HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Staff ReportBurning Mountain AT&T Communication Facility
SUAA-7831
June 18, 2014
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
TYPE OF REVIEW
APPLICANT (OWNER)
OPERATOR
LOCATION
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
ZONING
Amendment Request to an Existing Land
Use Change Permit
Burning Mountain Land & Cattle LLC /
SBA Towers II LLC
AT&T
105'/2 East Alkalai Creek Road, South of
the Town of New Castle
Located in Section 31, T5S, R90W on a
property known by Assessor's Parcel No.
2123-314-00-016.
Rural (R)
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL
The Applicant is requesting a minor modification to an existing Special Use Permit to
allow changes to the area of the site plan to allow for use by AT&T both on the ground
and on the tower.
The Applicant's representative, Smartlink, LLC, on behalf of AT&T, proposes to add a
new set of antennas to an existing tower. AT&T proposes to place antennas at
approximately 70 feet on the existing tower and the town height will not be increased. In
addition, AT&T also proposes to construct a new 12x16 foot equipment shelter that will
be placed on the ground inside. This will occur in an expansion of the existing project
footprint and will result in a new 200 square foot area leased by SBA Towers II, LLC. A
new backup emergency diesel generator and new utility service for AT&T will be placed
within this 200 square foot expansion area.
The telecommunication facility was originally approved as an unmanned 100 foot tall
tower on an existing telecommunication facility site of approximately 3,000 square feet.
The approval was memorialized in Resolution 2001-17 and recorded under reception
number 578604. (see attached Exhibit A)
II. BACKGROUND — AUTHORITY — APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
The original approval for the Communication Facility was granted by Resolution No. 2001-
17 (see attached Exhibit B). Section 4-106 of the Garfield County Land Use and
Development Code sets forth the process for requesting an amendment to an existing
Special Use Permit. Section 4-106(C) contains criteria for determining if the requested
amendment is a Minor Modification.
In accordance with the Land Use and Development Code a Pre -Application conference
was held and the Director of the Community Development Department made a formal
determination that the proposal meets the minor modification criteria. This analysis is
outlined below in Staff Analysis.
III. REVIEW CRITERIA — STAFF ANALYSIS
The Minor Modification criteria from Section 4-106(C) are shown below with Staff analysis
shown in italics.
A. Review Criteria.
Minor Modifications are those that deviate from standards or rearrange/reconfigure
elevations, structures, parking areas, landscape areas, drainage facilities, utilities, or
other site improvements in an approved Land Use Change Permit, including Subdivisions,
and that meet all of the following criteria as applicable:
1. Comply with all requirements of this Code;
The Amendment continues to meet all requirements of the Code.
2. Do not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan;
The Amendment does not conflict with the County's adopted Comprehensive Plan.
3. Do not change the character of the development;
The Amendment does not change the character of the development.
4. Do not alter the basic relationship of the development to adjacent property;
The Amendment does not change the basic relationship of the development to adjacent
properties.
5. Do not change the uses permitted;
The Amendment does not change the uses currently permitted.
6. Do not require amendment or abandonment of any easements or rights-of-way;
The Amendment does not require abandonment of any easements or rights of way.
7. Do not increase the density;
The Amendment does not increase the density of the project.
8. Do not increase the zone district dimensions to an amount exceeding the
maximum dimension in the applicable zone district in Table 3-201; and
The Amendment does not increase the zone district dimensions to an amount exceeding
the maximum dimensions in the Rural Zone District.
9. Do not decrease the amount of the following to an amount below the minimum
required in the applicable zone district:
The Amendment does not decrease the amount of any of the following to an amount
below the minimum required in the Rural Zone district.
a. Amount of dedicated Open Space;
b. The size of or change in the locations, lighting, or orientation of originally approved
signs;
c. Any zone district dimensions in Table 3-201.
IV. ADDITIONAL STAFF ANALYSIS
1. The original approval reflected in Resolution No. 2001-17 was adopted following a
public hearing before the Board of County Commissioners.
2. The Application has been referred to the County Attorney's Office for comment and
updated statements of authority as well as easements were provided and recorded as
requested.
3. No changes in overall height or general character of the facility are proposed.
4. The facility shall continue to be required to maintain compliance with all existing
conditions of approval including compliance with all applicable Federal Regulations (i.e.
FAA and FCC requirements and permits).
V. RECOMMENDATION
The Staff analysis supports a finding that the Application meets the criteria contained in
Section 4-106(C) for a Minor Modification. Section 4-106 (C) states that upon finding it a
minor modification the Director may approve, approve with conditions or deny the
amendment and provide written notice to the Applicant. Staff recommends that the
following supplemental conditions be required.
1. That all representations of the Applicant contained in the Amendment Application
submittals including the revised site plan and tower diagram (attached as Exhibit "A") shall
be conditions of approval unless specifically amended or modified by the conditions
contained herein.
2. All previous conditions of approval contained in Resolution No. 2001-17, attached
as Exhibit "B", shall remain in effect.
3. The Applicant shall maintain compliance with all FAA and FCC requirements as
required by the Land Use and Development Code.
Exhibit A
SMARTLINK, LLC
}
aK
6
0
Z
Z
TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY (PENDING)
w
x
V
DRIVING DIRECTIONS
ENGINEIERING
AO
F
_m �,< a11QQ iso
u1 J W tq=1
�¢9 W a
jN NF�
R U' a n % U g51! U AaE0
5 a 6 0
c c
w - 1
n 4
$i 5 53 F 6 z
Wd00y 1V 01OL'[04aj O311Old
6011V1-0002111.41 A0110A aI0O3 4 0/100111p0w5V1pa1O1d101021 W
in 8
z
O "J
ro
i w
rc w
SMARTLINK, LLC
E.8
U
tug
Buz
z
J
e
Wdo02 iv NZ 'CO 0311O1d
6up'I-31sO2,PN0 AMA zrmo s o1'PMUINew S1s1peIoid161oO vi
SMARTLINK, LLC
|\
6z
wk
0
l^31.32018 �.2 &TI co
SMARTLINK, LLC
S
N
U
.0 -An
SYNNaLNV 181Y'0'1
.0 -AL
z
0
W
J
W
1-
0
W
2 - ANTENNA PLAN
6,AA010020AI0 AaleAe e020C-I010Z CO 00A 03.1101d
MP0,05,1 a(wd\6 0DW
Exhibit B
AEU 1111 111111 11111 111111111 11111111 11111 111111
976604 04/03/2001 02:21P 81242 P354 M RLSDORF
1 of 3 R 0.00 D 0.00 GARFIELD COUNTY CO
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss
County of Garfield )
At a regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners for Garfield County,
Colorado, held in the Commissioners' Meeting Room, Garfield County Courthouse, in Glenwood
Springs on Monday, the 19th of March 2001, there were present:
John Martin , Commissioner Chairman
Larry McCown , Commissioner
Walt Stowe (absent) , Commissioner
Don DeFord , County Attorney
Mildred Alsdorf Clerk of the Board
Ed Green , County Administrator
when the following proceedings, among others were had and done, to -wit:
RESOLUTION NO, 2001-17
A RESOLUTION CONCERNED FOR THE APPROVAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
APPLICATION FOR ONE (1) 100 -FOOT TELECOMMUNICATION TOWER.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, has
received an application from NTCH Colorado, Inc for a special use permit to allow for the
approval of one (1) 100 -foot telecommunication towers.
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, held a
public hearing on the 19th day of March, 2001 upon the question of whether the above described
telecommunication tower should be granted or denied, at which hearing the public and interested
persons were given the opportunity to express their opinions concerning the approval of said
special use permit; and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, on the
basis of substantial competent evidence produced at the aforementioned hearing, has made the
following determination of fact as listed below:
A. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board of
County Commissioners;
B. That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all
interested parties were heard at that meeting;
C. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed special use permit is in the
best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of
the citizens of Garfield County;
1/101/11/11021111011111111011
2 of 3 R 0.00 D 0.00 GARFIEID COUNTY CO
D. That the application is in conformance with the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of
1978, as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield
County, Colorado that the NTCH Colorado, Inc. tower is hereby approved subject to compliance
with all of the following specific conditions:
1. The applicant will allow future co -locations.
2. This facility, including the tower, will be painted to blend in with the background, the color will be
approved by the planning department.
3. If the tower becomes dormant for more than six months either the tower owner or the landowner is
required to remove the tower at their expense.
4. That all representations of the applicant, either written or stated at the hearing before the Board of
County Commissioners, shall be considered conditions of approval.
5. That the applicant will meet all requirements of the Garfield County Zoning Resolution of 1978, as
amended.
Dated this 2nd day of April, A.D. 2001
GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,
GARFIE L COUNTY,
OL
Upon motion duly made and
following vote:
COMMTSSTONFR TRAINMAN
COMMISSIONER WALTER A.
COMMISSIONER LARRY L.
STATE OF COLORADO
)ss
County of Garfield
seconded the foregoing
TORN F
STOWE
MCCOWN
MARTIN
the
, Aye
, Aye
, Aye
1 , County Clerk and ex -officio Clerk of the Board of
County Commissioners, in and for the County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that the
annexed and foregoing Resolution is truly copied from the Records of the Proceeding of the
Board of County Commissioners for said Garfield County, now in my office.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, 1 have hereunto set my hand andDx OOIe seal of said
County, at Glenwood Springs this _ day of