Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSpectra Site Communications -2004 10 08 /' ~ :. ,. (, BROWN, GARGANESE, \VEISS & D'AGRESTA, P,A, ~lttot7t(J]J at LaJV Usher L. Brown' Jeffrey P. Buako Suzanne D'Agresta" Anthony A. GarganeseU John H, Ward' Jeffrey S, Weiss Offices in Orlando, Kissimmee, Cocoa & Viera Debra S. Babb-Nutcher" Joseph E, Blitch John U, Biedenharn, Jr, Victoria L, Cecil Lisa M, Fletcher Amy J, Goddard Katherine Latorre 'Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer DBoard Certified City, County & Local Government Law Erin J. O'~eary J. W. Taylor Of Counsel October 8,2004 VIA U.S. MAIL John Baker, Planning Coordinator City of Winter Springs 1126 East State Road 434 Winter Springs, FL 32708 Re: SpectraSite Communications, Inc.-Application for Sprint Communication Tower Co-location Winter Springs - General Our File No,: 1193 Dear John: Please allow this correspondence to serve as a follow-up to our letter dated September 13, 2004, regarding the above-referenced matter. In that regard, we have received the documents requested from Seminole County regarding the cell tower site. We were pleased to learn the cell tower was approved by special exception on or about June 26, 2000, by the Seminole County Board of Adjustment. As such and in accordance with our legal opinion, no further special exception is required for the tower to be increased in height by the requested 20 feet and the placement of an additional array at the top of the antenna. Please see Section 30,1368(d) of the County Code, The applicant will, however, be required to obtain a special exceptio'n for the ancillary facilities _ which they intend to plate on the ground. to service the array. As we previously opined, SpectraSite could avoid this requirement by providing for the co-location of the ancillary equipment with the existing Nextel equipment., However, we understand this may not be commercially or technically preferable, Based on the foregoing, SpectraSite should submit an application for special exception relating to the ancillary equipment. The special exception will need to be 225 East Robinson Street, Suite 660 . P.O, Box 2873. Orlando, Florida 32802-2873 Orlando (407) 425-9566 Fax (407) 425-9596 . Kissimmee (321) 402-0144 . Cocoa & Viera (866) 425-9566 Website: W'MY.orlandolaw.net . Emall: firm@orlandolaw.net " .~- John Baker, Planning Coordinator City of Winter Springs October 8,2004 Page 2 reviewed under the provisions of the County's Code, the County's land development regulations and may be approved in the usual course with reasonable conditions of approval such as landscaping and set-backs. We have enclosed for your file a copy of the documents received from Seminole County. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact our office, Very truly yours, / / j f Jeffrey p, uak Assistant City Attorney JPB/eah Enclosure G:IDocslCity of Winter SprlngslCorrespondencelBaker. JohnIBaker_SpectraSlte_Ltr100804,wpd Ivlessage Page 1 un John Baker From: Jeff Buak Dbuak@orlandolaw,net] Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 4:08 PM To: John Baker Subject: Re: SpectraSite Com, Tower Hi John, Our opinion was based upon two things, First the permit, dated June 27, 2000, only provides for the approval of a 156 foot monopole telecommunication tower, it does not mention any equipment facilities, Be that as it may, we assumed the original equipment facility was approved, even though not specifically listed on the permit nor on the application, as the same was provided for on the site plan. Assuming for the sake of argument that the special exception provided for the tower and original equipment facility, as well as three (3) other equipment facilities, the special exception expired after one (1) year if permits were not obtained, . ., ~ Second, the county code supports the proposition that the permit issued in 2000 did not contain a special exception for additional equipment facilities. The code specifically provides new equipment facilities will need a special exception unless they co-locate with existing facilities, The Code is trying to limit negative visual appearances by either limiting the number of facilities or alternatively allowing for a process whereby reasonable conditions can be implemented to protect against negative appearances, Please let us know if you have any questions, Jeff Buak ----- Original Message ----- From: John Baker To: jbuak@orlandolaw,net Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 3:43 PM Subject: SpectraSite Com. Tower Received the letter and associated documentation regarding the tower. It appears that the tower was approved with 2 future 10' x 20' equipment building pads for future co-location capability, If this were approved, please explain why we need to process a special exception? please advise thanks Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, andany attachment(s) to it, contains information intended only for the use ofthe individual(s) or entity named on the e-mail. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that reading it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank You. 10/12/2004 Sec. 30.1368, Co-location of communication tower antelmas, (a) General policy relating to co-location, To minimize adverse visual impacts associated with the proliferation and clustering of communication towers, co-location of communication antennas by more than one (1) carrier on existing or new communication towers is encouraged, Additional communication antennas proposed on existing Communication Towers are pem1itted uses and may co-locate onto existing communication towers if they satisfy the requirements of this section and no special exception is required; (b) Procedure for administrative granting of special exceptions. If co-location requires utilization of real property for construction of ancillary facilities such as equipment rooms, which uses were not permitted under the applicable zoning code and which uses are expressly prohibited by prior special exception~, then such ancillary facilities such as equipment rooms shall notbe deem~permlfteduse as a matter of right under this section unless and until a special exception is issued pursuant to the provisions of this subsection, (1) The Planning Manager, after consultation with the'applicant, shall determine in conjunction with the Planning and Development Director, consistent with sound and generally accepted planning and land use principles, whether co-location of ancillary equipment, such as equipment room, in support of co-located communication antennae are appropriate and meet the criteria of this section, (2) Upon a determination that the co-location of ancillary facilities, including equipment rooms, are appropriate for a parcel, the Planning Manager shall cause a "Notice of Intent to Allow Co-Location of Communication Tower Ancillary Facilities, --- Including Equipment Rooms" to be published in a newspaper of general circulation, The Notice shall, at a minimum, state-the address of the real property and the proposed use, The Notice shall further state that any person objecting to the use of the property as described must file a notice of objection with the Planning Division within fifteen (15) days of the publication. (3) Upon a determination that co-location of Communication Tower ancillary facilities (including equipment rooins) is not appropriate for the subject property, the applicant may appeal said decision the Board of County Commissioners by filing a notice of appeal with the Planning Division within fifteen (15) days of the rendering of the decision, The Planning Division shall schedule the appeal before the Board. The Board may approve or deny the co-location, (4) Ifthe Planning Division receives no objections to the Notice, in his or her sole discretion, then the Planning Manager shall allow the co-location of Communication Tower ancillary structures (including eq~ipment rooms) as proposed. (5) The Planning and Development Director shall issue a development order or denial development order consistent with the determination made under this section, (c) Type of construction. A communication tower which is modified or reconstructed to accommodate the co-location of an additional communication antenna shall be of the same tower type or a lesser impact tower type, as determined by the Planning Manager based upon the intent of sections 30.1362 through 30,1370 and sound and generally acceptable planning practices and principles, as the existing communication tower. (d) Height, An existing communication tower may be modified or rebuilt to a taller height, not to exceed twenty (20) feet over the tower's existing height, to accommodate the co-location of an additional communication antenna. Such a height increase may only occur one (1) time per communication tower and may be allowed for those sites, which obtained previous special exception approval. The additional height authorized herein shall not require an additional distance separation as described in Table 1, section 30.1364. The communication tower's pre-modification height shall be used to calculate such distance separations. -- .' .--.. __b h .-'-( e) -- - Site location: A communication tower which is being rebuilt to accommo'datethe-- 'n'" - ""--' - -, co-location of an additional communication antenna may be moved on the site to an area located within fifty (50) feet of its existing location and may also be relocated, with the approval of the Planning Manager Qased upon sound planning and land use principles and upon a finding that such approval would be consistent with and further the intent of this Code, in the same manner on a site which received a previous special exception notwithstanding any condition of approval relating to the grant ofthe special exception, After a communication tower is rebuilt to aGcommodate co-location, only one (1) tower may remain on the site. A communication tower relocated on a site shall continue to be measured from the original tower location for purposes of calculating separation - distances between communication towers, A communication tower which has been relocated on a site and which intrudes into the separation distances required with regard to property described in Table 1, section 30,1364, shall only be permitted when written consent as set forth in a recordable instrument is obtained from all property owners within the applicable separation distance, (f) Filing of a master plan, To enhance the County's ability to promote the co-location of communication towers, any communication company that owns or operates a communication tower in the County or intends to install a communication tower in the County shall file with the Planning Division a master plan indicating the site of all existing communication towers, any and all proposed communication tower sites and a statement describing the anticipated communication tower needs over the next ten (10) years; provided, however, that disclosure of marketing strategies, trade secrets, commercially privileged information or any other information that the provider deems would adversely effect his, her or its ability to compete is not required to be disclosed and the determination of the communication company shall be conclusive, The master plan shall be filed on or before January 1 of each year. The master plan is not binding. Its primary purpose is to serve as a mechanism of coordinating co-location of communication towers between persons and entities involved in that industry. (Ord. No. 96-5, 9 33,7-9-96; Ord, No, 00-13, 9 54,2-22-00; Ord. No. 02-53,9 1, 12-10- 02). CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 22,2004 PAGE 7 OF 33 INFORMATIONAL 304. Public Works Department Advising The City Commission Of The Status Of Various Capital Improvement Projects. There was no discussion on this Agenda Item, "I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE INFORMATIONAL AGENDA." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McLEOD, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BLAKE. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER McLEOD: AYE COMMISSIONER BLAKE: AYE DEPUTYMAYORMILLER: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS 400, Community Development Department Presents To The City Commission A Request For A Special Exception To Allow An Additional Telecommunications Co-Locator To Place Ground Equipment (Associated With Co-Locating Additional Antennae On An Existing Telecommunications Tower) Within A 100' X 100' Lease Site, Pursuant To Chapter 30 Of The Seminole County Code. Ms. Sahlstrom introduced this Agenda Item and stated, "He did indicate that a Special Exception would be required for the equipment - the additional equipment and facilities . that would be located on the ground. The equipment that will be located is actually shorter than the existing fence height. There is actually an error in your Staff Report where it says it's taller than the fe:q.ce, but the fence is in fact eight feet (8') and the existing equipment and future equipment would be less than that. Staff believes that the primary issue is whether this new equipment would be adequately screened. We have been told that there will be no lighting of the Tower; that the FAA [Federal Aviation Administration] will' not require lighting and that the equipment does not generate any noise and it's not a microwave dish." CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 22, 2004 PAGE 8 OF 33 Ms. Sahlstrom further stated, "The City Arborist made some comments that were given to the Applicant at the - BOA [Board of Adjustment] Meeting. And the Applicant did indicate that he would comply with all the comments. In your packet of materials, you have both what was the initial subm~ttal plus an additional two (2) sheets that were added at the back that show the change of adding more vegetation around that to screen it further. And the Applicant has indicated that they would irrigate this vegetation." Further discussion, Mr, Richard Shirah, Earth Com Services representing Spectra Site, 109 Thompson Cove, Saint Simons Island, Georgia: stated that "The work that we do; we work for a variety of carriers, in this case it's Sprint. One of the fIrst things that they expect us to do when we go out looking for sites is to fInd something we can co-locate on. In this case this tower was well located for that, because it's fItting in between other sites in the area, So that's the reason this one was chosen, If you go very far away from this, then you defeat the purpose of being there because it's there - to fill in that - hole to provide the coverage for the area - what we would call the Radio Frequency Objective." Discussion. Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input II portion of the Agenda Item. Ms. Robin Germillion, 1570 Wescott Loop, Winter Springs, Florida: spoke on this Tower being pleasing to the eye, and inquired as to how many additions there could be. Mr. Shirah stated, "When you go to a stealth type, what we call a close mount situation - what you're talking about - of course what's there already has the mounts on it." Mr. Shirah continued, "If you do the close mount, it limits the number of antennas you can use - but, what it does is then limits the capacity of that site, so a typical site you would want to get on there - in this case, they want six (6) antennas, which can be done with what you call 'stiff ann mounts'." Next, Mr. Shirah noted, "As far as converting this to some kind of camouflage or stealth structure in the future, that's a very difficult thing to do, I have done quite a number of camouflage towers, pine trees, flag poles, whatever - they need to fIt wherever they go - because most places where they have a camouflage tower - there will be a requirement that it be architecturally and aesthetically compatible, In regard to the ground equipment here, we are simply putting in a 14 x 16 pad - concrete pad, for a cabinet type facility. Our cabinet type ground equipment that will be below the level of the fence - as far as the top of that equipment. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MINUTES CITY caMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 22,2004 PAGE 9 OF 33 One af the issues that was raised in the BOA [Baard af Adjustment] was the naise factar. Sprint - in this case, they are nat putting a generatar an site. The anly time that they wauld need to. do. sa wauld be in the case af an emergency and at that time, they have an inventary af partable generatars they bring to. the site," Furthermare, Mr. Shirah said, "Also., we talked abaut a drainage issue, and I think same af the neighbars were cancerned abaut - due to. the wetness af the area aut there that it wauld cause a prablem, We wauld put in the system sa that it wauld strictly anly water the plants that are there; and that was a requirement afyaur Arbarist sa we want to. camply with that. The reasan we did nat bring that tatally to. a head was because we understand there cauld be patentially a prablem with the salinity af the water aut there. Sa, we didn't have quite enaugh time but we wanted to. cantinue to. mave farward with this, And, sa we need to. get aur hands an a Landscape Architect in Flarida to. do. the hamewark that needs to. be dane to. be sure we do. this_and do. it right. In the event that the salinity is a prablem, then we've gat to. find anather saurce af water. And it's a decent distance away fram visual abservatian aut there. But what we want to. do. is regardless - is provide what we need to. pravide to. insure the langevity af the plantings." Manager McLemare said, "My persanal recammendatian to. yau wauld be to. Table this Item tanight; and have this gentleman bring in the - phata renderings af the different types af stealth type antennas that go. an these pasts sa that yau can see thase, If he can't bring them, I have access to. them befare yau make this decisian." Manager McLemare further added, "Yau are trying to. limit the abtrusiveness afthe antennae that's an the pale itself to. surraunding praperty awners and there are aptians far daing that and I think yau aught to. knaw what thase are befare yau make a decisian." Deputy Mayor Miller remarked, "If we go. that raute, I wauld also. like to. see same artist renditians of what - the extensian wauld laok like with the antennas' an it." Deputy Mayor Miller commented, "The ather thing is, we have an airpart just to. the narth af us - what is the height at which yau have to have a beacan an the tap?" Mr, Shirah said, "There is no absolute height. Generally speaking, at 200 feet is when we have to. go to. the FAA [Federal Aviatian Administratian] to request them to. verify that there is' no determinatian af a safety hazard; 200 feet is the cut-aff paint. In this case, we've already dane aur hamewark on this, and there will nat be any kind af problem with the FAA [Federal Aviation Administratian)." Cammissianer Blake said, "I do. nat have any infarmatian whatsaever regarding the CountY's Rural-3 Land Use designation, ar the Agricultural-3 Zaning classificatian. What the requirements are; what is allawed; what is nat allawed; what is required to. have a Special Exceptian and Land Use issues af this sart are quite camplex and take same time in order far us to. comprehend what the rules are priar to. making a decision, CITY OF WINTER SPIUNGS MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - NOVEMBER 22,2004 PAGE 10 OF 33 What I would recommend, Mr. Manager, and I will make a Motion to this effect, is that your questions about information on different types of Towers, stealthiness of those Towers, issues of that sort;, I think are good issues to look at, but before we even get there, I think this Commission needs to hold a Workshop looking at some information on what the County's Land Use rules are, since we are, at this point in time, required to apply their rules to this application. And to not render any decision on this Application until such time that the Commission understands exactly what the Zoning and Land Use requirements are for the County at that location." Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input" portion of the Agenda Item. "I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE TABLE THIS APPLICATION AT THIS TIME, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE WILL SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP - I THINK IT IS PROBAQL Y GOING TO TAKE STAFF SOME TIME TO GET ALL THAT TOGETHER, SO I WOULD LIKE TO SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP IN - FEBRUARY, TO REVIEW THE COUNTY'S ZONING AND LAND USE LAWS, SPECIFICALLY AS THEY PERTAIN TO THE PARCEL THAT THIS APPLICATION IS ON; AND AFTER THAT TIME, THEN WE WILL RESCHEDULE THE PUBLIC HEARING." COMMISSIONER BLAKE ADDED, "IT WILL HAVE TO BE RE-ADVERTISED AT THAT TIME AND WE WILL BRING IT UP AGAIN FOR PUBLIC HEARING, AFTER WE HAVE ALL THOSE FACTS, AND CAN REHEAR IT." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BLAKE. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER BLAKE: AYE COMMISSIONER McLEOD: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR MILLER: AYE , MOTION CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARINGS 401. Community Development Department . Requests The CitY Commission. Hold A Public Hearing For Aesthetic Review Of The Barclay Woods Town House Units. Mr, John Reny, 641 North Maitland Avenue, Maitland, Florida: addressed the City Commission and stated, "I also brought in the draft of my HOA [Homeowner's Association] Covenants where I includt:d the Items excluding screened covered porches on those units, and keeping the garage doors closed, and the other issues that I was asked to address." Discussion, ," ARTICLE V. SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 7 of 15 not to exceed ten (10) feet in height, may be exempted from the garaging and fencing requirements of section 20-434 until July 2, 2001, if the dwelling unit of the owner, user, or caretaker of the authorized commercial vehicle does not have a garage or fence capable of screening the vehicle from view as provided in section 20-434 provided that the owner, user, or caretaker of the authorized commercial vehicle shall have first acquired from the city a limited term parking permit which shall be clearly affixed upon the rear window or rear panel of the authorized commercial vehicle. [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] (b) Following the termination of the period of the permit the commercial vehicle must comply in all respects with section 20-434 or be removed from the residential zoned district. (c) No authorized commercial vehicle as defined in section 20-434 may be provided a limited term parking permit later than December 31, 1999, (d) A permit may be transferred to a similar authorized commercial vehicle as defined in section 20- 434 for the duration of the special exception provided that a new permit is acquired from the city and the original permit is returned to the city, (e) _. LosUimited term parking permits must be replaced by the city and affixed_upon the, vehicle as provided herein before the vehicle can be parked in a residentially zoned district of the city. (f) Limited term parking permits may be purchased from the city for a price of twenty-five dollars ($25.00). Transferred and replacement limited term parking permits may be purchased from the city for a price of twenty-five dollars ($25.00), ' (Ord, No. 721,96,6-28-99; Ord, No. 747, 91, 11-22-99) Sec. 20-437. Exempted vehicles. (a) Governmental vehicles, Police, fire, rescue, and other governmental vehicles which serve a vital public safety, health or welfare purpose as determined by the city are exempted from the restrictions of this section and may be parked in residentially zoned districts of the city, (b) Automobiles. Automobiles which may be used in business but which do not have visible commercial lettering, signage, materials, supplies, equipment, storage racks attached thereto or stored thereupon are exempted from the restrictions on the parking of commercial vehicles, (Ord. No, 721, 97,6-28-99; Ord, No, 731, 92, 8-11-99) Secs. 20-438--20-450. Reserved. DIVISION 3. SITING AND REGULATION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWERS* *Editor's note: Ord. No, 645,9 I, adoptedJuly 14,1997, amended the Code by adding provisions designated as 9 20-434. In order to avoid conflicts in section numbering the editor has redesignated the provisions of Ord. No, 645 as 9 20-451. Sec. 20-451. Telecommunications towers. http://libraryl.munieode, com! gateway.dll/fl/florida/28494/28612/2861 7?f=templates$ fu=document - frame,." 317/2005