Gwinnett Index

Duluth UDC § 342.04

Collocation; Availability of Suitable Existing Structures

Governing jurisdiction
Duluth

Land inside these city limits is governed by Duluth's own code and boards. A "Duluth, GA" mailing address is not proof of being inside them — most such addresses fall in unincorporated Gwinnett.

Boundary: US Census TIGERweb (Incorporated Places, ACS 2025 vintage), vintage 2025.

Article
3 — Restrictions on Particular Uses
Pages in source
115–116
Adopted
2025-09-08
Amended through
2026-07-13
Source
Adopted PDF

Text

No new wireless support structure (tower) shall be allowed unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Department and the City Council that no existing tower or existing alternative tower structure (clock towers, bell towers, church steeples, light/power poles, electric transmission towers, manmade trees, and similar natural or manmade alternative-design mounting structures that camouflage or conceal the presence of antennas or towers) can accommodate the applicant's proposed wireless facilities. All evidence submitted shall be signed and sealed by appropriate licensed professionals or qualified industry experts. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the proposed antenna shall consist of the following: a. That no existing towers or suitable alternative tower structures are located within the geographic antennas placement area required to meet the applicant's engineering requirements. b. That existing towers or structures are not of sufficient height to meet the applicant's engineering requirements. c. That existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support the applicant's antenna and related equipment. 114 | P a g e Article Three. Restrictions on Particular Uses d. That the applicant's proposed antenna(s) would cause electromagnetic interference with the antenna(s) on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant's proposed antenna. e. That the cost or contractual provisions required by the tower owner to share an existing tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable. Costs exceeding new tower development are presumed to be unreasonable. f. That the applicant adequately demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that existing towers and structures unsuitable.