CC_Minutes_2010_0111 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1 4. Public Hearings 2 3 Chair Doherty reviewed the purpose and process for public hearings before the Planning Commission. 4 5 a. Plannins~ File 09-032 6 7 Request by Clearwire, LLC for approval of a 125-foot telecommunication tower 8 facility in Acorn Park, 286 County Road C, as a CONDITIONAL USE 9 Chair Doherty opened the Public Hearing for Planning File 09-032 at 6:57 p.m. 10 1 1 Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd reviewed staffs analysis of the request by Clearwire 12 , LLC for approval of a 125-foot telecommunication tower facility in Acorn Park 286 , County Road C, as a CONDITIONAL USE 13 . 14 15 Mr. Lloyd noted that this request had originally come before the Commission in October of 2009, but the timing of the request was such that the question of the 16 17 exact height and location of the facility had not been finally resolved between the various 18 City Departments prior to the public hearing; and that the request had been tabled at 19 that time to resolve those outstanding issues.. Mr.'Lloyd -aadvised that the current 20 location allows for more ground space and necessary height, without impacting the 21 park further. Mr. Lloyd advised that, while the int#ial instillation would include only 22 Clearwire, the tower would be designed to accomrt~ a height extension and the 23 ground facilities are such that additional equipment can be installed with minimal 24 impact to the aesthetics of use of the park, such as future expansion; however, is not 25 currently being considered and would need to be considered through a renewed conditional use approval process. 26 27 28 Mr. Lloyd noted that the Park and Recreation Commission had met last night, and in 29 light of their Master Plan efforts arld potentially needing to plan a park around the ~ 30 tower rather than having a more cornprehensive park plan available for Acorn Park, dictated their motion not to support the current tower proposal at this time 31 . 32 33 Staff recommend8d approval of the'. CONDITIONAL USE request, based on the 34 comments and fiindings, and subject to the conditions detailed in the staff report dated January 06, 2010. 35 36 Discussion amotg~Commissioners and staff included the current proposal compared 37 38 to the original ~plnposal by Clearwire for asingle-use tower, based on City Code and ' 39 the Gi#y s goal for rr~ufdpie users on fewer towers and on city-owned property where 40 technically feasible; increasing service needs and requests from other service providers in "dead" zones; lack of other appropriate public properties in this area that 41 42 could accommodate a tower and meet setback and zoning ordinance requirements; 43 and location of ground equipment adjacent to and impacting residential properties. ~ 44 45 ; Further .discussion included the original proposal of Clearwire for a narrower tower 46 that would also accommodate lights at the hockey rink but not accommodate additional height for multiple users; fencing not required initially to avoid a larger 47 footprint and impact to the park, but willingness of the applicant to install shrubs in the 48 49 short-term until other users make such landscaping insufficient for screening the 50 ground equipment; potential removal of existing trees and/or vegetation during the 51 construction and installation process to provide access; and whether locating a tower 52 in the trees may be aesthetically pleasing but not conducive to equipment effectiveness. 53 54 Chair Doherty .noted, for the record, that a-mail correspondence had been received 55 earlier today from the Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Bob Willmus, related