Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutS630 Staff Summary BOC for 10.2.17 meetingS-630 Staff Summary Page 1 of 8 S-630 STAFF SUMMARY SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST APPLICATION SUMMARY Case Number: S-630 Request: Special Use Permit to develop a telecommunications tower in a PD, Planned Development zoning district Applicant: Property Owner(s): Hellman, Yates, and Tisdale for Optima Towers IV Home Life, Inc. Location: Acreage: 2020 Corporate Drive 0.80 acres PID(s): Place Type: R02620-003-041-000 Employment Center Existing Land Use: Proposed Land Use: Vacant/Undeveloped Telecommunications Tower Current Zoning: PD, Planned Development SURROUNDING AREA LAND USE ZONING North Stormwater Management Pond PD East Recreation Area (Olsen Park) R-15 South Light Industrial PD West Light Industrial PD S-630 Staff Summary Page 2 of 8 ZONING HISTORY July 7, 1972 Initially zoned R-15 (Area 8B) July 1, 1985 Rezoned to PD, Planned Development COMMUNITY SERVICES Water/Sewer Water and Sewer is available through CFPUA Fire Protection New Hanover County Fire Services, New Hanover County North Fire District Schools Eaton Elementary, Castle Hayne Elementary, Trask Middle, and Laney High schools Recreation Olsen Park CONSERVATION, HISTORIC, & ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Conservation No known conservation resources. Historic No known historic resources. Archaeological No known archaeological resources. S-630 Staff Summary Page 3 of 8 PROPOSED SITE PLAN  The application proposes a 185’ tall monopole style tower that could accommodate antennas from multiple wireless communications providers: S-630 Staff Summary Page 4 of 8 TRANSPORTATION  Access will be provided via an improved driveway to Corporate Drive, a state-maintained road. Traffic Count - 2014 Road Location Volume Capacity V/C LOS Corporate Drive Entrance to Olsen Park 307 1000 0.31 A Trip Generation LAND USE INTENSITY AM PEAK PM PEAK Wireless Communication Facility N/A ≤ 1 ≤ 1  Traffic Impact Analysis are required to be completed for proposals that will generate more than 100 peak hour trips in either the AM or PM peak hours. ENVIRONMENTAL  The property does not contain any Special Flood Hazard Areas.  The property does not host any wetlands.  The subject property is within the Smith Creek (C;Sw) watershed.  Soils on site include Seagate Fine Sand and Leon Fine Sand according to the Soil Survey for New Hanover County. 2016 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN The New Hanover County Future Land Use Map provides a general representation of the vision for New Hanover County’s future land use, as designated by place types describing the character and function of the different types of development that make up the community. Specific goals of the comprehensive plan are designated to be promoted in each place type, and other goals may be relevant for particular properties. Future Land Use Map Place Type Employment Center Place Type Description Serves as employment and production hubs where office and light industrial uses predominate. Can include residential, civic, and recreational uses, but should be clearly delineated from rural and conservation areas. Commercial uses designed to serve the needs of the employment center are appropriate. Types of uses include office, industrial, single-family and multi- family residential, commercial/retail, and recreation. Consistency Analysis The proposed telecommunications tower is appropriate in this place type as it provides a necessary service for the office and light industrial uses that predominate, as well as nearby residential and commercial uses. S-630 Staff Summary Page 5 of 8 Relevant Goals of the Comprehensive Plan Goal I: Support business success Desired Outcome: A vibrant economy for New Hanover County based on business success Consistency Analysis: The proposed telecommunications tower supports the provision of necessary utilities for nearby and future desired businesses and industries. The comprehensive plan recommends encouraging targeted industries in identified Employment Centers, and the target industries identified by the Garner report, Pathways to Prosperity; which include life/marine sciences, high value office operations, precision manufacturing, and aircraft manufacturing; rely on telecommunications infrastructure. Goal II: Support workforce development and economic prosperity for all Desired Outcomes: Retain and attract businesses and companies with workforce talent that is aligned with our targeted industries Consistency Analysis: Telecommunications infrastructure is also necessary for the nearby educational institutions and residential areas, supporting the development of the workforce. Goal III: Promote fiscally responsible growth Desired Outcome: Growth patterns that achieve efficient provisions of services and equitable distribution of costs between the public and private sectors Consistency Analysis: The proposed site for the telecommunications tower is located in a CFPUA service area, though it would not require those utility services. S-630 Staff Summary Page 6 of 8 Staff Analysis of Comprehensive Plan Consistency The proposed telecommunications tower is consistent with the goals of the 2016 Comprehensive Plan, as it will support the types of office and light industrial uses recommended in the Employment Center place type, supporting business success. It will also support the telecommunications needs of nearby educational institutions and residential areas, supporting the development of a well- educated workforce. PLANNING BOARD ACTION The Planning Board considered this application at their July 7, 2016 meeting. No one from the public spoke in favor of, or in opposition to, the application. The Planning Board voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the special use permit request with no conditions, citing the preliminary findings of fact prepared by Staff based on the information provided by the Petitioner and presented at the public hearing. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION At the request of the petitioner, this application was continued at the August 1, 2016 Board of Commissioners meeting. Immediately prior to the meeting, staff and the petitioner received information from the Cape Fear Public Utility Authority that conflicted with information provided in the petitioner’s application materials that the water tank structure is being decommissioned and removed. The petitioner requested the item be placed on the April 3, 2017 Board of Commissioners meeting agenda. At that meeting, the petitioner requested that the item be continued; that request was granted by the Board. The item was placed on the July 17, 2017 Board of Commissioners meeting agenda at the request of the petitioner; at that meeting the Board granted the petitioner’s request to continue the item to the August 21, 2017 meeting. At that meeting, the Board granted the petitioner’s request that the case be continued to the October 2, 2017 meeting. STAFF PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS AND FINDINGS OF FACT: Staff has conducted an analysis of the proposed use and the information provided as part of the application package and has created preliminary findings of fact for each of the conclusions required to be reached to approve the special use permit request. These preliminary findings of fact and conclusions are based solely on the information provided to date, prior to any information or testimony in support or opposition to the request that may be presented at the upcoming public hearing at the Board of Commissioners meeting. Finding 1: The Board must find that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety where proposed and developed according to the plan as submitted and approved. A. Water and sewer infrastructure and capacity are available to serve the site, but not necessary for the proposed use. B. The subject property is located in the New Hanover County North Fire Service District. C. Access to the tower site will be provided by a driveway from Corporate Drive, a public road. D. The subject site does not host any known cultural or archaeological resources. S-630 Staff Summary Page 7 of 8 Staff Suggestion: Evidence in the record at this time supports a finding that the use will not materially endanger the public health or safety where proposed. Finding 2: The Board must find that the use meets all required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance. A. Telecommunication Communication Facilities, Cellular, and Related Towers are allowed by Special Use Permit in the Planned Development (PD) zoning district provided that the project meets the standards of Section 63.5-1 of the Zoning Ordinance. B. Section 63.5-1(A) requires that the setback from any existing residential property line or residential zoning district boundary for any tower, antenna, or related structure in any zoning district be a distance equal to the height of the tower as measured from the base of the tower. The location of the proposed 185’ tall tower is approximately 190’ feet the eastern property line, which abuts R-15 residential zoning, meeting the setback requirement of Section 63.5-1(A). C. Section 63.5-1(B)1 requires that the minimum distance between the tower and any other adjoining parcel of land or road must be equal to the minimum setback of 50’ described in Section 63.5-1(A), plus any additional distance necessary to ensure that the tower, as designed, will fall within the tower site. The proposed location complies with this provision, and no evidence has been submitted suggesting that additional distance is necessary. D. Section 63.5-1(B)2 requires the applicant to submit photographs and statements as to the potential visual and aesthetic impacts on all adjacent residential zoning districts. Information provided in Tab 8 of the application binder suffices this requirement. E. Section 63.5-1(C) requires a landscaped buffer with a base width not less than 25 feet and providing 100% opacity, in addition to a minimum 8 ft. tall fence surrounding the tower base. The proposed plans suffice this requirement. F. Section 63.5-1(D) requires that applicants seeking construction of new towers, antennas, and related structures demonstrate through submitted written evidence that collocation on any existing tower, antenna, or usable structure in the search area for the new tower is not reasonable or possible. A report found in Tab 9 of the application binder has been provided and states that collocation on any existing tower, antenna, or useable structure in the search area, including the CFPUA’s water tank, is not possible. However, technical data was not provided in the report to demonstrate that collocation on any existing tower, antenna, or usable structure in the search area is not reasonable or possible. G. Section 63.5-1(E) requires that towers over 150’ tall be engineered to accommodate a minimum of two additional providers. Evidence has been submitted demonstrating that this requirement has been met, as shown on Sheet Z02 of Tab 5 of the applicant’s materials. H. Section 63.5-1(F) requires certification that the construction or placement of the proposed facility complies with several federal regulations. An FCC Compliance Assessment has been submitted and demonstrates compliance with the federal regulations mentioned in Section 63.5-1(F). I. Section 63.5-1(I) regulates the signage allowed on the tower and related equipment. The signage proposed is compliant with this ordinance provision. J. Section 63.5-1(J) prohibits the storage of equipment, hazardous waste, or materials not needed for the operation, prohibits outdoor storage yards in a tower equipment compound, and prohibits habitable space within the compound area. The applicant’s proposal complies with this ordinance section. K. Section 63.5-1(L) requires that, when the proposed tower site is within 10,000 feet of an airport or within any runway approach zone, the applicant submit Form 7460 to the Federal S-630 Staff Summary Page 8 of 8 Aviation Administration (FAA) to assure compliance with all FAA standards. An FAA Aeronautical Evaluation was included with the application (Tab 10) and indicates that the site and proposal is in compliance with FAA regulations. Staff Suggestion: Evidence in the record at this time does not support a finding that the use meets all of the required conditions and specifications of the Zoning Ordinance. Finding 3: The Board must find that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property or that the use is a public necessity. A. The location of the proposed telecommunications tower is within an area designated for a mixture of uses, including commercial, office, and light industrial uses. B. The closest residential uses are approximately 1,600 feet away from the site proposed for the telecommunications tower. C. Predominate land uses in the immediate vicinity of the subject site are light industrial uses as well as Olsen Park, a public recreation area. D. A 25’ wide buffer surrounding the tower base will provide visual screening for future development. E. No evidence has been submitted that this project will decrease the property values of adjacent or nearby properties. Staff Suggestion: The evidence in the record at this time supports a finding that the use will not substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property. Finding 4: The Board must find that the location and character of the use if developed according to the plan as submitted and approved will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and in general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover County. A. The subject site is in an area primarily used for light industrial uses, with some residential uses approximately 1,600’ away. B. The site is classified as an Employment Center place type by the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan; these areas are meant to serve as employment and production hubs with office and light industrial uses predominating. C. The proposed telecommunications tower is consistent with the Employment Center place type from the 2016 Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Staff Suggestion: Evidence in the record at this time supports a finding that the use is general conformity with the plan of development for New Hanover County.