PUBLIC HEARING ITEM:
ITEM NO. 9: USE PERMITTED UPON REVIEW FOR CELL TOWER; 2300 WAKARUSA DRIVE (PGP)
UPR-12-07-03: Use Permitted upon Review request for placement of a cell tower. The applicant proposes a 150’ monopole tower. The property is located at the Clinton Water Treatment Plant facility at 2300 Wakarusa Drive. Submitted by Cavanaugh, Smith & Lemon, P.A. for Nextel Communications, Inc. The City of Lawrence is the property owner of record.
I. ZONING AND USES OF PROPERTY NEARBY
Staff Finding –The immediately surrounding properties are developed with residential uses to the north and east, commercial and multifamily uses to the south and “Yankee Tank Lake” (also know as Lake Alvamar) to the west.
II. CHARACTER OF THE AREA
The subject property is a City owned parcel including an existing fueling station on the north side of the property and the Clinton Water Treatment Plant on the south side. Future uses may include a fire station and public park. A residential neighborhood is located on the east side of Wakarusa Drive and another residential neighborhood is located to the north and northwest of the site. A commercial development area is located to the south. The east portion of the subject property is relatively flat, with some relief that hides buildings and improvements from Wakarusa Drive. The west half of the property has more topographic character and is heavily wooded. It is undeveloped at this time.
Staff Finding – The surrounding properties to the north, east and west are residential. Commercial uses are located near the intersection of Wakarusa Drive and Clinton Parkway on the south side of the property.
III. SUITABILITY OF SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE USES TO WHICH IT HAS BEEN RESTRICTED
Staff Finding – Proposed towers that exceed 100’ are subject to the approval of a UPR. The proposed use would not alter the base zoning. The suitability of the subject property for use as a public facility will not be altered by the approval of a UPR for construction of a tower. The location of a tower facility in a non-residential area is preferable. The subject property is owned by a public entity (the City of Lawrence). The size of the property (119 acres) allows for large setbacks to minimize the impact on surrounding properties.
IV. EXTENT TO WHICH REMOVAL OF RESTRICTIONS WILL DETRIMENTALLY AFFECT NEARBY PROPERTY
Proposed Tower to be located west of existing tower
Staff Finding –The subject property is currently used for non-residential activities and is sufficiently large to provide buffering from immediately surrounding residential uses. The tower site will utilize existing driveways for access. A segment of the driveway will need to be extended to the tower enclosure area. No new curb cuts would be provided for this proposed use (see site plan discussion below). The proposed tower is 150’ tall and the upper portion may be visible from some properties within the general vicinity. The base of the tower will be obstructed from some views by two 30’ high water reservoirs located northeast of the proposed tower site.
V. LENGTH OF TIME SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS REMAINED VACANT AS ZONED
Staff Finding – The subject property is not currently vacant, but is developed with a City water treatment facility and other City operations facilities. The property has been zoned RS-1 since the annexation of the property, as is usually the case for public property. The site plan was revised in 1998 for the addition of a city fuelling station SP-03-25-98. An existing cell tower (approved UPR-01-01-01) is located just east of the proposed new tower site.
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
Only negligible gains to the public health, safety and welfare would result from the approval of the proposed tower. The most significant gains would result to the users/subscribers of the cellular communication system. A lease agreement between the applicant and the City must be established prior to construction of the tower. If approved, the lease agreement might include a provision that space on the tower be made available to the City for location of Police and Fire equipment, if deemed necessary in the future. Additionally, the easement descriptions for access and utility service must be modified.
The improvement in communication service for a private provider’s customers is obvious. The provision of a facility/structure to allow multiple locations for competitors enhances the ability to consolidate similar uses in the future.
Staff Finding – If approved, no significant gains to the public health, safety and welfare would result from this proposed tower.
VII. CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Public Utility Strategies provided in Horizon 2020 to address utility needs in the community are geared toward essential utilities such as sewer and water, and to a lesser degree, electric and telephone service that serve day-to-day needs. The Plan 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 preplanned 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 some utilities to be located underground, such as major electric transmission lines. While the Plan speaks directly to electric transmission lines and public facilities such as water and wastewater treatment plants, the statements regarding the strong visual presence of some utilities and the need to minimize the environmental and aesthetic impacts are relevant to this application (see site plan discussion).
Staff Finding – Horizon 2020 does not directly address the issue of special or conditional uses. The plan provides basic guidance regarding major infrastructure improvements, and urges that they be carefully planned and provided. They should also be located in existing service areas to address growth. Additionally, placement and visual appearance are a key consideration in creating compatibility.
Fueling Station 60,659 SF (1.4 acres) located at north end of property
Water Treatment Plant: 75,589 SF (1.7 acres) located in southeast corner of property
Parking Required: None required for the tower use.
Parking Provided: Existing parking provided near the treatment facility.
Review Comments from Departments/Agencies:
The following are review comments from the various departments which reviewed the project. In most cases, the applicant has either revised the development plan to resolve the comment, been notified of a required future action, or a condition may be required to adequately address the requirement or concern.
Public Works/Engineering:
1. Reflect all existing utility easements and use. (Condition, Utility Easements)
2. This site plan will need to be coordinated with site plan for proposed fire and medical station No. 4, especially in relation to access on Wakarusa Street. (Revised)
3. No access should be allowed to Wakarusa Drive. Take access from existing parking lot. (Revised)
4. The Wakarusa Drive plans do not show an access point at this location. (Revised)
5. Sheet Number A1.1, conflicting information on size of utility easement. Need to revise. “New 5’-0 wide utility easement w/underground utility services to utility rack.” Width of shown easement – 8’-0”. (Condition, Utility Easements)
6. Sheet A3.0, Details, 5 & 6, show gravel type. (Revised)
7. Sheet E1.0, detail 3, shows 16 TYP., but there is no No. 16 in Grounding Notes. (Revised)
8. Sheet LS1.0 – Site Survey,
a. Need to accurately reflect existing easements (booked). (Condition, Utility Easements)
b. Legal Description Utility Easement, 5’ or 8’? – 8’ Utility Easement shows from leader, Private U/E?, Provide Register of Deeds Book & Page number. (Condition)
c. Why not use existing 10’ U/E along south property line? (Condition)
d. Access should be from Water Treatment Facility parking lot, until Fire Department/Medical Station is constructed. Need to eliminate Wakarusa access? (Revised)
e. No curb cut exists on Wakarusa Drive. Appears access control does not allow. (Revised)
f. If Wakarusa Drive access is allowed, then install concrete apron per city standard. (Revised)
g. Show existing U/E, such as 10’ U/E along northern property boundary, 10’ U/E along southern property boundary, 15’ KPS Easement along east property boundary – then 10’ U/E along the west side of KPS Easement. (Condition, Utility Easements)
Stormwater Engineering: No comment received.
Neighborhood Resources: No comment received.
Municipal Utilities:
1. This is not an acceptable location for the improvement. (Revised, location moved to west of existing cellular tower)
2. Utility Department will not sign off on proposed lease for the location as it conflicts with proposed fire station. (Revised)
3. Will need to resubmit revised location for additional review. (Revised)
Parks/Forestry: No comment.
Fire Department: No comment received.
Police Department: No comment received.
Sanitation Department: No comment received.
Traffic Engineering: No comment received.
Westar Energy: Need to extend north-south utility easement south to property line. (Condition, Utility Easement)
Aquila, Inc: No comment received.
Southern Star Central Gas: No comment received.
Southwestern Bell: No comment.
Sunflower Cablevision: No comment received.
Planning Department:
1. Communication Towers need to address requirements of City of Lawrence Code, Chapter 20, Section 14B. (Notified)
2. Per section 20-14BO3(a), provide documentation that the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing or approved tower or other structure due to one of the four stated reasons. (Notified)
3. Provide a statement on the capacity of the tower design, how it is designed to accommodate at least three two-way antennas for a 150’ tower (or at least one two-way antenna and one microwave facility), and if access tower capacity might be available for future use. (Notified)
4. Proposed location of tower is in conflict with future Fire and Medical Station No. 4, need to relocate, contact Chris Stewart – Assistant Director-Water, regarding potential relocation areas. (Notified)
5. Will need to revise site plan A1.0, A1.1 & Ls1.0 showing modified site location. (Revised)
6. Landscape Plan, L1, needs to reflect actual landscaping proposed. (Revised)
7. On the revised site plan, include the following:
a. Show the location of proposed utility service lines, and removal of the references to the dedication, if any, of utility easements. These areas are to be specifically described in the lease agreement between the applicant and the City per staff approval; (Condition, Utility Easement)
b. Section 20-14B03(d), provision of a note, “The tower owner/operator shall submit a letter to the Planning Office by July of each year listing the current users and types of antenna located on the approved tower. Reference UPR-12-07-03 in the letter.” (Revised)
c. Section 20-14B03(d), provision of a note, “A sign shall be posted on the tower or the exterior fence around the base of the tower noting the name and telephone number of the tower owner and operator.” (Revised)
8. If the UPR is approved, the following conditions will likely be required:
a. Execution of a site plan performance agreement. (Condition)
b. Execution of a lease agreement with the City of Lawrence, prior to release of the site plan for issuance of a building permit. (Condition)
Site Plan Review-Section 20-1608 of the City Code requires that a UPR application be accompanied with a site plan meeting the contents of the Site Plan provision of the Code (Section 20-1431). This site plan must also comply with Section 20-14B01, Tower Standards.
Setback and Height- The proposed application is for the construction of a 150’ monopole tower structure within a 100’ by 100’ enclosure. The proposed tower will be capable of accommodating equipment for Nextel Communications (the applicant) and two to three other future users of the tower.
Tower structures are required to be set back from the property line a distance equal to that of the height of the tower; in this case, 150’ or certified to be self-collapsing design. The proposed centerline of the tower is located slightly more than 150’ north of the southern property line.
The proposed tower is set back into the site from the east property line and will not create a visual nuisance from the adjacent street. The base of the tower will be blocked from view by the existing 30’ high water reservoirs. The top portion of the monopole will be visible depending on the location and angle from various locations in the general vicinity. Equipment for the communication antenna will be located within the tower enclosure area.
Zoning Preference – The surrounding area is residential in nature to the north, east and west. Towers are permitted in residential areas per Section 20-14B02(2) which states that all towers in excess of 100’ in height and all towers located in residential districts must reviewed a Use Permitted Upon Review.
Section 20-14B04 (e) states: “All towers should be located in areas zoned commercial, or industrial, except that towers may be permitted in areas zoned residential if it can be demonstrated that all reasonable efforts were made to locate the proposed tower in non-residentially zoned areas.” While the public property is “within a residential zone” it is developed and used for non-residential purposes. The existing uses are characterized as more industrial in nature. The RS-1 and RS-2 residential zoning districts have historically been used to designate public properties.
Section 20-1611 (UPR review guidelines) states: "It is necessary to give special consideration to certain uses because they are unique in nature, require large land areas, require greater density, are potentially incompatible with existing development or because effects of such uses cannot definitely be foreseen, or more intensely dominate the area in which they are located than do other uses permitted in the district...” The code provides two general guidelines in considering the application:
(a) The proposed use and site plan conform to the purpose and intent of the ordinance.
(b) The proposed use and site plan will not under the circumstances of the particular case regarding setback, height, density, and similar aspects be objectionable or be detrimental to the general welfare of the community and neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located.
Permission – The property owner of record, in this case, is the City of Lawrence. City staff is aware that the application has been submitted. Prior to entering a formal lease agreement, the project must obtain proper land use approval, a UPR. Staff has tentatively indicated that the proposed tower would not interfere with any existing or planned municipal operations.
Tower Design- Documentation for the tower design has been submitted with the UPR application. Additional review will be required with the submission of a building permit.
Lighting- The proposed tower does not include any lighting. The relatively low height of the tower does not require special lighting for FAA requirements.
Site Plan -The proposed site plan complies with the required submission information. Staff has noted during the review that some additional notation is required for clarification. Necessary access to the tower site will be described in the lease agreement. Necessary utilities to serve the site must also be addressed as part of any lease agreement with the property owner. The City has not favored the dedication of a utility easement across the property. Such an easement could potentially interfere with future plans for the property. Staff recommends that the site plan be revised to show the location of utility service lines and remove any reference that they will be dedicated as a utility easement.
The proposed use includes minor alterations to the existing City parking lot. This element will be detailed in a lease agreement between the applicant and the City if the UPR is approved. The site plan has been revised to provide additional detail regarding the proposed changes to the existing employee parking lot. The proposed use in terms of pavement coverage and parking requirements is minor.
PROFESSIONAL STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning Staff recommends approval of the Use Permitted upon Review 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 subject to the following conditions:
1. Execution of a site plan performance agreement;
2. Execution of a tower space or land lease agreement with the City of Lawrence, prior to release of the site plan for issuance of a building permit;
3. Provision of a letter that summarizes the structural standards of the proposed tower;
4. Provision of a revised site plan to include the following:
a. Provision of a revised site plan to show the location of proposed utility service lines, and removal of the reference to the dedication of utility easements. These areas are to be specifically described in the lease agreement between the application and the City per staff approval.
b. Addition of a note: “Any tower that is not in use for a period of three continuous years, or more, shall be removed by the owner at the owner's expense. Failure to remove the tower pursuant to non-use may result in removal and assessment of cost to the owner of the tower.”
c. Addition of a note: “A sign shall be posted on the exterior of the fence around the base of the tower noting the name and telephone number of the tower owner and operator.”; and
5. The tower owner/operator shall submit a letter to the Planning Office by July of each year listing the current users and types of antenna located on the approved tower (Reference UPR-12-07-03 in the letter).