§ 11-305. Preference for collocation.

(a)

All applicants seeking permission to construct one (1) or more towers in the County shall cooperate in collocation of antenna arrays on their towers where feasible. This requirement shall not be deemed to require applicants to incur additional expense to construct their towers in order to facilitate collocation. All applicants seeking permission to construct a new tower primarily dedicated for cellular or PCS communication purposes shall, where feasible, design and construct said tower so as to accommodate collocation of at least one (1) additional cellular or PCS provider in addition to applicant. Collocation is not required if the new antenna array would interfere with the applicant's use of the tower, or with reasonably foreseeable future uses anticipated by applicant. Upon the request of any third party whose request for collocation has been denied, applicant agrees to provide a written explanation of reasons for the denial.

(b)

All applicants seeking permission to construct a tower in order to serve one (1) or more specific purposes must demonstrate in the application process that they had made a reasonable and good faith effort to collocate their antenna arrays on existing towers or support structures. This paragraph does not apply to applicants who desire to construct a tower for the primary purpose of attracting other persons to collocate on the tower.

(c)

In complying with the requirements of paragraph (b), applicants must include the information required in the appropriate application form, provided that:

(1)

With regard to the required statement that the owners of all such towers have been contacted and asked about the possibility of collocation, an explanation of why such contact was not made will be satisfactory if it indicates that a particular tower was obviously unsatisfactory for technological or safety reasons, or if the owner could not be located after reasonable inquiry.

(2)

With regard to the required statement explaining why the available towers in the area are not suitable for collocation, by way of example and not limitation, existing towers would be unsuitable if collocation would cause interference problems, if there are other technological problems, if the tower is already filled to capacity, if the cost of collocation would exceed the cost of a new tower, if collocation would require a major modification (as such term is defined herein), or if collocation would not satisfy the reasonably foreseeable future needs of applicant which would be served by construction of a new tower.

(3)

With regard to the supplemental information which may be required by the staff of the Planning Board, applicant may delete any and all references to confidential pricing information in any correspondence required to be submitted.

(4)

The owner of the property upon which the tower sits must consent in writing to the above; unless the lease for the site states otherwise.

(Ord. No. 99-34, Art. 10, 7-8-99; Ord. No. 99-39, Art. 1, 9-9-99; Ord. No. 99-40, Art. 1, 9-9-99; Ord. No. 2009-37, Art. 1, 6-11-09)