PUBLIC HEARING ITEM:

PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT

Regular Agenda – Public Hearing Item:

PC Staff Report

09/25/06

ITEM NO. 5: SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR T-MOBILE; 2206 E 23^RD STREET (SLD)

SUP-07-01-06: Special Use Permit for a 150’ T-Mobile monopole cellular tower and equipment shelter. The property is located at 2206 E 23^rd Street. Submitted by Selective Site Consultants for T-Mobile Central LLC dba T-Mobile. Knights of Columbus Council 1372 are the property owner of record. (This item was deferred from the August Planning Commission meeting at the applicant’s request).

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff recommends approval of SUP-07-01-06, a Special Use Permit for the construction of a 150’ tower and placement of antenna and accessory structure and forwarding of it to the City Commission with a recommendation for approval, based upon the findings of fact presented in the body of the staff report and subject to the following conditions:

1. Completion of an independent review prior to consideration of the request by the City Commission.

2. Execution of a site plan performance agreement.

3. Facility shall be inspected annually at owner’s expense and inspection report shall be filed with Planning Director per section 20-529 (4).

4. Provision of a fee “sufficient to cover the cost of an independent study and provision of a form authorizing the city to use those funds to hire consulting engineers to review the application and advise the city on the extent to which the applicant has or has not met the Burden of Proof, required by subsection 20-529 (7)”. (Such fee shall be established by the City Commission) per section 20-529 (6);

5. Parking lot shall be restriped around tower, per staff approval to maintain access circulation and parking.

6. Future parking lot lighting shall require provision of a photometric plan per staff approval prior to issuance of a building permit.

7. Show and note any lighting for the equipment within the base compound area per staff approval. Lighting shall be shielded and directed downward.

8. Provision of a revised site plan to show and note the utility easement including the deed book and page reference.

Applicant’s Reason for Request:			Enhancement of existing service to T-Mobile customers.
KEY POINTS · Proposed request is for construction of a new communication tower. · Request is subject to new development code requirements.
GOLDEN FACTORS TO CONSIDER ZONING AND USES OF PROPERTY NEARBY · Non-residential uses are found in all directions. · County industrial zoning located to the north. CHARACTER OF THE AREA · Commercial corridor.
ASSOCIATED CASES/OTHER ACTION REQUIRED · UPR-01-02-82 – Approval of UPR for Knights of Columbus building following annexation of property.
PUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED PRIOR TO PRINTING · No comment on this item at this time.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Current Zoning and Land Use:		RS10 (Single-Dwelling Residential) District. Existing Knights of Columbus Hall. Approved Use Permitted Upon Review in 1982 for private lodge; Use Group 7 per old code (UPR-01-02-82).
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:		A (Agricultural) and I-1 (Limited Industrial) District to the north; existing county zoning part of undeveloped Farmland Property. IG (General Industrial) District to the east; undeveloped property B-1 (Neighborhood Business) District and CO (Commercial Office) District; to the south; undeveloped platted lots on the south side of E. 23^rd Street (K10- Highway). North half of E. 23^rd right-of-way zoned county. UR (Urban Reserve) district to the west; existing commercial uses.
Site Summary
Parent Parcel	1.99 acres; 156’ by 23’ lease area in central portion of property.
Proposed Tower	150’ tower
Structure Type	Typical monopole
Ground Equipment	Equipment cabinet, generator for emergency service only. Interior pad space for up to two additional carriers
Existing Building	8,500 GSF [6,800 NSF] first floor 8,500 GSF [6,800 NSF] basement 17,000 GSF [13,600 NSF] Total
Required Off-Street Parking	14 spaces per approved UPR 27 spaces @ 1 per 500 per GSF per new code
Provided Off-Street Parking	122 spaces prior to tower addition and interior landscape 101 spaces if approved tower addition and interior landscape

Site History:

The subject property is an existing built property located on the north side of E. 23^rd Street. Access to the site is from the 23^rd Street frontage road. The site includes a 60’ by 120’ building located at the north end of the site. The use was approved as a private lodge (under UG 7 old code). Required off street parking for the use was established as 14 spaces. The current Code requires the same ratio, but would include the basement space. Required parking therefore is calculated at 27 spaces. The front of the site is developed with a hard surface parking lot providing 122 spaces per the site plan (UPR -01-02-82). The total loss of parking resulting from the addition of the tower is 21 spaces. Adequate off-street parking is provided for the site.

I. ZONING AND USES OF PROPERTY NEARBY

Staff Finding – The subject is zoned for single-family residential use. The current zoning does not reflect the existing land use. The area is surrounded by a variety of non-residential land uses and includes County industrial zoning to the north.

II. CHARACTER OF THE AREA

Staff Finding –The subject property is located on the north side of E. 23^rd Street within a commercial corridor. The surrounding area includes a mix of non-residential uses along existing street frontage and undeveloped areas to the north and south.

III. SUITABILITY OF SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE USES TO WHICH IT HAS BEEN RESTRICTED

The property is zoned residentially as such the construction of a communication tower requires a special permit. Approval of a Special Use Permit will not alter the base zoning. The existing fraternal/lodge use was permitted in 1982 as a Use Permitted Upon Review (UPR-01-02-82).

Staff Finding - There is no proposed change to the existing zoning designation. The proposed request is for the construction of a 150’ tower.

IV. LENGTH OF TIME SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS REMAINED VACANT AS ZONED

Staff Finding – The subject property is used as private club facility. The property is developed with an existing structure and parking area.

V. EXTENT TO WHICH REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS WILL DETRIMENTALLY AFFECT NEARBY PROPERTY

Staff Finding –Approval of a Special Use Permit does not alter the existing zoning district. The general area of the proposed tower site is located in the central portion of the site. Vehicular circulation is maintained but re-striping will be required to delineate parking spaces and access aisles. The location of the tower and equipment is setback a maximum distance from public right-of-way and from adjacent property lines.

VI. RELATIVE GAIN TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE BY THE DESTRUCTION OF THE VALUE OF THE PETITIONER’S PROPERTY AS COMPARED TO THE HARDSHIP IMPOSED UPON THE INDIVIDUAL LANDOWNERS

Evaluation of the relative gain weighs the benefits to the community-at-large versus the benefit of the owners of the subject property. Benefits are measured based on anticipated impacts of the request on the public's health, safety and welfare.

Staff Finding –The proposed use would improve service delivery to existing T-Mobile customers. The proposed tower includes space for two additional carriers that could be co-located on the same structure in the future, thus reducing the need for additional towers in the same location. There are no apparent detriments to the public health, safety, and welfare by the proposed request.

VII. CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

The Public Utility Strategies section provided in Horizon 2020 addresses utility needs in the community. These strategies are geared toward essential utilities, such as sewer and water, as well as electrical and telephone services that serve day-to-day needs. Horizon 2020 states:

§ Plans should emphasize utility improvements and extensions that provide the highest level of service within existing service areas, particularly public water and wastewater treatment and collection.

§ The visual appearance of utility improvements will be addressed to ensure compatibility with existing and planned land use areas.

§ Wherever possible, the location of new major utility corridors should be pre-planned to ensure land use compatibility and minimal disruption to existing development areas.

The Plan states that utilities need to be located and extended in a planned manner that is sensitive to public concerns. It is not feasible for all utilities to be located underground. The Plan speaks directly to electric transmission lines regarding the strong visual presence of some utilities, but the need to minimize the environmental and aesthetic impacts are relevant to this application as well.

The subject property is located within the 23^rd Street corridor. This area is an identified “gateway” in Horizon 2020. Gateways are defined in the Plan as “transportation facilities that serve as entrances, or transitions between land uses and transportation corridors. Major gateways are entrances to the county and city from other transportation facilities, and often form a visitor's first impression of the community. The following policies are provided for reference:

Transportation Policy 2.10: Streetscape and Gateways

e. Utility (fire hydrants, traffic signal boxes, mail boxes, power poles, transformers, underground cables) design should minimize the visual presence of utilities within the streetscape. Utility corridors should be established in the greenspace to avoid conflicts between utilities and sidewalks or planting strips.

The proposed tower addition does not represent a major redevelopment of the site. The placement of the proposed tower is limited by the location of the existing building. The use of a buffer yard and solid fencing will improve the parking lot appearance by providing additional green space.

Staff Finding – Horizon 2020 does not directly address the issue of special uses. The plan provides basic guidance regarding major infrastructure improvements and urges that such uses be carefully planned and provided. The provision of such services should be focused in existing service areas to address growth. Additionally, placement and visual appearance are a key consideration in creating compatibility. Due to the location of the existing buildings, it is not feasible to install the tower behind the building.

SITE PLAN/STAFF REVIEW

This application has been reviewed based on the provisions of section 20-529 of the Land Development Code (effective July 1, 2006). The proposed request represents a request for a new 150’ communication tower in the eastern part of Lawrence. The tower enclosure area and buffer yard is located in the central portion of the property in the front of the building. Placement of the tower in the rear of the site is limited by the setback requirements, buffering requirements applicable to residentially zoned property and the location of the existing building. The site plan was revised to add standard notes as required by the new code.

Section 20-529 (8) states: In addition to the standards and conditions listed in Section 20-529(2) and 20-529(9), the City Commission shall consider the following factors in determining whether or not to issue a special use permit:

· Height

· Proximity of facility to residential structures and district boundaries

· Limitations of placement of facilities in other areas

· Surrounding land uses

· Surrounding topography and tree coverage

· Structural design to limit visual obtrusiveness

· Availability of co-location options

· Allocation of space on new facility for other users

Specific additions to the review criteria include assessment of topography and land cover and reduction of visual impact through tower design. For consistency the following summaries are provided in the same format as previously considered. Much of the review is an assessment of compliance of specific standards.

Justification Report

Section 20-529 (7) requires as a minimum submission requirement a document commonly referred to as a justification report. This submittal requirement must document the applicant’s efforts to co-locate on any existing tower or structure before proceeding with a request for a new communication tower. The application packet provided for submission of this proposed Special Use Permit included the required documentation to evaluate such opportunities. Co-location of equipment on existing structures was found to be unsuccessful because it did not achieve coverage of the targeted area per Section 20-529 (7) (i-V).

Setback and Height- The maximum height allowed for a tower is 180’ per Section 20-529(9) (i). The proposed tower height is 150’. Per Section 20-529(9) (ii) the setback of a tower must be equal to “at least one-half the Height of the Telecommunications Tower if the site is in or adjoins an R Base District”. An additional setback requirement is a separation standard of one-half mile between towers unless located on the same site.

· The subject property is an “R” zoned district.

· The subject property does not abut another “R” zoned district.

· The proposed tower location is shown in the front central portion of the property.

· Nearby towers are located east and west of the site over one-half mile in distance along E. 23^rd Street.

· The proposed tower complies with the required setbacks from the abutting property lines.

Previous code language allowed the setback of the tower to be reduced based on a fall zone specified in the engineering documentation. The central location allows for the provision of required landscaping that must be provided when a tower is proposed in an “R” zoned district.

Zoning Preference- Section 20-529 does not provide any language regarding a preferred zoning for communication towers. The usage of cell phones has increased both in user numbers and features. [Industry trend: More sites are needed because this combination is “eating up” the available capacity. This has resulted in towers being proposed in closer proximity. According to the applicant, there is a need to look for options approximately one every mile because of capacity issues, where three years ago towers could be situated every 3-4 miles apart.]

Permission – The applicant has provided staff with necessary documentation to assure that the property owner of record is party to this application. It was noted in the review that a utility easement will be necessary to extend hard wire phone service (AT&T utility) to the proposed facility from E. 23^rd Street to the tower site. This will require dedication of an easement by separate instrument and installation of the utility. The applicant will be required to coordinate with the property owner and the other utility company to provide this extension. The site plan shows a proposed utility easement along the west property line to accommodate power service to the proposed tower. Staff recommends the site plan be revised to add the deed book and page notations prior to release of the site plan for issuance of a building permit.

Tower Design – Section 20-529(9) (iv) requires the ability to provide multiple carrier placement on towers at a ratio of three “platforms” or mountings per every 150’. The proposed tower and enclosure will accommodate a total of three carriers. Other design elements set out in section 20-529 (9)(v-xviii) require underground routing of utilities as necessary, conformance with OSHA standards, fencing, prohibition of exterior storage not specifically related to the tower operation, lighting limitations, and accessory structures location and height. These standards are reflected as general notes on the face of the site plan.

The placement of the tower in the front of the site will add landscaping to the parking lot not previously provided. Light fixtures can be added to light the parking lot as well. A photometric plan for parking lot lighting is required prior to that activity if the base use (Knights of Columbus) wishes to proceed with that option in the future. Staff recommends the site plan be revised to provide a note stating that a photometric plan shall be provided prior to provision of parking lot lighting per staff approval.

[New Criteria] Screening – Section 20-529 (9) (xvii) establishes a buffer yard requirement for towers if located in or adjoining an “R” Base District. The tower shall be surrounded by a Type 3 Buffer Yard per section 20-1005 (f).

Minimum

Buffer Width

100 Linear Feet

Landscape Material Requirements

Trees

Shrubs

15 feet

Fence, wall or Berm required

20 feet

25 feet

The subject property is open in all directions. The primary structure is the lodge building/meeting hall that is setback from the public right-of-way in the rear portion of the property. The proposed landscape area will be 15’ wide. A 6’ solid wood fence will enclose the base area of the proposed tower. The arrangement of landscaping for the proposed site is more dispersed within the planting bed on the exterior of the fenced portion. The Development Code allows for the substitution of shrubs when a solid fence is provided. The proposed landscaping materials exceed the minimum required per this provision.

Lighting – Ground-mounted lighting would be subject to approval and should be detailed on the site plan. The proposed equipment at the base of the tower includes equipment cabinets and a generator and is not anticipated to be lighted. Any changes in this element would be subject to staff approval.

[New Criteria] Other – Notes have been added to the site plan for maintenance, annual inspection and reporting per section 20-529 (4). Additionally there is a requirement for independent review of the justification reports that shall be paid for by the applicant per section 20-529 (6) and construction section 20-529 (13). Staff is in the process of identifying a list of independent consultants and establishing a fee. The consideration of the proposed Special Use Permit is recommended to be deferred by City Commission consideration until the independent consultant review is complete so that the finding may be presented to the Commission with the Planning Commission recommendation concurrently.

Section 20-529 (7) sets out the requirements of the justification report or burden of proof. This documentation has been a standard of submission requirements previously. The new code addresses the provision to require an independent study and that the applicant shall provide fees to cover that independent review. The intent is that the applicant is subject to the independent consultant review. Approval of the proposed tower should be made subject to the outcome of the independent review.

The Planning Commission recommendation on this item will not be forwarded to the City Commission until the independent consultant review is completed so that the public hearing recommendation may be transmitted to the City Commission with the independent consultant findings.

Site Plan – The site plan shows the general location of the tower in the central portion of the site. This location was chosen to comply with the setback requirements of section 20-529 (9) and to provide an adequate space for the required buffer yard.

Structural Design is a factor of consideration as established in the new code (section 20-529 (9)). Related buildings and structures are required to be “designed to blend in with the surrounding environment through the use of color, camouflage and architecture.” The code recommends the use of monopoles over guyed tower. The proposed tower is a monopole structure with a base area enclosed by a solid fence that will screen the equipment cabinets. The tower is capable of accommodating multiple carriers in the future. There is no prevailing building or structure design along the north side of the corridor currently. Proposed ground structures include an equipment cabinet and generator which will be screened from view by a solid fence. The code does not specify the use of “stealth” type tower structures such as a flag pole, parking light fixture or other type of device nor does it preclude the use of such a tower. This tower type is an alternative the Commission could consider since the subject property is located along the E. 23^rd Street corridor and is an identified Gateway in Horizon 2020. However, the proposed tower is setback into the site 135’ from the front property line (north side of the frontage road) and, in staff’s opinion, is not within the immediate streetscape of E. 23^rd Street.

The landscaping buffering that will be added to the site will result in a benefit by providing interior landscape and pervious surface to the parking lot which currently does not include any parking lot screening or open space. Adequate off-street parking is accommodated on the site. The remaining parking lot will need to be restriped in accordance with code requirements to reflect the physical change to the site.