HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5916 Staff AnalysisNovember 2B, 19'94
Item No.:
File No.: Z-5916
Owner: Kahn Family Partnership; Alltel
Cellular Associates
Address: 724 Chester Street
Description: Part of Lots 9 and 10, Block 263,
Original City of Little Rock
Zoned: I-2
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the
height restrictions of Section 36-
201(e) to permit construction of a
160 foot tall monopole tower. The
ordinance restricts tower heights
to 75 feet.
variances are also requested from
the area regulations of Section 36-
320 allow the placement of the
tower and the associated equipment
shelter which will have a reduced
side yard of 6 feet and a reduced
rear yard of 5.5 feet. The
ordinance requires a side yard
setback of 15 feet and a rear yard
setback of 25 feet in the I-2 zone.
Justification: Engineering studies have shown a
requirement for an antenna of 160
feet in height to provide necessary
service to Alltel's clients. The
tower is being placed on a lease
area within a small, I-2 zoned lot
and cannot meet the setbacks
without variances.
Present Use of Property: Gravel parking lot
Proposed Use of Property: Same, with the addition of a
45 foot by 55 foot fenced compound
containing the tower and equipment
shelter.
November 28, 1994
Item No.: 8 (Cont.)
Staff Re]aort
A. Engineering Issues:
None, attendant to this issue
B. Staff Analysis:
As is typical with this technology, the cellular phone
service company has done engineering studies which indicate
that a tower of the proposed height is necessary at this
location in order to provide optimum service to the
service's customers.
The subject property is zoned I-2, which allows the tower as
a by -right use, but which limits the height to 75 feet. The
requested height of 160 feet should have no impact on the
adjacent properties. There are other towers in the
immediate vicinity, including MEMS and the Little Rock Fire
Department.
Due to the small size of the lot and the extreme setbacks
imposed by the I-2 zoning, variances are required for
placement of the tower and the associated equipment shelter.
Again, the requested variances should not have a negative
impact on the adjacent properties.
Staff feels that the proposal is reasonable and supports the
request height and setback variances.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested height variance
for the tower and the requested side yard and rear yard
setback variances for placement of the tower and the
equipment shelter.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(NOVEMBER 28, 1994)
Randy Frazier was present representing Alltel Cellular
Associates. There were objectors present. Staff presented the
item and a recommendation of approval. Mr. Frazier offered no
additional comments but stated he was available to answer any
questions.
Board member Jeff Hathaway noted that several tower issues had
come before the Board lately. He asked Mr. Frazier how the
required height for the tower is determined. He also asked how
many more of this type of request the City can expect.
Mr. Frazier responded that the proliferation of towers is also a
concern for Alltel. He stated that changes in technology and
2
November'28, 1994
Item No.: 8
increases in customer demand dictate the number of towers
required. Mr. Frazier stated that it was Alltel's goal to place
towers in areas where they will have the least impact on adjacent
properties.
Phil Whisenhunt, Engineering Supervisor for Alltel, addressed the
Board. He stated that the number of towers, the tower height and
locations are determined by customer demand. He stated that
Alltel was mandated by the FCC to provide optimum service to its
clients. Mr. Whisenhunt stated that this proposed tower will
increase both clarity of phone service and capacity.
Chairman Borchert asked if the technology was changing so that
towers will be reduced in height. Mr. Whisenhunt responded that
that was true.
After a brief discussion, Mr. Doug Lauder, Vice -President of
operations for KTHV Channel 11, addressed the Board. He stated
that the proposed tower falls directly in Channel 11's microwave
path to Chenal Mountain, blocking the station's signals to the
transmitter. He stated that the proposed tower could have a
negative impact on the television station.
Chairman Borchert asked Mr. Lauder if he had been in contact with
Alltel. Mr. Lauder stated that he had been unsuccessful in
reaching anyone regarding the tower.
Chairman Borchert asked if this conflict were not an issue to be
settled by the FCC.
Mr. Frazier stated that Alltel did not want to create a conflict
with Channel 11. He suggested that the Board could grant the
height and setback variances subject to the issue being resolved
with Channel 11.
Jeff Hathaway stated that he was uncomfortable with that type of
condition. He questioned who would decide if the signal is
interfered with or not and what mechanism would be put in to
control compliance with the condition.
Mr. Hathaway asked the City Attorney present if the Board could
make a condition that Channel 11 approve the tower location.
After a brief discussion of the proposal, Cindy Dawson, Assistant
City Attorney, responded that it would be appropriate to require
a written agreement, signed by both Alltel and Channel it stating
that the proposed tower location will not interfere with Channel
11's signal, prior to a building permit being issued.
Mr. Whisenhunt stated that it was possible to make that
determination prior to the construction of the tower and that
Alltel would work with Channel 11.
01
November 28, 1994
Item No.: 8 (Cont.)
After a brief discussion, a motion was made, as amended, to grant
the requested height and setback variances subject to a written
agreement, signed by both Alltel and Channel 11 stating that the
proposed tower location will not interfere with Channel Ills
signal, being submitted to the Planning Staff prior to a building
permit being issued.
The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 open
position.
4