HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998 Ordinance No. 048'' ...
. ,.,,
•
•
•
ORDINANCE NO.~
SERIES OF 1998
BY AUTHORITY
COUNCIL BILL NO. 29
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER BRADSHAW
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 16, OF THE ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL
CODE 1985 WITH THE ADDITION OF A NEW TITLE 16 , CHAPTER 5 , SECTION
29, ENTITLED TELECOMMUNICATIONS ANTENNAE Al'ID TOWERS WHICH
ESTABLISHES STANDARDS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS ANTENNAE AND TOWERS AND THE INSTALLATION
OF RELATED FACILITIES AND MOVING TITLE 16, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 21 TO
TITLE 16, CHAPTER 5, SECTION 30 , ENTITLED SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAE
IN THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO .
WHEREAS, in February 1997 the Englewood City Council passed Ordinance
No . 12 , Series of 1997 which established a temporary suspension on the issuance of
permits for the construction and installation of wireless telecommunication towers in
the City for period of 8 months and ended on November 20, 1997 and
WHEREAS , the moratorium was intended to provide time for staff to collect
information and revise zoning regulations that protect the interests of the community
and those of the telecommunication industry; and
WHEREAS, the City's current zoning regulations inadequately address land use
impacts associated with wireless telecommunication facilities due to such regulations
being developed prior to the advent of wireless communications ; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance is intended for the purpose of up dating the City's
zoning regulations to adequately address land use impacts associated with wireless
telecommunication facilities in the City of Englewood ;
WHEREAS , the addition of a new telecommunications ordinance requires a
relocation and renumbering of the existing Satellite Dish Antennae Ordinance for
clarification; and
WHEREAS , in order to protect the public health and safety of persons and
property, this ordinance is considered necessary to ensure that towers and antennae
are constructed, placed and maintained in a manner consistent with all applicable
codes; and
WHEREAS , the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposed
Telecommunications Antennae and Towers Ordinance and recommends the passage of
this Ordinance ; and
WHEREAS, the Englewood Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing
on the proposed Telecommunications ordinance on May 5 , 1998 ;
NOW, THEREFORE , BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD , COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS :
11 bi
Section 1. The City Council of the City of Englewood , Colorado hereby approves
amending Title 16 , of the Englewood Municipal Code 1985 , with the addition of Title
16, Chapter 5 , Section 29 , entitled Telecommunications Antennae And Towers
Ordinance , establishing standards for the development of telecommunications
antennae and towers and the installation of related facilities which shall read as
follows :
16-5-29 : TELECOMMUNICATIONS ANTENNAE AND TOWERS:
A. INTENT A.J.'ID PURPOSE: IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE
COMMUNICATION NEEDS OF RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES WHILE
PROTECTING THE PUBLIC HEALTH , SAFETY, AND GENERAL
WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY , THE CITY COUNCIL FINDS THAT
THESE REGU LATIONS ARE NECESSARY TO:
1. ESTABLISH A LOCAL POLICY CONCERNING
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS AND SERVICES ;
2 . PROMOTE COMPETITION IN THE PROVISION OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES ;
3. MINIMIZE U NNECESSARY LOCAL REGULATION OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS AND SERVICES ;
4 . ESTABLISH GUIDELINES , STANDARDS AND TIME FRAMES FOR
THE EXERCISE OF LOCAL AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO THE
REGULATION OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS AND
SERVICES ;
5. FACILITATE THE PROVISION OF WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES TO THE RESIDENTS AND
BUSINESSES OF THE CITY ;
6 . MINIMIZE ADVERSE VISUAL EFFECTS OF TOWERS THROUGH
CAREFUL DESIGN AND SITING STANDARDS ;
7. AVOID POTENTIAL PERSONAL INJURY AND DAMAGE TO
ADJACENT PROPERTIES FROM TOWER FAILURE THROUGH
STRUCTURAL STANDARDS AND SETBACK REQUIREMENTS;
8. ENCOURAGE AND MAXIMIZE THE USE OF EXISTING AND
APPROVED TOWERS , BUILDINGS AND OTHER STRUCTURES TO
ACCOl\!IMODATE NEW WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS
ANTENNAE IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TOWERS
NEEDED TO SERVE THE COMMUNITY ;
9. ASSURE THAT ALL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS
PROVIDING FACILITIES OR SERVICES WITHIN THE CITY COMPLY
WITH THE CITY'S MUNICIPAL CODE .
10. SECURE FAIR AND REASONABLE COMPENSATION TO THE CITY
AND ITS RESIDENTS FOR THE USE OF ANY APPROPRIATE
''
' , , ~
•
•
•
. ' '
•
•
•
PUBLIC PROPERTY FOR USE AS A SITE FOR WIRELESS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES ;
11. ENABLE THE CITY TO DISCHARGE ITS PUBLIC TRUST
CONSISTENT WITH RAPIDLY EVOLVING FEDERAL AND STATE
REGULATORY POLICIES , INDUSTRY COMPETITION, AND
TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT.
B . DEFINITIONS : THE FOLLOWING WORDS AND TERMS WHEN USED IN
THIS SECTION SHALL HA VE THE FOLLOWING MEANINGS UNLESS
THE CONTEXT CLEARLY STATES OTHERWISE:
ALTERNATIVE TOWER
STRUCTURE :
ANCILLARY
TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES:
ANTENNA :
CITY:
COLOCATION:
FAA:
FCC:
MEANS CLOCK TOWER , BELL STEEPLES,
BUILDINGS , LIGHT POLES , WATER
TOWERS AND SIMILAR ALTERNATIVE
DESIGN MOUNTING STRUCTURES THAT
HAVE THE CAPACITY TO CAMO U FLAGE
OR CONCEAL THE PRESENCE OF
ANTENNAE OR TOWERS.
MEANS ALL TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES AS DEFINED HEREIN
EXCEPT FOR TOWERS, ANTENNAE , OR
ALTERNATIVE TOWER STRUCTURES .
MEANS ANY TRANSMITTING AND/OR
RE CEIVING DEVICE USED IN
COMMUNICATIONS THAT RADIATES
OR CAPTURES ELECTROMAGNETIC
WAVES , DIGITAL SIGNALS , ANALOG
SIGNALS , RADIO FREQUENCIES,
WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS
SIGNALS , OR OTHER
COMMUNICATIONS SIGNALS.
MEANS THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD ,
COLORADO .
MEANSTHEPLACEMENTOFANTENNAE
OR OTHE R TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES BY TWO OR MORE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS IN
THE SAME LOCATION OR ON THE SAME
TOWER OR ALTERNATIVE TOWER
STRUCTURE.
MEANS THE FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION .
MEANS THE FEDERAL
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION .
' ' .
• HEIGHT: MEANS, WHEN REFERRING TO A
TOWER OR OTHER STRUCTURE , THE
DISTANCE MEASURED FROM THE
AVERAGE GROUND LEVEL TO THE
HIGHEST POINT ON THE TOWER OR
OTHER STRUCTURE , EVEN IF SAID
HIGHEST POINT IS AN Al~TENNA
MANAGER: MEANS THE ENGLEWOOD CITY
MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE .
MICRO-CELL: MEANS A LOW POWER
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY USED
TO PROVIDE INCREASED CAP A CITY IN
HIGH TELECOMMUNICATION DEMAND
AREAS , OFTEN TO IMPROVE COVERAGE
IN AREAS OF WEAK COVERAGE. MICRO-
CELLS COMMUNICATE WITH THE
PRIMARY FACILITY IN A COVERAGE
AREA VIA FIBER OPTIC CABLE ,
MICROWAVE OR LAND LINE .
MICROWAVE ANTENNA: MEANS A DISH -LIKE ANTENNA USED
TO LINK COMMUNICATION SITES • TOGETHER BY WIRELESS
TRANSMISSION OF VOICE OR DATA .
MONOPOLE : MEANS A STRUCTURE COMPOSED OF A
SINGLE SPIRE USED TO S U PPORT
TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT.
PRE -EXISTING TOWERS SHALL HA VE THE MEANING SET
AND ANTENNAE : FORTH IN SUBSECTION C (3) OF THIS
SECTION .
ROOF AND/OR BUILDING MEANS TELECOMMUNICATIONS
MOUNTED FACILITIES SUPPORTED ENTIRELY BY
TELECOMMUNICATIONS A BUILDING OTHER THAN A BUILDING
FACILITIES : ACCESSORY TO A
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY.
SECTORIZED PANEL MEANS AN ARRAY OF ANTENNAE
ANTENNAE: GENERALLY RECTANGULAR IN SHAPE
THAT ARE USED TO TRANSMIT AND
RECEIVE TELECOMMU NICATIONS
SIGNALS.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS MEANS AF ACILITY THAT TRANSMITS
FACILITY: AND/OR RECEIVES ELECTROMAGNETIC • SIGNALS . IT INCLUDES ANTENNAE ,
MICROWAVE DISHES , HORNS , AND
OTHER TYPES OF EQUIPMENT FOR THE
..
' '
• TRANSMISSION OR RECEIPT OF SUCH
SIGNALS , TELECOMMUNICATIONS
TOWERS OR SIMILAR STRUCTURES
SUPPORTING SAID EQUIPMENT,
EQUIPMENT BUILDINGS , PARKING
AREA , AND OTHER ACCESSORY
DEVELOPMENT.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS MEANS AND INCLUDES EVERY
PROVIDER: PERSON OR ENTITY WHO PROVIDES
TELECOMMU NICATIONS SERVICE
UTILIZING TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES.
TELECOMMUNICATIONS MEANS THE PROVIDING OR
SERVICE : OFFERING FOR RENT , SALE OR LEASE ,
OR IN EXCHANGE FOR OTHER VALUE
RECEIVED , OF THE TRANSMITTAL OF
VOICE , DATA , IMAGE , GRAPHIC Ai'\J'D
VIDEO PROGRAMMING INFORl'vlATION
BETWEEN OR AMONG POINTS BY WIRE ,
CABLE , FIBER OPTICS LASER,
MICROWAVE , RADIO , SATELLITE OR
SIMILAR FACILITIES , WITH OR
WITHO U T THE BENEFIT OF ANY • CLOSED TRANSMISSION MEDI UM .
TOWER: MEANS ANY STRU CT U RE THAT IS
DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED
PRIMARILY FOR THE P U RPOSE OF
SUPPORTING ONE OR MORE ANTENNA,
INCLUDING SELF SUPPORTING
LATTICE TOWERS , GUY TOWERS , OR
MONOPOLE TOWERS . THE TERM
INCLU DES RADIO AND TELEVISION
TRANSMISSION TOWERS , MI CROW A VE
TOWERS , COMMON CARRIER TOWERS,
CELLULAR AND PERSONAL
COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE
TELEPHONE TOWERS , MAN MADE
TREES , AND OTHER SIMILAR
STRUCTURES.
WHIP ANTENNA: MEANS AN ANTENNA THAT IS
CYLINDRICAL I N SHAPE . WHIP
ANTENNAE CAN BE DIRECTIONAL OR
OMNIDIRECTIONAL AND VARY IN SIZE
DEPENDING U PO N THE FREQU ENCY
AND GAIN FOR WHICH THEY ARE
DESIGNED . •
• C. APPL! CABILITY:
1. GENERAL APPLICABILITY. EXCEPT AS SPECIFICALLY PROVIDED
BELOW, THESE PROVISIONS SHALL APPLY THROUGHOUT THE
CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD , AND NO TOWER,
ANTENNA OR TELECOMMU NICATIONS FACILITY SHALL BE
PERMITTED EXCEPT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE PROVISIONS.
IN CASE OF ANY CONFLICT BETWEEN THE REQUIREMENTS OF
THIS SECTION AND ANY ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS , THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTIO. SHALL CONTROL .
2 . AMATE U R RADIO AND RECEIVE-ONLY ANTENNAE. THIS
SECTION SHALL NOT GOVER::-J" ANY TOWER, OR THE
INSTALLATION OF ANY ANTENNA, OWNED AND OPERATED BY A
FEDERALLY LICENSED AMATEUR RADIO STATION OPERATOR IN
ACCORDANCE WITH F CC R ULES , OR rs USED EXCLUSIVELY FOR
RECEIVE-ONLY ANTENNAE , SO LONG AS ALL OTHER
REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS ARE MET.
3 . PRE-EXISTING TOWERS , Al"\JTENNAE AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES. ANY TOWER, ANTENNA OR
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY FOR WHICH A PERMIT HAS
BEEN PROPERLY ISSUED PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF
THIS SECTION SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE • REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SECTION, OTHER THAN THE
REQUIREMENTS OF SUBSECTIONS G(3), (4), ( 5), ( 6), (7), ( 8) AND
SUBSECTION L. ANY S U CH TOWERS , ANTENNAE OR
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES SHALL BE REFERRED TO IN
THIS SECTION AS PRE-EXISTING TOWERS , PRE-EXISTING
ANTENNAE OR PREEXISTING TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES .
D . APPLICATION: ALL APPLICANTS FOR A BUILDING PERMIT SHALL
APPLY WITH THE CITY ON FORMS TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY,
WHICH SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
1. THE IDENTITY AND LEGAL STATU S OF THE APPLICANT .
2 . THE NAME , ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF THE
OFFICER, AGENT OR EMPLO''r""EE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
ACCURACY OF THE APPLICATION.
3. A NARRATIVE AND MAP DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICANT'S
EXISTING OR THEN CURRENT LAND USE APPLICATION FOR
PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES WITHIN THE
CITY , AND OUTSIDE OF THE CITY WITHIN ONE THOU SAND
(1,000) FEET OF ITS BOUNDARIES . IN ADDITION , THE
APPLICANT SHALL INFORM THE CITY GENERALLY OF THE
AREAS OF THE CITY IN WHICH IT BELIEVES • TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES MAY NEED TO BE LOCATED
WITHIN THE NEXT THREE YEARS . THIS PROVISION IS NOT
INTENDED TO BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THE APPLICANT
•
•
•
SUBMIT ITS BUSINESS PLAN , PROPRIETARY INFORMATION, OR
MAKE COMMITMENTS TO THE LOCATION OF FACILITIES IN
VARIOUS PARTS OF THE CITY. RATHER , IT IS AN ATTEMPT TO
PROVIDE A MECHANISM FOR THE CIT'{ AND ALL APPLICANTS
FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES TO SHARE GENERAL
INFORMATION, ASSIST IN THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE
PLANNING PROCESS, AND PROMOTE COLOCATION BY
IDENTIFYING AREAS IN WHICH TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES MIGHT BE APPROPRIATELY CONSTRUCTED FOR
MULTIPLE USERS . THE CITY SHALL MAINTAIN A LIST OF
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES Ai°"u UPDATE THE SAME
FROM INFORMATION FURNISHED BY ALL SERVICE PROVIDERS .
BY SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION, ALL APPLICANTS
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE CITY MAY DIRECT FUTURE
APPLICANTS TO DISCUSS COLOCATION WITH AN APPLICANT
THAT HAS DISCLOSED TO THE CITY THE POSSIBILITY OF
LOCATING TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN A GIVEN
AREA; PROVIDED HOWEVER THAT THE CITY IS NOT, BY SHARING
SUCH INFORMATION, IN ANY WAY REPRESENTING OR
WARRANTING THAT SUCH SITES ARE AVAILABLE OR SUITABLE.
4 . INFORMATION SUFFICIENT TO DETEK\IINE THAT THE
APPLICANT HAS APPLIED FOR AND RECEIVED ANY OPERATING
LICENSE OR OTHER APPROVALS REQUIRED BY THE FCC TO
PROVIDE TELECOMMUNICATIONS SER\lCES OR FACILITIES
WITHIN THE CITY .
5. A SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS THE RELATIVE SHAPE , SIZE AND
LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED TELECO~IMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES , WHICH SHALL INCLUDE:
a. A DESIGN DESCRIPTION, INCLUDI~G HEIGHT ABOVE
GRADE , MATERIALS AND COLOR.
b. A LANDSCAPING AND/OR VISUAL ~IITIGATION PLAN (TO
SCALE) ACCEPTABLE TO THE M.Ai'\ . .\GER, DETAILING HOW
SCREENING FROM THE PUBLIC vlEW WILL BE
ACCOMPLISHED , INCLUDING CROSS SECTIONAL VIEWS , AS
APPROPRIATE.
c. TO THE EXTENT REQUIRED BY Ll....°"uSCAPING STANDARDS
IN E.M .C. 16-5-26, AN EROSION CO).""TROL AND
REVEGETATION PLAN.
6. A STRUCTURAL REPORT BY A COLORADO LICENSED
PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER DEMONSTRATI N G THAT THE
FACILITY WILL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE STRUCTURAL
STANDARDS , THE GENERAL STRUCTURAL CAPACITY OF THE
PROPOSED FACILITY , AND THE NUMBER, TYPE AND SIZE OF
ANTENNAE THAT CAN BE ACCOMMODATED .
7. AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT BINDING THE APPLICANT, THE
PROPERTY OWNER (IF OTHER THAN THE APPLICANT) AND THE
APPLICANT'S AND/OR OWNER'S SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST TO
PROPERLY MAINTAIN THE EXTERIOR APPEARANCE OF AND TO • ULTIMATELY REMOVE THE TOWER , ANTENNAE AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION AND ANY CONDITIONS OF
APPROVAL.
8. AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THE CITY MAY ENTER ONTO THE
PROPERTY AND UNDERTAKE ANY MAINTENANCE OR REMOVAL
ACTIVITIES SO LONG AS:
a. THE MANAGER HAS PROVIDED THE APPLICANT WRITTEN
NOTICE REQUESTING THE WORK NEEDED TO COMPLY
WITH THIS SECTION AND PROVIDING THE APPLICANT AT
LEAST FORTY-FIVE (45) DAYS TO COMPLETE IT; AND A
FOLLOW UP NOTICE OF DEFAULT SPECIFYING FAILURE
TO COMPLY WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD PERMITTED , AND
INDICATING THE CITY'S INTENT TO COMMENCE THE
REQUIRED WORK WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE NOTICE; AND
b . THE APPLICANT HAS NOT FILED AN APPEAL PURSUANT TO
E.M.C. 16 -2 -6 WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF THE NOTICE OF
THE CITY'S INTENT TO COMMENCE THE REQUIRED WORK.
IF A APPEAL IS FILED, THE CITY SHALL BE AUTHORIZED
TO ENTER THE PROPERTY AND PERFORM THE NECESSARY
WORK IF THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED OR FINAL ACTION ON
IT IS TAKEN IN FAVOR OF THE CITY . • c . NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN THIS
SECTION TO THE CONTRARY, THE CITY SHALL NOT BE
REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE NOTICE DESCRIBED HEREIN
IF THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT RISK TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH
AND SAFETY REQUIRING IMMEDIATE REMEDIAL
MEASURES.
9. AN AGREEMENT TO POST A PERFORMANCE BOND, LETTER OF
CREDIT, OR OTHER FINANCIAL GUARANTY SATISFACTORY TO
THE MAJ.'JGER , AT THE TIME A PERMIT IS ISSUED , IN AN AMOUNT
TO BE SET BY THE CITY, REASONABLY RELATED TO THE COSTS
THAT MAY BE INCURRED BY THE CITY SHOULD THE APPLICANT
FAIL TO COMPLY WITH ANY OF ITS OBLIGATIONS PURSUANT TO
SUBSECTION L , (CONCERNING REMOVAL OF ABANDONED
FACILITIES.) THE BOND SHALL REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR A
PERIOD OF TEN (10) YEARS FROM THE DATE OF PERMIT
ISSUANCE.
10. A STATEMENT THAT THE APPLICANT AGREES TO ALLOW FOR
THE POTENTIAL COLOCATION OF ADDITIONAL
TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT BY OTHER PROVIDERS ON
THE APPLICANT'S TOWER OR WITHIN THE SAME SITE
LOCATION, SUBJECT TO REASONABLE CONDITIONS.
11. IF THE APPLICANT SEEKS A PERMIT FOR A TOWER, ANTENNA • OR TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES ON LEASED PROPERTY,
A WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE LANDLORD INDICATING THAT
•
•
•
THE LANDLORD IS PERMITTED TO ENTER INTO LEASES OF THE
SAME PROPERTY WITH OTHER TELECOMMUNICATIONS
PROVIDERS.
12. A WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM A QUALIFIED RADIO FREQUENCY
ENGINEER, CERTIFYING THAT A TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF
THE PROPOSED FACILITY INDICATES NO POTENTIAL
INTERFERENCE PROBLEMS AS DESCRIBED IN SlTBSECTION G(6).
ADDITIONALLY, THE APPLICATION SHALL CONTAIN AL"\J
ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT THE APPLICANT WILL NOTIFY THE
CITY AT LEAST TEN CALENDAR DAYS PRIOR TO THE
INTRODUCTION OF NEW SERVICE, AND ALLOW THE CITY TO
MONITOR INTERFERENCE LEVELS WITH PUBLIC SAFETY
TELECOMMUNICATIONS DURING THE TESTING PROCESS .
13. SUCH OTHER INFORMATION AS THE CITY MAY REASONABLY
REQUIRE.
E. AMENDMENT: EACH APPLICANT SHALL INFORM THE CITY , WITHIN
SIXTY (60) DAYS, OF ANY CHANGE OF THE INFORMATION SET FORTH
IN SUBSECTION D.
F. FEES: IN ADDITION TO ANY BUILDING PERMIT FEES AND
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION FEES, THE APPLICANT
SHALL PAY A TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES LICENSE FEE IN AN
AMOUNT TO BE SET BY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL .
TELECOMMUNICATIONS LICENSE FEES MAY BE MODIFIED FROM
TIME TO TIME BY CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION . THE CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION MAY FURTHER PROVIDE FOR A WAIVER OF FEES IN THE
CASE OF:
1. CONSTRUCTION OF NEW TOWERS WITH EXCESS CAPACITY ,
WHERE THE APPLICANT COMMITS IN ADVANCE TO ALLOW
COLOCATION;
2. COLOCATION OF ANTENNAE ON EXISTING TOWERS AND/OR
ALTERNATIVE TOWER STRUCTURES ;
3. LOCATION OF ANTENNAE ON EXISTING ALTERNATIVE TOWER
STRUCTURES ;
4 . OTHER CONDITIONS WHICH THE CITY BELIEVES WILL MINIMIZE
THE NEED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW TOWERS.
G. GENERAL GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS:
1. PRINCIPAL OR ACCESSORY USE. ANTENNAE AND OTHER
ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES MAY BE
CONSIDERED EITHER PRINCIPAL OR ACCESSORY USES.
TOWERS , UNLESS SPECIFICALLY ACCESSORY TO THE USE OF A
PROPERTY, SHALL BE CONSIDERED A PRINCIPAL USE OF
PROPERTY. A DIFFERENT EXISTING USE OR AN EXISTING
STRUCTURE ON THE SAME LOT SHALL NOT PRECLUDE THE
INSTALLATION OF AN ANTENNA ON SUCH LOT. WHERE A NEW
LOT OR LEASEHOLD PARCEL HAS BEEN CREATED FROM A • LARGER PARCEL, FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINI)..TG WHETHER
THE INSTALLATION OF A TOWER OR ANTENNA COMPLIES WITH
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS , INCLeDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, LOT CO\t:RAGE
REQUIREMENTS , AND OTHER SUCH REQUIREME)..TTS, THE
DIMENSIONS OF THE LARGER LOT FROM WHICH THE NEW LOT
WAS CREATED SHALL CONTROL. TOWERS TH....\.T _..\.RE
CONSTRUCTED, AND ANTENNAE THAT ARE INSTALLED IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION SHALL
NOT BE DEEMED TO CONSTITUTE THE EXPANSION OF A
NON-CONFORMING USE OR STRUCTURE.
2. AESTHETICS ; LIGHTING. THE GUIDELINES SET FORTH IN THIS
SUBSECTION 2 SHALL GOVERN THE LOCATION OF ALL TOWERS,
AND THE INSTALLATION OF ALL ANTENNAE, GOVERNED BY
THIS SECTION. WHERE OPTIONS FOR AESTHETIC TREATMENT
ARE PROVIDED , THE CITY SHALL DIRECT WHICH OPTION IS TO
BE UTILIZED.
a. TOWERS SHALL EITHER MAINTAI N A GALV_-ti"\JIZED STEEL
FINISH , OR SUBJECT TO ANY APPLICABLE F_..\.A
STANDARDS , BE PAINTED A NEUTRAL COLOR SO AS TO
REDUCE VISUAL OBTRUSIVENESS.
b. AT A TOWER SITE, THE DESIGN OF THE BlTILDINGS AND • RELATED TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES SHALL, TO
THE EXTENT POSSIBLE , USE MATERIALS , COLORS,
TEXTURES , SCREENING, AND LAi TDSC.APii\G THAT WILL
BLEND THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES TO THE
NATURAL SETTING AND BUILT ENVIRON:vIENT.
c. ALL APPLICANTS UNDER THIS SECTION SH...\LL COMPLY
WITH THE LANDSCAPING STANDARDS FOUND IN E.M.C.
TITLE 16 .
d. IF AN ANTENNA IS INSTALLED ON A STRU CTURE OTHER
THAN A TOWER, THE ANTENNA Al"\ffi S U PPORTING
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES MU ST BE OF A
NEUTRAL COLOR THAT IS IDENTICAL TO , OR CLOSELY
COMPATIBLE WITH , THE COLOR OF THE S U PPORTING
STRUCTURE SO AS TO MAKE THE Ai"\JTENl\A AND RELATED
FACILITIES AS VISUALLY UNOBTRU SIVE AS POSSIBLE.
e . TOWERS SHALL NOT BE ARTIFICIALLY LIGHTED , UNLESS
REQUIRED BY THE FAA OR OTHER APPLICABLE
AUTHORITY . IF LIGHTING IS REQ UIRED , THE CITY MAY
REVIEW ANY AVAILABLE LIGHTING ALTERNATIVES AND
APPROVE THE DESIGN THAT WO U LD CA U SE THE LEAST
DISTURBANCE TO THE SURROUNDING VIEWS . LIGHTING
MUST BE SHIELDED OR DIRECTED TO THE GREATEST • EXTENT POSSIBLE SO AS TO MINIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF
LIGHT THAT FALLS ONTO PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR
NEARBY PROPERTIES , PARTICULARLY RESIDENCES .
•
•
•
f. NO PORTION OF ANY ANTENNA ARRAY MAY EXTEND
BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE.
g . ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES SHALL BE
NO TALLER THAN THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE ZONING
DISTRICT WHERE THE FACILITIES ARE LOCATED Al"'ID
SHALL BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.
h . ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES IN AREAS
OF HIGH VISIBILITY SHALL, WHERE POSSIBLE , BE SITED
EITHER BELOW THE RIDGELINE , AMIDST GROUPS OF
TREES , OR DESIGNED (I.E ., PLACED UNDERGROUND ,
DEPRESSED , OR LOCATED BEHIND EARTH BERMS OR
OTHERWISE EFFECTIVELY SCREENED) TO MINIMIZE THEIR
PROFILE .
i. AS PART OF THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION
PROCESS DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION K, THE CITY MAY
REQUIRE A SPECIAL DESIGN OF ANY
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY WHERE FINDINGS OF
PARTICULAR SENSITIVITY ARE MADE .
3 . FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS. ALL TELECOMMUNICATION
FACILITIES MUST MEET OR EXCEED THE CURRENT STANDARDS
AND REGULATIONS OF THE FAA, THE FCC , AND ANY OTHER
AGENCY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WITH THE AUTHORITY
TO REGULATE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES. IF SUCH
STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS ARE CHANGED , THEN THE
OWNERS OF THE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES GOVERNED
BY THIS SECTION SHALL BRING SUCH TELECOMMUNICATION
FACILITIES INTO COMPLIANCE WITH SUCH REVISED
STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS WITHIN THE TIME FRAME
MANDATED BY THE CONTROLLING FEDERAL AGENCY . FAILURE
TO BRING TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES INTO
COMPLIANCE WITH SUCH REVISED STANDARDS AND
REGULATIONS SHALL CONSTITUTE GROUNDS FOR THE
REMOVAL OF THE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES AT THE
OWNER'S EXPENSE.
4. BUILDING CODES; SAFETY STANDARDS. TO ENSURE THE
STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF TOWERS , THE OWNER OF A TOWER
SHALL ENSURE THAT IT IS MAINTAINED IN COMPLIANCE WITH
STANDARDS CONTAINED IN APPLICABLE LOCAL BUILDING
CODES; THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS FOR TOWERS THAT ARE
PUBLISHED BY THE ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION , AS
AMENDED FROM TIME TO TIME ; AND ALL APPLICABLE CODES
ADOPTED BY THE CITY .
a . IN ADDITION TO ANY OTHER APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND
REQUIREMENTS , THE FOLLOWING SHALL APPLY TO ALL
TOWERS AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES :
i. SUFFICIENT ANTI-CLIMBING MEASURES MUST BE
INCORPORATED INTO EACH FACILITY TO REDUCE
POTENTIAL FOR TRESPASS AND INJURY. BY WAY OF
EXAMPLE, AND NOT OF LIMITATION, SECURITY
FENCING PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION K(6), TOGETHER
WITH A LACK OF PEGS ON THE BOTTOM PORTION OF
THE TOWER, SHALL BE CONSIDERED SUFFICIENT
ANTI-CLIMBING MEASURES.
u. NO GUY WIRES EMPLOYED MAY BE ANCHORED
WITHIN THE AREA IN FRONT OF ANY PRIMARY
STRUCTURE ON A PARCEL.
m. AT LEAST TEN FEET OF HORIZONTAL CLEARANCE
MUST EXIST BETWEEN ANY ANTENNAE AND ANY
POWER LINES , UNLESS MORE CLEARANCE IS
REQUIRED TO MEET COLORADO PUBLIC UTILITIES
COMMISSION STAL'IDARDS.
iv. ALL TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES MUST BE
DESIGNED AND/OR SITED SO THAT THEY DO NOT
POSE A POTENTIAL HAZARD TO NEARBY RESIDENCES
OR SURROUNDING PROPERTIES OR IMPROVEMENTS.
ANY TOWER SHALL BE DESIGNED AND MAINTAINED
TO WITHSTAND, WITHOUT FAILURE , THE MAXIMUM
FORCES EXPECTED FROM WIND, TORNADOES,
HURRICANES, AND OTHER NATURAL OCCURRENCES,
WHEN THE TOWER IS FULLY LOADED WITH
ANTENNAE , TRANSMITTERS, AND OTHER
TELECOMl\1UNICATIONS FACILITIES , AND
CAMOUFLAGING; OR , IN THE CASE OF PRE-EXISTING
TOWERS , WHEN THE TOWER IS LOADED WITH THE
ANTENNAE , TRANSMITTERS, AND/OR OTHER
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES AT THE TIME OF
PASSAGE OF THIS SECTION. INITIAL
DEMONSTRATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH THIS
REQUIREMENT SHALL BE PROVIDED VIA SUBMISSION
OF A REPORT TO THE MANAGER PREPARED BY A
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, LICENSED IN THE STATE OF
COLORADO, DESCRIBING THE TOWER STRUCTURE,
SPECIFYING THE NUMBER AND TYPE OF ANTENNAE
IT IS DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE , PROVIDING THE
BASIS FOR THE CALCULATIONS DONE , AND
DOCUMENTING THE ACTUAL CALCULATIONS
PERFORMED. PROOF OF ONGOING COMPLIANCE
SHALL BE PROVIDED PURSUANT TO ANY APPLICABLE
CODES.
b. IF, UPON INSPECTION, THE CITY CONCLUDES THAT A
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 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 A
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY , THE OWNER SHALL
•
•
•
. .
•
•
•
HA VE THIRTY (30) DAYS TO BRING SUCH
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY INTO COMPLIANCE
WITH SUCH STANDARDS . IF THE OWNER FAILS TO BRING
SUCH TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY INTO
COMPLIANCE WITHIN SAID THIRTY (30) DAYS , THE CITY
MAY REMOVE SUCH TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT
THE OWNER'S EXPENSE .
5. RADIO FREQUENCY STANDARDS. ALL APPLICANTS SHALL
COMPLY WITH FEDERAL STANDARDS FOR RADIO FREQUENCY
EMISSIONS. AT THE TIME OF PERMIT APPLICATION, THE
APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT A PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
REPORT WHICH PROVIDES CUMULATIVE FIELD PREDICTIONS
OF RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS OF ALL ANTENNAE TO BE
INITIALLY INSTALLED AT THE SUBJECT SITE , AND WHICH
COMPARES THE RESULTS WITH ESTABLISHED FEDERAL
STANDARDS. IN RESPONSE TO ANY WRITTEN COMPLAINT
REGARDING RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS , THE OPERATOR OF
A TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY SHALL, WITHIN A
REASONABLE PERIOD OF T IME AFTER RECEIVING NOTICE OF
THE WRITTEN COMPLAINT , SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE CITY
INDICATING WHETHER ALL RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS
GENERATED BY THAT ENTITY'S TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES ARE WITHIN FEDERAL ST_.\..."\.TDARDS. IF, IN
RESPONSE TO SUCH WRITTEN COMPL.VNT, IT IS DETERMINED
THAT THE EMISSIONS FROM THE FACILITY ARE WITHIN
ALLOWABLE FEDERAL STANDARDS , THE ENTITY PROVIDING
THE REPORT SHALL NOT BE REQUIRED TO MAKE A SIMILAR
RESPONSE TO FURTHER WRITTEN CO};IPLAINT FOR A PERIOD
OF AT LEAST ONE YEAR FROM THE DATE OF THE PRIOR
COMPLAINT. IF THE REPORT INDICATES THAT EMISSIONS
EXCEED FEDERAL STANDARDS , THE CITY MAY REQUIRE
CORRECTIVE ACTION WITHIN A REASO~ABLE PERIOD OF TIME ,
AND IF NOT CORRECTED , MAY REQUIRE REMOVAL OF THE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES PL""RSUANT TO
SUBSECTION L OF THIS SECTION. Ai"\J' ... '{ REASONABLE COSTS
INCURRED BY THE CITY , INCLUDING REASONABLE CONSULTING
COSTS TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THESE REQUIREMENTS ,
SHALL BE PAID BY THE APPLICANT.
6. SIGNAL INTERFERENCE . ALL TOWERS, ANTENNAE AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES iVIL.:ST BE DESIGNED
AND/OR SITED SO AS NOT TO CAUSE Il\'TERFERENCE WITH THE
NORMAL OPERATION OF RADIO , TELEVISION, TELEPHONE AND
OTHER TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICES UTILIZED BY
ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ;
NOR SHALL ANY SUCH FACILITIES INTERFERE WITH ANY
PUBLIC SAFETY TELECOMMUNICATIO);S .
7 . MODIFICATION. EXISTING ANTENNAE ON AN APPROVED
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY MAY BE MODIFIED , AND THE
POWER OUTPUT OF EXISTING ANTE~~AE ON AN APPROVED
FACILITY MAY BE INCREASED , PROVIDED THE STANDARDS AND
PROCEDURES OUTLINED IN ANSI STA..."\."TIARD AND C-95 .1 OR ANY
AMENDMENTS OR REVISIONS THERETO, OST BULLETIN NO. 65
AND ELECTRONICS INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATIONS EIA-RS 222(E) OR
THE LATEST REVISION OR AMENDMENT THEREOF; OR SUCH
CURRENT STANDARDS AS MAY BE APPROVED BY THE F.C.C . ARE
COMPLIED WITH.
a. THE MANAGER SHALL BE NOTIFIED WITHIN FOURTEEN
(14) DAYS OF ANY CHANGE IN OR ADDITION OF ANTENNAE
WHOSE POWER OUTPUT EXCEEDS 100 WATTS E.R.P. OF
RADIO FREQUENCY POWER OUTPUT . THE CITY MAY
REQUEST COPIES OF PLANS DEPICTING SUCH
MODIFICATION AND OTHER EVIDENCE NECESSARY TO
DEMONSTRATE THAT SUCH MODIFICATIONS ARE IN
COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION,
AND A PERMITTED USE APPROVAL . A SUBSEQUENT FIELD
REPORT, PREPARED BY A QUALIFIED RADIO FREQUENCY
ENGINEER, QUANTIFYING A PROJECTS RADIO FREQUENCY
EMISSIONS AND EXPOSURES , AND COMPARING THEM TO
ADOPTED FEDERAL STANDARDS , MAY BE REQUESTED BY
THE CITY UPON PROJECT INSTALLATION.
b. THE MANAGER MUST BE NOTIFIED AT LEAST THIRTY (30)
DAYS PRIOR TO ANY MODIFICATION WHICH INCREASES
THE WIND OR WEIGHT LOADING CAPACITY, HEIGHT OR
FOOTPRINT OF A TOWER , AND MAY REQUEST COPIES OF
PLANS WHICH DEPICT SUCH MODIFICATIONS AND
INDICATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS
SECTION, AND WITH THE PERMITTED USE APPROVAL.
DEPENDING UPON THE NATURE OF THE MODIFICATIONS ,
SUCH MODIFICATIONS MAY REQUIRE CONDITIONAL USE
APPROVAL PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION K OF THIS
SECTION.
8. PROHIBITED USE. ADVERTISING OR COMMUNICATION OF ANY
VISUAL MESSAGES FROM A TOWER OR ANTENNA IS
PROHIBITED, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SAFETY RELATED
MESSAGES.
H. BUILDING PERMITS . TOWERS , ANTENNAE AND
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES ARE CONSIDERED STRUCTURES ,
REQUIRING ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT DESCRIBED IN E.M.C.
TITLE 8. IN CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF A PERMIT FOR A
TOWER, ANTENNA OR TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY, AND IN
ORDER TO PROVIDE THE CITY WITH AC CURA TE AND CURRENT
INFORMATION CONCERNING ENTITIES THAT OWN OR OPERATE
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY ; TO ASSIST
THE CITY IN ENFORCEMENT OF THIS SECTION; TO ASSIST THE CITY
IN THE COLLECTION AND ENFORCEMENT OF ANY LICENSED FEES OR
CHARGES THAT MAY BE DUE THE CITY; AND TO ASSIST THE CITY IN
MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL , STATE AND FEDERAL
LAWS , THE APPLICANT SHALL, PRIOR TO A PERMIT BEING ISSUED ,
SUBMIT THE APPLICATION INFORMATION DESCRIBED IN
SUBSECTION D TO THE CITY MANAGER.
•
•
•
• I. PERMITTED USES --GENERAL. THE USES LISTED IN SUBSECTION J
ARE DEEMED TO BE PERMITTED USES AND SHALL NOT REQUIRE A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT . NEVERTHELESS , ALL SUCH USES SHALL
COMPLY WITH THIS SECTION AND ALL OTHER APPLICABLE
ORDINANCES. SEE FIGURE 1 AND PERMITTED USES IN SPECIFIC
ZONE DISTRICTS FOR ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS.
J. SPECIFIC PERMITTED USES .
1. LOCATING A TOWER OR ANTENNA, INCLUDING THE
PLACEMENT OF ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
USED IN CONNECTION WITH SAID TOWER OR ANTENNA IS
PERMITTED ON CITY OWNED PROPERTY IN ANY ZONING
DISTRICT SO LONG AS ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF THE
ZONING DISTRICT ARE MET.
2 . INSTALLING AL"\J ANTENNA ON AN EXISTING TOWER INCLUDING
THE PLACEMENT OF ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES , SO LONG AS SAID ADDITIONAL ANTENNA ADDS NO
ADDITIONAL HEIGHT TO SAID EXISTING TOWER, DOES NOT
PROJECT OUTWARD A DISTANCE OF MORE THAN FOURTEEN (14)
FEET, AND IS CONSISTENT WITH ANY APPLICABLE CONDITIONS
OF APPROVAL FOR THAT SITE , WHICH PREVIOUSLY HAVE BEEN
IMPOSED BY THE CITY.
• 3. INSTALLING AN ANTENNA ON AN EXISTING ALTERNATIVE
TOWER STRUCTURE , INCLUDING THE PLACEMENT OF
ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES, SO LONG AS
SAID ADDITIONAL ANTENNA ADDS NO MORE THAN FIFTEEN (15)
FEET OF ADDITIONAL HEIGHT TO SAID EXISTING STRUCTURE,
DOES NOT PROJECT OUTWARD A DISTANCE OF MORE THAN
FOURTEEN (14 ) FEET, AND IS CONSISTENT WITH ANY
APPLICABLE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THAT SITE ,
WHICH PREVIOUSLY HA VE BEEN IMPOSED BY THE CITY ;
PROVIDED , HOWEVER, THAT IF THE INSTALLATION OF AN
ANTENNA OR ANY OTHER ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES ON TOP OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE CAUSES AN
INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMITATION WITHIN THE
ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE STRUCTURE IS LOCATED ,
SUCH USE SHALL STILL BE CONSIDERED A SPECIFIC
PERMITTED USE SO LONG AS THE ANCILLARY FACILITIES ADD
NO MORE THAN FIFTEEN (15) ADDITIONAL FEET TO THE
HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE AND ARE ADEQUATELY SCREENED
TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE MANAGER.
4. LOCATING A TOWER IN ALL ZONING DISTRICTS OTHER THAN
RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS , SO LONG AS ALL OTHER
REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT , FIGURE 1, SECTION
K (5), (REGARDING SETBACKS AND SEPARATION,) ARE MET.
• 5 . LOCATING AN ALTERNATIVE TOWER STRUCTURE IN ALL
ZONING DISTRICTS , SO LONG AS ALL OTHER REQUIREMENTS OF
THE ZONING DISTRICT, FIGURE 1, AND SUBSECTION J ARE MET.
.·
K. CO ND ITIONAL USE PERMITS . • 1. GENERAL. THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS SHALL GOVERN THE
ISSUANCE OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR
TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES AND ARE IN ADDITION TO
THE GENERAL PROVISIONS REGARDING CONDITIONAL USES IN
E.M .C. TITLE 16:
a . IF THE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITY IS NOT A
PERMITTED USE UNDER SUBSECTION I , PERMITTED USES -
GENERAL, OF THIS SECTION, THEN A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT GRANTED PURSUANT TO THE PROCEDURES SET
FORTH IN E.M.C. 16-5-21 , CONDITIONAL U SES , AND THE
PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION, SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A TOWER OR THE PLACEMENT OF
ANTENNAE.
b . IN GRANTING A CONDITIONAL U SE PERMIT , THE CITY MAY
IMPOSE CONDITIONS TO THE EXTENT IT CONCLUDES SUCH
CONDITIONS ARE NECESSARY TO MINIMIZE ANY ADVERSE
EFFECT OF THE PROPOSED TELE COl\tllvI U NICATION FACILITY
ON ADJOINING PROPERTIES.
c. ANY INFORMATION OF AN ENGINEERING NATURE THAT THE
APPLICANT SUBMITS , WHETHER CIVIL , MECHANICAL,
STRUCTURAL, OR ELECTRICAL , SHALL BE CERTIFIED BY A • COLORADO REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. ANY
INFORMATION SUBMITTED RELATING TO RADIO
FREQUENCY EMISSIONS SHALL BE CERTIFIED BY A
QUALIFIED RADIO FREQUENCY E~GINEER.
d. AT LEAST FIFTEEN (15) DAYS PRIOR TO THE FIRST PUBLIC
HEARING ON ANY REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION, THE APPLICANT
SHALL PROVIDE NOTICE , IN WRITING, TO ALL PROPERTY
OWNERS WITHIN FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET OF THE
PROPERTY BOUNDARY OF THE SITE UPON WHICH THE
TOWER OR ANTENNA(E) ARE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED.
2. INFORMATION REQUIRED. EACH APPLICANT REQUESTING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL, IN
ADDITION TO THE INFORMATION REQ U IRED BY SECTION D ,
SUBMIT ALL INFORMATION REQUIRED IN E.M .C. 16-5-21 ,
CONDITIONAL USES , AND OTHER INFORMATION DEEMED BY
THE MANAGER TO BE NECESSARY TO ASSESS COMPLIANCE
WITH THIS SECTION.
3. FACTORS CONSIDERED IN GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMITS FOR TOWERS AND ANTENNAE . IN ADDITION TO THE
CRITERIA SET FORTH IN E.M .C. 16-5-21 , CONDITIONAL USES , THE
CITY SHALL CONSIDER THE FOLLOWL\'G FACTORS IN
DETERMINING WHETHER TO ISSUE A CONDITIONAL USE • PERMIT:
•
•
•
a . HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED TOWER OR HEIGHT OF
PROPOSED ANTENNAE ON A TOWER OR ALTERNATIVE
TOWER STRUCTURE ;
b. PROXIMITY OF THE TOWER TO RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES
AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES ;
c . NATURE OF USES ON ADJAC ENT AND NEARBY PROPERTIES ;
d . S U RROUNDING TOPOGRAPHY ;
e . SU RROUNDING TREE COVERAGE AND FOLIAGE ;
f. DESIGN OF THE TOWER, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO
DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS THAT HA VE THE EFFECT OF
REDUCING OR ELIMINATING VISUAL OBTRU SIVENESS;
g. PROPOSED INGRESS AND EGRESS ;
h . AN EVALUATION OF THE APPLICANT'S PLANS FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF ITS TELECOMMUNICATIO N S FACILITIES
ON THE SITE WHICH IS THE SUBJECT OF THE APPLICATION,
AS WELL AS THOSE PLANS ON FILE FROM OTHER
TELECOMMUNICATIONS PROVIDERS ;
i. AN EVALUATION OF THE CRITERIA SET FORTH IN
SUBSECTIONS D (APPLICATION) AND G (GENERAL
GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS) ABOVE ;
J. AVAILABILITY OF SUITABLE EXISTING TOWERS Al'ID OTHER
STRU CTURES AS DISCUSSED IN SUBSECTI O N D (3) OF THIS
SECTION.
k. ANY OTHER INFORMATION THAT THE CITY DEEMS
REASONABLY NECESSARY IN CONNECTION WITH THE
REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION.
4 . AVAILABILITY OF S U ITABLE EXISTING TOWERS OR OTHER
STRUCTURES. NO NEW TOWERS SHALL BE PERMITTED UNLESS
THE APPLICANT DEMONSTRATES TO THE REASONABLE
SATISFACTION OF THE CITY THAT NO EXISTI N G TOWER OR
STRUCTURE CAN ACCOMMODATE THE APPLICAl"\I T'S NEEDS .
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT NO EXISTING
TOWER OR STRUCTURE CAN ACCOMMODATE THE APPLICANT'S
PROPOSED ANTENNA MAY CONSIST OF THE FOLLOWING:
a. NO EXISTING TOWERS OR STRUCTURES ARE LOCATED
WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHIC AREA REQUIRED TO MEET THE
APPLICANT'S ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS .
b . EXISTING TOWERS OR STRUCTURES ARE NOT OF
SUFFICIENT HEIGHT TO MEET THE APPLICAN T'S
ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS .
c. EXISTING TOWERS OR STRUCTURES DO NOT HA VE
SUFFICIENT STRUCTURAL STRENGTH TO SUPPORT
APPLICANT'S PROPOSED ANTENNAE AND RELATED
EQUIPMENT.
d. THE APPLICANT'S PROPOSED ANTENNAE WOULD CAUSE
ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE WITH THE ANTENNAE
ON THE EXISTING TOWERS OR STRUCTURES , OR THE
ANTENNAE ON THE EXISTING TOWERS OR STRUCTURES
WOULD CAUSE INTERFERENCE WITH THE APPLICANT'S
PROPOSED ANTENNAE.
e. THE APPLICANT DEMONSTRATES THAT THERE ARE OTHER
LIMITING FACTORS THAT RENDER EXISTING TOWERS AND
STRUCTURES UNSUITABLE.
5 . SETBACKS AND SEPARATION. THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM
SETBACKS AND SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS SHALL APPLY TO
ALL TOWERS AND Al"\JTENNAE FOR WHICH A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT IS REQUIRED.
a. TOWERS MUST BE SET BACK A DISTANCE EQUAL TO THE
HEIGHT OF THE TOWER FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL ZONED
PROPERTY, OR FROM ANY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IN ANY
ZONING DISTRICT.
b. THE TOWERS, GUYS, AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES MUST SATISFY THE MINIMUM ZONING DISTRICT
SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, OR BE SET BACK A DISTANCE OF
AT LEAST FIFTY PERCENT (50%) OF THE HEIGHT OF THE
TOWER, WHICHEVER IS GREATER.
c. TOWERS OVER SIXTY (60) FEET IN HEIGHT SHALL NOT BE
LOCATED WITHIN ONE-QUARTER MILE FROM ANY EXISTING
TOWER THAT IS OVER SEVENTY-FIVE (75) FEET IN HEIGHT,
UNLESS THE APPLICANT HAS SHOWN TO THE SATISFACTION
OF THE CITY THAT THERE ARE NO REASONABLY SUITABLE
ALTERNATIVE SITES IN THE REQUIRED GEOGRAPHIC AREA
WHICH CAN MEET THE APPLICANT'S NEEDS.
6 . SECURITY FENCING . TOWERS OTHER THAN ALTERNATIVE
TOWER STRUCTURES w1A Y BE ENCLOSED BY SECURITY
FENCING, OF A TYPE APPROVED BY THE CITY , NOT LESS THAN
SIX FEET (6') IN HEIGHT AND SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH AN
APPROPRIATE ANTI-CLIMBING DEVICE.
7. LANDSCAPING. THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS SHALL
GOVERN THE LANDSCAPING SURROUNDING TOWERS FOR
WHICH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT IS REQUIRED.
a. TOWER AND ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES
SHALL BE LANDSCAPED WITH A BUFFER OF PLANT
MATERIALS THAT EFFECTIVELY SCREENS THE VIEW OF THE
COMPOUND FROM ADJACENT PROPERTY, AND IN
•
•
•
•
•
•
ACCORDANCE WITH THE LANDSCAPING STANDARDS IN
E.M.C . 16-5-26.
b . 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 , NATU RAL
GROWTH ARO U ND THE PERIMETER MAY BE SUFFICIENT TO
BUFFER.
8 . DECISION. THE DECISION ON WHETHER TO APPROVE OR DENY
AN APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL U SE PERMIT, SHALL BE
IN WRITING, BASED U PON S U BSTANTIAL EVIDENCE PRESENTED
AT A PUBLIC HEARING .
L . REMOVAL OF ABANDONED ANTENNAE, TOWERS AND OTHER
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES. ANY ANTENNA OR TOWER
THAT IS NOT OPERATED FOR A CONTI NUOUS PERIOD OF SIX
MONTHS SHALL BE CONSIDERED ABANDONED . THE CITY , IN ITS
SOLE DISCRETION, MAY REQUIRE AJ."'l" ABANDONED TOWER, ANTENNA
OR ANY OTHER ANCILLARY TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES TO
BE REMOVED. THE OWNER OF S U CH ANTENNA, TOWER OR ANY
OTHER ANCILLARY TELECOMMU NICATIONS FA CILITIES SHALL
REMOVE THE SAME WITHIN NINETY (90 ) DAYS OF RECEIPT OF
NOTICE FROM THE CITY NOTIFYING THE OWNER OF S U CH
ABANDONMENT . UPON REMOVAL THE SITE SHALL BE RESTORED
AND /OR REVEGETATED TO BLEND WITH THE SURROUNDING
ENVIRONMENT. IF SUCH ANTE N NA, TOWER OR ANCILLARY
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES ARE NOT REMOVED WITHIN SAID
NINETY (90) DAYS, THE CITY MAY REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF THE
SAME AT THE OWNER'S EXPENSE. IF THERE ARE TWO OR MORE
USERS OF A SINGLE TOWER, THEN THIS PROVISION SHALL NOT
BECOME EFFECTIVE UNTIL ALL USERS CEASE USING THE TOWER.
FIGURE 1 TELECOMMUNICATIONS FA CILITIES ZONING
LAND USE ZONE DISTRICTS
CATEGORIES
cu
P U
=
=
•
STRUCTURES
Altern ative Tower Structu re
Tower Stru cture
ANTENNAE
Microwave Antenn a
Sect orized Panel Ant enna
Whip An tenna
Co n ditional Use
Permitted Use
R-1-A R-1-B R-1-C
P U PU PU
cu cu cu
PU PU PU
P U PU PU
PU PU P U
•
R-2 R-2-C R-3 R-4 B-1 B-2 I-1 I-2
PU PU PU PU PU P U PU PU
cu cu cu cu cu cu PU PU
PU PU PU PU PU PU PU PU
PU PU PU PU PU PU PU PU
PU PU PU PU PU PU PU PU
•
•
•
•
Section 2. The City Council of the City of Englewood, Colorado hereby approves
amending Title 16 , of the Englewood Municipal Code 1985, by moving Title 16,
Chapter 4, Section 21 , entitled Satellite Dish Antennae, to Title 16, Chapter 5, Section
30, which shall read as follows:
16 4 21:16-5-30: SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAE:
A. Statement of Intent . The purpose of this Section is to set standards for the use
of satellite receive-only earth stations in order to safeguard the health, safety
and enjoyment of all the citizens of Englewood. The City Planning and Zoning
Commission and the City Council recognize that residents of the City may wish
to add to their television viewing pleasure by installing satellite dishes to
improve reception or increase the number of choices available. It is the intent of
this Section to facilitate the use of satellite dishes for those citizens who wish
to enhance their television viewing and also to protect the health, safety and
aesthetic objectives of all who live and/or work in Englewood .
B . Applicability of Ordinance Standards.
1. These regulations shall apply to any installation of satellite receive-only
earth stations in the following districts:
a. Reside ntial districts: R-1-A , R-1-B , R-1-C , R-2 , R-2-C, R-2-C/S.P.S ,
R-3 and R-4 .
b. Commercial districts: B-1 and B-2.
c. Industrial districts: I-1 and I-2 .
2. When a satellite dish, which was installed prior to the adoption of this
Ordinance SECTION and not in conformance with this Ordinance
SECTION, is changed or exchanged for another dish, the new mount
shall comply with the regµlations of this Section.
C. Installation Requirements.
1. All Districts .
a. ACCESSORY USE Permits shall be secured for all satellite dishes
and proper inspections secured during installation.
b. Any roof-mounted satellite dish shall have an engineer's certificate,
verifying that the roof-mounting is structurally sound and stable.
c. Satellite dish ANTENNAE shall be of a color harmonious with the
surroundings. There shall be no advertising in words or in pictures ,
other than the manufacturer's name in small letters.
d. Satellite receive-only earth stations, referred to as "satellite dishes",
shall be considered as accessory structures .
2. Individual districts. •
a. R-1-A , R-1-B, R-1-C , R-2, R-2-C, R-2-C/S.P.S.
(1) Satellite dishes shall not be mounted in front yards.
(2) Satellite dishes shall be mounted behind the front building line
of the principal conforming structure. If the adjoining property
has a conforming principal structure located behind that
building line , the dish shall be mounted in back of the front
building line of the adjoining property.
(3) The height of a free-standing ground-mounted satellite dish
shall be limited to ten feet (10') at the top of the pole.
(4) The dish shall be mounted no closer to the property line than
the setback requirements for accessory structures in the zone
district in which the property is locate d.
(5) Satellite dishes shall not be mounted on the roof of the
residential structure.
(6) When a ground-mounted satellite dish must be elevated over a
building for access to the transmitting satellite , the pole shall
be attached to the structure and the dish height shall be the • minimum necessary, as determined by the Chief Building
Inspector .
b. R-3 , R-4.
(1 ) Satellite dishes shall not be mounted forward of the front
building line .
(2) Satellite dishes may be mounted on roofs on residential
buildings of more than four ( 4) units only or on other
non-residential principal permitted uses .
(3) Any roof-mounted satellite dish shall have an engineer's
certificate submitted to the Building Department, verifying that
the roof mounting is sound and stable .
(4) Placement of ground-mounted dishes shall meet the same
setback requirements as other permitted accessory uses, except
the height limitation, which is ten feet (10') to the top of the
pole.
(5) When a ground-mounted satellite dish must be elevated over a
building for access to transmitting satellites, the pole shall be
attached to the structure , and the dish height shall be the
minimum necessary as determined by the Chief Building
Inspector. •
•
•
•
c. B-2 , B-2.
(1) Satellite dishes shall be mounted on roof tops or in open space.
Space for the dish shall not be included in the required
landscaped areas .
(2) Ground-mounted satellite dishes shall be placed in back of the
front building line.
(3) Satellite dishes shall not be mounted on any temporary
structure or any vehicle, except for siting purposes.
(4) Roof-mounted satellite dishes shall have an engineer's certificate
submitted to the Building Department.
d. I-2 , I-2.
(1) Ground-mounted satellite dishes shall not be located in the
a rea reserved for landscaping.
(2) Satellite dishes shall not be mounted on any temporary
s t ructure or any vehicle , except for siting purposes.
(3) Any roof-mounted satellite dishes shall have an engineer's
certificate .
D. Definitions .
GROUND-MOUNTS:
HARMONIOUS COLOR:
SATELLITE DISH:
The typical ground-mounted satellite has the
antenna mounted on a pole which is at least
three feet (3') deep in the ground, encased in
concrete at least eight inches (8") in diameter.
The cable to the receiver is buried in the
ground between the antenna and the
structure.
The color is preferably a neutral color:
off-white, black, dark green, or metallic,
unless the background is such that one of
those would not blend with the surroundings .
The satellite receive-only earth station
antenna consists of 1) dish antenna which
receives communication from satellites in
orbit; 2) a low-noise amplifier (lna) at the
focal point of the receiving component; and 3)
a coaxial cable to carry the signal to the
satellite receiver, which transforms the
low-frequency signal to a television signal.
SATELLITE RECEIVER: The satellite receiver resembles a stereo
receiver or amplifier with an array of knobs
and controls. It is usually located near the TV
set and allows tuning of any of the channels
coming from the satellite. Another control
rotates the dish to select which satellite at
which to aim the antenna.
Section 3. Safety Clauses. The City Council, hereby finds, determines, and
declares that this Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the
City of Englewood, that it is promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the
public, and that this Ordinance is necessary for the preservation of health and safety
and for the protection of public convenience and welfare. The City Council further
determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the proper legislative
object sought to be obtained.
Section 4. Severabilitv. If any clause , sentence, paragraph, or part of this
Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall for any
reason be adjudged by a court of competent jurisdiction invalid , such judgment shall
not affect impair or invalidate the remainder of this Ordinance or its application to
other persons or circumstances.
Section 5. Inconsistent Ordinances . Nothing herein contained shall be deemed a
waiver of the provisions of any other Code section or regulation applicable to
telecommunications. If there is a conflict between the regulations in this Section and
any other Code section or regulations, the more stringent regulations shall apply.
Section 6. Effect of repeal or modification. The repeal or modification of any
provision of the Code of the City of Englewood by this Ordinance shall not release ,
extinguish, alter, modify, or change in whole or in part any penalty , forfeiture , or
liability, either civil or criminal, which shall have been incurre d under such provision,
and each provision shall be treated and held as still remaining in force for the
purposes of sustaining any and all proper actions , suits , proceedings, and
prosecutions for the enforcement of the penalty, forfeiture , or liability, as well as for
the purpose of sustaining any judgment, decree, or order which can or may be
rendered , entered, or made in such actions, suits, proceedings, or prosecutions .
Section 7. Penalty. The Penalty Provision of E.M. C. Section 1-4-1 shall apply to
each and every violation of this Ordinance.
Introduced, read in full , and passed on first reading on the 1st day of June , 1998.
•
•
•
• CITY OF ENGLEWOOD PLANNING AL'ID ZONING COl\tIMISSION
•
•
IN THE MATTER OF CASE #OR-98-03 )
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS )
AND RECOM1\.1ENDATIONS RELATING )
TO A PROPOSED Al\iIENDJ.VIENT TO THE )
COMPREHENSIVE ZONING ORDINAJ.~CE )
BY ADOPTING ST ANDA.RDS FOR THE )
DEVELOPl\1ENT OF TELECOMMUNICA-)
TIONS ANTENNAE AND TOWERS Ai'ID )
INSTALLATION OF RELATED FACILITIES )
INITIATED BY:
The Department of Neighborhood
And Business Development
)
)
)
)
)
FINDINGS OF FACT AND
CONCLUSIONS OF THE
CITY PLANNING AND
ZONING COMMISSION
Commission Members Present : Welker , Dummer , Homer , Lathram , Rininger , Tobin ,
Douglas
Commission Members Absent : Weber
This mauer was considered at Public Hearing before the City Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion on May 5, 1998, in the City Council Chambers of the Englewood City Hall.
Testimony was received from staff, special legal counsel , and members of the telecommunica-
tions industry . The Commission received notice of Public Hearing , the Staff Report , and Draft
V of the proposed amendments , which were incorporated into and made a pan of the record of
the Public Hearing .
After considering the statements of the wimesses , and reviewing the pertinent documents , the
members of the City Planning and Zoning Commission made the following Findings and Con-
clusions .
1.
FINDINGS OF FACT
THAT the Public Hearing was initiated by the Neighborhood & Business Development
to address the needs of the community and of the telecommunications industry by es-
tablishing standards on development and installation of telecommunication facilities .
2. THAT notice of the Public Hearing was given by publication in the Englewood Herald
on April 17, 1998.
3. THAT Planning Analyst Denning testified that existing ordinances enacted in
Englewood are inadequate to address location and installation of telecommunication
towers, antennae and related facilities. Mr. Denning also testified that City Council
did, in 1997, enact an eight month moratorium on installation of further telecommuni-
cation towers, antennae and related facilities; staff began research and work on drafting
the proposed regulations, and members of the telecommunications industry asked for an
opportunity to participate in drafting the regulations, and a special counsel was ap-
pointed by the City Attorney's Office to write the regulations.
4. THAT Special Counsel Ken Fellman testified to his collaborative work with City staff
and members of the telecommunications industry in development of the proposed regu-
lations. Mr. Fellman testified that changes proposed in Draft V of the proposed regu-
lations incorporate many of the changes and modifications discussed during the study
session with the Planning & Zoning Commission in February , 1998.
5. THAT telecommunications industry representatives Ann Closser , of Air Touch Cellu-
lar, and Troy Miller, of Western Wireless, testified to wording and sections of the pro-
posed regulations that are of concern to them.
6. THAT members of the Planning Commission considered and discussed each of the
points of concern raised by Ms . Closser and Mr. Miller prior to reaching a decision on
the proposed regulations.
CONCLUSIONS
1. THAT the proposed amendment of the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance has been ini-
tiated by the Neighborhood & Business Development Department.
2. THAT notice of the Public Hearing was published in the Englewood Herald on April
17, 1998.
3 . THAT the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Zoning_ Ordinance will establish
standards and regulations for telecommunications towers , antennae and related facilities
installed within the corporate limits of the City of Englewood.
•
•
•
•
•
•
DECISION
THEREFORE, it is the decision of the City Planning and Zoning Commission that the pro-
posed standards for development of telecommunications antennae and towers and installation of
related facilities, as set forth in Draft V, dated May 5, 1998, should be enacted by the
Englewood City Council.
The decision was reached upon a vote on a motion made at the meeting of the City Planning
and Zoning Commission on May 5, 1998, by Mr. Horner, seconded by Ms. Tobin, which mo-
tion states:
The Planning Commission approve Draft V, as amended, of the Telecommunications Stan-
dards, and recommend approval of Draft V, as amended, by the Englewood City Council.
AYES :
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT :
Lathram, Rininger , Tobin, Welker, Dummer, Horner, Douglas
None
None
Weber
The motion carried .
These Findings and Conclusions are effective as of the meeting on May 5 , 1998.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY PLANNING & ZONING COl\IIMISSION
f:\dept\nbd\group\boards\plancomm\findings 98\fof or-98-03.doc
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
REQUEST:
STAFF REPORT
Planning & Zoning Commission
Robert Simpson, Director of Neighborhood & Business Development
Brad Denning, Planning Analyst
May 5 , 1998
Telecommunications Ordinance Case# OR-98-03
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Staff requests that Planning and Zoning Commission review, receive public testimony and
provide comment on amendments to the Englewood Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance regarding
telecommunication guidelines and standards in the City of Englewood. These revisions address
the rapid growth of the telecommunications industry , specifically the requests for location of
wireless telecommunications towers and facilities in the City .
RECOMMENDATION:
,·
•
Staff recommends that Planning and Zoning Commission approve the ordinance which
establishes standards and guidelines for the development of wireless communication facilities in •
the City of Englewood.
BACKGROUND :
As of February 3 , 1997 , Council Bill No. 9 was enacted to establish a temporary suspension on
the issuance of permits for the construction and installation of wireless telecommunication
towers in the City of Englewood for a period of eight months . The moratorium was intended to
provide time for City staff to collect information and revise zoning regulations that protect the
interests of the community and those of the telecommunication industry. The moratorium ended
on November 2om, 1997 . Implementation of new regulations has been delayed due to ongoing
collaboration with legal staff and telecommunications industry representatives.
The City Attorney appointed Mr. Ken Fellman as Special Counsel to draft the proposed
ordinance by working with various city departments and the industry task force. Nlr. Fellman
will address the Commission regarding the content of the proposed ordinance.
ORDINANCE PROPOSAL :
The City 's current zoning regulations inadequately address land use impacts associated with
wireless telecommunication facilities because such regulations were developed prior to the
advent of wireless communications. Neighborhood and Business Development has reviewed
extensive reports from various communities, both locally and nationally, in an effort to keep •
abreast of the activities surrounding this issue.
... . .
•
•
•
The foremost issues of this ordinance are:
1. Location -Location of T ewers and/ or telecommunications facilities.
2.. fnventorv -Creating Inventories of existing structures suitable for use as antenna support
platforms (e.g. communications towers, water tanks, inactive chimneys, buildings, existing or
planned public facilities and/or lands, police and fire stations, etc.)
3. Criteria -Criteria for tower siting and design.
4. Co-location -The location of more than one cellular service provider locating transmitters on
a single tower or structure.
5. Incentives -Provide incentives such as tax abatements for "stealth" or camouflaged towers ,
an expeditious review and approval process for towers proposed within preferred land use
areas, using existing buildings or public facilities, or co-location usage.
AITACHMENTS -TELECOMMUNICATIONS DRAFT
F:IDEPnNBD\GROUPl.BOARDS\PLANCOMMISTAFF REPORTS 98\TELECOMMUN!CA TIO NS STAFF REPORT J.ZJ.DOC
2
, '
•
•
•
Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the 5th day of June , 1998 .
A Public Hearing was held on July 6 , 1998
Read by title and passed on final reading on the 20th day of July, 1998 .
Published by title as Ordinance No .lti:, Series of 1998, on the 24th day of July,
1998.
I, Loucrishia A. Ellis , City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify
that the above and foregoing is a true copy#the Ordinance passed on final reading
and published by title as Ordinance No. (1Z., Series of 1998
•
•
•
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
Date Agenda Item Subject Telecommunications
Ordinance -Amendment of
Comprehensive Zoning
June 1, 1998 10 a iii Ordinance
Initiated By Staff Source
Neighborhood and Business Development Brad Denning, Planning Analyst
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff recommends that City Council approve amendments to the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance to
add telecommunication guidelines and standards in the City of Englewood. These revisions address
the rapid growth of the telecommunications industry, specifically, the requests for locating wireless
telecommunication towers and facilities in the city.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND
As of February 3, 1997, Council Bill No. 9 was enacted to establish a temporary suspension on the
issuance of permits for the construction and installation of wireless telecommunication towers in the City
of Englewood for a period of eight months. The moratorium was intended to provide time for City staff to
collect information and revise zoning regulations that protect the interests of the community and those of
the telecommunication industry. The moratorium ended on November 20th, 1997. Implementation of new
regulations has been delayed due to ongoing collaboration and coordination with legal staff, city
departments, and the telecommunications industry task-force representatives.
The City's current zoning regulations inadequately address land use impacts associated with wireless
telecommunication facilities because such regulations were developed prior to the advent of wireless
communications. Neighborhood and Business Development has reviewed extensive reports from various
communities in an effort to keep abreast of the activities surrounding this issue.
The foremost issues of this ordinance are:
1. Location -Location of Towers and/or telecommunications facilities.
2. Inventory -Creating Inventories of existing structures suitable for use as antenna support platforms
(e.g. communications towers, water tanks, inactive chimneys, buildings, existing or planned public
facilities and/or lands, police and fire stations, etc.)
3. Criteria -Criteria for tower siting and design.
4. Co-location -The location of more than one cellular service provider locating transmitters on a single
tower or structure .
5. Incentives -Provide incentives such as tax abatements for "stealth" or camouflaged towers, an
expeditious review and approval process for towers proposed within preferred land use areas, using
existing buildings or public facilities, or co-location usage.
Due to the specialized nature of this issue, the City Attorney appointed Mr. Ken Fellman, Kissinger & •
Fellman, P.C., as Special Counsel to draft the proposed ordinance. NBD worked with Mr. Fellman,
various city departments and the industry task force to coordinate efforts on the ordinance. Mr.
Fellman will address Council regarding the content of the proposed ordinance.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Potential financial impact to the City. Staff has conducted a survey of the current and potential tower
and antenna sites in the city. Some proactive municipalities have marketed City sites to
telecommunication providers for leasing , depending on the need of the industry and the design of their
cell site systems.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Proposed Ordinance
Findings of Fact
Staff Report
•
•