Logo
File #: 19976-25    Version: 1
Type: Briefing/Report (Dept,BCC) - Action Requested Status: Agenda Ready (BCC)
File created: 3/20/2025 In control: Planning and Zoning Commission
On agenda: 3/26/2025 Final action:
Title: Case No. TEL-2024-0005 A request from Pinnacle Consulting (aka Sun State Tower) and Co-Applicant Verizon Wireless, on behalf of Los Alamos County, property owner, are requesting an 80-foot tall, new Wireless Telecommunication Facility tower to collocate two commercial antenna arrays; and construction of a 20-foot x 30-foot split-faced block wall, 8-foot tall, to surround ground equipment. The property, WRS N1, is within the ballfields area at Overlook Park, addressed as 580 Overlook Rd, and is within the Open Space (OS-PP) Public Park sub-zone district.
Attachments: 1. A - Application Submittal, 2. C - Legals, 3. B - IDRC, 4. D - Staff Report TEL-2024-0005
Title
Case No. TEL-2024-0005 A request from Pinnacle Consulting (aka Sun State Tower) and Co-Applicant Verizon Wireless, on behalf of Los Alamos County, property owner, are requesting an 80-foot tall, new Wireless Telecommunication Facility tower to collocate two commercial antenna arrays; and construction of a 20-foot x 30-foot split-faced block wall, 8-foot tall, to surround ground equipment. The property, WRS N1, is within the ballfields area at Overlook Park, addressed as 580 Overlook Rd, and is within the Open Space (OS-PP) Public Park sub-zone district.
Property Owners
Los Alamos County
Applicant
Pinnacle Consulting (aka Sun State Tower) and Co-Applicant Verizon Wireless
Case Manager
Jane Mathews, Senior Planner
Section 16-74(c)(3), Wireless Telecom Facility Decision Criteria
a. The proposed telecommunications facilities are necessary to close a demonstrated significant gap in service coverage of the applicant based on actual signal strength data for the area where the gap is claimed and for the type of gap claimed.
b. The applicant has demonstrated that no other less intrusive means or alternative to the proposed telecommunications facilities design is practicable.
c. The applicant has demonstrated that no higher priority location per section 16-17(j)(2) is practicable.
Section 16-72(c)(3), Public Hearing Decisions
The hearing body making a final decision shall take any one of the following actions:

1. Approve the application as presented if the proposal is in conformity with the criteria.
2. Approve the application with conditions. In granting conditional approval, the hearing body making the final decision may only impose such conditions as are reasonably necessary to meet the approval criteria.
3. Deny the application if the proposal is not in conformance with the decision criteria within division 3, Specific Development Procedures. Remand the application back to the recommending body for further proceedings.
Attachments
A - Application...

Click here for full text