HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6560-A Staff AnalysisFebruary 17, 2000
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6560-A
NAME; Alltel Collocation - Tower Use Permit
r.00ATTON: 10500 Chicot Road
OWNER/APPLICANT: William R. Butler Revocable Trust/Alltel
PROPOSAL: To obtain a tower use permit to add 10 feet
to the height and a small equipment building
on the ground at the existing Wireless
Communication Facility at 10,500 Chicot Road
on property Zoned C-3, General Commercial.
ORDINANCE DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. SITE LOCATION:
This site contains an existing tower located near the
southwest corner of the intersection of Chicot Road and
Mabelvale Cutoff.
2. COMPATIBILITY WITH NEIGHBORHOOD:
This site is zoned C-3, General Commercial. Zoning to the
north and northeast is C-3, to the west, south and east is
R-2, Single Family Residential. There is a small restaurant
to the north, single family houses exist to the west and
northwest, a church to the south, and vacant land across
Chicot to the east.
Staff believes this use is compatible with the surrounding
neighborhood, and with proper screening and adherence to
the latest landscaping requirements, the site would also be
compatible.
The West Baseline, Chicot, Rob Roy Way, Legion Hut, and
Yorkwood Neighborhood Associations were notified of the
public hearing. Staff received letters opposing the
proposal from both the Legion Hut and the West Baseline
Neighborhood Associations.
February 17, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6560-A
3. ON SITE DRIVES AND PARKING:
There would continue to be one gravel access driveway from
Chicot Road which enters the site lease area from the south
by way of an access easement and meets the requirement for
parking for maintenance vehicles.
4. SCREENING AND BUFFERS:
New zoning screening and landscaping requirements should be
imposed.
5. PUBLIC WORKS COMMENTS:
a. Mabelvale Cutoff is listed on the Master Street Plan as
a minor arterial. A dedication of right-of-way to 45
feet from centerline is required.
b. Chicot Road is listed on the Master Street Plan as a
principal arterial, dedication of right-of-way to 55
feet from centerline is required.
c. A 20 feet radial dedication of right-of-way is required
at the corner of Mabelvale Cutoff.
6. UTILITY AND FIRE DEPT. COMMENTS:
Water: If any water service is required an acreage charge
of $150 per acre applies in addition to normal
charges.
Wastewater: No sewer service required for this project.
Southwestern Bell: Approved as submitted.
ARKLA: Approved as submitted.
Entergy: No comments received.
Fire Department: Approved as submitted.
CATA: No comments requested.
2
February 17, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6560-A
7. STAFF ANALYSIS:
The applicant has requested a Tower Use Permit to add 10
feet to an existing 125 foot Wireless Communication
Facility tower so they can collocate on this site. The
existing tower was permitted August 26, 1998 through the
administrative review process since it met all the
ordinance Development Standards.
The setbacks for the equipment are met, the tower setbacks
are not. The tower is set back 125 feet from the
residential zoned property to the west and 127 feet from
the south. The ordinance requires the tower to be setback
the height of the tower from any residential zoned area.
The new height of 135 feet would cause the tower to be 10
feet closer to the residential property to the west and 8
feet closer to the south than the ordinance allows.
Therefore, a reduced setback variance would be required for
both those directions. The applicant requested variances
for the reduced setbacks. Since the proposed plan does not
meet the ordinance development standards for setbacks to
the tower, a tower use permit from the Commission is
required.
Another issue to be resolved is that on the site
plan/survey, the wireless facility is not all included
within the leased area shown. In addition, the owner of the
property this site lies on, disagreed to dedicate any
needed right-of-way as required by the Master Street Plan.
Public Works included in their comments a need for
additional right-of-way.
This site is located just north of the Cedar Lane Church of
the Nazarene, on Chicot Road. There are houses on the
adjacent property to the west and northwest, and a small
restaurant just to the north of the existing WCF site.
Across Chicot Road to the east is vacant.
Staff believes this is a reasonable collocation which would
prevent the need for an additional WCF to be established in
this same general area for Alltel. Applying the new
screening and landscaping requirements should make the base
of this facility acceptable to the neighborhood.
3
February 17, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F
FILE NO.: Z -6560-A
By Federal mandate, Alltel must be allowed to install
facilities to allow them to provide the service required in
their license to operate a wireless system in Little Rock.
However, the City can apply reasonable regulations to
minimize potential aesthetic impacts on the surrounding
area. Therefore, Staff does feel the landscape and
screening requirements, and Master Street Plan dedications
are reasonable and should be imposed.
8. STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the Tower Use Permit to
include the variance for the reduced setback of 125 feet to
the west and 127 feet -to the south subject to compliance
with the following conditions:
a. Comply with the City's Landscape and Screening
requirements in the WCF Ordinance.
b. Comply with Public Works Comments.
c. Only lighting allowed is that required by State or
Federal law, and that required for safety and security
of equipment. Even that must be down shielded and kept
within the boundaries of the site.
d. Insure that the entire facility, including the fencing
and landscape strip is located within the leased area.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS: (OCTOBER 21, 1999)
Staff informed the Committee that the applicant had requested in
writing October 14, 1999, that this item be deferred until the
next scheduled meeting, including the Committee's review. Since
Staff had no objection to the deferral and the Committee had no
questions or objections, there was no discussion of the item.
The Committee supported accepting the requested deferral.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION:
(NOVEMBER 11, 1999)
No one was present representing the application. There were no
registered supporters or objectors present. Staff presented the
item with a recommendation for approval of the applicant's
requested deferral.
4
February 17, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6560-A
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for
deferral to the January 6, 2000, public hearing. The vote was 9
ayes, 0 nays, 1 absent, and 1 open position.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS: (DECEMBER 9, 1999)
Staff informed the Committee that the applicant had requested in
writing November 29, 1999, that this item be deferred until the
next scheduled meeting, and not be reviewed by the Committee at
this time. Staff had no objection to the deferral and the
Committee had no questions or objections, so there was no
discussion of the item. The Committee supported accepting the
requested deferral.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (JANUARY 6, 2000)
No one was present representing the application. There were. no
registered supporters or objectors present. Staff presented the
item with a recommendation for approval of the applicant's
requested deferral.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved for
deferral to the February 17, 2000, public hearing. The vote was
11 ayes, 0 nays, 0 absent.
SUBDIVISION COMMITTEE COMMENTS: (JANUARY 27, 2000)
Alissa Coffield and Keith Buchanan from Alltel, and Less Jackson
from Faulk and Foster Real Estate Services, were present
representing the application. Staff gave a brief description of
the proposal.
Ms. Coffield briefly reviewed why they were requesting
collocation and needed the extra height. The main open issue
seemed to be the requirement for the increased landscaping and
screening, particularly since the existing leased area would be
too small to allow compliance. She stated that Alltel and
Telecorp, the owner of the original WCF, were still discussing
what their position would be.
5
February 17, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6560-A
There being no further issues, the Committee accepted the
proposal and forwarded the item to the full Commission for final
action.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: (FEBRUARY 17, 2000)
Belinda Bodie, from Faulk & Foster Real Estate, and Keith
Buchanan, from Alltel, were present representing the
application. There were no registered objectors present. Staff
presented the item with a recommendation for approval subject to
compliance with the conditions listed under "Staff
Recommendation," paragraph 8 above.
Ms. Bodie briefly reviewed the proposal and the specific height
locations of the antennas for Alltel (125 feet) and Telecorp
(135 feet). She commented that the collocation would eliminate
the need for an additional tower for Alltel, and she
acknowledged the neighborhood concerns particularly over
landscaping and screening. She stated that Alltel was working
with Telecorp (the tower owner), to address those concerns,
bring the site into compliance with the City's requirements, and
relocate the fence within the leased area.
Janet Berry spoke for the Legion Hut and West Baseline
Neighborhood Associations. She stated that the associations were
willing to accept the site with the proposed collocation if four
conditions with regard to the landscaping and screening were
included as conditions of the C.U.P. The conditions were as
follows:
1. A minimum six-foot masonry wall or other fence
structure with not less than 85% opacity shall
surround the site. Access to the towers shall be
through a locked gate.
2. A row of evergreen trees, a minimum of eight feet
tall at time of planting and a maximum of ten feet
apart, shall be planted around the fence.
3. A continuous hedge at least thirty inches high at
the time of planting, and capable of growing to at
6
February 17, 2000
SUBDIVISION
ITEM NO.: F FILE NO.: Z -6560-A
least thirty-six inches in height within eighteen
months, shall be planted in front of the tree line
referenced above.
4. All vegetation shall be either of xeriscape
tolerant varieties or irrigated, and properly
maintained to assure good health and vitality.
Mr. Lawson asked for clarification of what was meant by 1185%
opacity." Ms. Berry responded that the intent was to not be able
to see the base area of the tower site.
Ms. Bodie stated that they accepted the four conditions.
Commissioner Hawn commented that he didn't feel it was proper to
write into the C.U.P. more stringent requirements than the
current ordinance required.
Commissioner Rector stated that since the applicant was
accepting the requested conditions, he didn't see a problem
including the four points as conditions.
Commissioner Muse asked if the proposed taller tower was to
fall, would it hit any structures. Staff responded that the only
structure it could hit would be the restaurant to the north, no
residences. He added a question about the danger of added
sections, like the one that would be used to add the additional
10 feet, coming loose. Ms. Bodie stated that she was unaware of
that ever happening, and that the design of these towers is for
them to bend over at the upper levels before an entire tower
would topple over.
Norm Floyd, President of West Baseline Neighborhood Association,
stated that they agreed that no residences would be struck by a
falling tower, and responded to a question from Commissioner
Nunnley that they did not have a concern over the setbacks.
A motion was made to approve the application to include staff
comments and recommendations, and the four conditions requested
by the Neighborhood Associations as read by Ms. Berry as a
minimum for landscaping and screening. The motion passed by a
vote of 9 ayes, 0 nays and 2 absent.
W7