Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSTAFF REPORT - 09-00389 - Fuller Consulting (for AT&T) - CUP for Antenna on top of Multi-Family Bldg.Community Development Department STAFF REPORT 12 North Center Rexburg, ID 83440 SUBJECT: garyi@rexburg.org Phone: 208.359.3020 x314 www.rexburg.org Fax: 208.359.3024 Conditional Use Permit, file # 09 00389 APPLICANT: Fuller Consulting, LLC, on behalf of AT&T 4835 N. Villa Ridge Way Boise, lD C I TY OF REXBURG Americas Family Community PROPERTY OWNER: Steiner Elevators, Inc. 164 West 1" North Rexburg, ID PURPOSE: Request is for an existing, temporary telecommunications facility to remain at its current location at 164 West l't North PROPERTY LOCATION: 164 West I" North Rexburg, ID PROPERTY ID: RPRRXB10244220 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Light Industrial ZONING DISTRICT: Light Industrial APPLICABLE CRITERIA: Wireless Telecommunications Towers and Antennas (Ord. 915) City of Rexburg Development Code (Ord. 926) § 6.13 Conditional Use Permits AUTHORITY § 7(a) Establishes provisions that "shall govern the issuance of special use permits (conditional use permit) for towers or antennas by the Planning Commission.) I. BACKGROUND The applicant submitted an application to allow the temporary telecommunications tower that exists at the Steiner Elevator property to become permanent. A conditional use permit would need to be obtained for the application to proceed. The proposal must be reviewed and approved by the City's Planning Commission for issuance of the permit. Rather than making a recommendation to the City Council, the Commission may act on this application. The City's telecommunications ordinance (Ordinance 915) provides direction on the siting of towers and related services. Within this ordinance collocation of new antennae on existing towers is required Case No. 09 00389 Page 1 unless the applicant can show that this is not a feasible option. If a new tower is proposed, a conditional permit must be obtained. Land uses that require conditional use permits are allowed within a zone if it can be found that the proposed use and/or facility will not adversely impact the neighborhood and community of which it belongs. This determination may be based on the adherence of the proposal to certain conditions of approval. Therefore, the City, upon receipt of a CUP request, should review the proposal and either approve, deny, or approve with conditions. II. SITE DESCRIPTION The subject property is an approximately one acre lot. The lot is accessed from 15` North Street just a small distance to the east of 2"a West Street. The surrounding neighborhood is a mixture of older single-family homes, light industry, commercial and the back parking lot of a grocery store. III. ANALYSIS A conditional use permit for a telecommunications tower requires the proposal meet two sets of criteria, one set from the telecommunications ordinance (Ord. 915) and the other set of criteria from the Development Code (Ord. 926). The following are those criteria for granting a conditional use permit followed by staff's analysis. ORDINANCE 915, the Telecommunications Ordinance The goals of this ordinance must be met taking into consideration the following factors: § 7(b)(2)(i) Height and elevation of the proposed tower- The height of the proposed tower is 130 - feet. The cell tower is mounted on top of the closest tall grain elevator to the street. § 7(b)(2)(ii) Proximity of the tower to residential structures and residential district boundaries - The tower is proposed to be located approximately 160 -feet from the nearest residential structure. The grain elevator is the principle structure and is existing. § 7(b)(2)(iii) Nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties- The surrounding land uses include single-family homes light industrial and commercial businesses. § 7(b)(2)(iv) Surrounding topography- The site is located in the center of Rexburg on flat ground. § 7(b)(2)(v) Surrounding tree cover- There is some tree coverage in the area. § 7(b)(2)(vi) Design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that have the effect of reducing or eliminating visual obtrusiveness- The proposal is for an antenna and does not negatively affect the looks of the silos.. § 7(b)(2)(vii) Proposed ingress and egress- The parcel upon which the subject property is located abuts a public right-of-way. Ingress and egress is through the subject property. § 7(b)(2)(viii) and § 7(a)(3) Availability of suitable existing towers, other structures, or alternative technologies not requiring the use of towers or structures, as discussed in Section7(b)(3) of this ordinance- The use on an existing structure should satisfy this requirement. 7(b)(4) Setbacks (i) Setbacks should not be an issue as the antenna is located on an existing structure. Case No. 09 00389 Page 2 § 7(b)(5) Separation- Intended to avoid clustering of towers and visual impacts. (i) Separation from off-site uses/designated areas a. The antenna is proposed to be on an existing structure. (ii) Separation distances between towers a. This standard requires that the proposal be located a certain distance from other towers in the vicinity. There are no towers in the vicinity. § 7(b)(6) Security Fencing- Towers must be enclosed by security fencing with appropriate anti - climbing devices. Not applicable. ORDINANCE 1026, the Development Code requires that a conditional use: a. Constitute a conditional use as established in Table], Zoning Districts, and Table 2, Land Use Schedule. The proposed use, "cell tower" is listed as a conditionally permitted use under Section 3.18.020(F) of the Development Code; therefore, this criterion is met. b. Be in accordance with a specific orgeneral objective of the City's Comprehensive Plan and the regulations of this Ordinance. The City's comprehensive plan has designated the subject property as Light Industrial. The zoning map is the same, therefore this criterion is met. c. Be designed and constructed in a manner to be harmonious with the existing character of the neighborhood and the zone in which the property is located. The immediate surrounding structures are grain silos and not negatively impacted. The Commission should explore the application material and determine if this criterion is met, or can be met through reasonable conditions of approval. d. Not create a nuisance or safety hazard for neighboring properties in terms of excessive noise or vibration, improperly directed glare or heat, electrical interference, odors, dust or air pollutants, solid waste generation and storage, hazardous materials or waste, excessive traffic generation, or interference with pedestrian traffic. Regarding glare, heat, dust, air pollutants, there are no foreseeable impacts to the neighborhood. Regarding electrical interference, the applicant should explain to the Commission how the proposed use will or will not interfere with the nearby homes. Regarding odors, solid waste generation and storage, excessive traffic generation, or interference with pedestrian traffic, there are no foreseeable impacts. There should be no outside storage of material or equipment unless fully screened form public right-of-way. This screening, if in it self is deemed objectionable by affected property owners, should be approved by the Planning Commission or designee. Staff has included proposed conditions of approval that address trash storage and general storage occurring on the outside of the building. The Commission should determine if through reasonable conditions of approval this criterion can be met. e. Be adequately served by essential public facilities and services such as access streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer service, and schools. Case No. 09 00389 Page 3 If existing facilities are not adequate, the developer shall show that such facilities shall be upgraded sufficiently to serve the proposed use. The site is served by all applicable essential public facilities and services; therefore, this criterion is met. f. Not generate traffic in excess of the capacity of public streets or access points serving the proposed use and will assure adequate visibility at traffic access points. Not Applicable. g. Be effectively buffered to screen adjoining properties from adverse impacts of noise, building size and resulting shadow, traffic, and parking. Not Applicable. h. Be compatible with the slope of the site and the capacity of the soils and will not be in an area of natural hazards unless suitably designed to protect lives and property. i. Not Applicable. j. Not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a historic feature of significance to the community of Rexburg. Not applicable IV. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval based on compliance to the "Proposed Conditions of Approval" attached. The Commission should take public testimony and determine if the proposed conditional use permit can be approved, denied, or approved with conditions. Staff has proposed some conditions of approval, should the Commission choose to approve with conditions. Proposed Conditions of Approval 1. There should be no outside storage of material or equipment unless fully screened form public right- of-way. This screening, if in it self is deemed objectionable by affected property owners, should be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission or designee. 2. Commercial lighting standards per the City's development code shall be adhered to. 3. Large equipment that is to be located on the subject property and is to be used for heating/cooling/ventilation of the proposed building(s), or similar uses, shall be located the maximum feasible distance from any adjacent residential dwelling unit, and shall incorporate any current technology that reduces noise generation. 4. Information shall be included that adequately addresses the need for regular site maintenance to ensure that noxious weeds are not present and at the same time no dust leaves the property in such a manner that it becomes a nuisance Case No. 09 00389 Page 4