HomeMy WebLinkAbout26-06 RESOLUTION4
RESOLUTION NO. 26-06
A RESOLUTION GRANTING AN APPEAL OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S PASSAGE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 06-
1875, A REQUEST FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
TOWER AT 520 N. COLLEGE AVE. TO REPLACE TWO
EXISTING NON -CONFORMING TOWERS.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS:
Section 1. That the City Council of the City of Fayetteville, Arkansas
hereby grants the appeal of the Planning Commission's passage of Conditional
Use Permit 06-1875, (a request for a wireless communications tower at 520 N
College Ave. to replace two existing non -conforming towers), and denies the
requested Conditional Use based upon the following factual findings
a. The evidence conclusively shows that the existing cell tower
locations provide complete cell phone coverage for the area which would be
served by this tower;
b. The request to increase capacity would be better served by a
location which would permit a tower that could serve several, rather than a
single, cell phone company;
c. The applicant admitted that a location within a nearby commercial
area could serve a cell phone company about as well as his proposed location,
d. The residential Washington -Willow Historic District abuts the
proposed location of the cell tower and would be very adversely affected
aesthetically;
e. The adjoining residential Washington -Willow Historic District
would suffer economic losses through property devaluation if this tower was
permitted;
f. Refusing to grant this Conditional Use is also justified because the
applicant failed to completely comply with the City's ordinances (especially
concerning co -locations and use of city water tanks in the area);
RECEIVED
'JAN 17 2006
ow OF FAYETTEVILLE
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
COUNCIL MEETING OF:
ALDERMAN APPEAL REQUEST FORM
February 7, 2006
C r:11 2.S j 4r'
StNr ro44 � r (�i�cGy
RECEIVED I'
JAN 17 2006
CITY OF FAYETr'EVILLE
CRY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROM: Alderman Don Marr
SOldiU SJIUd
311IA31L3Ard 40 A1I0
i L 1 NV1,
APPEAL TITLE AND SUBJECT:
Appeal the passage of the CUP 06-1875 (Cell Tower/Smith 2 Way.
Conditional Use Permit submitted by Michael Smith and Gary Cochran for
Smith 2 -Way Radio for property located at 520 N College Avenue. The request
is for a cell tower at the rear of the subject property to replace two existing
non -conforming cell towers.
lderman Date
t?..4
A erman
s4a9
Alderman
! 7
Date
Date
heyer
Bman Date
•
City Council Meeting of February 7, 2006
Agenda Item Number
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA MEMO
To: Mayor and City Council
Thru: Gary Dumas, Director of Operations
From. Jeremy C. Pate, Director of Current Planning
Date: January 18, 2006
Subject: Conditional Use Permit for Smith Two -Way Radio - 520 North College (CUP
06-1875)
RECOMMENDATION
Planning Staff recommends approval of a conditional use permit to allow a wireless
communications tower, submitted by Smith Two -Way Radio at 520 North College
Avenue. This action would remove two existing shorter wireless communications towers
and replace them with a single tower.
BACKGROUND
The subject property contains approximately 0.51 acres of developed property that
contains two existing wireless communications towers: (1) a 65' guyed tower with a 20'
antenna extending above the tower; and (2) a wooden utility type monopole and
extension bracket that supports antennas up to 62 feet above the ground. A photo of
these existing towers is attached in the staff report provided to the Planning Commission.
The applicant requests conditional use approval to replace these towers with a 100'
monopole tower that meets current ordinance requirements. The site is currently zoned
C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial, which allows new wireless communications towers as a
conditional use.
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission voted 5-2-0 in favor of this request on January 9, 2006, with
Commissioners Allen and Ostner voting no. Recommended conditions were approved by
the Planning Commission, with the exception of a condition to limit the tower to a
maximum of 90' in height, and are reflected in the attached staff report.
There was a large amount of public comment at the meeting stating objection to the
project with concerns mainly centered on community character and visual impacts.
BUDGET IMPACT
None.
WttvILIe
ARKANSAS
THE CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE, ARKANSAS
PLANNING DIVISION CORRESPONDENCE
TO: Fayetteville Planning Commission
FROM: Andrew Garner, Senior Planner
THRU: Jeremy Pate, Director of Current Planning
DATE: January 1 006 January 18, 2006
PC Meeting of January 9, 2006
125 W. Mountain St.
Fayetteville, AR 72701
Telephone! (479)575-8267
CUP 06-1875: (Cell Tower/Smith 2 Way, 446): Submitted by Michael Smith/Gary Cochran
Smith 2 -Way Radio for property located at 520 College Avenue. The property is zoned C-2
THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL and contains approximately 0.51 acres. The request is to
approve a wireless communications tower at the rear of the subject property.
Property Owner. Michael Smith Planner: ANDREW GARNER
RECOMMENDED MOTION: Staff recommends approval of the requested wireless
communications tower with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall comply with all applicable federal regulations.
2. Equipment used in conjunction with the tower shall not generate noise which
can be heard beyond the site per Unified Development Code (UDC) Chapter
163.14 (A)(1).
3. Lighting on the tower shall only be installed if mandated by the Federal Aviation
Administration (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 right-of-way.
4. The tower shall be no taller than 100' 90' (including all antennas, arrays, or
other appurtenances).
MODIFIED BY PLANNING COMMISSION 01/09/06
5. The pole shall be painted utilizing the transitional paint scheme as shown in the
application, or a color as determined by the Planning Commission which blends
in with the background.
6. The utility equipment at the base of the tower shall be surrounded by a wooden
security fence of sufficient height to prevent the view of the premises from
vehicular and pedestrian traffic on adjacent streets. The existing barbed wire
and chain link fencing shall be removed in conjunction with this request.
K: IRepnrts120061PC Reports101-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Sinidr 2 War Cell Toner).doc
7. Landscaping shall be added to the site (and shown on plans) which provides a
"buffer of dense tree growth and under story vegetation in all directions to
create an effective year round visual buffer" as required by UDC Chapter
163.14 (B)(11). Species and location of the required plantings shall be subject to
the approval of the Landscape Administrator.
8. The minimum distance from the base of the tower to any residential dwelling
unit shall be the lower height or required setback, whichever is greater, unless
all persons owning said residence or the land on which said residences are
located consent in writing to the construction of the tower, pursuant to UDC
Section 163.14(B)(3).
9. The applicant shall provide a sight line representation for review and approval
of Planning Staff pursuant to UDC Section 163.14(B)(8). These representations
shall be provided from four points 90 degrees apart and 100 feet from the
proposed tower. These profiles shall show all intervening trees and buildings
10. Any connection to existing utilities to provide power to this site shall be located
underground.
11. The booklet shall be revised to delete all reference to the Dean Soloman tower.
12. Only ownership and cautionary signage located on the screening fence shall be
permitted as provided by Chapter 163.14 (A)(3).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Required YES
X Approved ❑ Denied
Motion: Graves
Second: Clark
Vote: 5-2-0 (Allen, Ostner voting `no')
Date: January 9, 2006
Comments:
BACKGROUND:
The applicant is proposing to remove two existing shorter wireless communications towers and
replace them with a single tower. The existing towers are: (1) a 65' guyed tower with a 20'
antenna extending above the tower to 82'; and (2) a wooden utility type monopole and extension
bracket that supports antennas up to 62 feet above the ground. A photo of these existing towers
KJReports120061PC Reports101-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Towerjdoe
is attached to this report. The applicant proposes to replace these towers with a 100' monopole
tower, that meets current ordinance requirements.
The proposed site is located at 520 College Street in north -central Fayetteville.
Following ordinance requirements, notification (certified mail) was provided to all property
owners within a 500' 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).
Smith Two -Way Radio states in their application that the carriers are suffering service -affecting
capacity issues due to RF frequency use, and coverage and tower to tower hand-off issues due to
the distance and barriers between existing towers. Due to the growth of the tree line in the area
the applicant stated that they cannot maintain a line of sight signal path to the closest tower
which is located on Mount Sequoyah. The second closest tower is on the VA Water Tower/Old
Washington Regional Medical Center. The applicant stated that the existing towers on the site
are not able to cover the area.
The applicant states that the proposed taller tower is needed to improve call handling capacity,
cellular coverage and tower -to -tower hand off. Additionally, the proposed tower will allow for
the co -location of several wireless carriers. The applicant considered the existing vegetation,
buildings and surrounding land use to minimize the visual impact of the tower. Additionally, the
applicants will use Slim Line T -Mount antennas and the transitional paint scheme that was
approved at the Zion Road/Crossover Road site.
It is staff's opinion that wireless coverage can be provided at this location that will not detract
from the scenic quality and character of the area. Staff finds that the proposal would improve the
aesthetic appearance of the area by removing two existing outdated towers, upgrading the
existing chain link and barb wire fence with a 10' wood privacy type fence and landscaping that
would block view of the new cellular equipment and storage buildings at the base of the pole.
The proposed location is outside of the boundaries of the Design Overlay District.
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning:
Direction
Land Use
Zoning
North
Commercial
C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial
South
Commercial
C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial
East
Single-family dwellings
RSF-4, Residential Single -Family Four
Units/Acre
West
Commercial
C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial
Public Comment: One written letter has been received from a property owner in the vicinity
discussing the adverse effects of living next to the existing wireless communication towers on
the site, and potential adverse effects of installing a new tower that should be considered by the
Planning Commission such as: community character, light pollution, and poor television and
radio reception caused by the tower. Additional public comment received by the applicant is
provided in the supplemental booklet provided, and generally indicated support for the project.
K:IReports12006(PC Reporis101-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Towei).doc
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Community Commercial
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.
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
Finding: The Planning Commission is empowered under § 163.17 (see attached) to
grant the requested conditional use permit.
(b.) That the granting of the conditional use will not adversely affect
K4Repmis120061PC Reports101-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 I;'av Cell Tower).doc
the public interest.
Finding: Granting the requested conditional use for a 100' monopole tower with
camouflaging will not adversely affect the public interest. By using
camouflaging, existing vegetation and new landscaping, a balance can be
achieved that will maintain the scenic quality of the city as well as allow
cellular companies to provide an important service to the community and
emergency services. Removing the outdated towers and replacing them with
a newer, more effective tower will help provide more effective and
comprehensive wireless service for the public in the area. In addition the
proposal would visually improve the site by removing two outdated cluttered
towers, replacing the existing chain link and barb wire fence with a 10'
privacy fence, and installing a landscape buffer around the site.
(c.) The Planning Commission shall certify:
(1.) Compliance with the specific rules governing individual
conditional uses; and
Finding: The applicant has complied with specific rules governing this individual
conditional use request.
•
(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 existing curb cut will be used to access this site.
(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;
Finding: No parking or loading areas are required for this use.
(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.
K:I Reports120061 PC Reports101-09-06ICUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Tower).doc
(d.) Utilities, with reference to locations, availability,
and compatibility;
Finding: Utilities shall be located underground or screened from the public view with
the exception of the proposed monopole and the equipment mounted on that
apparatus.
(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.
(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: Only ownership and cautionary signage located on the screening fence shall
be permitted.
(g•)
Required setbacks and other open space; and
Finding: The location of the proposed monopole is in compliance with required
setbacks for the C-2 zoning district, and as depicted in the booklet provided
is residential dwellings are not within the fall zone of the tower.
(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, by utilizing existing vegetation,
adding additional vegetation, camouflaging the tower, and locating the
structure away from rights-of-way will lessen the visual impact of the
proposed tower. With implementation of this project, views of the site would
change from two cluttered towers and antenna structures with a maximum
height of 82', chain link and barbed wire fence, to views of a new 100'
monopole tower with a slim T-type mount antenna, 10' privacy fence and
landscaping. Staff finds that the proposed project would be more compatible
with the surrounding land uses than the existing use of the site with two un -
screened towers.
CHAPTER 163: USE CONDITIONS
163.14 Wireless Communications Facilities.
K: IReports120061PC Repor:s101-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Toner).doc
(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: Applicant shall comply with all applicable federal regulations. Proof of
compliance shall be provided upon request of the Zoning and Development
Administrator.
(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: Lighting on the tower shall only be installed if mandated by the FAA.
Security lighting or motions -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.
(B) New Towers. New wireless communications towers shall meet the following
requirements:
(1) Type of Towers Allowed. New towers shall be limited to monopole type
structures or altemative tower structures.
Finding: The applicant is proposing a monopole structure.
K:IReporls120061PC Reports101-09-06ICUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Tower).doe
(2) Tower or antenna height limitations. Towers or altemative tower
structures are permitted to a maximum height of 150 feet.
Finding: The proposed monopole is 100' tall.
(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: The 100' fall zone is depicted in the materials provided by the applicant,
showing that there are no residential dwellings within 100' feet of the
proposed tower in compliance with this requirement.
(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: The proposed location of the tower is located in such a way as to utilize
existing buildings and foliage as screening. Additionally, the applicants will
use Slim line T -type -mount antennas, plant additional trees and shrubs and
will paint the tower to match existing foliage and the skyline.
(5)
Color of Towers. To the extent that any antenna extend above the height
of the vegetation immediately surrounding it, they shall be a neutral color,
painted or unpainted, unless the FAA requires otherwise.
Finding: The applicants will use a transitional paint scheme to match existing
vegetation and the skyline.
(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 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.
K:IReporrs12006IPC Repons101-09-06ICUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Tower).doc
(c) Provide a map that shows other potential stand-alone locations for
your facility that have been explored.
Finding: Item (c) is reflected within the report, as provided by the applicant and
distributed with this agenda to the Commissioners.
(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.
(d) 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: Based on information provided by the applicant, the proposed location is
evidently superior to other locations because of the inadequate wireless
communication coverage in this area. As depicted in the attached maps, the
closest tower is located on Mount Sequoyah, and effective signal to and from
the existing lower towers is now being blocked by the tree line. The carriers
have call handling capacity issues due to the amount of users and coverage
issues due to the distance between the existing facilities. The proposed
location is set in the rear of the property, approximately 170' from College
Avenue, and behind two existing commercial structures. The closest
residential structures are adjacent to the eastern property line of the site,
outside of the 100' fall zone. Staff finds that the proposed new low profile
tower with a 10' privacy fence and landscaping would be more compatible
with surrounding residential uses than the existing two towers and chain link
and barb wire fences surrounding the site. .
(f) 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 effort to co -locate with other carriers. The Planning
Commission may deny a permit to an applicant that has not demonstrated a good
faith effort to provide for co -location. Such good faith effort includes:
(1) A survey of all existing structures that may be feasible sites for co -locating
wireless communications facilities;
(2) Contact with all the other wireless communications licensed carriers
K:IReports120061PC Reports10l-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Tower).doc
operating in the City and Washington County; and
(3) Sharing information necessary to determine if co -location is feasible under
the design configuration most accommodating to co -location.
(4) Letter from tower owner stating why co -location is not feasible.
Finding: The applicant did not provide much information regarding alternative
locations for the tower as the project would replace two existing towers with
one tower. The applicant did describe the current poor wireless coverage in
the area, providing rationale that the newer, taller tower would provide
better coverage for the vicinity than the existing towers. See attached
materials.
(g) Describe how you will accommodate other antenna arrays that could
co -locate on your facility. Describe how this accommodation will
impact both your pole or tower, and your ground mounted facilities.
Provide documentation of your provider's willingness to
accommodate other providers who may be able to co -locate on your
facility.
Finding: This facility will allow co -location for several wireless carriers as stated
within the applicant's request.
(7) Required (after condition) and Balloon Test or Crane Test Photographs.
The proposed tower shall be photographed from four locations taken 90 degrees
apart and 300' from the center of the tower. The proposed tower shall be
superimposed on the photographs. A balloon or crane test shall be performed to
illustrate the height of the tower and photographed from the same four locations.
The time period, not to exceed one week, within which the test will be performed,
shall be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 14
days, but not more than 21 days prior to the test. The four locations shall be
approved by the City Planner.
Finding: The applicant has provided visual simulations of the proposed tower from
appropriate locations.
(8) Sight Line Representation. A sight line representation shall be drawn from
four points 90 degrees apart and 100 feet from the proposed tower. Each sight
line shall be depicted in profile, drawn at one inch equals 40 feet. The profiles
shall show all intervening trees and buildings.
Finding: The applicant has provided a one mile east -west terrain profile showing the
100' tower. However a sight line representation shall be drawn from four
points 90 degrees apart and 100 feet from the proposed tower. Each sight
line shall be depicted in profile, drawn at one inch equals 40 feet. The
K:IRepons12006IPC Repoits101-09-06ICUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Wav Cell Thu •el) .doc
profiles shall show all intervening trees and buildings. Staff finds that with
the terrain profile and visual simulations provided, the conclusion can be
made that the project would not cause an adverse visual impact compared
with the existing condition, but would rather improve the appearance of the
site. However, the sight line representations are required to be submitted
and approved by staff pursuant to ordinance, prior to building permit.
(9)
Structural lntegrity and Inspection of Towers.
(a) The applicant shall provide a certification letter that states the tower meets or
exceeds design criteria and all local, state, and federal requirements regarding
the construction, maintenance, and operation of the tower.
(b) If a tower fails to comply with the requirements and criteria above and
constitutes a danger to person or property, then upon written notice being
provided to the owner of the tower, the owner shall have thirty (30) days to
bring such tower into compliance within thirty (30) days, the City may
terminate that owner's conditional use permit and/or cause the removal of
such tower. (at the owner's expense).
(c) By making an application hereunder, the applicant agrees to regularly
maintain and keep in a reasonably safe and workmanlike manner all towers,
antenna arrays, fences and outbuildings owned by the applicant which are
located in the City. The applicant further agrees to conduct inspections of all
such facilities not less frequently than every 12 months. The applicant agrees
that said inspections shall be conducted by one or more designated persons
holding a combination of education ad experience so that they are reasonably
capable of identifying functional problems with the facilities.
Finding: The applicant has provided a letter from Sabre Communications
Corporation that states the tower meets design criteria.
(10) Security Fencing and Anti -climbing Device. Through the use of security
fencing, towers and equipment shall be enclosed by wood board fencing not less
than six (6) feet in height. The tower shall also be equipped with an appropriate
anti -climbing device. The facility shall place signs indicating "No Trespassing",
"High Voltage" or other pertinent information on the outside of the fence, unless
it is decided that the goals of this ordinance would be better served by waiving
this provision in a particular instance. Barbed wire fencing or razor wire shall be
prohibited.
Finding: The applicant would construct a wood privacy fence around the base of the
tower and would provide an anti -climbing device on the tower. All barbed
wire on the site shall be removed, and chain link fencing in this area shall be
removed
K:IReports120061PC Reports101-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Smidr 2 WVov Cell Tower).doc
(11) Vegetative Screening Requirements. Wireless communications facilities
shall be surrounded by buffers of dense tree growth and understory vegetation in
all directions to create an effective year-round visual buffer. Trees and vegetation
may be existing on the subject property or installed as part of the proposed facility
or combination of both.
Finding: Vegetative screening, consisting of evergreen trees and shrubs, shall be
provided by the applicant, with species and location to be approved by the
Landscape Administrator. If possible, some trees may be planted along the
street, as well.
(12) Setback from Property Lines. Wireless communications facilities shall
meet current setbacks as required by zoning.
Finding: The proposed facility and accessory structure shall comply with C-2 setback
requirements.
•
K:IRepartsI20061PC Reports101-09-06ICUP 06-1875 (Smith, 2 Way Cell Towe ).doc
City of Fayetteville Unified Development Code
Section 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 conditioning 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.
(2) Compliance with federal regulations. Applicant shall comply with all applicable federal regulations. Proof of
compliance shall be provided upon request of the Zoning and Development Administrator.
(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 communication facility, provided that the lighting is shielded in such a way
that no light is directed towards adjacent properties or rights-of-way.
(b) Signs shall be limited to those needed to identify the property and the owner and wam of any danger.
No signs, symbols, identifying emblems, flags, or banners shall be allowed on towers.
(B) New towers. New wireless communications towers shall meet the following requirements:
(1) Type of towers allowed. New towers shall be limited to monopole type structures or altemative tower
structures.
(2) Tower or antenna height limitations. Towers or altemative tower structures are permitted to a maximum
height of 150 feet.
Fall zone. The minimum distance from the base of any tower to any residential dwelling unit shall be the
lower height or required setback, whichever is greater, unless all persons owning said residence 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.
(3)
(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 designed to be camouflaged to the greatest extent possible
including, but not limited to, use of compatible building materials and colors, screening, landscaping, and
placement within trees.
Color of towers. To the extent that any antenna extending above the height of the vegetation immediately
surrounding it, they shall be a neutral color, painted or unpainted, unless the FAA requires otherwise.
(5)
(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 that shows other existing or planned facilities that will be used by the wireless
communication service provider who is making the application;
(c) Provide a map that shows other potential stand alone locations for your facility that have been explored;
(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 specifications on proposed lighting of the facility;
(e) Describe why the proposed location is superior, from a community perspective, to other potential
K:IReporis120061PC Reports101-09-06ICUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Tawe).doc
locations. Factors to consider in the community perspective should include: visual aspects, setbacks,
and proximity of single-family residences;
(f) 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 effort to co -locate with other
carriers. The Planning Commission may deny a permit to an applicant that has not demonstrated a
good faith effort to provide for co -location. Such good faith effort includes:
(9)
(i) A survey of all existing structures that may be feasible sites for co -locating wireless
communications facilities;
(ii) Contact with all other wireless communications facilities;
(iii) Sharing information necessary to determine if co -location is feasible under the design configuration
most accommodating to co -location; and
(iv) Letter from tower owner stating why co -location is not feasible.
Describe how you will accommodate other antenna arrays that could co -locate on your facility.
Describe how this accommodation will impact both your pole or tower, and your ground mounted
facilities. Provide documentation of your provider's willingness to accommodate other providers who
may be able to co -locate on your facility.
(7) Required (after condition) balloon test and crane test photographs. The proposed tower shall be
photographed from four locations taken 900 apart and 300 feet from the center of the tower. The proposed
tower shall be superimposed on the photographs. A balloon or crane test shall be performed to illustrate the
height of the tower and photographed from the same four locations. The time period, not to exceed one
week, within which the test will be performed, shall be advertised in a newspaper of general circulation in the
city at least 14 days, but not more than 21 days prior to the test. The four locations shall be approved by the
Zoning and Development Administrator.
(8) Sight line representation. A sight line representation shall be drawn from four points 90° apart and 100 feet
from the proposed tower. Each sight line shall be depicted in profile, drawn at one inch equals 40 feet. The
profiles shall show all intervening trees and buildings.
(9) Structural integrity and inspections of towers.
(a) The applicant shall provide a certification letter that states the tower meets or exceeds design criteria
and all local, state, and federal requirements regarding the construction, maintenance, and operation of
the tower.
(b) If a tower fails to comply with the requirements and criteria above and constitutes a danger to persons
or property, then upon written notice being provided to the owner of the tower, the owner shall have 30
days to bring such tower into compliance with such requirements and criteria. If the owner fails to bring
such tower into compliance within 30 days, the city may terminate the owner's conditional use permit
and/or cause the removal of such tower (at the owner's expense).
(c) By making application hereunder, the applicant agrees to regularly maintain and keep in a reasonably
safe and workmanlike manner all towers, antenna arrays, fences and outbuildings owned by applicant
which are located in the city. The applicant further agrees to conduct inspections of all such facilities
not less frequently than every 12 months. The applicant agrees that said inspections shall be
conducted by one or more designated persons holding a combination of education and experience so
that they are reasonably capable of identifying functional problems with the facilities.
(10) Security fencing and anti -climbing device, Through the use of security fencing, towers and equipment shall
be enclosed by wood board fencing not less than six feet in height. The tower shall also be equipped with
an appropriate anti -climbing device. The facility shall place signs indicating "No Trespassing," "High
Voltage," or other pertinent information on the outside of the fence, unless it is decided that the goals of this
ordinance would be better served by waiving this provisions in a particular instance. Barbed wire fencing or
razor wire shall be prohibited.
(11)Vegetative screening requirements. Wireless communications facilities shall be surrounded by buffers of
K:IReports120061PC Reports101-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Tower).doc
dense tree growth and understory vegetation in all directions to create an effective year-round visual buffer.
Trees and vegetation may be existing on the subject property or installed as part of the proposed facility or a
combination of both.
(12) Setbacks froth property lines. Wireless communication facilities shall meet current setbacks as required by
zoning.
(C) Co -location. Applicants for co -location shall meet the following requirements:
(1) Administrative approval for antenna co -locations and locations on other structures. The Zoning and
Development Administrator, following an administrative review without requiring the issuance of a
conditional use permit, may approve the following antenna installation:
(a) Locating on existing structures Installation of an antenna on an existing structure other than a tower
(such as a building, sign, light pole, electric transmission tower and similarly scaled public
utilities/facilities, water tower, or other free-standing nonresidential structure), provided that the addition
of the antenna does not add more than 20 feet of height to the original structure;
(b) Locating on exiting towers. Installation of an antenna on an existing tower of any height, and the
placement of additional buildings or other supporting equipment used in connection with such additional
antenna, so long as the proposed additions would add no more than 20 feet of height to the original
height of the tower. The addition or modification, to the extent possible, should be designated to
minimize visibility; and
(c) For the purpose of co -location, the applicant must submit information from a licensed professional
engineer certifying the capacity of the tower for additional providers and a letter of intent from the
applicant indicating their intent to share space.
(D) Other requirements.
(1) Wireless communications facilities placed on top of buildings. When a wireless communications facility
extends above the roof height of a building on which it is mounted, every effort shall be made to conceal the
facility within or behind existing architectural features to limit its visibility from public ways. Facilities
mounted on a roof shall be stepped back from the front facade in order to limit their impact on the building's
silhouette.
(2) Wireless communications facilities placed on sides of buildings. Antennas which are side -mounted on
buildings shall be painted or constructed of materials to match the color of the building material directly
behind them.
(E) Exemptions.
(1) Personal use. Towers for personal use which, including the height of all antenna arrays, do not extend more
than 80 feet from the ground and shall meet the current setbacks as required by zoning.
(2) Temporary structures. Temporary structures designed to be used for not more than 14 days in connection
with a special event or for any reasonable period of time in and immediately following an emergency,
including without limitation those towers which are identified as "C.O.W.s" or "Cellular on Wheels."
(3) Existing towers. All existing towers may be replaced with the same type and height of tower structure as
currently exists. All replacement towers shall comply with §163.14(A) and (B) regarding color of towers,
structural integrity and inspections of towers, security fencing and anti -climbing device, and vegetative
screening requirements. All existing guyed towers shall also be subject to the following conditions:
(a) A demolition permit shall be issued prior to a building permit being issued for the replacement tower;
(b) The demolition permit shall expire within 90 days and shall require the existing tower to be demolished
within 90 days from issuance of the building permit for the replacement tower;
(c) The new tower shall be constructed as close as technically feasible to the existing tower;
(d) Additional antennas may be installed on an existing tower of any height, and additional buildings or
K:IReports120061PC Repons101-09-061CUP 06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Tower).doc
other supporting equipment used in connection with such additional antennas may be placed at the
tower site so long as the proposed additions would add rio more than 20 feet height to the original
height of the existing tower. The addition or modification, to the extent possible, should be designed to
minimize visibility;
(e) The replacement structure may be increased in width to a maximum of 36 inches. Existing guyed
towers over 36 inches shall not be increased in width with a replacement tower.
(4) Emergency and utility towers and antennas. Towers and antennas under 35 feet in height used for 9-1-1
services and utility monitoring (gas, water, sewer, traffic lights, etc.).
(F) Municipal profits from towers. The City of Fayetteville should actively market its own property and existing
structures as suitable co -location sites. As noted above, the review process is shortened and simplified when
co -location on city property is submitted by applicant. An annual lease amount should be charged according to
the fair market value of the location. In cases where the company no longer needs the tower, the city may
require it to be removed. Applicants can provide co -location space for city -owned antenna.
(G) Abandoned antennas and towers. At such time that a licensed carrier abandons or discontinues operation
of a wireless communication facility, such carrier will notify the city of the proposed date of abandonment or
discontinuation of operations. Such notice shall be given no less than 30 days prior to abandonment or
discontinuation of operations. In the event that licensed carrier fails to give such notice, the wireless
communications facility shall be considered abandoned upon such discontinuation of operations. Upon
abandonment or discontinuation of use, the carrier shall physically remove the wireless communications facility
within 90 days from the date of abandonment or discontinuation of use. "Physically remove" shall include, but
not be limited to:
(1) Removal of antenna, equipment shelters and security barriers from the subject property;
(2) Proper disposal of the waste materials from the site in accordance with local and state solid waste disposal
regulations;
Restoring the location of the wireless communications facility to its natural condition, except that any
landscaping and grading shall remain in the after -condition.
(H) Notification of change of ownership/operator. Upon assignment or transfer of a conditional use permit, or any of
the rights thereunder to a new wireless telecommunications operator, the owner or operator shall provide written
notice within 30 days to the Zoning and Development Administrator.
(Ord. No. 4178, §4, 8-31-99; Ord. No. 4285, 1-2-01)
(3)
K:IReports120061PCReports10/-09-061CUP06-1875 (Smith 2 Way Cell Tower).doc
Fayetteville Unified Development Code
Section 161.17 District C-2, Thoroughfare Commercial
(A) Purpose. The Thoroughfare Commercial District is designed especially to encourage the functional grouping. of these
commercial enterprises catering primarily to highway travelers.
(B) Uses.
(1) Permitted uses.
Unit 1
City-wide uses by right
Unit
4
Unit 21
Cultural and recreational facilities
Unit 12
Offices, studios and related services
Unit 13
Eating places
Unit 14
Hotel, motel, and amusement facilities
Unit 15
Neighborhood shopping goods
Unit 16
Shopping goods
Unit 17
Trades and services
Unit 18
Gasoline service stations & drive-in
restaurants
Unit 19
Commercial recreation, small sites
Unit 20
Commercial recreation, large sites
Unit 25
Professional offices
Unit 33
Adult live entertainment
club or bar
Unit 34
Liquor store
(2) Conditional uses.
Unit 2
City-wide uses by conditional use permit
Unit 3
Public protection and utility facilities
Unit 21
Warehousing and wholesale
Unit 28
Center for collecting recyclable materials
20 ft.
Unit 32
Sexually oriented business
Unit 35
Outdoor music establishments
Unit 36
Wireless communications facilities
(C) Density. None.
(D) Bulk and area regulations. None.
(E) Setback regulations.
Front
50
ft.
Side
None
Side, when contiguous to a residential
district
15 ft.
Rear
20 ft.
(F) Height regulations. In District C-2 any building which exceeds the height of 20 feet shall be set back from any boundary
line of any residential district a distance of one foot for each foot of height in excess of 20 feet. No building shall exceed six
stories or 75 feet in height.
(G) Building area. On any lot, the area occupied by all buildings shall not exceed 60% of the total arca of such lot.
(Code 1965, App. A., Art. 5(VI); Ord. No. 1833, 11-1-71; Ord. No. 2351, 6-2-77; Ord. No. 2603, 2-19-80; Ord. No. 1747, 6-29-
70; Code 1991. §160.036; Ord. No. 4034, §3, 4, 4-15-97; Ord. No. 4100, §2 (Ex. A), 6-16-98; Ord. No. 4178, 8-31-99; Ord.
4727, 7-19-05)
K:1Reports110061PC Reportsl0l-09-06ICUP 06-1875 (Smith 1 Way Cell Towe,jdoc