| Date |
Text |
| 2020-02-13 14:44:31 | INCOMPLETE APPLICATION |
| | |
| | PERMIT 19020390 - WEST PALM BEACH NODE 2 SITE #15034001 |
| | INTERSECTION S. FLAGLER DRIVE AND S. CLEMATIS - 2ND |
| | REVIEW |
| | |
| | REPEAT COMMENT: IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTIONS 78-402(B) |
| | AND 78-411(B)(4) OF THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH CODE OF |
| | ORDINANCES, THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH IS REQUESTING |
| | THAT THIS PROPOSED SMALL WIRELESS FACILITY BE MOVED TO |
| | ANOTHER LOCATION IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND PLACED ON AN |
| | ALTERNATIVE UTILITY POLE OR ON A NEW UTILITY POLE TO BE |
| | INSTALLED WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHILE STAFF |
| | APPRECIATES THE REMOVAL OF THE POLE FROM THE FLAGLER |
| | DRIVE MEDIAN, VERIZON DID NOT CONTACT STAFF REGARDING |
| | ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS PRIOR TO RESUBMITTING THE |
| | APPLICATION. |
| | |
| | PLEASE SEE THE LIST BELOW FOR AN ANALYSIS OF THE |
| | DEFICIENCIES IN INFORMATION REQUIRED BY SECTION 78-401 |
| | OF THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH CODE AS PART OF THE |
| | COMMUNICATION FACILITIES PLACEMENT PERMIT APPLICATION. |
| | THE DEFICIENT INFORMATION MUST BE PROVIDED FOR STAFF TO |
| | REVIEW THE PERMIT APPLICATION. PLEASE NOTE THAT STAFF |
| | HAS ALSO INCLUDED SOME SUBSTANTIVE REVIEW COMMENTS, |
| | THAT WHILE NOT RESULTING IN A DEFICIENT APPLICATION, |
| | NEED TO BE ADDRESSED OR THE PERMIT WILL NOT BE |
| | APPROVED. |
| | |
| | 1) UPDATED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING A SURVEY |
| | PREPARED BY A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYOR. THE SURVEY |
| | PROVIDES THE REQUIRED INFORMATION EXCEPT IF FAILS TO |
| | SHOW THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, SO STAFF IS UNABLE FOR |
| | VERIFY THAT THE PROPOSED POLE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE |
| | RIGHT-OF-WAY OR ON PRIVATE (CITY OWNED) PROPERTY. A |
| | COMPARISON WITH CITY RECORDS INDICATES THAT THE POLE |
| | MAY OR MAY NOT BE ON CITY PROPERTY; HOWEVER, IF THE |
| | PROPOSED PULL-BOXES ARE CLEARLY ON THE CITY OWNED |
| | PROPERTY. THESE ITEMS MAY NOT BE LOCATED ON CITY |
| | PROPERTY WITHOUT CITY APPROVAL AND POSSIBLY A LEASE |
| | AMENDMENT. THE APPLICATION IS NOT COMPLETE WITHOUT THE |
| | RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE SHOWN ON THE SURVEY |
| | |
| | 2) REPEAT COMMENT: CONCEALMENT METHODS DESCRIPTIONS - |
| | THE PROPOSED SUPPORT POLE DOES NOT MEET THE CITY |
| | CONCEALMENT STANDARDS OUTLINED IN SECTION 78-411(F)(1) |
| | OF THE CITY CODE. THE POLE DESIGN DOES NOT COMPLY WITH |
| | THE REQUIREMENTS THAT THE POLE BE COMPARABLE IN STYLE |
| | AND CONFIGURATION TO EXISTING STREETLIGHT FIXTURES AND |
| | THAT ANY WIRELESS FACILITY EQUIPMENT MUST BE CONCEALED |
| | WITHIN THE POLE STRUCTURE. |
| | |
| | 3) UPDATED COMMENT: PUBLIC UTILITY LETTERS ELECTRIC |
| | SERVICE, AND TELEVISION CABLE ? THE SURVEY PROVIDED |
| | WITH THE APPLICATION SHOWS COMCAST AND FPL FACILITIES |
| | WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE PROPOSED POLE EMBEDMENT. IN |
| | ORDER TO VERIFY THAT THE INSTALLATION WILL NOT |
| | INTERFERE WITH THE EXISTING FACILITIES, PROVIDE COPIES |
| | OF THE PUBLIC UTILITY LETTERS FROM COMCAST AND FPL. |
| | PLEASE NOTE, IF THE POLE IS INSTALLED IN A DIFFERENT |
| | LOCATION BASED ON THE RELOCATION REQUEST THAT IS NOT |
| | LOCATED NEAR EXISTING UTILITY PROVIDERS, THEN THIS WILL |
| | NO LONGER BE REQUIRED. |
| | |
| | CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | |
