The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010-02-22 - Agendas - FinalPlanning Commission Planning Commissioners Officers Sean Trumbo, Chair Audy Lack, Vice -Chair Matthew Cabe, Secretary aye evtlle ARKANSAS Tentative Agenda City of Fayetteville, Arkansas Planning Commission Meeting February 22, 2010 Craig Honchell Jeremy Kennedy Christine Myres Porter Winston Jim Zant A meeting of the Fayetteville Planning Commission will be held on February 22, 2010 at 5:30 PM in Room 219 of the City Administration Building located at 113 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Call to Order Roll Call Agenda Session Presentations, Reports and Discussion Items: 1. Applications for new and incumbent Planning Commissioners are due February 26th 2. Nominating Committee Meeting for the election of officers. Consent: 1. Approval of the minutes from the Monday, February 8, 2010 meeting. Old Business: 2. CUP 10-3501: Conditional Use Permit (3484 W. WEDINGTON/SHOPPES AT WEDINGTON, 401): Submitted by MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. for property located at 3484 W. WEDINGTON DRIVE. The property is zoned C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 2.24 acres. The request is for a conditional use permit to allow a 10,000 square foot church (Use Unit 4) in the C-1 zoning district. Planner: Andrew Garner The applicant has requested this item be tabled indefinitely. New Business: 3. CUP 10-3508: Conditional Use Permit (GREEN LEAF RENTAL OFFICE, 440): Submitted by THOMAS J. EMBACH for property located at 1028 N. BETTY JO DRIVE. The property is zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY - 24 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.97 acres. The request is for a 544 s.f. structure to be located on the subject property and used as a rental office for the Greenleaf Apartments. Planner: Andrew Garner 4. CUP 10-3512: Conditional Use Permit (CELL TOWER/HILL & MLK, JR.BLVD, 522): Submitted by SMITH TWO-WAY RADIO for property located SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HILL AVENUE AND THE RAILROAD TRACKS. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 0.12 acres. The request is for a 150 ft. 'flag pole type cellular tower on the subject property. Planner: Dara Sanders NOTICE TO MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE All interested parties may appear and be heard at the public hearings. If you wish to address the Planning Commission on an agenda item please queue behind the podium when the Chair asks for public comment. Once the Chair recognizes you, go to the podium and give your name and address. Address your comments to the Chair, who is the presiding officer. The Chair will direct your comments to the appropriate appointed official, staff, or others for response. Please keep your comments brief, to the point, and relevant to the agenda item being considered so that everyone has a chance to speak. As a courtesy please tum off all cell phones and pagers. A copy of the Planning Commission agenda and other pertinent data are open and available for inspection in the office of City Planning (575-8267), 125 West Mountain Street, Fayetteville, Arkansas. All interested parties are invited to review the petitions. Interpreters or TDD, Telecommunication Device for the Deaf, are available for all public hearings; 72 hour notice is required. For further information or to request an interpreter, please call 575-8330. •'_ aye��evL e PC Meeting of February 22, 2010 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: ' Andrew Gamer, Senior Planner THRU: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director DATE: February 18, 2010 125 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: (479) 575-8267 CUP 10-3501: Conditional Use Permit (SHOPPES AT WEDINGTON, 401): Submitted by MCCLELLAND CONSULTING ENGINEERS for property located at 3484 W. WEDINGTON DR. The property is zoned C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 2.24 acres. The request is for a church, Use Unit 4, Cultural and Recreational Facilities, in the C-1, Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District. Planner: Andrew Garner THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED THIS ITEM TO BE TABLED INDEFINITELY TO ALLOW MORE TIME TO FINALIZE SHARED PARKING AGREEMENTS WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS. G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Review 110-3501 CUP Shoppes @ Wedington U 04103-P1 gq t22;f )02-22- 10110-3501 PLNG Comments PC rpt 02-22-I0.doc Planning Commission CUP 10-3501 Shoppes at Wedington Agenda Item 2 - _ Page 1 of 2 February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3501 Shoppes at Wedington Agenda Item 2 Page 2 of 2 a e evi le 1 KANSAS PC Meeting of February 22, 2010 THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE 125 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: (479) 575-8267 TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission FROM: Andrew Garner, Senior Planner THRU: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director DATE: February 16, 2010 CUP 10-3508: Conditional Use Permit (GREEN LEAF RENTAL OFFICE, 440): Submitted by THOMAS J. EMBACH for property located at 1028 N. BETTY JO DRIVE. The property is zoned RMF -24, MULTI FAMILY - 24 UNITS/ACRE and contains approximately 0.97 acres. The request is for a 544 square foot structure to be located on the subject property and used as a rental office for the Greenleaf Apartments. Planner: Andrew Gamer BACKGROUND: Property Description: The subject property is located south of Wedington Drive at 1028 Betty Jo Drive within the existing Greenleaf Apartment site. The site contains 0.97: acres, is zoned RMF -24, and is developed with multi -family buildings and parking lots, Surrounding zoning and land use is presented in Table 1 Table 1 Surrounding Land Use and Zonin Direction from Site Land Use Zoning North Commercial C-1 South Multi -family residential RMF -24 East Commercial C-2 West Multi -family residential R -O Proposal: The applicant is requesting approval for the use of a 544 square foot rental office in the existing multi -family development. A conceptual site plan and architectural elevations have been submitted for review and are included with this staff report. A letter from the applicant is also included with this report and indicates the hours of operation will be from 9 AM - 5 PM and a maximum number of two employees. Parking: Required parking for an office use is one space per 300 square feet, or two spaces (one being an ADA space) for the proposed 544 square foot rental office. There is adequate room for approximately three standard on -street parking spaces adjacent to the proposed office on Betty Jo Drive. One ADA parking space would be accommodated by re -striping the existing parking lot. February 22, 2010 G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Review110-3508 CUP 1028 Betty Jo103-Planning pq,j,,gg&Qn.Q,ls§(bn CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 1 of 18 Request: The applicant requests approval for an office use (Use Unit 25) within the RMF -24 Zoning District. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends approval of the requested office use (Use Unit 25) in the RMF -24 zoning district, subject to the following conditions: 1. All new exterior lighting for the project shall meet requirements of the City Lighting Ordinance and shall be reviewed prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. The new office and existing development shall provide parking in compliance with City parking ratios and all ordinance requirements. One off-street ADA parking space shall be provided in the existing parking lot for the new office building. At the time of building permit a parking chart shall be included on the site plan indicating the number of overall parking spaces for the apartments and the office. On -street parking on Betty Jo Drive may count for standard parking spaces. 3. Any applicable or necessary building permits shall be obtained prior to construction. 4. The proposed office is "limited to the specifications as proposed : by the applicant fora maximum of 544 square feet, daily hours of operation from 9. 5. The new building is required to be located within the 10-25 foot build -to zone, and will be reviewed in detail for compliance at the time of building permit review. 6. Any new mechanical/utility equipment (roof and ground mounted) associated with the office shall be screened using materials that are compatible with and incorporated into the structure, smaller ground - mounted equipment may be screened with tall grasses or shrubs. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES ❑ Approved ❑ Denied Motion: Second: Vote: Date: Comments: February 22, 2010 February 22, 2010 G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Review110-3508 CUP 1028 Betty Jo103-Planning nniiviei ragii@n CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 2 of 18 The "CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL listed in this report are accepted in total without exception by the entity requesting approval of this conditional use. Name: Date: FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: Residential Neighborhood Area Section 163.02. AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES. B. Authority; Conditions. The Planning Commission shall: 1. Hear and decide only such special exemptions as it is specifically authorized to pass on by the terms of this chapter. Decide such questions as are involved in determining whether a conditional use should be granted; and, Grant a conditional use with such conditions and safeguards as are appropriate under this chapter; or Deny a conditional use when not in harmony intent of this chapter. A conditional use shall not be granted by the Planning Commission unless and until: 1. A written application for a conditional use is submitted indicating the section of this chapter under which the conditional use is sought and stating the grounds on which it is requested. Finding: The applicant has submitted a written application requesting a conditional use for an office (Use Unit 25) within the RMF -24 zoning district. 2. The applicant shall pay a filing fee as required under Chapter 159 to cover the cost of expenses incurred in connection with processing such application. Finding: The applicant has paid the required filing fee. 3. The Planning Commission shall make the following written findings before a conditional use shall be issued: February 22, 2010 G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Review110-3508 CLIP 1028 Betty JoO3-Planningppdrytj2"ajaon • CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page'3 of 18 (a.) That it is empowered under the section of this chapter described in the application to grant the conditional use; and Finding: The Planning Commission is empowered under §161.14 to grant the requested conditional use permit. (b.) That the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest. Finding: Granting the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest. This rental office for the apartments is of a small scale that is compatible with the existing multi -family residential buildings, and will assist in the management and maintenance of the apartment community. (c.) The Planning Commission shall certify: (1.) Compliance with the specific rules •governing individual conditional uses; and (2.) That satisfactory provisions and arrangements have been made concerning the following, where applicable: (a.) Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control and access in case of fire or catastrophe; Finding: The applicant proposes that parking for this use be directly adjacent to the building in the existing parking bays and in front of the proposed building on Betty Jo Drive. The parking situation, both in the existing lot or on -street, will safely accommodate vehicles, and will not create any safety issues with pedestrians. One new ADA parking space is required for the office building. (b.) Off-street parking and loading areas where required, with particular attention to ingress and egress, economic, noise, glare, or odor effects of the special exception on adjoining properties and properties generally in the district; February 22, 2010 G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Review110-3508 CUP 1028 Betty .1&03-PlanningGfNiMF 1CjQ7%ih4n4k,a an CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 4 of 18 Finding: Parking spaces to accommodate two vehicles are proposed for this office and the existing apartments in the existing parking lots to the north and south of the proposed building and on Betty Jo Drive. As stated in Finding 2.a., adequate ingress and egress is provided. The 544 square foot apartment management and rental office would not have adverse economic, noise, glare, or odor effects to adjoining properties. The small building is proposed between two existing apartment buildings adjacent to Betty Jo Drive. Any new exterior Lighting from the office building will be required to comply with the lighting ordinance and would not pose glare or nuisance to adjacent buildings. Finding: (c) Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to ingress and egress, and off- street parking and loading, Arrangements for the pick-up of any refuse generated on this office building shall be coordinated with the Solid Waste Division. New dumpster facilities for this building are not anticipated. Finding: (d.) Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and compatibility; Utilities exist to serve the proposed building. Staff recommends tha all utility equipment be screened from view from the street. (e.) Screeningand: buffering with reference to type, dimensions, and character; Screening is not requiredforthis use as it is incorporated and . . planned as part of the overall development of the apartment complex. (f.) Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony with properties in the district; Finding: Prior to installation of any new signage a sign permit is required to be obtained in accordance with Unified Development Code Chapter 174. As discussed in Findings 2.a. and 2.b., staff finds that this use would not propose adverse impacts related to glare, traffic safety or economic effect. Staff finds that the proposed small scale office use will be compatible with and complimentary to the existing apartment complex and surrounding multi -family and commercial uses, and that the building elevations are well articulated and an appropriate scale for the neighborhood. February 22, 2010 G: IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Reviewll0-3508 CUP 1028 Betty J6103-PlanningPktwS idegildrriii;¢/bn CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 5 of 18 (g.) Required setbacks and other open space; and Finding: A detailed site plan indicating the required setbacks, build -to zone, and other open space will be required prior to building permit. The conceptual site plan submitted with this application appears to comply with these issues. The only item that may need to be revised prior to building permit is that no new pavement for the ADA parking spaces is permitted within the build -to zone. (h.) General compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. Finding: The proposed office use will provide for the management and rental needs of the existing apartment development. As discussed in findings throughout this staff report, staff recommends that the proposed 544 square foot office building for use as a rental and management office for the existing apartment buildings is compatible with not only the Greenleaf Apartments but other surrounding apartments and commercial development. February 22, 2010 G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review12010IDevelopment Review 10-3508 CUP 1028 Betty JoI03-Planning AmppAai1+irAg en CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 6 of 18 FAYETTEVILLE UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE 161.14 District RMF -24, Residential Multi -Family — Twenty -Four Units Per Acre (A)Purpose. The RMF -24 Multi -family Residential District is designed to permit and encourage the developing of a variety of dwelling types in suitable environments in a variety of densities. (B) Uses. (1) Permitted uses. Unit 1 City-wide uses by right Unit 8 Single-family dwellings Unit 9 Two-family dwellings Unit 10 Three-family dwellings Unit 26 Multi -family dwellings (2) Conditional uses. Unit 2 City-wide uses by conditional use permit Unit 3 Public protection and utility facilities Unit 4 Cultural and recreational facilities Unit 5 Government facilities Unit 11 Manufactured home park Unif25 Professionalioffices Unit 24 Home occupations Unit 36 Wireless communications facilities Units per acre 24 or less (D)Bulk and area regulations. (1) Lot width minimum. Manufactured home park 100 ft. Lot within a Manufactured home park 50 ft. Single-family 60 ft. Two-family 60 ft. Three or more 90 ft. Professional offices 100 ft. (2) Lot area minimum. Manufactured home park 3 acres Lot within a mobile home park 4,200 sq. ft. Townhouses: Development Individual lot 10,000 sq. ft. 2,500 sq. ft. Single-family 6,000 sq. ft. February 22, 2010 C: IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Reviewl10-3508 CUP 1028 Betty Jo103-Planningrymia§iQ$i8}'m448n CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 7 of 18 Two-family 7,000 sq. ft. Three or more 9,000 sq. ft. Fraternity or Sorority 2 acres Professional offices 1 acres (3) Land area per dwelling unit. Manufactured home 3,000 sq. ft. Apartments: No bedroom One bedroom Two bedroom 1,700 sq. ft. 1,700 sq. ft. 2,000 sq. ft. Fraternity or Sorority 1,000 sq. ft. per resident (E) Setback requirements. Front Side Rear The principal facade of a building shall be built within a build -to zone that is located between 10 feet and a line 25 feet from the front property line. 8 ft. 25 ft. HHOD Front HHOD Side : . HHOD Rear 15 ft. 8 ft. ; 15:ft. ._.. Cross reference(s)--Variance Ch. 156. (F) Building height regulations. Building Height Maximum - 1 60ft. (G) Height regulations. Any building which exceeds the height of 20 feet shall be set back from any side boundary line of an adjacent single family district, an additional distance of one foot for each foot of height in excess of 20 feet. Building area. None. (H)Minimum buildable street frontage. 50% of the lot width. (I) Parking regulations. No parking lots are allowed to be located in the front or side build -to zone facing a public right-of-way. (Code 1965, App. A., Art. 5(111); Ord. No. 2320, 4-6-77; Ord. No. 2700, 2-2-81; Code 1991, §160.033; Ord. No. 4100, §2 (Ex. A), 6- 16-98; Ord. No. 4178, 8-31-99; Ord. 5028, 6-19-07; Ord. 5079, 11-20-07; Ord. 5224, 3-3-09; Ord. 5262, 8-4-09) February 22, 2010 G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development ReviewtlO-3508 CUP 1028 Betty JoI03-PlanningOlimpriirgi V rda-Mn CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 8 of 18 Rental Office for Greenleaf Apartments Conditional Use Permit — City of Fayetteville CUP Checklist Item #1 — See check for $105.00 attached Item #2 — See survey attached Item #3 A) Building size 544 sq ft including storage B) Parking — two spaces C) Hours 9:00 AM — 5:00 PM, 2 employees, tenants average 4 — 5 per day D) Lighting attached to building. Lighting will comply with the City's "dark sky" ordinance E) Noise — none F) No screening needed. A 3' decorative wrought iron fence will be located across the front of the buildings G) Put in dumpster H) No impact on traffic I) This will greatly assist in the management and maintenance of the apartment community J) Site Plan — already sent Item #4 Site Plan — Already sent L'� t)5.1'EIZ) Item #5 Preliminary floor plans — Already sent Item #6 Site Map locations of property owners to follow Item #7 — Conditional Use Permit attached Item #8 — Ok, we agree February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 9 of 18 ga Aw---011 Witham Baylor Anderson 5201 Fairway/Studio 11, North Little itod<. Arkansas 72116-6 Phone/Pam (501) 753-2300 1 NEW LEASING OFFICE WITH 2 ADDPfIONAL� PARKING SPACES, 1 ADA • 2'. kCI`, 2 4. 0,,87: d 4427' ZatAtnq: , RMT -z4 LOCATION PLA GREENLEAF TOWNHO ES 22, 2010 AgendFAYETTEVILi.F, AR GO8&eenn 508 Green Leaf Rental Office E0 39Vd 1331IH�NOS2l3QNWU1 00CZEBLI0Pagei Item 3 6006/L01ZI gage 119 1l J o Ig t. GREENLEAF TOWNHOMES FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS rU t(<t4P 10 .31 Agenda Item 3 Page 11 of 18 sntal Office o:e. Dean = aeoesja.} es.. Er BLDG NEPIACX exIrr0 Warta'(s 3A. as ass .m arraa es Saris pesos HOC GEL PACE 5S 'DATE: 09-01-1009 JACOBS M.ZA/AGS( LWD STILT SURVEY SCALE r = 40' ate pag: F_i£ NaQROZW aPIRTYFNI1 Y32: 8Gt FSTAfF.NA59.PS DRLRM BY: JMLM WEST: 1 OF 7 3729 w e9SSOPVI PS. rd mSWtAx p .aa m's s e,�r„i raaa ✓08 P0. DUM4600 ' February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 12 of 18 r WEST ELEVATION SCALE: /4"-l'-0" February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 13 of 18 r February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 14 of 18 IYYNUbS1i )RCe1 V February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 15 of 18 L V r O t • W :e w c L L SOUTH ELEVATION February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 16 of 18 CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 17 of 18 r ' 1pQusON;ST$ RSF-0 h ElOLLYSJr� ALLE�'_gfi� i°HATFIEJ S7; 1;o`t 111••••41 >i RSF-4 ...ORA i,�SF-0• _BERRYST�, Overview Legend Subject Property CUP10-3508 Boundary 0 0.25 0.5 119§, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3508 Green Leaf Rental Office Agenda Item 3 Page 18 of 18- 'ry�teville An KA NSPS THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS PC Meeting of February 22, 2010 PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE 125 W. Mountain St. Fayetteville, AR 72701 Telephone: (479) 575-8267 TO: Planning Commission Members FROM: Dara Sanders, Current Planner THRU: Jeremy Pate, Development Services Director DATE: February 17, 2010 CUP 10-3512: Conditional Use Permit (CELL TOWER/HILL & MLK, JR.BLVD, 522): Submitted by SMITH TWO-WAY RADIO for property located SOUTHEAST OF THE INTERSECTION OF HILL AVENUE AND THE RAILROAD TRACKS. The property is zoned C-2, THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 0.12 acres. The request is for a 150 ft. 'flag pole type' cellular tower on the subject property. Planner: Dara Sanders Background: The subject property is undeveloped and located east of Fayetteville High School and north of Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard between Hill Avenue and Government Avenue. Proposal: The applicant is proposing to erect a 150 -foot tall flagpole tower with an area at the base for equipment shelters and wireless equipment. The lease site area is approximately 7,050 sq. ft. and is currently proposed for use by AT&T. Following ordinance requirements, notification was provided to all property owners within a 500 foot radius of the center of the proposed tower. The type and height of the proposed tower is, in accordance with Chapter 163.14(B) (1 & 2). The tower is not located within 150 feet of a residential structure. The applicant provided all documentation required by Chapter 163.14 to process a conditional use request. The applicants have stated in their application that AT&T has reached the capacity of their existing towers and is suffering a substantial level of dropped calls and network busy signals causing an unacceptable service condition in the identified target area of Fayetteville High School and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. The result of the limited capacity now requires new facilities to relieve the pressure on the network. The applicants have stated in their application that there are no existing towers or structureswithin the immediate area to allow for co -location by the applicant. However, a review of the RF coverage maps provided reveals that the coverage and capacity problems that AT&T is experiencing could potentially be resolved by co -locating on two (2) existing sites located south of the target area. The lack of existing cell towers in the direct vicinity of the high school preempted the applicants to look at erecting a new tower. G:IETCIDerelopmeni Services Review 20/01Deve/opment Review170-3512 CUP (Hill Ave and MLK J0103 -Planning CammissionlFebniary 22, 20101Co,nmenls and RedlineslCUP 10-3512 (Cell Tower MLK).doc February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3512 Cell Tower/Hill & MLK Agenda Item 4 Page 1 of 46 Surrounding Land Use: Direction Land Use Zoning North Railroad C-2 and RMF -40 South Residential I-1 East Industrial 1-1 West Commercial C-2 Public Comment: Staff has not received any public comment. Discussion: Chapter 163.13(A)(6)(f) states that the Planning Commission may deny a permit to an applicant that has not demonstrated a good faith effort to provide for co -location. Such effort includes a survey of all existing structures that may be feasible sites for co -locating; contact with all other wireless communications facilities; sharing information necessary to determine if co -locations is feasible under the design configuration most accommodating to co -location; and a letter from tower owners stating why co -location is not feasible. Staff finds that the intent of the regulation of wireless communications facilities is to co -locate antennae on existing structures and/or towers. Only after an applicant has exhausted all co -location possibilities should consideration for a new tower should be submitted with supporting documentation demonstrating the need. In this particular application, the documents do not argue for a new tower based on a "coverage" concern; rather, additional facilities are needed to meet the current and projected volume of calls, or a "capacity" concern. The applicant has provided several maps that identify the target area around Fayetteville High School and six (6) existing wireless communication sites in the vicinity — four (4) to the north of the target area and two (2) to the south of the target area. The four (4) existing sites to the north of the target area have AT&T antennae. These sites work in conjunction currently to handle the volume of calls in the area and to provide the appropriate level of coverage. The applicant has not provided sufficient information in the application indicating that AT&T could not co -locate additional antennae at one or more of these existing sites to the north to improve the stated capacity issue. The two (2) existing sites to the south of the target area — Beechwood Avenue and 15th Street (Allied Storage) — currently do not carry AT&T antenna. The applicant has provided information indicating that co -locating AT&T antenna at these two locations will extend service and provide additional capacity to the target area but issued a statement that these sites would be over capacity due to the number of call volume produced by the target area; however, the applicant has not submitted any supporting documentation demonstrating that, while coverage would be provided, additional call capacity to meet the demonstrated need would not be provided by co -locating on these existing sites. Staff does not find in favor of the application as submitted, finding that other co -location possibilities do exist presently without the construction of a new tower, and recommends denial. Staff recommends that the applicant co -locate antennae at the existing Beechwood Avenue and 15'h Street sites. Should co -location at these sites not resolve the coverage and capacity issue in the area, staff would reevaluate data supporting that claim and review an application for Planning Commission consideration of a new tower. G: IETCIDeve/opmem Sen ices Reviewl10101 Dei'elopmenw Review) /0-3512 CUP (Hill Ave and MLK Jr)103-Planning CwnmissionlFebruory 22, 20101Commenrs and Redlines CUP 10-3512 (Cell Tower MLK).doc February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3512 Cell Tower/Hill & MLK Agenda Item 4 Page 2 of 46 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of the application based on the findings and discussion included in this staff report. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES 0 Approved 0 Tabled 0 Denied Motion: Second: Vote: Meeting Date: February 22, 2010 Comments: FUTURE LAND USE PLAN DESIGNATION: City Neighborhood Area. Section 163.02. AUTHORITY; CONDITIONS; PROCEDURES. B. Authority; Conditions. The Planning Commission shall: 1. Hear and decide only such special exemptions as it is specifically authorized to pass on by the terms of this chapter. 2. Decide such questions as are involved in determining whether a conditional use should be granted; and, 3. Grant a conditional use with such conditions and safeguards as are appropriate under this chapter; or 4. Deny a conditional use when not in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. C. A conditional use shall not be granted by the Planning Commission unless and until: 1. A written application for a conditional use is submitted indicating the section of this chapter under which the conditional use is sought and stating the grounds on which it is requested. Finding: The applicant has submitted a written application requesting a conditional use permit for a Wireless Communications Facility on property zoned C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial. 2. The applicant shall pay a filing fee as required under Chapter 159 to cover the cost of expenses incurred in connection with processing such application. Finding: The applicant has paid the required filing fee. 3. The Planning Commission shall make the following written findings before a conditional use shall be issued: (a.) That it is empowered under the section of this chapter described in the application to grant the conditional use; and G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Review110-35/2 CUP (Hill Ave and MLKJr)103-Planning CommissionlFebruary 22, 20101Comments and RedlinestCUP 10-3512 (Cell Tower MLK).doc February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3512 Cell Tower/Hill & MLK Agenda Item 4 Page 3 of 46 Finding: The Planning Commission is empowered under § 163.14 (see attached) to grant the requested conditional use permit. (b.) That the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect the public interest. Finding: Granting the requested conditional use for a 150' tall flagpole tower should not adversely affect the public interest. The tower and surrounding base equipment will be located approximately 150' from the nearest public right-of-way, which should prevent the general public from viewing the equipment shelter and associated wireless equipment, while still providing an important service to the community. Pursuant to Chapter 164.13(B)(4), where an applicant demonstrates that it is not feasible to collocate on an existing structure, a new tower should be camouflaged to the greatest extent possible, or stealth technology should be utilized. And by designing the tower as a flagpole with internal antenna, the visual obstructions of multiple antennas protruding from a standard monopole would be eliminated. The flagpole design would allow the carrier to provide required service to their customers, while also maintaining the overall scenic quality of the city. However, at the direction of the Unified Development Code, co -location is and should be the primary means of providing cellular coverage where it is possible, rather than adding additional towers within the City. In this case, there appears to be numerous opportunities to co -locate antennae so as to not visually impact the landscape of the area. (c.) The Planning Commission shall certify: (1.) Compliance with the specific rules governing individual conditional uses; and Finding: The applicant has not complied with all specific rules governing this individual conditional use request. See sections 6 (e). (2.) That satisfactory provisions and arrangements have been made concerning the following, where applicable: (a.) Ingress and egress to property and proposed structures thereon with particular reference to automotive and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control and access in case of fire or catastrophe; Finding: An access easement is proposed to provide access and service the facility off of Hill Avenue. Traffic and pedestrian access will not be adversely impacted. (b.) Off-street parking and loading areas where required, with particular attention to ingress and egress, economic, noise, glare, or odor effects of the special exception on adjoining properties and properties generally in the district; G:I ETCIDevelopment Services Rei dew120101Deveiopment Review110-3512 CUP (Hill Ave and MLK .11)103 -Planning CommissionlFebruary 22, 20101 Comments and RedlinesACUP 10-3512. (Cell Tower MLK).doc February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3512 Cell Tower/Hill & MLK Agenda Item 4 Page 4 of 46 Finding: No parking or loading areas are required for this use, however additional paved or gravel area may be required for maintenance vehicles servicing the facility. The details of any additional parking and loading areas will be reviewed in detail at the time of development. (c.) Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to ingress and egress, and off-street parking and loading, Finding: No refuse areas are required for this use. (d.) Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and compatibility; Finding: Should the request be approved by the Planning Commission, utilities shall be located underground or screened from the public view with the exception of the proposed cellular tower and the ground -mounted equipment. Any electric lines that must be extended or provided to the site shall be done so at the cost of the applicant, and all lines shall be located underground, at the cost of the applicant. (e.) Screening and buffering with reference to type, dimensions, and character; Finding: If approved, screening shall be provided as required by Chapter 163.14; see ordinance section included as part of this report. Trees and vegetation may be utilized as screening if existing on the subject property or shall be installed as part of the proposed facility or a combination of both. (f.) Signs, if any, and proposed exterior lighting with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony with properties in the district; Finding: Should the request be approved by the Planning Commission, only warning, site identification and FCC signs would be permitted on the subject facility. All required signs shall be located on the fence structure. (g.) Required setbacks and other open space; and Finding: The location of the proposed ground equipment is outside of the required setbacks for the C-2 zoning district. (h.) General compatibility with adjacent properties and other property in the district. Finding: Compatibility with adjacent properties is difficult to achieve when erecting any type of tower structure. However, the applicants are proposing a white flagpole with internal antenna to reduce the visual impact in this area, which is surrounded by commercial and residential uses. Staff finds that the color of the tower and location of the tower mentioned above, in combination with vegetative and fence screening G: IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Development Review110-3512 CUP (Hill Ave and MLK J0103-P/anning CommissionlFebruary 22, 20101Comnten/s and RedlinesICUP 10-3512 (Cell Tower MLK).doc February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3512 Cell Tower/Hill & MLK Agenda Item 4 Page 5 of 46 around the utility equipment at the base of the tower, would result in minimal visual impacts resulting in general compatibility. Ultimately, however, if co -location can be co -located on existing structures, this would result in uch greater general compatibility than a new tower. CHAPTER 163: USE CONDITIONS 163.14 Wireless Communications Facilities. (A) The following general requirements shall apply to all new wireless communications facilities. (1) Noise Requirements. Equipment used in connection with a tower or antenna array shall not generate noise that can be heard beyond the site. This prohibition does not apply to air condition units no noisier than ordinary residential units or generator used in emergency situations where regular power supply for a facility is temporarily interrupted; provided that any permanently installed generator shall be equipped with a functional residential muffler. Finding: Equipment used in connection with the tower shall not generate noise which can be heard beyond the site per Chapter 163.14. (2) Compliance with Federal Regulations. Applicant shall comply with all applicable federal regulations. Proof of compliance shall be provided upon request of the City Planner. Finding: Should the request be approved by the Planning Commission, the applicant shall comply with all applicable federal regulations. Proof of compliance shall be provided prior to issuance of a building permit. (3) Lighting and Signage. (a) Wireless communications facilities shall be lighted only if required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Security lighting or motion -activated lighting may be used around the base of a tower and within the wireless communications facility, provided that the lighting is shielded in such a way that no light is directed towards adjacent properties or right-of-way. (b) Signs shall be limited to those needed to identify the property and tower and warn of any danger. No signs, symbols, identifying emblems, flags, or banners shall be allowed on towers. Finding: Should the request be approved by the Planning Commission, lighting on the tower shall only be installed if mandated by the FAA. Security lighting or motion - activated Lighting may be used around the base of the tower, provided that the lighting is shielded in such a way that no light is directed towards adjacent properties or rights-of-way. All outdoor lighting shall meet lighting ordinance requirements and shall not be located higher than 6' above surrounding grade. (B) New Towers. New wireless communications towers shall meet the following requirements: G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Developmenl Review110-3512 CUP (Hill Ave and MLK Jr)103-Planning CommissionlFebruary 22, 20101Comments and Redlines CUP 10-3512 (Cell TowerMLK).doc February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3512 Cell Tower/Hill & MLK Agenda Item 4 Page 6 of 46 (1) Type of Towers Allowed. New towers shall be limited to monopole type structures or alternative tower structures. Finding: The applicant is proposing a white painted flagpole structure. (2) Tower or antenna height limitations. Towers or alternative tower structures are permitted to a maximum height of 150 feet. Finding: The maximum tower height (including antenna, lighting rod, and all other appurtenances) permitted by the Unified Development Code is 150', and the applicant is currently proposing a 150' tall tower. (3) Fall Zone. The minimum distance from the base of any tower to any residential dwelling unit shall be the tower height or required setback, whichever is greater, unless all persons owning said residences or the land on which said residences are located consent in a sign writing to the construction of said tower. This setback is considered a "fall zone." In the event that an existing structure is proposed as a mount for a wireless communication facility, a fall zone shall not be required. Finding: There are no residential dwelling units located within a 150' of the base of the tower. (4) Camouflaging or Stealth Technology for New Towers. If the applicant demonstrates that it is not feasible to locate on an existing structure, towers shall be designated to be camouflaged to the greatest extent possible, including but not limited to: use of a compatible building materials and colors, screening, landscaping and placement within trees. Finding: Staff finds that the applicant has not demonstrated to any degree that it is not feasible to locate on an existing structure. Rather the applicant indicates multiple structures in the area that provide improved coverage and enhanced capacity for the target area, if AT&T antennae were co -located thereon. Should the Planning Commission find that these structures are not suitable for the target area, staff finds the utilization of the flagpole design camouflages to a far greater extent than other towers utilizing external antenna constructed by the applicant in previous applications (see attached photographs provided by staff). Without designing the tower as a flagpole with internal antenna, the proposed tower would not be camouflaged to the greatest extent possible at this particular site. (5) Color of Towers. To the extent that any antenna extends above the height of the vegetation immediately surrounding it, they shall be a neutral color, painted or unpainted, unless the FAA requires otherwise. Finding: Should the request be approved by the Planning Commission, staff recommends a white flagpole to minimize visual impact to the area. (6) Information Required to Process New Tower Requests. (a) Provide a map of the geographic area that your project will serve. (b) Provide a map hat show other existing or planned facilities that will be used G:IETCIDevelopment Services Review120101Developmeni Review1/0-3512 CUP (Hill Ave and MLKJr)103-Planning CommissionlFebnuary 22, 20101Comments and Redlines CUP 10-3512 (Cell Tower MLX).doc February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3512 Cell Tower/Hill & MLK Agenda Item 4 Page 7 of 46 by the wireless communication service provider who is making the application. Finding: Item (a) and item (b) are reflected within the report, as provided by the applicant and distributed with this agenda to the Commissioners. (c) Provide a map that shows other potential stand-alone locations for your facility that have been explored. Finding: The applicant has provided several maps that identify the target area around Fayetteville High School and six (6) existing wireless communication sites in the vicinity — four (4) to the north of the target area and two (2) to the south of the target area. The four (4) existing sites to the north of the target area have AT&T antennae. The applicant has not provided sufficient information indicating that AT&T could not co -locate additional antennae at one or more of these existing sites to the north to improve the stated capacity issue. The two (2) existing sites to the south of the target area — Beechwood Avenue and WI' Street (Allied Storage) — currently do not carry AT&T antenna. The applicant has provided information indicating that co -locating AT&T antenna at these two locations will extend service and provide additional capacity to the target area but issued a statement that the distance between the facilities is not adequate and does not solve the main issue of capacity; however, the applicant has not submitted supporting documentation demonstrating that, while coverage would be provided, additional call capacity would not be provided by these existing sites. Discussion with the applicant has indicated that co -locating would help, in fact, some of the dropped calls occurring in the area. (d) Provide a scaled site plan containing information showing the property boundaries, proposed tower, existing land use, surrounding land uses and zoning, access road(s) location and surface material, existing and proposed structures and topography. The plan shall indicate proposed landscaping, fencing, parking areas, location of any signage and specification on proposed lighting of the facility Finding Item (d) is reflected within the report, as provided by the applicant and distributed with this agenda to the Commissioners. (e) Describe why the proposed location is superior, from a community perspective, to other potential locations. Factors to consider in the community perspective should include: visual aspects, setbacks and proximity to single family residences. Finding: Staff does not find the proposed location to be superior. Co -locating new carriers on existing cellular towers or existing structures is the first and best option available from a community perspective. Staff finds that all co -location opportunities have not been exhausted. See discussion in section (c) on the previous page. (1) Describe your efforts to co -locate your facility on one of the poles or towers that currently exists, or is under construction. The applicant should demonstrate a good faith G: IETCIDevelopment Services Review12010IDevelopmeni Review1l0-3512 CUP (Hill Ave and MLK Jr)103-Planning CommissionWebruary 22, 2010IComments and RedlinestCUP 10-3512 (Cell Tower MLK).doc February 22, 2010 Planning Commission CUP 10-3512 Cell Tower/Hill & MLK Agenda Item 4 Page 8 of 46