The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About829 SOUTH SHIELDS - MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS - 44-01 - REPORTS - RECOMMENDATION/REPORT W/ATTACHMENTSFOUNDATION 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. \=`: ` ENG. FILE NO.39563TRO56 DWG. NO. A992413^ 6 R l 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 personnel' knowledgeable and experienced with the proposed foundation type. Construction shall be in 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. L'i 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. '`. ENG. FILE NO.39563TRO56 DWG. NO. A992413*5 R I FILE NO.: 39563TRO56 . G. N . SHEET 4 .. No Text LOADING DESCP I P T ION LOAD CASES: l 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 2 LUCENT TECHNOLOGY ANTENNA CENTERLINE 5' ABOVE TOP OF POLE EPA - 30 SO. FT. (Cc X Aa) WEIGHT = 1000 LBS INCLUDING COAX CABLE EPA = 0/2" 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 ( l/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 (1/2" ICE) = l9 SO. FT. WEIGHT = 750 LBS INCLUDING COAX CABLE LOADING PER ANSIITIAIEIA-222-F 1996 85 MPH BASIC WIND SPEED (1/2" RADIAL ICE LOAD) LOADING NO TA TION LOADING DESCRIPTION . 85-234 85 MPH WI TH LOAD CASES 2,3 d 4 85-230 85 MPH WITH LOAD CASES 2 d 3 85-204 85 MPH WITH LOAD CASES 2 d 4 85-200 85 MPH WITH LOAD CASE 2 85-134 85 MPH WITH LOAD CASES 1,3 d 4 85-130 85 MPH WITH LOAD CASES l d 3 85-104 85 MPH WITH LOAD CASES l d 4 85-100 85 MPH WITH LOAD CASE l THE LOADING d POLE SECTION CHARTS ON SHEETS 3 d 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: l8" DIA. TOP SECTIONS PART NUMBER LENGTH (FT) ST 1805 0 Tl 1 /0 ST1915 /5 20 ST1825 25 30 ST1835 35 ST1840 40 FILE NO.: 39563 TRO55 a h m TOP ANTENNA HANDHOLE (TYPICAL) INTERNAL FLANGE (IF REQUIRED) INTERNAL FLANGE ACCESS PORT .I- D EQUIPMENT MOUNTING HOLES 0 LY>aVO LINE CONC PSI CONCRETE 0 -�� ASTM C33 GRAVEL OR CRUSHED STOE BASE SF1B20 FA,Ia.MTfW SECTION SECTION PROPERTIES 0. D. WALL Fy IN (IN) (KSI 18 0.25 52 MAXIMUM REACTION FOUNDATION SECTION SFIBZO DOWNLOAD (K) 7.0 SHEAR (K) 4.3 OTAI (FT-K) 203.3 OPTIONAL FOUNDATION INSTALLATION DETAILS 1. CONCRETE MAY BE PLACED INSIDE POLE PROVIDED ADEOUATE DRAINAGE IS MAINTAINEO AT TOP OF INTERIOR CONCRETE ELEVATION. 2. WELL GRADED A57M C33 GRAVEL OR CRUSLED STO+E MAY BE SLABSTITUTED FOR CONCRETE, 2" MAX. SIZE, TAMP IN 5" LIFTS. TOWER DESIGN LOADING DESIGN WIND LOAD BASICWIND SPEED (E112A RADIAL ICE 7996, BS MPH ICE LOAD). REFER TO SHEETS 2 THRU 4 FOR LOADING AND HEIGHT LIMITATIONS FLANGE SCHEDULE PIPE DIA. FLANGE TYPE FLANGE THICKNESS ND. OF BOLTS BOLT SIZE BOLT CIRCLE IB- INTERNA 1.25" 12 7/8- 15.375- 19" EXTERNAL] 1.0" 12 1' 1 21.0- GENERAL NOTES IA-222-F ED TO ROHY. SED ON 2-F AND J. ANTEMMS AND LINES ARE PROVIDED BY OTHERS IALES5 OTHERWISE SPECIFIED. 4. PULE MEAGER DESIGN DOES NOT INCLUDE STRESSES DLE TO ERECTION SINCE ERECTION EOIIPMENT AND CONDITIONS ARE LNKNDWN. DESIGN ASSLWS COMPETENT AND OUALIFIED PERSONTEL WILL ERECT THE POLE. 5. WORK SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F. "STRUCTLRAL STANDARDS FOR STEEL ANTENNA TONERS AND ANTENNA SUPPORTING STRUCTLRES. S. THE MINfMIIAN YIELD STRENGTH OF FLANGE PLATES STALL BE 36 KSI. 7. FIELD CONNECTIONS SHALL BE BOLTED. NO FIELD MELDS SHALL BE ALLOWED. B. STP CR.RAL BOLTS SHALL CONFORM TO ASTM A-325. 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 "SNX TIGtfT- CONDITIOIN AS DEFINED IN THE NOVEAIBER 13. 1985, AISC "SPECIFI- CATION FOR STRUCTIARAL JOINTS USING A325 OR A490 BOLTS'. 11. STRLCTLRAL STEEL AND CONNECTION BOLTS SHALL BE HOT -DIPPED GALVANIZED AFTER FABRICATION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F. 12. PI.ERCHASER SHALL VERIFY THE INSTALLATION IS IN C06FORMAACE WITH LOCAL. STATE, AND FEDERAL REOUIREMENTS FOR OBSTRLCTION MARKING AND LIGHTING. 13. TOLERANCE ON POLE STEEL HEIGHT IS EOUAL TO PLUS I% OR MINAS 1/2/.. 14. DESIGN ASSLfAES THAT, AS A MINIMIAA, MAINTENANCE ANO INSPECTION WILL BE PERFORMED OVER THE LIFE OF THE STRICTURE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ANSI/TIA/EIA-222-F. 15. DESIGN ASSLMES LEVEL GRADE AT POLE SITE. 15. POLE ORIENTATION 70 BE DETERMINED BY OTHERS. 17. DESIGN ASSUMES THAT ALL ANTENNA TRANSMISSION LINES ARE ROUTED INTERNALLY. 18. FOI.NOATION DESIGN HAS BEEN BASED UPON PRESUMPTIVE SOIL DESIGN PARAMETERS. FOR FOUNDATION GENERAL NOTES, PRESIA.PTIVE DESIGN PARAMETERS AND REDUIRED SLLSURFACE VERIFICATION, REFER TO SHEETS 5 ANO 6. TOOHW . C ITf EM"ING Is THE T PUT2D IT YfLE CA R 0 H N IN PART •)TINT O MITTEN N . IB" DIA. STEEL POLE DESIGN I,..", saN oarlois9 FOR U.S. HEST WIRELESS lrAd E"ra• NI 9-10-99 EM. /1LE. o.Tl. NO., A 9924 1 3 1-1 Fl.", 39563TRO56 v 1 , e C r "Industries.. 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 Owest 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 requirement anywhere 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 (� David J. Bur Owner, 829 S. Shields Street, Ft. Collins, CO STATE OF `-lunar\1D ) ) ss. COUNTY OF mzf) 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) V Notary Public in and for the State of Residing at C/ My commission expires: Z2.0 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 (ANSYrIA/EIA-222-F). These design criteria require loading, V2" 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. �01 R NLA L• E iEll Randall teinke Registered Architect STATE OF 0 Y0.° O �� ss. COUNTY OFVV/ ) 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 abov ritten. (Seal of officer) P R Notary Public in and for thelState of l �b t7 KAR :< Residing at 00.& kARtSN 1. 0 My commission expires:�l�� °FCoLORP� 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: 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 noW �`..f.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: skimbre@uswest.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 E OMG plurylER n wm .nas Q w �seav Q• n es Q UAW''� DIETING ASPHALT DR SWAY I ---- — I-------- ---- EXISTING GRASS RROPBSED TRW HIS unlLr I 32'-0 CGIRR101f TO BE AIBT}I1FD ON SREL IrWIE I I I RROFOSEH wcsl ro' a RaE I I I I X1511NG ONE STORY BUILDING I I J I]'-0' EXISTING GATE Fn51}+c nnNNNG NW I — — SECTOR 2 AZIM 2T0n. Qwestla. E}6'IRC NpSE EXISRNG Wireless GRASS YARD snc nrawnoH SHIELDS S&EAUZABETH tOm REHEsrAL i EnR ca,ia. m EXI I FTC-234E DECK pulp,. rrPE COMMUNITY COMMUNICATOR POLE AND ` OUTDOOR EQUIPMENT sHEn rmi °0 SITE PUN SITE PLAN Z r I,-0 SHCR NWBER fiFv SP-1 B VICINITY MAP #44-01 829 South Shields Modification of Standards Tvne II (LUC) 11 /08/01 1"=600' Qwest Wireless Telecommunication Facility, Modification of Standard, File #44-01 December 6, 2001 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Page 5 A. The request for a modification to the Land Use Code are subject to review by the Planning and Zoning Board. B. Granting the requested modification to Section 3.8.13(C)(1) would not be detrimental to the public good because the pole will be structurally sound and will not present a safety factor to the adjacent properties. C. By reason of exceptional physical conditions (the limited size of the lot and lack of available open area) the strict application of Section 3.8.13(C)(1) would result in undue hardship upon the owner of the property because a monopole that was compliant with the setback would be too short to be functional. 6. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the modification request to Section 3.8.13(C)(1) of the LUC for the Qwest Wireless Telecommunication Facility, File #44-01. Qwest Wireless Telecommunication Facility, Modification of Standard, File #44-01 December 6, 2001 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Page 4 equipment (as in an ice storm). The City of Fort Collins is located within a 'high wind location' which requires structures to be designed for a 100 mph wind. The applicant has indicated that, while the design standards indicate an 85-mph wind load, the pole is designed to withstand a much greater force, up to 200 mph. The architects and engineers who designed the pole, have stamped the drawings and indicate they are structurally sound. (2) By reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations, unique to such property, including, but not limited to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, or physical conditions which hinder the owner's ability to install a solar energy system, the strict application of the standard sought to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant." The property is currently developed, with limited open areas in which to install a wireless telecommunication facility. Other properties within the immediate vicinity are also relatively small, with very little open area to develop a wireless telecommunication facility that meets the setback standard of one -foot setback for every foot of pole height. Ultimately, the pole height will determine how much setback is needed. The applicant is requesting a pole height of 60 feet. The applicant has not completed frequency studies to fully determine if this is the minimum height needed for a pole. Also, the Land Use Code requires all new monopoles to be 'co -locatable', able to, accommodate additional wireless telecommunication carriers. This also increases the pole height to allow additional carriers to locate on the pole. The pole must also be tall enough to perform its function, too short of a pole will not transmit a signal. The applicant feels that regardless of the ultimate tower height, a modification is necessary due to the closeness of the proposed pole to the adjacent property (currently shown at 13 feet). Based on the criteria in Section 2.8.2(H)(3), the applicant has demonstrated the physical limitations of the property with respect to following the setback requirements for a wireless telecommunication facility. However, staff would like to point out that the applicant must still meet all other aspects of Section 3.8.13, Wireless Telecommunication, for a facility to be permitted on this site. The granting of this modification in no way grants approval for a wireless telecommunication site which must be approved through a project development plan. 5. FINDINGS OF FACT/CONCLUSION: Qwest Wireless Telecommunication Facility, Modification of Standard, File #44-01 December 6, 2001 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Page 3 which hinder the owner's ability to install a solar energy system, the strict application of the standard sought to be modified would result in unusual and exceptional practical difficulties, or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such property, provided that such difficulties or hardship are not caused by the act or omission of the applicant. " 3. APPLICANT'S REQUEST A. Applicant's Justification for 3.8.13(C)(1) (1) Not detrimental to the public good. The applicant has provided documentation by registered architects and engineers stating that the design of the pole would fail only under such extraordinary conditions, that the adjacent structures would be destroyed as well. Additionally, due to the secluded nature of the pole, it is highly unlikely that a vehicle would strike the pole with enough velocity to cause the pole to topple. The pole has also been designed to 'break' at certain points along the pole, rather than the entire pole toppling over. Therefore, the reduced setback is not detrimental to the public good. (2) Exceptional situation unique to property. The monopole is proposed in the rear of the property. The property is developed with buildings, parking and a small open area in the rear of the lot. The monopole and accessory ground equipment is proposed to be located at the north end of the lot, next to existing electrical facilities and access. The open area is too small to accommodate the minimum setback for a 60-foot pole. Locating the pole in the front of the building would bring the pole closer to South Shields Street, which would result in unacceptable visual impact to the streetscape. Please see the attached letter for additional points of justification by the applicant. 4. EVALUATION OF MODIFICATION REQUEST A. Staffs Evaluation of 3.8.13(C)(1) (1) Not detrimental to the public good. Staff has reviewed the materials submitted as part of the modification request. The pole is designed to be 18 inches in diameter, and extend 15 feet beneath the surface. This foundation will be anchored in concrete. The design specification included in attachment C of the applicant letter indicate the pole is designed for a wind speed of 85 miles per hour and assuming a %2 inch of ice coating the pole and Qwest Wireless Telecommunication Facility, Modification of Standard, File #44-01 December 6, 2001 Planning & Zoning Board Meeting Page 2 FINDINGS and ANALYSIS 1. BACKGROUND The surrounding zoning and land uses are as follows: N: CC — office, health clinic; E: CSU — Colorado State University, Moby Arena; S: CC — fast food restaurant, retail; W: CC — retail, restaurant. The property was annexed into the City as part of the Fifth South Shields Annexation in February 1961. 2. MODIFICATION REQUEST Division 2.8 MODIFICATION OF STANDARDS As specified in the LUC Section 2.8.2 Modification Review Procedures (H) (Standards), the Planning and Zoning Board shall review, consider, and approve, approve with conditions, or deny an application for a modification based upon: "... granting of the modification would not be detrimental to the public good; and that: the plan as submitted will advance or protect the public interests and purposes 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; or The granting of a modification from the strict application of any standard would, without impairing the intent and purpose of this Land Use Code, substantially alleviate an existing, defined and described problem of city-wide concern or would result in a substantial benefit to the city by reason of the fact that the proposed project would substantially address an important community need specifically and expressly defined and described in the City's Comprehensive Plan, adopted policy, ordinance or resolution of the City Council, and the strict application of such a standard would render the project practically infeasible; or By reason of exceptional physical conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations, unique to such property, including , but not limited to, physical conditions such as exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, or physical conditions STAFF REPORT PROJECT: 829 SOUTH SHIELDS -MODIFICATION OF STANDARD, QWEST WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY - File #44-01 OWNER: David J. Burrus 829 South Shields Street Fort Collins, CO 80524 APPLICANT Qwest C/o Sam Kimbrell 4301 East Colfax Avenue, Suite #314 Denver, CO 80220 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a modification to the Land Use Code to reduce the setback for a wireless telecommunication facility from the property lines from 60 feet to 13 feet. The monopole is proposed in the rear of the lot of 829 South Shields Avenue. This is the Teriyaki Wok building just north of the West Elizabeth Avenue and West of South Shields Street. The property is zoned Community Commercial and is currently used for a restaurant and residential units. This request is limited to a modification to the setback standard. The applicant will be submitting a project development plan for the proposed monopole, which will be reviewed as a Type 1, administrative review. RECOMMENDATION: Approval EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a modification to Section 3.8.13(C)(1) of the Fort Collins Land Use Code. This section requires a minimum setback for a wireless telecommunications pole of one foot for every foot of pole height. The applicant is currently proposing a pole height of 60 feet, which would require a minimum setback of 60 feet. The applicant is proposing a 13-foot setback from the west property line and a 32-foot setback from the north .property line. Wireless telecommunication facilities are permitted within the Community Commercial Zone District subject to administrative review. COMMUNITY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 281 N. College Ave. P.O. Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 (970) 221-6750 PLANNING DEPARTMENT