Item 6B
Department of Planning & Development Services
S T A F F R E P O R T
September 8, 2015
CASE NO: ZA15-034
PROJECT: Specific Use Permit for a Telecommunications Tower, Antennas and Ancillary
Buildings at 1604 Hart Street
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY:
PI Telecom Infrastructure V, Inc is requesting approval of a Specific Use Permit for
a telecommunication tower, antennas and ancillary buildings to be located at 1604
SPIN #8
Hart Street on approximately 3.7 acres.
DETAILS:
PI Telecom Infrastructure V, Inc. is seeking approval of a specific use permit for the
installation of a telecommunications tower with 3 options ranging in height from
approximately 80-feet to 95-feet tall.
90 ft. (95-ft. with branches)
80 ft. Monument 95 ft. Stealth
Monopine with 48-inch
Pole with 42-inch
with 3-sided
base and the monopine
diameter pole
10-foot side panels
branches range from 2-5-
feet in length
At the May 21, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the applicant
proposed to locate an 125-foot telecommunication tower between two (2) existing
industrial buildings (1610 and 1612 Hart Street) with capacity of up to four (4)
antenna structures. The Commission suggested that the applicant move the tower
location further south from the original location.
At the June 4, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the applicant
Case No.
ZA15-034
revised the location of the tower to the south side of the building located at 1612
Hart Street. The proposed tower was a 125-foot monopine tower with a ground
equipment platform and an eight foot fencecrete enclosure with shrubs. See
Attachment C, page 5 for the previous site plan.
Based on the discussions at the June 4, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission
meeting, the applicant requested to be tabled until the August 20, 2015 Planning
and Zoning Commission meeting.
At the August 20, 2015 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, the applicant
brought forth a revised site plan and elevations for the site. The applicant proposed
to maintain the location of the tower at the south end of the building at 1612 Hart
Street adjacent to the right-of-way. The base diameter was reduced to 48-inches
removing one of the variances. The equipment fencing and equipment shelter will
remain the same. The previously proposed monopine tower was be reduced in
height from 125-feet to 90-feet (95-feet overall with branches).
The applicant proposed three (3) options for consideration. The options included:
1. A 90-foot monopine (preferred): The overall height will be 95-feet with
branches at the top of the pole.
2. An 80-foot monument: The monument has a steel frame with a “stealth”
skin made from a carbon fiber compound that can be painted or textured to
resemble concrete or brick, but remains translucent to radio waves. Each
side panel is approximately 10-foot wide. Inside the monument is a smaller
diameter steel monopole serving as the mounting structure for antennas.
3. A 95-foot stealth pole: The stealth pole has a 42 –inch diameter base and a
steel skin up to the 60 foot elevation. The top part of the pole is a series of
stealth skin carbon fiber panels painted to match the color of the external
steel on the bottom part of the pole. Inside the stealth pole is a smaller
diameter steel monopole serving as the mounting structure for antennas
with canisters containing the antennas.
Additional information is available on these options in Attachment C, page 14.
The applicant has requested two variances for the new tower proposal:
Variances:
1. Tower Location:
The City’s Zoning Ordinance requires that towers shall be
located in such a manner that if the structure should fall along its longest
dimension, it will remain within property boundaries and avoid habitable
structures, public streets, utility lines and other telecommunication towers.
The maximum 95-foot tower is currently located 30-feet from a utility
easement to the east, 45-feet from the property line and located 20-feet
from the front property line to the south. The proposed towers, at the
longest dimension, are approximately 95-feet.
2. Antenna Platform Size:
The Zoning Ordinance permits a maximum of a 4-
foot depth on each antenna platform. The monopine platforms will be
approximately 6-foot in depth as the antennas are clustered on the pole
within the branching structure in order to conceal the antennas. The other
two options would not require this variance.
Case No.
ZA15-034
Comparison of Regulations and Variances
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended denial (5-0) of the Specific
Specific Regulations
for Telecommunication
00Variance Monopine 95 ft. Monument 80 ft. Stealth 95 ft.
Towers, Antennas &
Ancillary Buildings
Side Property line: 45 ft. Side Property line: 45 ft. Side Property line: 45 ft. (50
(50 ft. variance) (35 ft. variance) ft. variance)
Setback for Fall Zone
within Property
95 ft. max. required Front Property Line: 20 ft. Front Property Line: 20 ft. Front Property Line: 20 ft.
Boundaries to avoid
(monopine and stealth) (75 ft. variance) (60 ft. variance) (75 ft. variance)
Habitable Structures,
Public Streets, Utility
(80 ft. max. for Utility line: 30 ft. (65 ft. Utility line: 30 ft. (50 ft. Utility line: 30 ft. (65 ft.
Lines and other
monument) variance) variance) variance)
Telecommunication
Towers
Building Setback: 5 ft. Building Setback: 5 ft. (75 Building Setback: 5 ft.
(90 ft. variance) ft. variance) (90 ft. variance)
Antenna Platform
NA
4 ft. maximum Monopine: 6 ft. depth NA
Monopine Only
Use Permit request.
For the September 15, 2015 City Council meeting, the applicant has not made any
changes to the proposal presented to the Planning and Zoning Commission at the
August 20, 2015 meeting. The applicant is seeking approval of one of the 3 tower
options; the 90-foot monopine pole, the 80-foot monument tower or the 95-foot
stealth pole. The 20 foot by 60 foot fencing enclosure will be surrounded by an 8-
foot fencecrete perimeter fence on the south and east, an existing building on the
north and a 20-foot by 8-foot wrought iron gate to the west with shrubs on 4-foot
centers. An additional 4 canopy trees and 12 accents trees are required for the
bufferyard.
Section 45.7 d. 2) of the Special Use Permits requires the following:
Co-location and Availability of Suitable Existing Towers and Other Structures
a) No new tower shall be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates to the city
that no existing tower or structure can accommodate the applicant’s proposed
antenna. Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing tower or structure
can accommodate the applicant’s proposed antenna may consist of any of the
following:
i) No existing towers or structures are located within the geographic area required
to meet applicant’s engineering requirements.
ii) Existing towers or structures are not of sufficient height to meet applicant’s
engineering requirements.
iii) Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support
applicant’s proposed antenna and related equipment.
iv) The applicant’s proposed antenna would cause electromagnetic interference
with the antenna on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna on the
existing towers or structures would cause interference with the applicant’s
proposed antenna.
v) The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner in order to
share the existing tower or structure or to adapt an existing tower or structure
Case No.
ZA15-034
sharing are unreasonable. Costs exceed new tower development are presumed
to be unreasonable.
vi) The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render
existing towers and structures unsuitable.
Due to the opposition in excess of 20% of the land area within 200-feet of the
subject property (currently 61.55%), a super majority vote is required in order to
approve this item.
ACTION NEEDED: 1) Conduct Public Hearing
2) Consider Specific Use Permit for a Telecommunication Tower Request
ATTACHMENTS:
(A) Background Information
(B) Vicinity Map
(C) Plans and Support Information – Link to PowerPoint Presentation
(D) SPIN Report from April 28, 2015
(E) Site Plan Review Summary No. 6, dated September 1, 2015
(F) Surrounding Property Owners Map
(G) Surrounding Property Owner Responses
(H) Resolution No. 15-028
STAFF CONTACT:
Ken Baker (817) 748-8067
Patty Moos (817) 748-8269
Case No.
ZA15-034
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
OWNERS:
Boyle Family Partnership
APPLICANT:
PI telecom Infrastructure V, Inc.
PROPERTY SITUATION:
1604 Hart Street (1610 and 1612 Hart Street)
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Lot 4, Block A of the Hart Industrial Park Addition
LAND USE CATEGORY:
Industrial
CURRENT ZONING:
“I-1” Light Industrial District
HISTORY:
May 17, 1988; City Council approve a Preliminary Plat for Hart Industrial
Park
June 7, 1988; City Council approved a zoning change for the Hart Industrial
Park.
July 5, 1988; City Council approved a Final Plat for Lots 1-4, Block A and
Lots 1-5, Block B of the Hart Industrial Park.
The existing four buildings were constructed between 1997 and 2000.
TRANSPORTATION
ASSESSMENT:
This request does not affect traffic on or around the property. The only
traffic generated by the applicant’s request is typical maintenance and
service to the tower and cabinets.
TREE PRESERVATION:
No trees will be affected by the request.
PLANNING AND
ZONING COMMISSION:
May 21, 2015; Approved (4-0) the motion to table to the June 4, 2015
Planning and Zoning Commission meeting per the applicant’s request.
June 4, 2015; Approved (6-0) the motion to table to the August 20, 2015
Planning and Zoning Commission meeting per the applicant’s request.
August 20, 2015; Approved (5-0) the motion to deny ZA15-034.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Site Plan Review Summary No. 6 dated September 1, 2015, is located
under Attachment E of this staff report.
\\\\SLKSV1057\\THLocal\\Community Development\\MEMO\\2015 Cases\\034 - SUP - Telecommunications 1610 Hart
Case No. Attachment A
ZA15-034 Page 1
Case No. Attachment B
ZA15-034 Page 1
Plans and Support Information
Previously Proposed Site Plan 5-21-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 1
Previously Proposed Elevation 5-21-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 2
Previously Proposed Existing Landscaping 5-21-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 3
Photographs 5-21-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 4
Proposed Revised Tower Overall Site Plan 6-4-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 5
Proposed Site Plan 6-4-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 6
Revised East Elevation 6-4-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 7
Proposed Landscape 6-4-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 8
Revised Photographs 6-4-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 9
Telecommunication Tower at Timberline Court and E. Continental Boulevard
View Southwest to Timberline Court and E. Continental Blvd.
View South to Timberline Court from E. Continental Blvd.
View West to Timberline Court and E. Continental Blvd.
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 10
Proposed Site Plan 8-20-15 (P&Z ) and 9-15-15 (CC)
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 11
Proposed Elevations 8-20-15 (P&Z) and 9-15-15 (CC)
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 12
Proposed Narrative 8-20-15 (P&Z) and 9-15-15 (CC)
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 13
90 ft. Monopine with 48-inch base 80 ft. Monument 95 ft. Stealth Pole
The monopine branches range 3-sided structure with 42-inch diameter pole
from 2-5-feet in length 10-foot side panels
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 14
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 16
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 17
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 18
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 19
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 20
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 21
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 22
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 23
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 24
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 25
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 26
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 27
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 28
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 29
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 30
Additional Narrative from email dated 8-12-15:
Variances:
1. Most of our variances are set back variances. With a tower no greater than 95 feet tall,
the required fall zone, and therefore, the required set backs are also 95 feet. We are
asking for the following setbacks:
a. 45 foot setback from side property line (50 foot fall zone variance.)
b. 20 foot setback from front property line (75 foot fall zone variance and 10 foot
front yard variance).
c. 30 foot setback from utility easement ( 65 foot fall zone variance.)
d. 5 foot setback from the building (90 foot fall zone variance)
2. The other variance deals with antenna platform size. Since we are seeking approval of
a stealth structure, we are seeking exemption from strict platform dimensions. (the
maximum of the platform depth is 4-feet).
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 31
Additional Narrative 8-20-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 32
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 33
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 34
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 35
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 36
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 37
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 38
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 39
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 40
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 41
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 42
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 43
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 44
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 45
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 46
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 47
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 48
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 49
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 50
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 51
Proposed Site Plan 8-20-15
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 52
Proposed Elevations
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 53
Engineer’s Letter
Case No. Attachment C
ZA15-034 Page 54
SPIN MEETING REPORT
Case Number:
SPIN Item Number:
SPIN2015-12
Project Name:
Monopole Communications Tower
SPIN Neighborhood:
SPIN #8
Meeting Date:
April 28, 2015
Meeting Location:
1400 Main Street, Southlake, TX
City Council Chambers
Total Attendance:
17
Host:
Sherry Berman, Community Engagement Committee
Applicant(s) Presenting:
Doug Henderson, representing Parallel Infrastructure
City Staff Present:
Jerod Potts, Planner I
City Staff Contact:
Patty Moos, Planner I (817) 748-8269
Town Hall Forums can be viewed in their entirety by visiting http://www.cityofsouthlake.com and clicking on “Learn More” under
Video On Demand; forums are listed under SPIN by meeting date.
FORUM SUMMARY
Property Situation:
1610 Hart St.
Development Details:
Seeking approval for SUP for a wireless telecommunications monopole at 1610 Hart Street
Proposing installation of a steel pole which would be approximately 120 feet tall
Presenter noted the antennas on top of the pole would improve wireless phone signals, including
the irregular 911 signal in the surrounding area
Presenter mentioned that although the property at 1610 Hart is zoned Industrial, a Specific Use
Permit is required for any telecom pole installation in the City of Southlake
Presenter mentioned that more than 80% of 9-1-1 calls are made from wireless phones
The presenter noted the location needed to be situated in a commercial or industrial location but
would still meet City of Southlake design criteria. Presenter said that the site at 1610 Hart street is
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 1
situated between two existing industrial buildings in the Hart Industrial Park in a 20 foot by 60 foot
space.
Presenter mentioned the ground equipment would hidden from view from anyone outside and the
tower that would be standing up would be near tall trees which would soften that view from the
outside
The presenter mentioned the large tree buffer zone that already exists for the site on the east side
Presenter referenced a photo simulation (attached below) that illustrated the potential view of the
tower from Tealwood Court and mentioned the existing tree line north of the industrial park and the
existing homes in the area cover a lot of the view
Presenter referenced a photo simulation (attached below) of a view from the Hart and Brumlow
intersection
Presented at SPIN:
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 2
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 3
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 4
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 5
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 6
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 7
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 8
QUESTIONS / CONCERNS:
Average telephone pole is about 40 feet, average 2-story house in the City is about 35 feet, your
pole is going to be 120 feet, there will be about 60 feet of tower visible above the trees that will be
visible in the City skyline
Homes are a little more than 35 feet tall and whether you see the tower is in relation to
o
where you are. Simulations are based on an engineer’s calculations of where they would
be. If you were referencing the tower in relation to the existing trees you would see 50-60
feet of the pole above the trees. If you are right next to the trees they would hide the pole
Are you purchasing the property in between or will the owner of those two pieces of property sublet
the land to you so that then becomes a commercial investment for them?
This is a lease however the owner does have a participating position in this development in
o
that they receive a portion of subleases that might be on this. It is a long-term, 30-year
lease
So the tower is privately owned and leased to the FCC?
That is correct. The pole and the equipment are privately owned by Parallel Infrastructure
o
and their leasing the ground space from the property owner
Do you plan to meet with any of the home owners in Tealwood specifically or possibly over off
Warwick which is part of Timarron off of Brumlow?
The closest subdivision is Tealwood and it is my desire to meet with property owners in the
o
Tealwood Addition before the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 9
The only thing taller than about 40 feet right now are water towers and church steeples so your
pole changes some of the City skyline
There is an existing pole on East Continental that is taller than this pole
o
Is it a functional pole?
I contacted the site owner and was unable to determine that. Looked at the site and was
o
unable to determine whether the antennas were active antennas or old ones
Have you located any other down areas in the Southlake area that you would propose another pole
in the future?
There are areas that have the same problem – this is the first one for Parallel Infrastructure.
o
How far is the average pole cover in distance?
Our search areas are never larger than a quarter-mile radius.
o
SPIN Meeting Reports are general observations of SPIN Meetings by City staff and SPIN Representatives. The report is neither verbatim nor official meeting minutes;
rather it serves to inform elected and appointed officials, City staff, and the public of the issues and questions raised by residents and the general responses made.
Responses as summarized in this report should not be taken as guarantees by the applicant. Interested parties are strongly encouraged to follow the case through the
Planning and Zoning Commission and final action by City Council.
Case No. Attachment D
ZA15-034 Page 10
SPECIFIC USE PERMIT REVIEW SUMMARY
ZA15-034Six09/01/15
Case No.: Review No.: Date of Review:
SPECIFIC USE PERMIT
Project Name: –Telecommunications Tower-1610 Hart Street
APPLICANT: PI Telecom Infrastructure V, Inc. OWNER: Boyle Family Partnership
Contact: Doug Henderson
4601 Touchton Road, Bldg. 300, Ste. 3200 3301 Westover Court
Jacksonville, FL 32246 Grapevine, TX 76051-6859
Phone: 817-729-7006 Phone: 817-994-1702
Email: dougger@airmail.net
CITY STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT RECEIVED BY THE CITY ON 8/3/2015 AND WE OFFER
THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS. THESE STIPULATIONS ARE HEREBY MADE CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL
UNLESS SPECIFICALLY AMENDED BY THE CITY COUNCIL. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR NEED FURTHER
CLARIFICATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE APPROPRIATE STAFF MEMBER.
Planning Review
Patty Moos
Planner I
Phone: (817) 748-8269
Email: pmoos@ci.southlake.tx.us
1. All development must comply with the underlying zoning district regulations.
2. Towers shall be located in such a manner that if the structure should fall along its longest
dimension, it will remain within property boundaries and avoid habitable structures, public streets,
The applicant has requested a variance to this
utility lines and other telecommunication towers.
requirement.
The applicant has requested a variance to this
3. Antenna Platforms must not exceed 4-foot depth.
requirement.
4. Provide plantings for a F2 bufferyard around the perimeter of the enclosure as required in the
Section 42, Bufferyards and Section 45.7 d. 8) c) Specific Use Permits of the Zoning Ordinance. It
appears that 4 canopies trees, 8 accent trees and 12 shrubs are required.
Informational Comments
Section 45.7d 5. Building Codes; Safety Standards
a) After receiving the appropriate zoning approval, no tower, antenna, or other appurtenance shall
be installed without first obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Official.
b) To ensure the structural integrity of towers, the owner of a tower shall ensure that the tower is
constructed and maintained in compliance with standards contained in applicable local building
codes (“Uniform Building Codes, UBC”) and applicable standards for towers, published by the
Electronics Industries Association Standard 222, (“EIA-222") “Structural Standards for Steel
Antenna towers and Antenna Support Structures.”
Case No. Attachment E
ZA15-034 Page 1
c) A tower inspection report (based upon applicable UBC and EIA-222 standards) shall 45-11
be prepared by an engineer licensed in the state of Texas and filed with the Building Official in
accordance to the following schedule: a) monopoles--at least once every ten (10) years; b) lattice
towers--at least once every (5) years; and c) guyed towers--at least once every three (3) years.
However, the Building Official may require an immediate inspection should an issue of safety be
raised.
d) If, upon inspection, the tower fails to comply with such codes and standards and constitutes a
danger to persons or property, then upon notice being provided to the owner of the tower, the
owner shall have thirty (30) days to bring such tower into compliance with such standards, unless
the applicant can demonstrate a hardship and thus establish the need for additional time. If the
owner fails to bring such tower into compliance within said thirty (30) days, the city shall remove
such tower at the owner’s expense.
At a tower site, the design of the buildings and related structures shall, to the extent 45-13
possible, use materials, colors, and textures that will comply with the materials permitted by the
underlying zoning district and shall blend with the natural setting and any existing structures on the
site, or the equipment building shall be contained entirely within a main building on the property, or
the equipment building shall be housed in an underground vault.
Highly reflective surfaces shall not be permitted. No glare shall be emitted to adjacent properties.
All exterior wires and/or cables necessary for operation of the antenna shall be placed
underground, whenever practicable, except for wires or cables attached flush with the surface of a
building or the structure of the antenna.
No permanent lighting is allowed on towers except as required by the FCC or the FAA (i.e., red
lights by night/white strobe lighting during the day).
Any temporary lighting shall be oriented inward so as not to project onto surrounding residential
property.
After receiving the appropriate zoning approval, no tower, antenna, or other appurtenance shall be
installed without first obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Official.
To ensure the structural integrity of towers, the owner of a tower shall ensure that the tower is
constructed and maintained in compliance with standards contained in applicable local building
codes (“Uniform Building Codes, UBC”) and applicable standards for towers, published by the
Electronics Industries Association Standard 222, (“EIA-222") “Structural Standards for Steel
Antenna towers and Antenna Support Structures.”
A tower inspection report (based upon applicable UBC and EIA-222 standards) shall be prepared
by an engineer licensed in the state of Texas and filed with the Building Official in accordance to
the following schedule: a) monopoles--at least once every ten (10) years; b) lattice towers--at least
once every (5) years; and c) guyed towers--at least once every three (3) years. However, the
Building Official may require an immediate inspection should an issue of safety be raised.
If, upon inspection, the tower fails to comply with such codes and standards and constitutes a
danger to persons or property, then upon notice being provided to the owner of the tower, the
owner shall have thirty (30) days to bring such tower into compliance with such standards, unless
the applicant can demonstrate a hardship and thus establish the need for additional time. If the
owner fails to bring such tower into compliance within said thirty (30) days, the city shall remove
such tower at the owner’s expense.
Case No. Attachment E
ZA15-034 Page 2
Existing mature tree growth and natural land forms on the site shall be preserved to the maximum
extent possible. In some cases, such as towers sited on large, wooded lots, natural growth around
the property perimeter may be sufficient buffer. Mitigation of any tree removal shall be in
accordance to the Tree Preservation Ordinance, as amended.
Equipment structures shall be of minimum size to house transmitting/receiving equipment and shall
not be utilized for offices, vehicle storage, or for any other use other than for transmitting and
receiving transmissions. No outside storage shall be permitted on the site.
No more than three (3) separate equipment buildings shall be located on a single lot.
No lettering, symbols, images, or trademarks large enough to be legible to occupants of vehicular
traffic on any adjacent roadway shall be placed on, or affixed to, any part of a telecommunications
tower, platform, antenna or ancillary structure.
If high voltage is necessary, signs shall be posted every 20' on any exterior fencing which state,
“Danger--High Voltage.” The operator shall also post “No Trespassing” signs.
The owner of a tower and/or related telecommunications facilities shall notify the Building Official
when the tower or other structures have ceased operating as part of a telecommunications system
authorized by the FCC. Within six (6) months of the date the tower ceases to operate as part of an
authorized telecommunications system, the tower must either be removed from the site, or a
certificate of occupancy must be obtained to allow another permitted use of the tower. If within six
(6) months, the owner fails to remove the tower or obtain proper authorization for the use of the
tower, the Building Official shall revoke the certificate of occupancy for the tower and notify the city
attorney to pursue enforcement remedies.
Tower owner(s) shall bear all demolition costs.
Section 45.4 General Requirements for Specific Use Permits:
a. Any use permitted hereunder shall meet the minimum requirements provided in the district in
which it is located.
b. A specific use permit shall automatically expire if a building permit is not issued and construction
begun within six (6) months of the granting of the specific use permit or if the use shall cease for a
period of six (6) months.
Tree Conservation/Landscape Review
Keith Martin
Landscape Administrator
Phone: (817) 748-8229
E-mail: kmartin@ci.southlake.tx.us
* No comments.
Fire Department Review
Kelly Clements
Assistant Fire Marshal
Phone: (817) 748-8671
Case No. Attachment E
ZA15-034 Page 3
E-mail: kclements@ci.southlake.tx.us
GENERAL COMMENTS:
No comments based on submitted information.
General Informational Comments
* All mechanical equipment must be screened of view from right-of-ways and residential properties in
accordance with the Zoning Ordinance No. 480, as amended.
* All lighting must comply with the Lighting Ordinance No. 693, as amended.
* All development must comply with the Drainage Ordinance No. 605 and the Erosion and Sediment
Control Ordinance No. 946, as amended.
* Development must comply with all requirements in Zoning Ordinance No. 480, Section 26, I-1 Light
Industrial District and Section 45 Specific Use Permits.
* Denotes Informational Comment
Case No. Attachment E
ZA15-034 Page 4
Surrounding Property Owners
SPO # Owner Zoning Address Acreage Response
Belle-View Enterprise Llc I1 1217 BRUMLOW AVE 0.94
1.
NR
Lago Del Sur Llc I1 1605 HART ST 3.37
2.
NR
1595 Hart Street Llc I1 1595 HART ST 1.00
3.
NR
Diles, Richard L & Alice M SP1 1219 BRUMLOW AVE 1.02
4.
NR
Tang, Eric Etux Susan Hsieh TZD 1105 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
5.
O
Evans, Benton L Etux Stephanie TZD 1137 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
6.
O
Herzog/Lease Partners Ltd I1 1594 HART ST 1.36
7.
O
Wright, Joe L AG 1719 E CONTINENTAL BLVD 31.81
8. O
Boyle Family Partnership I1 1604 HART ST 1.48
9.
F
Boyle Family Partnership I1 1600 HART ST 0.99
10.
F
C & L Capital Investments Llc TZD 1112 TEALWOOD CT 0.33
11.
NR
C & L Capital Investments Llc TZD 1116 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
12.
O
C & L Capital Investments Llc TZD 1120 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
13.
O
Llano Durango Capital Llc/
14.
Baillargeon, Ann TZD 1124 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
O
Ducey, Christopher Etux Lisa F TZD 1128 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
15.
O
C & L Capital Investments Llc TZD 1130 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
16.
NR
Llano Durango Capital Llc TZD 1132 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
17.
O
Llano Durango Capital Llc TZD 1136 TEALWOOD CT 0.23
18.
O
Responses: F: In Favor O: Opposed U: Undecided NR: No Response
Notices Sent:Sixteen (16)
Responses Received:In Favor: 2 Opposed: 10 Undecided: 0
Opposition outside 200 ft.: 29
In favor outside 200 ft.: 3
Case No. Attachment F
ZA14-034 Page 1
Within 200 ft. of Property
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 1
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 2
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 3
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 4
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 5
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 6
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 7
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 8
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 9
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 10
Outside 200 ft. of property
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 11
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 12
From: Date: To:
Ame Beanland <amebean@mac.com> June 3, 2015 at 8:25:19 PM CDT
kbaker@ci.southlake.tx.us, parodriguez@ci.southlake.tx.us, aortowski@ci.southlake.tx.us,
jkjones@ci.southlake.tx.us, pschank@ci.southlake.tx.us, bthatcher@ci.southlake.tx.us,
Subject: NO cell phone tower on Continental
syelverton@ci.southlake.tx.us, lpayne@ci.southlake.tx.us
Blvd. Southlake
I VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE THE CELL PHONE TOWER ON CONTINENTAL
We have enough to combat in our environment — pesticides, mosquito spraying, airline traffic pollutants,
general pollution, allergens, etc. Seriously?
I CHALLENGE YOU TO STAND UP FOR SOUTHLAKE, protect us, advocate for us DO YOUR JOB. I don’t
care how many calls I drop—I choose health for myself and my family over convenience.
—Ame Beanland
704 Manchester Ct
Southlake, Texas 76092
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 13
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 14
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 15
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 16
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 17
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 18
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 19
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 20
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 21
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 22
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 23
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 24
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 25
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 26
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 27
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 28
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 29
Case No. Attachment G
ZA15-034 Page 30
RESOLUTION NO. 15-028
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, GRANTING A SPECIFIC USE PERMIT FOR
A TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER, ANTENNAS AND
ANCILLARY BUILDINGSON PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS, LOCATED AT 1610 HART STREET, BEING
DESCRIBED AS ADDITION AS DEPICTED ON THE APPROVED
SITE EXHIBIT ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED
HEREIN AS EXHIBIT “A” AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS
, a Specific Use Permit for Telecommunications Tower, Antennas and
Ancillary Buildingshas been requested by a person or corporation having a proprietary interest
in the zoned as “I-1” Light Industrial District; and,
WHEREAS
, in accordance with the requirements of Section 45.1 (45) and 45.17 of the
City’s Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City
Council have given the requisite notices by publication and otherwise, and have afforded the
persons interested and situated in the affected area and in the vicinity thereof; and,
WHEREAS
, the City Council does hereby find and determine that the granting of such
Specific Use Permit is in the best interest of the public health, safety, morals and general
welfare of the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS:
SECTION 1.
A Specific Use Permit is hereby granted for a telecommunication tower, antennas and
ancillary buildings on property located at 1610 Hart Street, being described asLot 4, Block A of
the Hart Industrial Park Addition as depicted on the approved Site Exhibit attached hereto and
incorporated herein as Exhibit “A” and providing an effective date, subject to the provisions
Case No. Attachment H
ZA15-034 Page 1
contained in the comprehensive zoning ordinance and the restrictions set forth herein.
SECTION 2.
This resolution shall become effective on the date of approval by the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED THIS _____th DAY OF September, 2015.
CITY OF SOUTHLAKE
By: _________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Lori Payne
City Secretary
Case No. Attachment H
ZA15-034 Page 2
EXHIBIT ‘A”
Plans and Support Information
Case No. Attachment H
ZA15-034 Page 3