HomeMy WebLinkAboutA003 - Report to Zoning Board dated July 24, 2024
1
ITEM #: 4
DATE: 07-24-24
CITY OF AMES
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND HOUSING
REPORT TO THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
DATE PREPARED: July 24, 2024
CASE FILE NO.: SUP-001985
REQUEST: Amendment to an existing Special Use Permit to remove the upper portion
of the stealth tower and replace with larger diameter stealth canisters
including new antenna and equipment on the existing cellular tower located
at 106 South Dakota Avenue.
PROPERTY
OWNER: Ames Woman’s Club
APPLICANT: United States Cellular Corp.
CONTACT: Rob Viera
LOCATION: 106 South Dakota Avenue (Ames Woman’s Club)
ZONING: “S-GA” Government / Airport District
BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant, United States Cellular Corp., is requesting approval of a Special Use Permit to
install mounted antennas and larger stealth canisters on an existing “stealth” monopole at 106
South Dakota Avenue, on the property with the Ames Woman’s Club (see Attachment A, Location
Map). The height of the existing tower will remain the same.
Stealth monopole cellular towers are a standard request and are designed to minimize the visual
impact by creating a more streamlined and proportional appearance than standard exterior
mounted antennae arrays. A Special Use Permit (SUP) for the construction of the existing tower
was approved by the Zoning Board of Adjustment in September 2003 and included approval of a
120-foot stealth monopole with interior mounted cellular antennas to the east of building occupied
by the Ames Woman’s Club on South Dakota Avenue between Lincoln Swing and Todd Drive.
The pole has four stealth canisters containing cellular phone antennas and additional antennas
below those canisters.
The ZBA approved modifications to the SUP in 2014 (allowing additional antennas below the four,
10-foot stealth canisters) and in 2020 (allowing the four, 10-foot stealth canisters to be enlarged
in diameter).
The monopole and existing ground equipment are located in an enclosed area measuring
approximately 50 feet by 50 feet. The existing monopole is located in accordance with required
setbacks of the zoning code.
2
Any change to the design that would modify the stealth elements originally approved, requires an
amendment to the Special Use Permit. Verizon is proposing to remove the second highest 10 feet
of antenna canister and replace it. The existing canisters are all 48 inches in diameter; the one
new canister is 84 inches. The height will remain at 120 feet. The applicant has submitted a
structural analysis signed by an Iowa-certified engineer indicating the base will support the new
equipment and that the pole will be structurally sound after the change. Pedestrian safety from
ice or other falling debris should not be an issue, as the tower meets the setbacks standards of
the code and the proposed antennas are interior mounted.
An existing, solid wood fence surrounds the base of the tower on all sides. The tower and
enclosure are to the east of the club building and north of the parking lot. No change to the existing
fencing is proposed, and all new equipment will be located within the existing enclosure. The
enclosure is bordered on all sides by columnar arborvitae.
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
that create a large diameter sheath for the antennas.
PUBLIC NOTICING:
Notification was made to all owners of property within 200 feet. A notice of public hearing was
placed on the property and published in the newspaper.
APPLICABLE LAW:
Chapter 29, Section 29.1307(8) of the Municipal Code includes “Cell Site Standards” stated as
follows:
(8) Cell Site Standards. The following standards and procedures, in addition to those
contained in Section 29.1503, shall apply to the issuance of a Wireless Permit and
issuance of a Special Use Permit for a cell site with antenna. [The standards are listed in
this report below.]
* * *
(12) Changes. There shall be no change in the exterior appearance of a cell site, including any
change in the profile of the tower, that is a departure from what was shown or represented
in the approved Special Use Permit except as allowed by this ordinance.
In addition, Section 29.1503(4)(a),(c), and (e) of the Zoning Ordinance 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 (c) 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 standards,
and in addition, shall find adequate evidence that each use in its proposed location
will… [The standards are listed in this report below.]
3
(b) Residential 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… [The standards are listed in this report below.]
(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.
FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS:
Based upon the submitted information and site plan provided in the application, the following
findings of fact and conclusions may be made regarding the standards of approval.
Sec. 29.1307(8) Cell Site Standards.
(a) Tower 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 or tower shall be constructed, altered, or
maintained so as to project above any of the imaginary airspace surfaces described
in FAR Part 77 of the FAA guidance on airspace protection.
Findings of Fact: No change to the height is proposed.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(a) for a Special Use Permit.
(b) Setbacks from Base of Tower. The minimum distance between the base of the
support or any guy anchors and any property line shall be equal to 50% of the
antenna height.
Findings of Fact: The existing tower location meets the required setback which is 50% of
the height of the tower (60 feet). The tower is situated on the parcel approximately 147
feet from the north property line (Lincoln Swing), 168 feet from the south property line
(Todd Drive), 137 feet from the west property line (South Dakota Avenue), and 60 feet
from the east property line (which contains an apartment building).
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(b) for a Special Use Permit.
(c) 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
devises, as approved by the manufacturers.
Findings of Fact: An analysis has verified the structural integrity of the tower and
foundation and their ability to support the proposed equipment.
The changes to the tower do not include adding any external antennas, so ice and falling
debris would not be an issue. The tower structure is a featureless pole with no provision
4
to climb. Anti-climbing devices are not applicable, as there is no way to climb the tower.
The equipment compound is fenced and locked to deter unauthorized access to the tower.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(c) for a Special Use Permit.
(d) Screening. Appropriate screening shall be installed composed of wood, masonry
material or other substantial materials. Landscaping may also be required.
Findings of Fact: The facility has an existing wood fence surrounding the base of the pole
on all sides. The tower enclosure is screened on all sides, except for the gate on the south
side, by mature arborvitae. No additional landscaping is triggered by the proposed
changes at the top of the pole.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(d) for a Special Use Permit.
(e) Painting and Visual Aesthetics. The design of towers, antennas and base stations
should minimize the visual impact of the facility through siting, landscape
screening, and stealth techniques.
(i) Towers shall either maintain a galvanized steel finish (dull gray or white) or,
subject to any applicable standards of the FAA, be painted a neutral color so as
to reduce visual obtrusiveness to the maximum extent possible.
Findings of Fact: The new canister is shown in submitted drawings as having a solid
exterior, without perforations.
A paint color for the canister was not specified. It should be possible to paint the
canister to match what is above and below.
Conclusions: Although a paint color was not provided, the applicant should be able to
match the color on the new canister with that of the existing canisters. Staff
recommends stipulations regarding the coloring, should the permit be approved.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard (i) for a
Special Use Permit.
(ii) The design of the base station and related structures shall, to the maximum
extent possible, use materials, colors, textures, screening, and landscaping that
will blend them into the natural setting and surrounding buildings.
Findings of Fact: The existing equipment area is surrounded by an 8-foto tall wood
fence. The fence encloses, screens, and secures the equipment and the base of the
existing monopole. The enclosure is further screened by columnar arborvitae, which
are mature and have grown together to serve as an effective screen.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(ii) for a Special Use Permit.
(iii) The wireless facility shall be designed to complement the physical landscape in
which they are intended to be located. Examples of stealth techniques that may
5
be compatible include but are not limited to faux trees, unipoles / “slick sticks”,
bell towers, etc. New stealth towers shall be configured and located in a manner
that shall minimize adverse effects including visual impacts on the landscape
and adjacent properties. New freestanding structures shall be designed to be
compatible with adjacent structures and landscapes with specific design
considerations such as architectural designs, scale, color and texture.
Findings of Fact: The existing antenna equipment to be replaced adheres to all of the
required concealment standards with the use of a slick pole, equipment located behind
stealth canisters, light colored appearance, and a fence. While there are antennas on
the pole below the canisters that are not concealed, these will not be affected by the
proposed changes.
The new canister will be larger than the existing canister. The existing canister is 48
inches, and the new one will be 84 inches: it will protrude noticeably.
Conclusions: Although the new canister will protrude 18 inches on each side beyond
(36 inches total in diameter) the existing canisters, staff finds that replacing equipment
on an existing tower is preferable to constructing a new tower or siting the new
equipment on top of an existing building. Cell equipment has evolved over the years
and while the antennas themselves have shrunk as a result of technological advances,
the amount of equipment needed for telephonic and data purposes has increased.
When the pole was initially approved in 2003, smart phones had not yet been invented
and phones were primarily used for voice calls. In the intervening two decades,
demand for the equipment on a cell tower has increased and with it, the amount of
equipment has increased. When first approved, this tower was a slim, monopole. Over
time, and with previous approvals, the canisters have increased in diameter. The
proposed new canister will contain 5G equipment that will enable faster, more modern
use of mobile devices.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard (iii) for a
Special Use Permit.
(iv) Conduit or cable must be concealed on towers with externally mounted
equipment.
Findings of Fact: The cable for the tower will be mounted internally and concealed.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(iv) for a Special Use Permit.
(v) The use of internally mounted or flush mounted technology is encouraged when
adjacent to residential areas, prominent commercial areas and prominent
entryways to the city.
Findings of Fact: New antennas will be installed internally and concealed with stealth
canisters. The proposed antennas, however, are larger than what is existing,
necessitating the larger 84-inch cannisters.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(v) for a Special Use Permit.
6
(f) Air Safety. Support structures 200 feet in height or taller, or those near airports,
shall meet all Federal Aviation Administration regulations.
Findings of Fact: The existing structure is less than 200 feet.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(f).
(g) Separation Requirements. Towers exceeding 50 feet in height, except those
incorporation stealth techniques, shall be place at minimum one-quarter mile apart.
Wireless facilities in right-of-way are not subject to separation requirements.
Findings of Fact: There are no wireless towers within a quarter mile of this structure.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(g).
(h) Access. All access to wireless communications sites must be hard surface (PCC
or HMA) unless approved otherwise subject to a special use permit by the Zoning
Board of Adjustment. Placement of a tower shall not affect the use or access to
required parking of a principal use on site.
Findings of Fact: The existing access to the tower is through a paved parking lot. An
existing short, gravel access drive (approximately 8 feet wide by 12 feet deep) is located
on the north side of the parking lot and leads to the south side of the enclosure to a gate
that access the fenced-in equipment. The existing gravel drive was part of the prior
approval.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Cell Site Standard
(h).
Special Use Permit – General Standards.
(i) Be harmonious with and in accordance with the general principles and proposals
of the Land Use Policy Plan (LUPP)* of the City.
*The City of Ames has now adopted Ames Plan 2040 as its comprehensive plan, which
supersedes the old Land Use Policy Plan.
Findings of Fact: 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
initial approval.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets General Standard (i)
for a Special Use Permit.
(ii) Be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be harmonious and
appropriate in appearance with the existing and 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.
7
Findings of Fact: The proposed revisions to the tower will include a wider (84-inch
diameter) stealth canister to conceal the new antennas. The second highest 10-foot-tall
canister of the 120-foot-tall tower will therefore be noticeably wider than what is above and
below it, though nothing else about the site will change. The existing compound area is
surrounded by a wood fence. New equipment will be located within the existing enclosure
or in the interior of the stealth tower.
Conclusions: The profile of the concealment increases 36 inches in diameter, which is a
visible level of width increase compared to the base pole. The canister will match the
existing color of the other canisters.
Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets General Standard (ii) for a Special
Use Permit.
(iii) Not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future uses in the same general
vicinity.
Findings of Fact: There are no hazardous materials kept on site and this is an unmanned
facility so there is minimal activity at this location. The monopole meets recognized
engineering standards and wind and ice loading criteria. This property will be maintained
on a regular basis. The operation of the equipment is licensed by the FCC to meet federal
regulations.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets General Standard
(iii) for a Special Use Permit.
(iv) Be served adequately by essential public facilities and services such as highways,
streets, police, fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and
sewage facilities, and/or schools.
Findings of Fact: The tower does not generate waste and no water or sewer service is
required. The site of the leased area is roughly 50 feet by 50 feet – a relatively small
amount of impervious area. This area will not change with the proposed modification and
drainage is unaffected by the improvements.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets General Standard
(iv) for a Special Use Permit.
(v) Not create excessive additional requirements at public cost for public facilities or
services.
Findings of Fact: There will be no additional public costs for public facilities or services to
accommodate the proposed renovation of the tower. The proposed changes will improve
cellular coverage for the public.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets General Standard (v)
for a Special Use Permit.
(vi) Not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, and 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.
8
Findings of Fact: There are no activities or materials within this leased area that pose any
public threat. This facility is a transmission tower and emits no noise, smoke, fumes, glare,
or odor. The operation of the equipment is licensed by the FCC to meet federal regulations.
This is an unmanned facility that will not generate any additional traffic in the area.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets General Standard
(vi) for a Special Use Permit.
(vii) Be consistent with the intent and purpose of the Zone in which it is proposed to
locate such use.
Findings of Fact: A cell tower is an allowable use in the Residential High Density Zoning
District and the existing tower was approved for a Special Use Permit by the Zoning Board
of Adjustment in 2003. The ground equipment is concealed by a fence and mature
landscaping and is setback all nearby streets. Allowing modifications that maintain
compatibility with the surroundings is consistent with state and local cell site standards.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets General Standard
(vii) for a Special Use Permit.
Special Use Permit – Residential Zone Standards.
Staff evaluated this site based on residential standards, as the areas to the north, which are
closest to the site, are zoned and used residentially.
(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.
Findings of Fact: It is not anticipated that there will be frequent visits to the wireless tower.
There will be no effect on the level of service at intersections in the area.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Residential Standard
(i) for a Special Use Permit.
(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.
Findings of Fact: It is not anticipated that there will be frequent visits to the wireless tower
and the proposed changes will not increase traffic. Service technicians visiting the site can
continue to the parking lot and access it off of Todd Drive or Lincoln Swing.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Residential Standard
(ii) for a Special Use Permit.
(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.
9
Findings of Fact: A heavy truck will likely be required for the removal of the old antennas
and the installation of the new ones. Afterwards, such visits to the site by heavy trucks are
expected to be infrequent.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Residential Standard
(iii) for a Special Use Permit.
(iv) Not have noticeably different and disruptive hours of operation.
Findings of Fact: It is not anticipated that there will be frequent visits to the wireless tower.
Such visits will likely occur during daylight.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Residential Standard
(iv) for a Special Use Permit.
(v) Be sufficiently desirable for the entire community that the loss of residential land is
justifiable in relation to the benefit.
Findings of Fact: The new antenna will facilitate improved service for US Cellular
customers. No residential land is being removed: the site occupies a small piece of the
large tract of land that has been used for decades by the Ames Woman’s Club.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Residential Standard
(v) for a Special Use Permit.
(vi) Be compatible in terms of structure placement, height, orientation, or scale with the
predominate building pattern in the area.
Findings of Fact: While the existing tower is very tall, 120 feet, the proposed modifications
will not increase the height. The structure is set back 60 feet from the nearest property
line, which meets the required minimum setback of 50% of the height of the tower. While
not generally considered attractive, cell towers are a modern necessity and the cost in any
aesthetic detraction is generally considered worthwhile for the gain in mobile phone
service.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Residential Standard
(vi) for a Special Use Permit.
(vii) Be located on the lot with a greater setback or with landscape buffering to minimize
the impact of the use on adjacent property.
Findings of Fact: There are mature, columnar arborvitae on every side of the enclosure
that serve to screen the base of the tower. The tower itself, can be seen and will continue
to be seen from all surrounding properties. The proposed changes will not alter the existing
visibility.
Conclusions: It can be concluded that the use meets Residential Standard (vii) for a
Special Use Permit.
(viii) Be consistent with all other applicable standards in the zone.
10
Findings of Fact: The proposed cell tower site is consistent with all other applicable
standards in the zone.
Conclusions: Therefore, it can be concluded that the use meets Residential Standard
(viii) for a Special Use Permit.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may approve the Amended Special Use Permit for a Cell
Tower with Antennas to allow for the replacement an existing 10-foot-tall, 48-inch-wide stealth
canister with a new 84-inch stealth canister and the addition of new interior mounted antennas
and associated equipment, located at 106 South Dakota Avenue based on the findings of fact
and conclusions stated herein, as detailed on the submitted Site Plan and Elevations and the
stipulations below:
a.) The final color of the pole and cannisters shall match. This may require repainting the
pole to match the cannisters. Any fittings and straps of the cannisters shall also be
aligned and secured to ensure a consistent aesthetic and appearance. The pole and
cannisters shall be maintained in an ongoing manner with a consistent color and fit.
2. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may approve the Amended Special Use Permit for a Cell
Tower with Antennas to allow for the replacement an existing 10-foot-tall, 48-inch-wide stealth
canister with a new 84-inch stealth canister and the addition of new interior mounted antennas
and associated equipment, located at 106 South Dakota Avenue based on the findings of fact
and conclusions stated herein, as detailed on the submitted Site Plan and Elevations.
3. The Zoning Board of Adjustment may deny the Amended 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:
The Zoning Board of Adjustment may approve the Amended Special Use Permit for a Cell Tower
with Antennas to allow for the replacement an existing 10-foot-tall, 48-inch-wide stealth canister
with a new 84-inch stealth canister and the addition of new interior mounted antennas and
associated equipment, located at 106 South Dakota Avenue, is consistent with the requirements
for a Special Use Permit for a Cell Tower with Antennas and with the general and specific
commercial standards required for granting a Special Use Permit. Staff recommends the approval
include the stipulation on the appearance of the tower to ensure that the result looks as it is
presented. The cellular tower use will operate in manner that is compatible with the surrounding
uses and not cause a nuisance to adjacent neighbors.
Therefore, 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.
11
Attachment A
Zoning & Aerial Map
12
13
Attachment B
Photographic Simulation
14
Attachment B
Proposed Site Plan
15
Attachment B
Proposed Compound Plan
16
Attachment B
Existing & Proposed Tower Elevations
17
Attachment B
Equipment Closeup
18
Attachment B
Proposed Elevation
19
Attachment B
Closeup of Canister