Loading...
DRC commentsTUE/ectric ~ Lone Star Gas ~ Comments for the City of Coppell Development Review Committee April 29, 1999 S-1161, AT&T Wireless Services Zoning Change Acceptable. Tim Brancheau 14400 losey Lane Farmers Branch, Texas 75234 07:42 CITY OF COPPELL a CITY OF COPPELL N0.151 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW coMMITTEE LEISURE SERVICES COMMENTS tM: AT&T Wireless Serv/ces, Zoning Change DRC DATE: April 29, 1999 and May 6, ~999 CONTACT: Brad Reid, Park Planning and Landscape Manaser COM.MIENT STATUS: No Conunents ~C4.2999d DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE P.O~ PREVENTION COMMENTS ITEM: S-1161, AT&T WIRI~.Li?.$S S~,RVICES APRIL 29, 1999 CONTACT: TRA VIS CRUMP, FIP, g MARSHAL. (~72) 304-3503 COMMENT STATUS: A 24 feet wide concrete fire lane to be installed so that all portions of the structure are within 150 feet of a fire lane. Fire lane to platted as an easement. DE VEL OPMENT RE VIE W COMMITTEE ENGINEERING COMMENTS ITEM: S-1161, AT&T Wireless Services, a zoning Change request from "A" to "A.S.U.P." to allow a communications antenna to be mounted to an existing TU Electric tower with an equipment cabinet at the base of the tower, located approximately 710' northwest of the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and the D.A.R.T. right-of-way, at the request ora T& T Wireless Services. DRC DA TE: April 29, 1999 and May 6, 1999 CONTACT: Mike Martin, P.E., Assistant City Engineer (972-304-3679) COMMENT STATUS.: ~PRELIMINAR Y wrn r A r 1. How is the site accessed? 2. Show the location of proposed improvement for Coppell Crossing Development. City of Coppell Development Review Committee Comments Pl~nnin~ Department S-1161, AT&T Wireless SerVices, A Zoning Change from "A" to "A-S.U.P." DRC Date: April 29, 1999 Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting: City Council Meeting: June 8, 1999 May 20, 1999 Provide a legal description of the leased parcel. Show the setback distances between the tower and the ~nearest residentially zoned properties. Show the separation distance between the tower and a divided thoroughfare. If applicant does not meet the separation distances botla the Planning and Zoning Commission may waive or reduce the burden of the al~plicant of one or more of the criteria if they conclude that the goals of Section 3~A are being served. That burden of proof will be on the applicant. The proposed dirt road to the T.U. Electric tower encroaches on the approved perimeter landscape buffer of Lot 2, Block 1, Coppell Crossing. Applicant will have to contact Mockingbird Management Company and work out another access to this proposed site. The dirt road is not acceptable a~ shown. Staff requests that the Burford Holly be planted 3' on center rather than 3' 6". Bring to the May 6th DRC meeting a color board sample of all exterior-building materials of the equipment cabinet. A reminder that the zoning change request sign must be placed on the property by May l0th and remain on site through June 8th. Note: A. B. Staff written comments will be faxed to each applicant. Please revise plats, landscape plans, and utility plans based on ~taff recommendations. Should applicant disagree with staff comments please provide reasons why staff recommendations should not be followed when you attend the May 6th Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting. Each applicant will bring one new set of revised plats and i~lans to the May 6th DRC meeting. Applicants will be asked to show, explain and defend any revision. An Engineer for the project or other representative is urged to attend the meeting. Applicant will have till noon Tuesday, May llth to resubmit e~ghteen (18) folded copies of revised plans and three (3) reduced paper copies (8 1/2 X 11) of each exhibit to the Planning Department May 11, 1999 SEPARATION DISTANCES STATEMEN~ The following is provided by the applicant, AT&T Wireless Services in response to DRC comment//4: Comment: If applicant does not meet the separation distances both the Planning & ZoOing Commission may waive the or reduce the burden of the applicam of one or more of tbe criteria if they COnclude that the goals of Section 32A are being served. That burden of proof will be on the applicant. Response: AT&T Wireless Services has an agreement to locate on an existing TU Transmission tower located generally northwest oftbe intersection of Belt Line Road and MacArthur i~ Coppell. Section 32B3 establishes criteria whereby antennas should be located on existing structures. In the coverage target area there is an existing PrimeCo cell site. It is located on an adjacent TU trans~nission tower approximately 400 feet fi.om the subject site. That site was constructed to accommodate l~rimeCo and there are numerous other TU transmission towers within this immediate area which are suitabl~ for similar antenna mounts. The AT&T site is situated closer to a commercial area, away from residences and can be accessed fi.om existing easements and future commercial fire lanes rather than residential Streets and alleyways. The TU site can support, generally, one cartier per tower without additional structural strengthening. Thus it is appropriate to locate on an adjacent tower rather than collocate on an existipg tower. Further antennas generally need 10-feet of vertical separation which does not exist on the Pr~meCo site. This separation is required because of possible interference concerns. Since TU owns both tdwers, costs and potential revenues are not an issue with TU. Wexisting structure and relative unobtrusiveness fi.om existing residences, iand major arterials close by. We respectfully request your waiver oftbe tower separation requirements.