,000 watts and we give that up, I lose everything. Not from a financial perspective, but even if I went to sell that radio station, its value has dropped two-thirds. So my hope is that within this 1.5 miles, which we have identified this particular piece of property from Bayshore Counseling, and we're able to rent it, lease it, we don't have to spend another $250,000 for the property, That puts this project in a little over $200,000 for an AM radio station. That's a lot of money today for an AM radio station. But we're committed to the community. We're committed to having the ability to have a station that is going to perform well, and it's going to perform well for many, many years to come. Right now, it's on its last leg. You know, you can't get parts for a 1947 Gates transmitter anymore that's not made in China.

I have a question. Current tower, how close is that to residential?

What was that again, sir?

How close is the current tower to residential?

I did some of the studies. I didn't see many residential.

No, no, the current tower.

Oh, right now?

Yeah.

It's in a residential area.

Okay, and that's my point. This is going to be further away from people than the current tower has been for 80 years. That's the way I read this. So it's actually an improvement for the community as far as moving it away from people. That's what I read. It is. Okay.

Mr.. Chairman Without talking for me talking about a substantive issue here purely procedural on the motion at the table I guess my question would be to all of the people around this table What are we expecting to to hear or learn more a week down the road or ten days down the road good question I?

Can answer the reason I thought I explained the reason I? is that I haven't had time to digest a response from the public and I'm not saying that you know that this is I Don't know. I haven't decided if it comes to a vote tonight.

I don't haven't decided I'm gonna vote but I think you know Well, I see that the issue here is procedural not so much as the documents before us. I

Mr. Chairman, if the question is should we table or not, I would like to express my opinion that I don't see a reason to table it. I feel satisfied that due diligence has been satisfied. I think that this 11 and a half hour letter doesn't hold sway with me. It's been, I think, addressed both by Mr. Fike and on these other matters. I don't want to be obstructionist. I feel like I have done due diligence in listening and trying to understand, and I'm convinced that that delay doesn't serve a purpose from my perspective.

Okay. Are you ready for a vote on that? I do agree that all these questions that they bring up have been answered.

Mr. Chairman, could I have one more? One more, and then we're going to call the vote, because that's going to go on for another hour. Thank you. I think we should. For anybody who's impatient with this process, I think we're doing what we're supposed to be doing. I mean, it's our job to make sure we understand what we're doing. This is a long-term decision, and it's not us just being annoying. I think we're doing great in asking a lot of questions before we make decisions. decision that could affect the community. So thank you.

And I agree with that and I think that is our job and our responsibility.

So we're going to need a vote and then a roll call. I'd like to just clarify so everyone is aware that this is a vote on the motion to table. A vote of yes means we're going to table it. A vote of no is that we will vote on it tonight.

And then we'll need another motion.

Any questions on that? I hope not. Okay.

David Miller.

Me, no.

Mike Zuloff.

No.

Jake Castile. No. Jim Jackson.

No.

Connor Whelan.

No.

Pete McGorry.

Abstain.

Mr. Chair.

Tom Tucker.

No. I'm sorry. Okay. Mr. Chairman. Yes. Motion to approve the application subject to the conditions outlined in the staff report.

I'd like to discuss before a second.

No, no, you can only discuss after a second.

I'm second. Okay, go ahead. My only concern with any of this is that it's back hidden away. I don't know what the standard procedure is, but I don't see anybody jumping over that fence currently because you can see all around that fence. I'm familiar with where this is going to be, and it's a fence inside of a fence behind a border of buildings. It's a good place to sneak and climb a tower. I would actually recommend we do barbed wire here. I just want to say that for the record. I don't know if we need to actually allow that or not.

Okay. It's entered into the record. Okay. So we moved and seconded. Roll call. Okay.

Tom Tucker.

Yes.

Jim Jackson.

Yes.

Jay Castile. Yes. Mike Zuloff.

Yes.

Pete McGorry.

Abstain.

David Miller.

Yes.

Connor Whalen.

Yes.

Okay, I have our next meeting is the 23rd, but I heard we are going to have it or not have it because you said we don't have any agenda items.

The September 23rd meeting is officially canceled.

Okay, that's what I thought. That one is canceled, so our next meeting will be in October.

That's Wednesday, October 28th.

Okay. Any other comments? Motion to it. Yes.

On behalf of the AAS, I want to thank you. I re-read it again. Hank has done his due diligence and run us through the mill, make sure we answer all the questions, and we appreciate that. Appreciate that. Appreciate the time and the work that you've done here tonight.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you all. Motion to adjourn.

Okay. Can I say something to the commission once the cameras go? Not to you guys, but can everybody here state? I need a second.

I need a second. It's been moved and seconded. We are adjourned.

Cool. Sorry, everybody.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. I don't want a violation of the open meeting.

I was trying to apologize for cutting them off because everybody started moving.