City Council Minutes 2002 02 05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Louisville City Council Meeting February 5, 2002 Page 4 CODE CONCERNING TELECOMMUNICATIONS/CMRS FACILITIES - 2~r~ READING - PUBLIC HEARING (advertised Daily Camera 12/22/01) Davidson called for City Attorney introduction. City Attorney Sam Light read Ordinance No. 1374, Series 2001, and noted that there are second reading amendments. Davidson called for Staff presentation. Planning Director Paul Wood thanked former Planning Commission member Christopher Leh for his service. Wood summarized that Ordinance No. 1374; Series 2001 would amend Title 17 (zoning) Telecommunication for the Louisville Code. He stated that the Ordinance is a very limited scope in terms of amendments. Wood outlined the amendments as follows: · Clarifies the height restrictions for CMRS Facilities in all zoning districts where it was otherwise not well defined. For Commercial Districts, the maximum height for any CMRS facility would be 50 feet. For Industrial Districts, the maximum height would be 50 feet. For most Residential Districts, it would be 35 feet unless further restricted by a PUD. · Corrects some grammatical errors that appeared during adoption of the original ordi.nance. · Change the definitions for a Freestanding CMRS Facility, and redefine the definition of an Alternative Tower Structure (ATS). · Current CMRS Regulations - Under existing regulations, a CMRS facility such as the "Community Locator" proposed previously was not allowed, for two reasons: 1) The definition of a Freestanding CMRS Facility included, by way of example any monopole structure. The Community Locator was a monopole structure and therefore was considered a freestanding facility, which are not permitted anywhere in the City. 2) The definition of an ATS states that an ATS is to be used "as an alternative to" (among other things) a monopole functioning for the sole purpose of supporting an antenna array. Thus, by definition, a monopole cannot be considered an ATS. · Proposed CMRS Regulations - Under the proposed new regulations, a CMRS facility such as the "Community Locator" could be permitted, if authorized by the Planning Commission and Council through the SRU public hearing process. The way the ordinance is drafted, these types of facilities are not explicitly authorized as a "use by right". However, they could be authorized if determined to meet the definition of an ATS, which requires they be "compatible with the natural setting and surrounding structures." That determination remains a contextual one for the Commission and Council. A facility such as the "Community Locator" also might not be determined to be a permissible ATS in a given location. Wood addressed the maximum height issue and explained that there is a policy position in the ordinance that encourages facilities to be co-locatable, which allows an additional 4