HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6116 Staff AnalysisApril 25, 1996
ITRM NO.: 17 FILE NO_: Z-5i?6
NAME:
LOCATION:
OWNER APPLICANT:
PROpaSAL:
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. Site Location:
AT&T - Conditional Use Permit
7626 Cantrell Road
Jack Burchfield/AT&T Wireless
Services by Hunter Stuart
A conditional use permit is
requested to allow for the
construction of a 110 foot
tall, monopole cellular
telecommunications tower on
this C-3 zoned property.
Associated with the tower is
an unmanned 12 foot by 20 foot
equipment building. The
applicant is also requesting
height and setback variances
for the tower and equipment
building.
The site is located at the northeast corner of Cantrell
Road and "T" Street.
2. Com)atii:)ility with Neighbor -hood:
The proposed tower site is in an area of mixed zoning
and uses located along the north side of Cantrell Road.
The properties fronting Cantrell Road, to the south and
west of this site, are primarily zoned C-3 and contain
a variety of commercial uses. The properties to the
north of this site are zoned R-2 and contain single
family residences. The property immediately east of
this site is zoned R-5 and contains multifamily
residences with single family residences further east.
The proposed 110 foot tower should not have a negative
impact on the adjacent neighborhoods, in as much as it
is a replacement for the current tower.
3. On -Site Drives and Parking:
Access to this site will be gained by utilizing a 20
foot access easement off of "T" Street. Parking is
provided at the tower site for a service technician who
April 25, 1996
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NQ.: 17 Cont. FILE NO : Z--6116
will occasionally visit the site for maintenance
purposes. No additional parking is required.
4. Screening and Buffers:
No Comments
5. City Engineer Comments:
Grading permit required.
6. Utility Comments:
No Comments
7- Staff Anal si_s :
The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to
allow for the construction of a 110 foot tall, monopole
tower on this C-3 zoned site located at 7626 Cantrell
Road. Associated with the tower is an unmanned 12 foot
by 20 foot equipment building.
The proposed tower and equipment building will be
located along the north property line of this site,
adjacent to single family residential property. the
site currently contains a 110 foot tall antenna
structure with guy wires and a 15 foot by 45 foot metal
storage building in this same general area. The 110
foot tall antenna and the metal storage building will
be removed as part of this proposal.
The applicant is also requesting height and setback
variances for the tower and equipment building. A
maximum height of 110 feet is requested for the tower,
which exceeds the maximum height (75 feet) allowed by
ordinance. A 10 foot setback is proposed, for the
equipment building, along the north property line.
This encroaches into the minimum 25 foot rear yard
setback as required by ordinance. The existing metal
storage building (which will be removed) has an
existing 8 foot setback along this north (rear)
property line. The proposed equipment building, which
will be less than half the size of the existing storage
building, will maintain a two foot greater setback.
The north side of the equipment building will have no
window or door openings.- The base of the tower will be
screened by a 6 foot wood opaque fence.
Based on the fact that this existing site contains a
110 foot antenna structure with guy wires and a 15 foot
by 45 foot metal storage building (both of which will
be removed), the proposed new monopole tower and 12
foot by 20 foot equipment building should prove to be
2
April 25, 1996
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: 17(Cont.)FILE NO.: Z-6116
an improvement to the site and should have no adverse
effect on the surrounding neighborhoods.
8. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the application and of the
requested height and setback variances subject to
compliance with the City Engineer Comments.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENT: (APRIL 4, 1996)
Hunter Stuart was present, representing the application. He
gave a brief description of the proposal. He described the
monopole size and equipment building.
Monte Moore, of the Planning Staff, discussed the variances
requested.
After a brief discussion, the Committee accepted the
presentation and forwarded the issue to full Commission for
final action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (APRIL 25, 1996)
Staff presented the item, stating that there were no
outstanding issues to be resolved. Staff recommended
approval of the conditional use permit, subject to the
applicant complying with the conditions noted in the "Staff
Recommendation". There were no objectors to this matter.
The Chairman placed the item before the Commission for
inclusion within the Consent Agenda for approval. A motion
to that effect was made. The motion was passed on a vote of
10 ayes, 0 nays, and 1 absent.
3