4.1. BASR 07-24-2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to Planning Commission/Qwest July 24,2001 Page 3 • The structural design of the tower allows the tower to bend to off-load the wind resistance and not fall over. Therefore,the 150 foot setback is not necessary for safety reasons. The 150 foot setback from the south property line would place the tower at a lower elevation on the hill and would require a higher tower in order to meet coverage requirements.Because of the width of the lot, the 150 foot setback can not be met from both the east and west property lines. The applicant has placed the tower so that it complies with the 150 foot setback from the east property line. However, in doing this the setback from the west property line,which is the right-of-way for Highway 169,is 75 feet.The tower will be about 200 feet from the Highway 169 pavement. The hardship is particular to the land and structure involved in that the property is only 225 feet wide which does not allow any location on the site to meet the 150 foot setback from both the east and west property lines.By shifting the tower to the north the tower will be at a lower elevation on the hill and the tower will have to be taller to meet the coverage requirements, therefore increasing the need for a variance. The literal application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the petitioner of rights enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this ordinance. There are two other site in the city with mono-pole towers,AT&T and APT,that do not meet setback requirements. There are also 3 guyed lattice towers located near the intersection of Count Road 33 and Proctor Road and a lattice tower near the high school which do not meet setback requirements. The proposed tower does meet the setback requirements of the underlying Al zoning district. • The circumstances that create the need for a variance are not a consequence of the petitioner's actions or inaction.The circumstance are a consequence of the shape and topography of the lot. The variance will not be injurious to or adversely affect the health,safety or welfare of the residents of the City or the neighborhood where the property is located and will in keeping with spirit and intent of the ordinance.The neighboring residence and Highway 169 are both more than 200 feet away from the tower, which is greater than the height of the tower. Rezoning In order to construct the proposed tower,a rezoning to AT is required.This overlay district was established to manage the proliferation of antenna towers and to ensure their proper placement regarding health,safety ands welfare of the community.This overlay district does not change the underlying Al and ME zoning districts, all the uses allowed and the dimensional regulations in the Al and ME districts will continued to be allowed on land zoned AT. In considering a rezoning request of this nature, consideration should be given to the compatibility with surrounding land uses and whether the rezoning is necessary to provide effective wireless telecommunication coverage for the city. The proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The applicant has shown that this location is • necessary in order to provide effective wireless telecommunication coverage for the city.The rezoning is also in consistent with the Comprehensive Plan for the city. S:\PLANNING\SCOTT\CU01-25.DOC