HomeMy WebLinkAboutA7 i
ITEM #:
DATE: 09-24-14
CITY OF AMES
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND HOUSING
REPORT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DATE PREPARED: September 17, 2014
CASE FILE NO.: ZBA14-22
REQUEST: Amendment to an existing Special Use Permit to install exterior mounted
antennas on the existing US Cellular tower located at 106 South Dakota
Avenue
PROPERTY OWNER: Ames Women's Club
CONTACT: Peter McNally, The Grinnell Group, representing Iowa Wireless
Services, LLC
LOCATION: 106 South Dakota Avenue
ZONING: "RH" Residential High Density
BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant is requesting approval of an amended Special Use Permit to install a
fourth providers antennas on the exterior of an existing "stealth" monopole at 106 South
Dakota Avenue, which is the location of the Ames Woman's Club (See Attachment A,
Location Map). A Special Use Permit for the construction of the existing tower was
approved in 2003, and included approval of a 120-foot monopole with interior mounted
cellular antennas on the east side of the Woman's Club building, north of the parking lot.
The monopole and existing ground equipment by US Cellular are located in an area
lease that measures 50' feet by 50' feet.
A existing equipment area is surrounded by an eight-foot tall wood board fence at the
the boundaries of the lease area The fence will enclose, screen, and secure the
equipment shelter and the base of the existing monopole and equipment as well as any
new mounted equipment. Columnar Arborvitae, spaced at approximately eight feet on-
center, was planted outside the lease area next to the fence.
Iowa Wireless is proposing to add new equipment for the site that will occupy an area in
the middle of the existing lease area measuring approximately 13 feet by 10.75 feet.
The existing monopole is located as follows in accordance with required setbacks of the
zoning code:
0 88 feet from the north right of way line;
0 60 feet from the east property line;
1
0 168 feet from the south property line, and,
0 137 feet from the west property line.
There are four locations for cellular equipment to be mounted on the interior of the
existing monopole. U.S. Cellular occupies the top three cellular equipment locations
(115', 105', and 95') and Verizon occupies the lowest location (85) on the monopole.
With the four interior mounting locations filled, Iowa Wireless is proposing to mount
three (3) 4G antennas to the exterior of the tower at an elevation of 75 feet. The
mounting detail submitted indicates the antennas will extend off of the tower
approximately 25 inches, with the cables running down the length of the tower attached
with steel bands and brackets mounted every 4 feet on center. The there will be two
vertical support poles and the antennas themselves attached to the poles. The size of
the antennas and attachments are approximately 8 feet in height.
Iowa Wireless has noted that the tower cannot be modified to accommodate any
additional interior mounted antennas due to the material needs for transmission of
interior mounted antennas and that the interior of the monopole is already at capacity
with cables from the existing four mounting locations.
The Zoning Board of Adjustment must determine if the previously approved
monopole would continue to meet the Special Use Permit criteria with the
proposed external changes.
APPLICABLE LAW:
Specific criteria and design standards for wireless communication facilities are found in
Section 29.1307.
(7) Standards for Special Use Permit. The following standards and procedures, in addition
to those contained in Section 29.1503, shall apply to the issuance of a Special Use Permit
for a cell site with antenna:
(a) Necessity. The wireless communications company shall demonstrate, using
technological evidence, that the antenna must be located where it is proposed in
order to satisfy the antenna's function in the company's grid system.
(b) Co-location Effort. If the wireless communications company proposes to build a
tower (as opposed to mounting the antenna on an existing tall structure), it shall
demonstrate that it contacted the owners of tall structures within a one-quarter-
mile radius of the site proposed, asked for permission to install the antenna on
those tall structures, and was denied for reasons other than failure to agree on
compensation. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may deny the permit if it
concludes that the applicant has not made a good faith effort to mount the antenna
on an existing tall structure.
(c) Antenna Height. The applicant shall demonstrate, to the reasonable satisfaction of
the Zoning Board of Adjustment, that the antenna is the minimum height required
to function satisfactorily. No antenna that is taller than this minimum height shall
be approved.
2
t
(d) Setbacks from Base of Antenna Support Structure. The minimum distance
between the base of the support or any guy anchors and any property line shall be
the largest of the following:
(i) 50% of antenna height;
(ii) The minimum setback in the underlying Zone; or
(iii) 60 feet.
(e) Antenna Support Structure Safety. The applicant shall demonstrate, to the
reasonable satisfaction of the Zoning Board of Adjustment, that the proposed
antenna and support structure are safe and the surrounding areas will not be
negatively affected by support structure failure, falling ice or other debris, or radio
frequency interference. All support structures shall be fitted with anti-climbing
devices, as approved by the manufacturers.
(f) Fencing. An opaque fence constructed of wood or masonry material, or other
substantial material, that is consistent with the existing structures on the proposed
site and approved by the Zoning Board of Adjustment, shall be installed around
the antenna support structure and other equipment unless the antenna is mounted
on an existing structure.
(g) Co-location. In order to reduce the number of antenna support structures needed
in the community in the future, the proposed support structure shall be required to
accommodate other users, including other wireless communications companies
and local police, fire and ambulance companies.
(h) FCC License. The wireless communication company shall provide proof that it is
licensed by the Federal Communications Commission.
(i) Required Parking. If the cell site is fully automated, adequate parking shall be
required for maintenance workers. If the site is not automated,the number of
required parking spaces shall equal the number of people on the largest shift.
(j) Painting. Antenna support structures should be painted in such a manner as to
reduce the visual impact and create a harmonious appearance with its
surroundings.
(k) Site Plan. A frill site plan shall be required for all cell sites, showing the antenna,
antenna support structure, building, fencing, buffering, and access.
(1) Air Safety. Support structures 200 feet in height or taller, or those near airports,
shall meet all Federal Aviation Administration regulations.
In addition, Chapter 29, Section 29.1503(4)(a), (c) and (e) of the Municipal Code states
the following:
(4) Review Criteria. Before a Special Use Permit application can be approved, the Zoning
Board of Adjustment shall establish that the following general standards, as well as the
specific standards outlined in subsection (b) below, where applicable, have been or shall
be satisfied. The Board's action shall be based on stated findings of fact. The conditions
imposed shall be construed as limitations on the power of the Board to act. A mere
finding that a use conforms to those conditions or a recitation of those conditions,
unaccompanied by specific findings of fact, shall not be considered findings of fact for
the purpose of complying with this Ordinance.
(a) General Standards. The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall review each
application for the purpose of determining that each proposed use meets the following
3
standards, and in addition, shall find adequate evidence that each use in its proposed
location will:
(i) Be harmonious with and in accordance with the general principles and
proposals of the Land Use Policy Plan of the City;
(ii) Be designed, constructed, operated, and maintained so as to be
harmonious in appearance with the existing or intended character of the
general vicinity and that such a use will not change the essential character
of the area in which it is proposed;
(iii) Not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future uses in the same
general vicinity;
(iv) Be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as
highways, streets, police, fire protection, drainage structure, refuse
disposal, water and sewage facilities, and/or schools;
(v) Not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public
facilities and services;
(vi) Not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment or conditions
of operation that will be detrimental to any person, property or general
welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes,
glare, or odors; and
(vii) Be consistent with the intent and purpose of the Zone in which it is
proposed to locate such use.
(b) Residential Zone Standards. The Zoning Board of Adjustment shall review each
application for the purpose of determining that each proposed use in a residential zone
meets the following standards, as well as those set forth in Section 29.1503(4)(a)
above and, in addition, shall find adequate evidence that each use in its proposed
location will:
(i) Not create excessively higher levels of traffic than the predominant pattern
in the area and not create additional traffic from the proposed use that
would change the street classification and such traffic shall not lower the
level of service at area intersections;
(ii) Not create a noticeably different travel pattern than the predominant
pattern in the area. Special attention must be shown to deliveries or service
trips in a residential zone that are different than the normal to and from
work travel pattern in the residential area;
(iii) Not generate truck trips by trucks over 26,000 pounds g.v.w (gross
vehicular weight) to and from site except for food delivery vehicles, waste
collection vehicles and moving vans;
(iv) Not have noticeably different and disruptive hours of operation;
(v) Be sufficiently desirable for the entire community that the loss of
residential land is justifiable in relation to the benefit;
(vi) Be compatible in terms of structure placement, height, orientation or scale
with the predominate building pattern in the area;
(vii) Be located on the lot with a greater setback or with landscape buffering to
minimize the impact of the use on adjacent property; and
(viii) Be consistent with all other applicable standards in the zone.
4
(e) Conditions. The Board may impose such additional conditions it deems necessary
for the general welfare, for the protection of individual property rights, and for
ensuring that the intent and objectives of this Ordinance will be observed.
Any development in the City is also subject to the Development Standards of Article 4.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Notification was made to all owners of property within 200 feet. In addition, a notice of
public hearing was placed on the property at 106 South Dakota Avenue. As of this
writing, no comments have been received.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS:
Based upon the project description and the submitted site plan and additional material,
the following findings of fact and conclusions may be made.
Findings:
1. The proposed use is allowed in the Residential High Density Zone and currently
has an approved Special Use Permit for the existing tower and interior mounted
antennas.
2. Section 29.1307 provides criteria for wireless communication facilities.
a. The applicant has provided a coverage map indicating the need for (-
wireless service in this area. The applicant notes that this co-location will
eliminate the need for a new tower in this area. I-wireless is not a licensed
carrier by the FCC, but is affiliated with T-mobile.
b. This is a proposed co-location on an existing tower. There is not another
tower in this general area.
c. The applicant has stated that additional height would be beneficial, but the
proposed height is the minimum needed to serve the area without the
construction of a new tower.
d. The tower meets all the minimum required setbacks of the code.
e. A structural analysis has been submitted to staff and is shown to meet the
applicable standards for the tower. The applicant notes that the area will
not be affected by safety issues such as ice or other falling debris because
the tower meets the setbacks standards of the code and the proposed
antennas are considered to be flush mounted, as opposed to being
mounted on an antenna array.
f. Opaque wood fencing with gates was installed around the existing tower
and equipment enclosure. No change to the existing fencing is proposed,
and any new equipment needed for the co-location will be located within
the existing enclosure.
g. All four locations on the interior of the tower are currently occupied by
other carriers. The applicant is proposing to mount their antennas on the
exterior of the tower in order to extend the co-location capabilities of the
existing tower without the need to building a new one. The applicant has
noted that the proposed equipment cannot be mounted on the interior of
5
the tower at the proposed elevation because 1) the tower is metal at the
lower elevation, not "rf friendly" as at the higher elevation locations, and 2)
there is no physical room within the tower for any more equipment or
cables to run the length of the tower.
h. The FCC license was issued at the time of construction of the existing
tower.
i. This cell site is fully automated. The site plan indicates enough area to
allow for parking of any maintenance vehicles to service the site.
j. There are no proposed changes to the appearance of the existing tower,
other than to mount the proposed antennas and cables for I-Wireless on
the exterior of the existing monopole.
k. A full site plan has been submitted that clearly shows the tower and
antenna location, equipment and compound area, fence location, and
access to the site. In addition, the applicants have submitted elevation
drawings of the proposed monopole and equipment area in relation to the
existing site. They have also included a mounting detail of the proposed
exterior antennas.
I. This item is not applicable for the height of the proposed new equipment to
be mounted on the tower.
3. Section 29.1503 provides criteria for all uses in any zone.
a. The exiting tower has an approved Special Use Permit and was found to
be in accordance with the general principles of the LUPP and the city at
the time of approval.
b. The compound area is fenced with a solid fence and screened by
landscaping. Any new equipment will be located within the existing fence
enclosure.
c. The proposed cellular equipment should not be hazardous or disturbing to
existing or future uses in the area. The monopole will meet recognized
engineering standards and will meet wind and ice loading criteria. This
property will be maintained on a regular basis. The improved cellular
service as a result of this tower location will be a benefit to the community.
d. There will be no additional public costs for public facilities or services to
accommodate the proposed co-location.
e. The City is responsible for police and fire coverage of the site. The tower
at the time of approval was not found to be a concern for additional public
incurred costs.
f. The only traffic to the site will be additional maintenance trips, and there
will be no noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors as result of this use.
g. A cell tower is a permitted use in the Residential High Density zone and
the existing tower was approved for a Special Use Permit by the Zoning
Board of Adjustment.
4. Residential Zone Standards 29.1053(c).
a. It is anticipated that maintenance crews will visit the site once every
month. This would have no effect on the level of service at intersections in
the area.
b. The proposed co-location for the site for the cell tower would not change
6
the travel pattern in the area. Service technicians visiting the site would
continue to use the driveway from Todd Drive to access the site.
c. Trucks that would visit this site would not have a gross vehicle weight of
26,000 pounds, or above.
d. Maintenance crews would visit the site once each month.
e. The proposed use is a co-location on the already existing tower and any
proposed equipment will be located within the existing mechanical
enclosure.
f. With this being a co-location, no new towers are proposed. The only new
structure will be an outdoor equipment cabinet, which is smaller than the
existing for US Cellular and will be located within the existing enclosure.
The proposed antennas will be mounted at a height of 75 feet on a tower
that was approved at an overall height of 120'.
g. The tower met all the minimum setback requirements and the existing
enclosure is surrounded by an opaque fence and plant material to
sufficiently screen the equipment from public view.
h. The proposed cell tower site is consistent with all other applicable
standards in the zone.
Conclusion:
Staff believes the application meets both the general standards and the specific
standards for issuance of a Special Use Permit (Standards for a Cell Site with Antenna
as per Section 29.1307, General Standards as per Section 29.1503(4)(a), and
Residential Zone Standards as per Section 29.1503(4)(b)). While the current monopole
was constructed as a "stealth" internal mounted antennae design back in 2003, the
code does not require that the tower be constructed with interior mounted antennas
only. However, this type of cellular tower construction has been a standard request of
the city for the purpose of minimizing the visual impact of cellular towers in residential
areas. Staff feels that the allowance to install the proposed antennas on the existing
tower, thus expanding the capabilities of the current tower without having to building a
new tower in this area, is in line with the intent of the code for new cellular equipment
locations.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may approve with a condition the Amended Special
Use Permit for a Cell Tower with Antennas to allow for the exterior mounting of new
antennas by I-Wireless, located at 106 South Dakota Avenue based on the findings
of fact and conclusions stated herein, as detailed on the submitted Site Plan.
a.) The coaxial cable shall be enclosed within conduit casing along the outside of
the monopole and painted gray to match the surface of the monopole.
2. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may approve with different or no conditions the
Amended Special Use Permit for a Cell Tower with Antennas to allow for the exterior
mounting of new antennas by I-Wireless, located at 106 South Dakota Avenue
based on the findings of fact and conclusions stated, as detailed on the submitted
Site Plan.
7
3. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may deny the Special Use Permit for Cell Site with
Antenna at 106 South Dakota Avenue if the Board finds and concludes that the
proposed amendment to the Special Use Permit is not consistent with adopted
policies and regulations, or that the amendment will impose impacts that cannot be
reasonably mitigated.
4. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may continue this request to a future meeting of the
ZBA to allow the applicant to provide additional information.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions above, it is the recommendation of
the Department of Planning and Housing that the Zoning Board of Adjustment act in
accordance with Alternative #1, which is to allow for the exterior mounting of new
antennas by I-Wireless, with a condition, located at 106 South Dakota Avenue as
detailed on the submitted Site Plan.
8
Attachment A
Location Map
-LINCOLN WAY- "'
_ LINCOLN WAYm.'..._ ,,,,..
^•-LINGO tN•W
-ia
mam
vF
ti
r
trt - i I ;fro
r? a -6 pay
� a
8� '�2 Ma 7 8 i �� � Y. �♦ �,
2 /
u It, y+q .-
�• Subject Site r
3 y
,
TOOOdR,, .... TbO DR .. a T 40 D 6R � -
v>m
Location Map
' 106 S. Dakota Avenue
nil
9