HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/09/2022 - Planning and Zoning Commission - AGENDA - Work Session*Work session times are approximate and are subject to change without notice.
David Katz, Chair Virtual Meeting
Ted Shepard, Vice Chair Zoom Webinar
Michelle Haefele
Per Hogestad
Adam Sass
Jeff Schneider
Julie Stackhouse
Planning and Zoning Hearing will be held on Thursday, September 15, 2022 in City Hall Chambers or online.
Planning & Zoning Special Hearing will be held on Wed., September 28, 2022 in City Hall Chambers or online.
Regular Work Session
September 9, 2022
Virtual Meeting
Noon – 3:35 p.m.
Planning and Zoning Commission
Work Session Agenda
Participation for this remote Planning and Zoning Commission work session will be available online or by phone.
Commission members and staff may be present in-person but interested members of the public and applicant
teams are strongly encouraged to participate via Zoom. No public comment is accepted during work sessions.
Public Attendance (Online): Individuals who wish to attend the Planning and Zoning work session via remote
public participation can do so through Zoom at https://fcgov.zoom.us/j/97948451538. Individuals participating in
the Zoom session should also watch the meeting through that site.
The meeting will be available to join beginning at 11:45 a.m. on September 9, 2022. Attendees should try to sign in
prior to 12:00 p.m. if possible.
In order to attend:
Use a laptop, computer, or internet-enabled smartphone. (Using earphones with a microphone will greatly
improve your audio).
You need to have access to the internet.
Keep yourself on muted status.
If you have any technical difficulties during the work session, please email kclaypool@fcgov.com.
Public Attendance (Phone): If you do not have access to the internet, you can call into the work session via phone.
Please dial: 1-253-215-8782 or 1-346-248-7799, with Webinar ID: 979 4845 1538.
(Continued on next page)
Packet pg. 1
City of Fort Collins Page 2
TOPICS: PROJECTED TIMES:
Consent:
1. July 21, 2022 Hearing Draft Minutes
2. USC Entrance ADA Improvements MA (Puga)
3. Brick Stone Apartments on Harmony (Beals)
12:00 – 12:35
Discussion:
4. Heartside Hill ODP & PDP (Lindsey)
5. Bloom Filing Two (Kleer)
6. Phase 1 LUC Update (Beals) – THIS WILL BE HEARD AT THE
EXTRA HEARING SCHEDULED 9/28
12:35 – 2:50
Policy and Legislation:
• Wireless Code Update (Lindsey)
2:50 – 3:10
Commission Topics:
• APA Planning Officials Training Series: Part 4
• Upcoming Hearing Calendar (Sizemore)
• Commission Updates (Sizemore)
• Transportation Board Liaison Update (Gavaldon)
3:10 – 3:35
The meeting will be available beginning at 11:45 a.m. Please call in to the meeting prior to 12:00 p.m., if possible.
Once you join the meeting: keep yourself on muted status. If you have any technical difficulties during the
meeting, please email kclaypool@fcgov.com.
The September 15 Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting will be available online, remotely and in-
person. Information on participating in the September 15 Planning and Zoning regular meeting is contained in the
agenda for the September 15 meeting available at https://www.fcgov.com/cityclerk/planning-
zoning.php. Members of the public wishing to submit documents, visual presentations, or written comments for
the Commission to consider regarding any item on the agenda must be emailed to smanno@fcgov.com at least 24
hours prior to the September 15 meeting.
Packet pg. 2
Wireless Telecommunication Code Project UpdateSeptember 9, 2022Planning & Zoning Commission Work SessionWill Lindsey, City PlannerPacket pg. 3
Agenda2•Project Timeline• Scope of Work• Key Policy Recommendations• Discussion/Questions/FeedbackPacket pg. 4
Project Timeline3•Q1 2022: City Council Work Session (01/25)• Q2 2022: Review existing standards with consultant, draft recommended amendments to Land Use Code• Q3 2022: Refine recommended amendments, seek additional guidance from Boards, Commissions, and Council• Q4 2022: Bring proposed Land Use Code amendments to Commission and Council for considerationPacket pg. 5
4STRATEGIC OBJECTIVESNLSH 1.6 – Protect and preserve quality of life in neighborhoods.HPG 7.1 – Provide world-class municipal services to residents and businesses.CITY PLANSafe Community SC-2b – Complete a Wireless Communications Plan and implement targeted Land Use Code amendments.Packet pg. 6
5Packet pg. 7
Plan FindingsHeat Capacity Map For A Single Provider• Over ½ of the City is deficient in wireless coverage and network capacity6ColorPotential CapacitySignal Strength DescriptionGreen GoodRatio of number of sites to subscriber base should support a robust networkOrange AverageRatio of number of sites to subscriber base is problematic to support a robust networkRed PoorRatio of number of sites to subscriber base is poor likely cannot support a robust networkPacket pg. 8
7Recommendation 1Permit wireless towers on non-residential properties in more residential zone districts.Zone District Area Calculations:ZONEACRESCG1,194D120HMN56LMN6,546MMN1,875NCB158NCL538NCM545RF444RUL288UE2,751Packet pg. 9
8Plan FindingsFindings• More wireless antennas mounted on existing structures and buildings than free standing towers• Only 18% of existing sites have more than 1 wireless provider• 82% are single provider sitesColorSignal StrengthSignal Strength DescriptionYellow SuperiorStrong enough to operate within most buildingsGreen AverageStrong enough to operate in vehicle but not inside most buildingsBlue AcceptableStrong enough to operate outside but not in a vehicle or buildingPacket pg. 10
9Recommendation 2Allow City-owned properties to be available for the siting of wireless towers.Packet pg. 11
Existing Design RequirementsLUC 3.8.13(C)(8) -Color. All wireless te lecom m unication facilities and equipm ent shall be painted to match as closely as possible th e color and textu re of th e wall, building or surrounding built enviro n m en t. Muted colors, earth to n e s and subdued colors shall be used.LUC 3.8.13(C)(15) -Stealth Technology. To th e extent reasonably feasible, th e applicant shall em ploy "stealth technology" so as to convert th e wireless te lecom m unication facility into wireless te lecom m unication equipm ent, as th e best method by which to mitigate and/or cam ouflage visual impacts. Stealth technology consists of, but is not limite d to , th e use of grain bins, silos or elevators, church steeples, water to w e rs, clock to w e rs, bell to w e rs, false penthouses or other similar "m imic" structures. Such "m imic" structures shall have a contextual relationship to th e adjacent area.10Packet pg. 12
11Recommendation 3Strengthen and enhance existing context-based standards to regulate tower design.Packet pg. 13
12Recommendations Recap1. Permit wireless towers on non-residential properties in more residential zone districts.2. Allow City-owned properties to be available for the siting of wireless towers.3. Strengthen and enhance existing context-based standards to regulate tower design.Packet pg. 14
For Questions or Comments, Please Contact:THANK YOU!Will Lindsey, City Plannerwlindsey@fcgov.com/ 970-224-6164Packet pg. 15
14Plan Findings123 Sites (May 2021)Majority of facilities are macro cell (96)Majority of facilities are concealed (69)Monopole Tower Non-concealed (22)Base Station Non-concealed (19)Unipole Tower Concealed (44)Base Station Concealed (25)Packet pg. 16
15Reference SlidesPacket pg. 17
16Public OutreachKey Takeaways Spring 2021 Survey Responses•Aestheticsare of greatest importance to the community•85.3% - “Quality of wireless service is important to me.”•42.9% - “My network coverage at home is poor.”•10.6% - “My network coverage at home is excellent.”•67.8% - “I prefer taller facilities with multiple collocation possibilities opposed to shorter and potential more towers.”•93.9% - “I would support locating concealed cell towers on City owned property.”Packet pg. 18
17Adoption RecommendationPlanning Staff recommends that the City Council make a motion adopting the Wireless Telecommunication Master Plan on First Reading.Packet pg. 19
18Plan FindingsFindingsRooftop antennas can be 15’ above the roof but:• Zoning requires maximum distance between antenna and roof edge• Architecturally difficult to add concealment for a 2nd provider• Building owners may be limiting number of rooftop providersPacket pg. 20
Plan Findings19Zone Districts• Current standards favor co-location on existing structures over free-standing facilities• Denser residential areas where facilities are not allowed are also absent of tall structures for co-locationPacket pg. 21
20Vision for the FutureProvide context-sensitive concealment elements that are compatible with surrounding natural and architectural environments.Use limited public lands, such as parks, civic buildings and golf coursesin an effort to allow greater community control over placement and design, protect the community from visual impacts and improve coverage in hard to reach residential areas.Promote greater transparency from the wireless industryby requiring applicants to demonstrate radio frequency emission compliance with any new or existing wireless development.Maintain cohesive small wireless facility design standardswhich require undergrounding of equipment to protect the community's visual quality.Continually monitor, update, and publish the City's database of existing wireless communication facilitiesas a tool to promote collocation.Packet pg. 22
21Stories We’ve Heard“I would like to see strong 5G connectivity through out Fort Collins. I realize that for some aesthetics are an issue for some, however wireless connectivity is becoming essential and is a public safety issue.” “There needs to be a balance between connectivity and the way this technology affects people who are electromagnetically sensitive.”“I feel less safe at work late at night, because I’m usually alone and have close to no service where I’m located.”“I have contemplated moving out of south FC strictly because the coverage is so bad. Even those that say its not a priority or concern, do not deal with bad connection issues.”“I like the idea of having greater site density on existing structuresand minimizing tall standalone towers.”“Registry Ridge is a great community in Fort Collins, however we have been forgotten regarding cell towers and cell servicein this community.”“Frequent updates on the progress of this infrastructurewould be good to know.”Packet pg. 23
22Legal FrameworkCOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934Created the FCC and established that wireline and wireless communications would be exclusively regulated by the Federal Government.TELECOMMUNICATION ACT OF 1996, Section 704Preserves local governments zoning authority over certain aspects of the personal wireless services communications industry.FCC 2016 AND 2018 REPORT AND ORDERS AND DECLARATORY RULINGSCollocation by right on eligible facilities, shot clock timelines established and small wireless facilities in rights-of-wayCOLORADO HOUSE BILL 17-1193“The siting, mounting, placement, construction, and operation of a small cell facility or a small cell network is a permitted use by right in any zone”Packet pg. 24
23Phase 1 FindingsGreat Variety Of Concealed (45) and Semi-concealed (15) Towers and Base StationsFaux SiloFaux 2ndStoryPainted AntennaFaux ClockPacket pg. 25
• 75 sites 60’ or less in height• Ordinance requirements effectively advancing: • Use of existing structures• Variety of concealment techniques• Low antenna mounts• Conversely low antenna mountings:• Less collocation• Smaller service area24Phase 1 FindingsConcealed Tower Concealed Base StationPacket pg. 26
Phase 2 Findings25Coverage Map For A Single Provider At Each Site• High frequency coverage map• The level of propagation signal strength is shown through the gradation of colors from yellow to blue.ColorSignal StrengthSignal Strength DescriptionYellow SuperiorStrong enough to operate within most buildingsGreen AverageStrong enough to operate in vehicle but not inside most buildingsBlue AcceptableStrong enough to operate outside but not in a vehicle or buildingPacket pg. 27
26• Gap ComparisonsService Provider Coverage Map Comparisons • High frequency coverage map• Service provider with greatest number of sites deployed• Service provider with fewer number of sites deployed• Some areas are same for both providersProvider 1 Provider 2 Packet pg. 28
27• Network CapacityCapacity Variables• Population Per Square Mile• Traffic Counts• Year data collected varies by point (2014-2020)• Totals collected at each point are per day Packet pg. 29
Phase 2 Findings28Heat Capacity Map For A Single Provider• High frequency coverage map• The level of propagation signal strength is shown through the gradation of colors from green to red.ColorPotential CapacitySignal Strength DescriptionGreen GoodRatio of number of sites to subscriber base should support a robust networkOrange AverageRatio of number of sites to subscriber base is problematic to support a robust networkRed PoorRatio of number of sites to subscriber base is poor likely cannot support a robust networkPacket pg. 30
29• LUC Definitions•Wireless telecom m unication equipm entshall mean any equipm ent used to provide wireless te lecom m unication service, but which is not affixed to or contained with in a wireless te lecom m unication service facility, but is instead affixed to or m ounted on an existing building or structure th a t is used for som e other purpose.•Wireless telecom m unication facilityshall mean any freestanding facility, building, pole, to w e r or structure used to provide only wireless te lecommunication services, and which consists of, with o u t limita tion, antennae, equipm ent and storage and other accessory structures used to provide wireless te lecom m unication services.Packet pg. 31
Gap and Zoning Comparisons30Zone District Area Calculations:ZONEArea Sq MiCG1.866D0.188HMN0.087LMN10.229MMN2.930NCB0.247NCL0.842NCM0.853RF0.695RUL0.450UE4.299Packet pg. 32
• City-owned properties overlayed with propagation pattern• Could address coverage gaps in highly residential areas• Facilities could be subject to enhanced review if located on public properties31Gap and City-Owned Lands ComparisonPacket pg. 33
32Packet pg. 34