Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFTC SKIBOS SC, WTF (VERIZON) - PDP - PDP170039 - SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS - ROUND 1 - WTE / WTF INFORMATIONLRK CONSULTING ON BEHALF OF VERIZON WIRELESS October 23, 2017 Wireless-Telecommunications Facility (WTF) Type 1 Review: Co-location Documentation FTC Skibos SC located at 1108 N. College Avenue, Parcel ID# 9701300015 Candidate Analysis: The first step of any new project is a thorough candidate analysis conducted upon review of the wireless-telecommunication standards of the local jurisdiction, zoning map interpretation, and in-person site visits. The combination of these steps allows Verizon Wireless to then identify the most appropriate locations as well as locations that are actually feasible in terms of the ability to execute a lease agreement with the underlying property owner and that will be operational once installed. Whenever possible, Verizon Wireless leans towards co-location on structures such as buildings, utility infrastructure, or existing wireless-telecommunication facilities. Occasionally, a property owner will not be interested in leasing space to us for equipment or a facility. Other times, terrain, vegetation, and buildings will limit the construction feasibility and overall functionality of the equipment. The culmination of this analysis results in moving forward with a willing property owner, a location that is construction feasible, and a design that meets the intent of the wireless-telecommunications code. Small Cell Wireless-Telecommunication Facilities & Equipment: In the past, Verizon Wireless has constructed mostly macro projects designed to typically serve over a mile or more of users. These could have been installed on rooftops, existing wireless facility structures (tower co-location), or on new freestanding structures. In order to keep up with demand for data capacity and coverage in much smaller corners of the community, Verizon Wireless is moving towards implementation of small cell projects that typically serve a half mile or less. The target area of improved service could be as small as an office park or even just a busy intersection. As such, it will become increasingly less feasible to co-locate on existing buildings or poles due to the limited amount of options in these areas. It’s my understanding that Verizon Wireless is currently working with the City and Fort Collins Utilities to bring traffic light poles as well as street light poles along public right-of-way into the mix to increase the amount of co-location options. Until that time, Verizon will continue to analyze, identify, and design for co-location with the occasional need for a new freestanding structure. In regards to the design, small cell projects like FTC Skibos have one to two antennas whereas a typical macro site tends to have nine to twelve antennas. Because of this significant decrease in antennas, Verizon Wireless is able to install smaller equipment making them better equipped to fit into discrete locations. They are also able to implement more stealth technology designs such as light poles, flag poles, skinny canisters, or steeples as a result of this transition from macro to small cell projects. These mimic structures will continue to have context to the area. LRK CONSULTING ON BEHALF OF VERIZON WIRELESS Area Co-location Analysis: Prior to moving forward with the property at 1108 North College Avenue, I contacted several property owners in the area of influence that appeared to make it through our preliminary test of feasibility (as noted previously). Our area of influence was extremely small limiting the overall number of options to work with due to the described nature of small cell projects. I’ve provided a table below documenting a list of addresses, who was contacted, when they were contacted, and the end result of those interactions. Most of the contacted property owners did not respond to calls or letters aside from the car dealership that we moved forward with and one other property located at 903 North College Avenue. Table of Contacted Property Owners 1108 N COLLEGE AVE MARK PRALL, 970-484-5999 2/22/2017- 3/22/2017 We moved forward with this property owner because of their location, interest, construction feasibility, and ability to meet the standards of the wireless code. 903 N COLLEGE AVE STEVE KRAXBERGER, 970-484-8080 2/22/2017- 3/22/2017 This property owner was interested, but our analysis noted that an installation on the low height rooftop would not be feasible. Further, no other existing structures on the property would have allowed for co-location thus we would have moved forward with a new structure request at this location. 1004 N COLLEGE AVE 970-631-8178 2/22/2017- 3/22/2017 This property owner did not return our calls or respond to our letters of interest. 830 N COLLEGE AVE 970-493-7575 2/22/2017- 3/22/2017 This property owner did not return our calls or respond to our letters of interest. 935 N COLLEGE AVE 970-484-0798 2/22/2017- 3/22/2017 This property owner did not return our calls or respond to our letters of interest. 900 N COLLEGE AVE 970-484-0798 2/22/2017- 3/22/2017 This property owner did not return our calls or respond to our letters of interest. 903 North College Ave Co-location Review: I conducted an on-site design visit on March 8th , 2017 to properly vet the location. This visit allowed me to gather notes and photos to better understand any limitations of the site. My visit concluded that the low existing building height, the limited existing structures capable of colocation, and mature vegetation to the south and west would be defeating. On top of these issues, which would have resulted in a new freestanding facility anyway, the property was also much further south of the area needing the new wireless service improvements. LRK CONSULTING ON BEHALF OF VERIZON WIRELESS 1108 North College Avenue Colocation Review: As the only willing and feasible candidate, we moved forward with 1108 North College Avenue. Our implementation team attended a site design visit on April 10th , 2017 to determine the most appropriate design. Our original design concept was to install a rooftop antenna. However, we were not confident that a rooftop design could be screened in a way would have the least possible impact on the architectural character and overall aesthetics of the building a key component of the wireless-telecommunication standards for rooftop equipment. The three existing light poles were also considered for colocation of equipment. Unfortunately, utilizing any one of the light poles would have required that the pole be replaced with a new pole in order to be structurally capable of holding a concealed antenna. Since all three of these light poles are also located in highly visible and frequently traversed locations on the property, the modification of any of the existing light poles would have been noticeable and difficult. With visibility of any new structure in mind, we continued analyzing the property to find a location tucked further into the interior of the property and away from College Ave. The existing layout of the property and the land use code also constricted our options. However, as we focused on the east half of the property, we ultimately discovered an ideal location that was capable of meeting the required setback, avoided the owner’s daily operations, and utilized existing screening potential from nearby buildings resulting in the best-case scenario. Lastly, while we have not depicted colocation on the pole itself, Verizon and the property owner will work with any party interested in co-locating on the skinny canister upon notification of their intent to do so. Lease area for ground equipment would be immediately adjacent to the pole, while an antenna could be located between 15’ and 18’ height range. Sincerely, Senior Site Acquisition Consultant, LRK Consulting LLC 1196 Grant Street, Unit 313, Denver, CO 80203 mrsagar45@gmail.com 219-477-0099