HomeMy WebLinkAbout829 SOUTH SHIELDS - MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS - 44-01 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - MODIFICATION REQUESTFOUNDATION GENERAL NOTES
12. Foundation design assumes continuous concrete placement without construction joints.
13. Top of foundation shall be sloped to drain with a floated finish.
14. Foundation design assumes casing, if used, will not be left in place. Equipment, procedures
and proportions of concrete materials shall insure concrete will not be adversely disturbed
upon casing removal.
15. Drilling fluid, if used, shall be fully displaced by concrete and shall not be detrimental to
concrete or surrounding soil. Contaminated concrete shall be removed from top of foundation .
and replaced with fresh concrete. All slurry inside pole must be removed.
4
ENG. FILE NO.39563TRO56
DWG. NO. A992413= 6 R 1
FOUNDATION GENERAL NOTES
1. Work shall be in accordance with local codes, safety regulations and unless otherwise noted,
the latest revision of ACI 318, 'Building Code Requirements for Reinforced Concrete".
Procedures for the protection of excavations, existing construction and utilities shall be
established prior to foundation installation.
2. Concrete materials shall conform to the appropriate state requirements for exposed structural
concrete.
3. Proportions of concrete materials shall be suitable for the installation method utilized and shall
result in durable concrete for resistance to local anticipated aggressive actions. The durability
requirements of ACI 318 Chapter 4 shall be`satisfied based on the conditions expected at the
site. As a minimum, concrete shall develop a minimum compressive strength of 3000 psi
(20.7 MPa) in 28 days.
4. Maximum size of aggregate shall not exceed size suitable=for installation method utilized.
5. The foundation embedment depth results in the followiig lateral bearing stresses calculated in
accordance with the 1997 UBC, Section 1806.8.2.1, equation 6-1:
Concrete backfill foundation ............ 89 psf/ft
Compacted gravel backfill foundation.....111 psf/ft
These values may be compared to the allowable foundation and lateral pressures indicated
in UBC Table 18-1-A. The foundation embedment.'depth has been determined assuming
that allowable lateral bearing stresses may be increased by one-third per UBC Section
1612.3.2, and that'/2" deflection at grade is acceptable per UBC Table 18-1-A, Footnote 3.
It is the responsibility of US WEST to verify that the calculated lateral bearing stresses are
acceptable based on site -specific soil conditions.
6. Foundation installation shall be supervised by personnd knowledgeable and experienced with
the proposed foundation type. Construction shall be is accordance with generally accepted
installation practices.
7. Foundation design assumes field inspections will be performed to verify that construction
materials, installation methods and assumed design parameters are acceptable based on
conditions existing at the site.
8. Loose material shall be removed from bottom of excavation prior to concrete placement. Sides
of excavation shall be rough and free of loose cuttings. '
9. Concrete shall be placed in a manner that will prevent segregation of concrete. materials,
infiltration of water or soil and other occurrences which may decrease the strength or durability
of the foundation.
10. Free fall concrete may be used provided fall is vertical down without hitting sides of
excavation. Under no circumstances shall concrete fall through water.
11. Concrete shall be placed against undisturbed soil.
\I' ENG. FILE NO.39563TRO56 DWG. NO. A992413,5 R I
�'i
TOTAL LENGTH OF 18" DIAMETER TOP SECTION
Ems
FILE NO.: 39563TRO56
DWG. NO. A992413 I
No Text
LOADING DESCRIPTION
LOAD CASES:
/ OUALCOMM MICRO BTS ANTENNA
CENTERLINE 5' ABOVE TOP OF POLE
EPA = 15 SO.FT. (Ca X Aa)
WEIGHT = 1000 LBS INCLUDING
COAX CABLE
EPA (1 /2" ICE) = 20 SO. FT.
WEIGHT = 1250 LBS INCLUDING
COAX CABLE
Z LUCENT TECHNOLOGY ANTENNA
CENTERLINE 5' ABOVE TOP OF POLE
EPA - 30 SO. FT. (Cc X Aa)
WEIGHT = 1000 LBS INCLUDING
COAX CABLE
EPA = (1/2" ICE) = 39 SO.FT.
WEIGHT = 1250 LBS INCLUDING
COAX CABLE
3 CO -LOCATE ANTENNA CENTERLINE
TOP OF POLE OR AS SPECIFIED ON
SHEETS 3 AND 4
EPA = 30 SO. FT. (Ca X Aa)
WEIGHT = 1000 LBS INCLUDING
COAX CABLE
EPA (1/2" ICE) = 39 SO. FT.
WEIGHT = 1250 LBS INCLUDING
COAX CABLE
4 HDR RADIO ANTENNA CENTERLINE
5' BELOW CO -LOCATE ANTENNA OR
AS -SPECIFIED ON SHEETS 3 AND 4
EPA = 15 SO.FT. (Ca X Aa)
WEIGHT = 500 LBS INCLUDING
COAX CABLE
EPA ( l/2" ICE) = 19 SO. FT.
WEIGHT = 750 LBS INCLUDING
COAX CABLE
LOADING PER ANSIITIAIEIA-222-F 1996
85 MPH BASIC WIND SPEED (l/2" RADIAL ICE LOAD)
LOADING
NOTATION
LOADING DESCRIPTION .
85-234
85 MPH
WITH LOAD
CASES 2,3
8 4
85-230
85 MPH
WITH LOAD
CASES 2 6
3
85-204
85 MPH
WITH LOAD
CASES 2 &
4
85-200
85 MPH
WITH LOAD
CASE 2
85-134
85 MPH
WITH LOAD
CASES 1,3
& 4
85-130
85 MPH
WITH LOAD
CASES / d
3
85-104
85 MPH
WITH LOAD
CASES / B
4
85-100
85 MPH
WITH LOAD
CASE I
THE LOADING d POLE SECTION CHARTS ON SHEETS 3 8 4 INDICATE
THE REOUIRED SECTIONS FOR VARIOUS ANTENNA HEIGHTS. THE TOTAL
LENGTH OF l8" DIA TOP SECTIONS SPECIFIED MAY BE MADE UP OF
ANY COMBINATION OF SECTIONS FROM THE FOLLOWING TABLE:
18" DIA. TOP SECTIONS
PART NUMBER
LENGTH (FT)
ST1805
0
Tf /
/0
ST1815
15
20
ST1925
25
30
ST1835
35
ST 1840
1 40
FILE NO.: 39563 TRO56
TOP ANTENNA
0
m
TM ANT£N4A
CENTER LINE
HANOHOLE (TYPICAL)
INTERNAL FLANGE
(IF REQUIRED)
0
¢
ti
0
iXW
omk
m —
INTERNAL. FLANGE
ACCESS PORT
0
EQUIPMENT
0
MOUNTING HOLES
T/1°IM LINE
NPST
CONCRETE
O
CONCC RETE
o
ASTM C33 GRAVEL OR
CRUSHED STONE BASE
5F1°20 F°LMATIQN SECTIIJN
SECTION PROPERTIES
DIALL
WIN)
y
N)
(KSI)
/B
0.25
52
MAXIMUM REACTION
FOUNDATION
SECTION
SFlB20
WNLOAD (K)
7.0
SHEAR (K)
4.3
OTM (FT-K)
203.3
OPTIONAL FOUNDATION
INSTALLATION DETAILS
I. CONCRETE MAY BE PLACED INSIDE POLE
PROVIDED ADEQUATE DRAINAGE IS
MAINTAINED AT TOP OF INTERIOR
CONCRETE ELEVATION.
?. WELL GRADED ASIM C33 GRAVEL OR
CRUSTED STaC MAY BE SUBSTITUTED
FOR CONCRETE, 2" MAX. SIZE,
TAMP IN 6' LIFTS.
TOWER DESIGN LOADING
DESI BASICNWWIND LOAD IND SPEED (ER A RADIAL/ICE LOAD). 1996, BS MPH
REFER TO SHEETS 2 THRU 4 FOR LOADING
AND HEIGHT LIMITATIONS
FLANGE SCHEDULE
PIPE
DIA.
FLANGE
I TYPE
FLANGE
I THICKNESS
N7. OF
BOLTS
BOLT
SIZE
BOLT
CIRCLE
1B'
fNTEl7NA
I.25'
l2
7/B'
15. 375'
IB^
EXTERNA
1.0'
l2
I^
2/.O^
GENERAL NOTES
1. RCYN COMMANICATION POLE DESIGNS CONFORM TO ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F
LIIESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED MDER POLE DESIGN LOADING.
2. THE DESIGN LOADING CRITERIA INDICATED HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO RO`N.
THE DESIGN LOADING CRITERIA HAS BEEN ASSURED TO BE BASED ON
SITE -SPECIFIC DATA IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/TIAZEIA-222-F AND
MAST BE VERIFIED BY OTHERS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION.
J. ANTENNAS AND LINES ARE PROVIDED BY OTHERS UILESS
OTHERWISE SPECIFIED.
4. POLE AEMBER DESIGN DOES NIT INICLLvE STRESSES DIE TO ERECTION
SINCE ERECTION EQUIPMENT AND CONDITIONS ARE L.NCNTNN. DESIGN
ASSLAES COAPETENT AND QUALIFIED PERSOMEL WILL ERECT THE POLE.
5. WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F. ^STRL.CTLRAL
STANDARDS FOR STEEL ANTEMA, TOWERS AND ANTEPPIA SUPPORTING
STRLCTLRES.
6. THE MINIMA/ YIELD STRENGTH OF FLANGE PLATES SHALL BE 36 KSI.
7. FIELD CONNECTIONS SHALL BE BOLTED. NO FIELD WELDS SHALL BE
ALLOWED.
B. STRLCTIRAL BOLTS SHALL CO'NFDRA/ TO ASTAR A-32S. EXCEPT WHERE
NOTED.
9. PAL NITS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL I- DIA. BOLTS AND SMALLER.
LOCK WASHERS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL LARGER DIAMETER BOLTS.
10. ALL HIGH STRENGTH BOLTS ARE TO BE TIGHTENED TO A ^SN.GTIGHT'
CONDITION AS DEFINED IN THE NOVEAIBER 13. 1SRS, RISC 'SPECIFI-
CATION FOR STRUCTURAL JOINTS USING A325 OR A490 BOLTS-.
II. STRUCTLRAL STEEL AND COM ECTION BOLTS SHALL BE HOT -DIPPED
GALVANIZED AFTER FABRICATION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH
ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F.
12. PLROU"SER SHALL VERIFY THE INSTALLATION IS IN CChFLXMnPCE
WITH LOCAL. STATE, AND FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR OBSTRUCTION
MARKING AND LIGHTING.
13. TOLERANCE ON POLE STEEL HEIGHT 15 EQUAL TO PLUS IX OR MINUS 1/2/..
14. DESIGN ASSU.LES THAT, AS A MINIAA.M, MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION
WILL BE PERFORAED OVER THE LIFE OF THE STRUCTURE IN ACCORDANCE
WITH ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F.
15. DESIGN ASSUMES LEVEL GRADE AT POLE SITE.
IS. POLE ORIENTATION TO BE DETERMINED BY OTHERS.
17. DESIGN ASSL.MES THAT ALL ANTEAM TRANSMISSION LINES ARE ROUTED
INTERNALLY.
IB. FOLMATION DESIGN HAS BEEN BASED UPON PRESUIPTIVE SOIL DESIGN
PARAMETERS. FOR FOLRIIDATION GENERAL NOTES. PRESLAPTIVE DESIGN
PARAMETERS AND REQUIRED SLIBSLRFACE VERIFICATION. REFER TO
SHEETS 5 AND 6.
RNA l..,w TS INC �An i2. ,GI.,. IT is ,�, R O H N
I° K IEPHmLFO. MnIF° dl MZ IN WLLE Qi
IN PART Yl1NNT PR NlTtEN LVRNT.
�••'•"'� °y °•'• 18" DIA. STEEL POLE DESIGN
u.._^, swN 09/IW99 FOR
w.•.., As7 s-/o-ss U. S. NEST WIRELESS
E..., IIN s-I o-ss I FILE. °„°. NeI.. A 9924 1 3 I
OIL
Industries, Inc.
PURCHASER:
NAME OF PROJECT:
ROHN FILE NUMBER:
ROHN DRAWING NUMBERS:
World Headquarters
6718 W. Plank Rd.
Peoria, IL 61604 USA
Ph: 309-697-4400
FAX:309-697-5612
QWEST WIRELESS
GRE-230C, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
18" DIAMETER STEEL POLE DESIGN
39563JA163
A992413R1, 1-6
I CERTIFY THAT THE ATTACHED DRAWINGS AND CALCULATIONS WERE PREPARED
UNDER MY SUPERVISION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOADING CRITERIA SPECIFIED
BY THE PURCHASER AND THAT I AM A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER UNDER
THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF COLORADO.
THE REFERENCED FOUNDATION IS A STANDARD FOUNDATION DESIGNED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH PRESUMPTIVE SOIL DESIGN PARAMETERS. VERIFICATION OF
ACTUAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS WILL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF
CONCRETE.
CERTII
DATE:
Over 50 Years of Service to the Communications Industry
EXHIBIT B
David J.Burrus
829 South Shields Street
Ft. Collins, CO 80524
Current Planning
281 North College
Ft. Collins, CO 80521
REGARDING: Proposed Qwest CMRS facility at 829 S. Shield Street
To Whom it concerns:
I am the owner of the above referenced property and other adjacent properties to the west and east of
the proposed pole location as noted on the Qwest site plan.
During my discussions and negotiations with Qwest, it became apparent that setback requirements for
the proposed project could not be met. The lot is narrow and can not accommodate the setback
requirementanywhere on the lot.
I have studied the relevant architectural and engineering documents regarding the pole which were
made available to me by Qwest representatives. I've concluded that the pole, if constructed as
proposed, poses no danger -to me, to structures owned by me or to my personal well being or to that of
my tenants.
Qwest has informed me that this pole could fail under certain circumstances but I understand those
circumstances to be so outstanding that structures in the immediate area would be demolished prior to
such failure. While I might like to ensure the absolute integrity of the pole, I understand that to be
impossible and that there are few absolutes in this life.
Understanding the engineering and practical circumstances of this situation, I respectfully request that
Qwest's request for modification to standards be granted. Thank you for your consideration.
erel pp
David J. &ur'�
Owner, 829 S. Shields Street, Ft. Collins, CO
STATE OFgt�l arac� p )
ss.
COUNTY OF Va,-r mef )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that David J. Burrus is the person who appeared before me, and
said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the uses
and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written.
(Seal of officer)
Notary Public in and for the State of
Residing at
My commission expires: 0
Exhibit A
Memorandum
To: Fort Collins Planning Department
October 29, 2001
Project Name: Shields & Elizabeth
829 South Shields
Project No. FTC-234
To Whom it May Concern;
The Rohn pole will be designed per all applicable codes (UBC) and regulations (ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F). These design criteria require
loading, W' ice and wind factors which effect the structural strength of the pole. Rohn also designs their poles to fail at pole sections and
not at the base of the pole. While this pole in theory could fail, such failure would be precipitated by such violent conditions that
surrounding residential and commercial structures would be totally destroyed prior to the pole failure. To the best of my knowledge no
monopole has failed in the 10 years that I have been designing and constructing wireless facilities.
Please contact our office if you have any questions.
col
R NDA L•
iEli E F
fr gCG �
Randall teinke e�\�
Registered Architect `�� A�'
N
STATE OF O T 01 D
s) ss.
COUNTY OF �V —( )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Randall Steinke is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he signed this instrument
and acknowledged it to be his free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
In witness whereof. I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first abo 'tten.
(Seal of officer)W
Notary Public in and for the State of l �6 KAR
Residing at �e tnuedt , Pot ot2 a fso KqR FN L. j0
CSON
t
My commission expires 9s
I�°Fo'o�oaP�
Having established that the plan as submitted promotes the general purpose of the
standard for which the modification is requested equally well or better than would a
plan which complies with the standard for which the modification is requested, the
applicant respectfully requests the granting of the modification to standards of setback
requirement of 1:1 to proposed setbacks per the site plan.
Page 6 of 6
SUMMARY
The general purpose of the standard for which the modification is requested is a
setback requirement that is intended to insure that structures upon adjacent properties
would not be impacted by a pole failure and that residents of, or visitors to, those
properties would not be harmed by such failure.
The plan as submitted promotes the general purpose of the standard for which the
modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with
the standard in that:
1. Exhibits A and C established that the pole will survive conditions that would
completely destroy adjacent structures and it can be reasonably assumed that
prior to the advent of such conditions, residents and visitors would have
vacated the structures in favor of safer confines. The pole location as proposed
can not reasonably be accessed by vehicular traffic and certainly can not be
accessed by traffic traveling at speeds sufficient to cause a pole failure.
2. Exhibit B establishes that the property owner of the proposed site and the
adjacent properties has considered the risks of the proposed project and has
concluded them to be minimal and wholly acceptable under the architectural
and engineering standards as set forth.
Page 5 of 6
Exhibit B, is a letter from the owner of the property that will accommodate the pole
and of the property adjacent to the proposed site to the west and east. The letter
establishes the property owner's understanding of the circumstances surrounding the
request, the construction standards of the pole as set forth herein and his support for
the modification to standards.
Exhibit C, is engineering information which documents the structural integrity of the
pole as submitted.
Page 4 of 6
BURDEN MET:
Applicant believes the aforementioned burden is met as follows:
1. Public Good:
The granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good. In deed
granting the modification to standards would increase accessibility to wireless
communications for personal, business and emergency uses which serves the public
good. There are no health or safety issues regarding wireless communications.
The plan as submitted would promote the general purpose of the standard for which
the modification is requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies
with the standard for which a modification is requested from a public safety
perspective which is primary in this issue. The following exhibits support this finding.
Exhibit A is a letter from Qwest's Architect which establishes that if the pole were to
fail, such failure would be precipitated by such violent circumstances that adjacent
structures would be completely destroyed prior to pole failure. These would include
weather related circumstances and natural disasters. Barring such unforeseen and
highly unlikely conditions, the integrity of the pole is sure.
The pole is not adjacent to major rights of way and there is no reasonable situation
whereby vehicular traffic could fail the pole. There are adjacent structures to the east
and west of the proposed pole location. These properties are safeguarded from a pole
failure in that the pole will survive conditions sufficient to destroy these structures.
Page 3 of 6
INTENT:
Applicant's intent is to construct a 60' co -locatable, CMRS pole at 829 South Shields in Ft.
Collins. This property is zoned CC, Community Commercial which requires a 1:1 setback
from property lines. Applicant seeks a modification of standard from the 1:1 setback
requirement, under Fort Collins Land Use Code, Article 2, Division 2 (B), Section 2.8.2,
Subsection H1.
General Purpose
The general purpose of the setback requirement is to secure a fallen pole upon the
property on which it is constructed. The objective here is to safeguard individuals on
adjacent properties and that is advisable from a public safety standpoint and wholly
acceptable public policy.
Exceptions:
Exceptions are made for providers that are able to show that constructed poles will
implode upon the property or fail at stress intersections and thus not affect adjacent
properties.
Page 2 of 6
I s flo
Qwest
Sam Kimbrell, Senior Site Acquisition Consultant
Owest
4301 E. Colfax, Suite 314
Denver, CO 80220
Phone: 720 271-9814 \ Fax: 303 398-8497
E-mail: skimbrefuswest.com
Current Planning Department
Ft. Collins, CO 80522
Regarding: Request for modification to the standards
Fort Collins Land Use Code
Applicable Statute: Article 2.8.2 Modification Review Procedures/Subsection: H1
Under the statute referenced above, the burden of applicant is to show that:
The granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good and that
1) the plan as submitted will promote the general purpose of the standard for which the modification is
requested equally well or better than would a plan which complies with the standard for which a modification is
requested.
Objective:
Applicant's objective is to provide wireless communications to the Shields Street and
Elizabeth Street corridors and includes the CSU Campus which is east of the proposed site.
In order to accomplish this, the site must be proximate the intersection of the two streets at a
height of 60'.
Properties in this general area maintain Community Commercial and CSU zoning. The
properties are predominately small lots incorporating commercial establishments with a mix
of buildings and parking. Vacant lots in this commercial district would generally not be large
enough to accommodate a 60' setback anywhere on the properties. Lots adjacent to the
intersection are built upon and eliminate the possibility of achieving the required setback.
Page 1 of 6