February 16, 2012

Mr. Lavigne stated that he is questioning the conditional use “D” variance as part of the application. Ms. Borg stated that the application requires three “D” variances. Chairman Neuer stated that this is the Board that hears these types of applications. Mr. Buechler stated that if Mr. Lavigne thinks otherwise he should speak now. Mr. Lavigne stated that he would like an interpretation of the zoning ordinance 25-4 for commercial antennas because he believes what his applicant is proposing falls under that. Ms. Beirne said that she agrees with him and that it does fall under commercial antennas according to the ordinance. Mr. Lavigne stated that be is questioning the “D” variance for more than one principal use. Ms. Beime stated that it was already determined that every carrier has been a different use. Chairman Neuer questioned how Ms. Borg came to the conclusion about two uses. Ms. Borg stated that each antenna grouping is a different use. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Lavigne if he would like to amend the application to include an interpretation asking if it is more than one principal use and Mr. Lavigne said yes. Chairman Neuer also asked Ms. Beirne if it is considered more than one principal use and she stated that they have always considered them a different use and it is more than one use on a principal lot. Chairman Neuer asked for a motion to approve amending the application; Mr. Bullock made the motion and Mr. Bucchler seconded. The vote was as follows: Buechler: Yes Steinhart: Yes Bullock: Yes Sussman: Yes Gabry: Yes Weiss: - Quentzel: Yes Chairman Neuer ‘Yes Sacks: - Chairman Neuer stated that it is a conditional use. Mr. Quentzel stated that he is conflicted and feels that it’s a commercial antenna and not a different use. Chairman Neuer stated that, historically, when you have a different antenna on the same tower it is a different use and that is how the Board has historically considered similar matters. Mr. Lavigne stated that, with it being a conditional use, the ordinance for the height is under 200°. He questioned if it was still a “D” variance. Mr. Buechler stated that the ordinance requirement is under 200’; Mr. Lavigne said that they do meet that requirement. After some discussion the consensus was that the applicant does not need a height variance. Mr. Lavigne presented his first witness. Mr. Dan Collins approached the podium and was

et that requirement. After some discussion the consensus was that the applicant does not need a height variance. Mr. Lavigne presented his first witness. Mr. Dan Collins approached the podium and was sworn under oath. Mr. Collins stated that he was an FCC compliance expert; he has an electrical degree and has testified before this Zoning Board before in September, 2011. Chairman Neuer accepted his credentials as an FCC compliance expert. Mr. Collins stated that his report was included in the application package. Chairman Neuer asked Mr. Collins if he was to ask him to read his report, would he testify that it was accurate. Mr. Collins replied yes and Chairman Neuer admitted Mr. Collins’ compliance report into evidence as exhibit Al.