|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
DCPREZ-2014-10672
DaneCounty-Planning
>
Zoning
>
1 Rezones
>
2010s
>
2014
>
DCPREZ-2014-10672
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/28/2015 11:38:35 AM
Creation date
10/28/2015 9:59:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Rezone/CUP
Rezone/CUP - Type
Rezone
Petition Number
10672
Town
Rutland Township
Section Numbers
34
AccelaLink
DCPREZ-2014-10672
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
192
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
2.Utilize a self-support structure,eliminating the need for guy wires <br /> 3.Install white day and white night strobe lights <br /> 4.Install bird diverter devices on the guy wires <br /> To address the four factors listed above,several alternatives were reviewed by the client for the <br /> proposed tower facility,and are further discussed below. <br /> 1.Reducing the tower height to less than 200 feet is not feasible at this site since it would not <br /> meet the necessary coverage objectives. <br /> 2.A change from a guyed tower to a self-support structure is not feasible as the additional <br /> cost associated with a self-support tower may render coverage in this rural area <br /> impractical, <br /> 3.The tower owner has agreed dual-medium intensity lighting,but the side lights will flash at <br /> a minimum rate of 30 flashes per minute. White lighting at night is typically not <br /> acceptable to meet local zoning standards. However,this issue can be discussed with <br /> the local zoning representatives and an attempt can be made to implement this <br /> recommendation if compatible with the surroundings and as approved by the FAA. <br /> 4.Bird diverter devices are not currently proposed for this tower. <br /> Additionally,the proposed communications facility is designed to accommodate at least three <br /> additional telecommunication carriers,precluding the need to construct additional towers and <br /> associated compounds in this area. <br /> SECTION 5:CONCLUSIONS <br /> Edge Consulting has made the following determination for the proposed 488-foot guyed <br /> communications tower: NO EFFECT for the Whooping crane(Grus americanus), Higgins eye <br /> pearly mussel(Lamps///s higginsh),Sheepnose(Plethobasus cyphyus),Eastern prairie fringed <br /> orchid Platanthera/eucophaea),Mead's milkweed(Asclep/as meadil),and Prairie bush-clover <br /> (Lespedeza leptostachya). We request your concurrence on our determination of effect. <br /> In addition,Edge Consulting requests your correspondence in regards to mitigation measures to <br /> reduce the potential risk to migratory birds. Please inform us if any preferred mitigation measures <br /> are recommended for this project. <br /> If we do not receive correspondence from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service within 30 <br /> days_of receipt of this letter, Edge Consulting will assume there are no concerns regarding any <br /> listed threatened or endangered species or designated critical habitats,and that the bird <br /> mitigation measures noted above are acceptable for the proposed tower. <br /> Respectfully, <br /> Tracy . runasky <br /> Environmental Scientist <br /> Edge Consulting Engin:- c. <br /> tdrunasky@edgeconsult.com <br /> Street Maps <br /> USGS Quad Map <br /> Site Plan <br /> Site Photographs <br /> 5080 FWS Ltr Submittal_Guy Wires 3 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.