Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes BZA 06-28-99CARMEL /CLAY BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS JUNE 28, 1999 The regularly scheduled meeting of the Carmel /Clay Board of Zoning Appeals was called to order with the Pledge of Allegiance at approximately 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers of City Hall, Carmel, Indiana. Members present were: Earlene Plavchak; Pat Rice; Charles Weinkauf; and Tom Yedlick. The minutes were not yet available for approval. Mark Monroe announced that items lh. and 2h. continue to be tabled by the Board; these will likely be on the Agenda for July. Items 3h. through 5h. were tabled by the Petitioner and will likely be heard at the July meeting. Items 6h. and 7h. have been withdrawn by the petitioner and will no longer appear on the Agenda. Charles Weinkauf announced that Mark Monroe will be moving into the private sector and no longer with the City; tonight is his last BZA meeting. H. Public Hearing: Note: Items 8h., 9h., and 1Oh. were heard together. 8h. Omnipoint Telecommunications Tower (SE- 32 -99) Petitioner seeks Special Exception approval to allow a telecommunications tower in a residential zoning district. The site is located at 2135 West 141 Street. The site is zoned S -1 /Residence. Filed by James Burroughs of Ice Miller Donadio Ryan. 9h. Omnipoint Telecommunications Tower (V- 33 -99) Petitioner seeks approval of a developmental standards variance of Section 26.1.4 of the Carmel /Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow an increase in the allowable height of the tower in a residential zoning district from 120 feet to 150 feet. The site is located at 2135 West 141 Street. The site is zoned S -1 /Residence. Filed by James Burroughs of Ice Miller Donadio Ryan. 10h. Omnipoint Telecommunications Tower (V- 34 -99) Petitioner seeks approval of a developmental standards variance of Section 265.2.17 of the Carmel /Clay Zoning Ordinance to allow the tower to be located within 100 feet of a parcel used for residential purposes. The site is located at 2135 West 141 Street. The site is zoned S -1 /Residence. Filed by James Burroughs of Ice, Miller Donadio Ryan. In response to questions and comments from Charles Weinkauf and the petitioner, Mark Monroe reported that the Department has not been furnished with any information, written or graphic, that shows that there are no suitable locations for these two tower proposals. The Department has provided the petitioner with information for alternative sites and those alternative have not been presented to the Department or the Board. The Department's recommendation is to table. Jim Burroughs of Ice, Miller Donadio Ryan, One American Square, Indianapolis, appeared before the Board representing the applicant. The applicant agreed to table items 11h. and 12h., and decided to proceed with items 8h., 9h., and 10h. Mr. Burroughs was representing two clients: Omnipoint Communications, and Unisite. Unisite is a company that builds, manages, and leases space on telecommunications towers. They are not in the business of providing wireless communications services, rather, they are in the business of building towers in such a way that they will accommodate the antennae of multiple users. Omnipoint provides telecommunications service, wireless, pcs, and digital telecommunications service. Omnipoint has an agreement with unisite that it will lease space on this tower once it is built. One tower will be located at 141 Street west of Towne Road. The tower will be located in a heavily wooded area. Omnipoint is located at various points within Hamilton County, mostly on roof tops, but also on towers of other service providers such as water towers, grain elevators, etc. Over 50% of Omnipoint towers are located on existing structures. Over 60% of the Omnipoint sites are located within areas that zoning already permits tower without public hearing approval. A tower in an S -1 zoning requires a Special Exception. A variance for height is also being requested. Under Carmel's Ordinance, the height limitation at this location is 120 feet; the petitioner is requesting 150 feet. Also, the tower is located within 100 feet of a property used for residential purposes. Mr. Burroughs stated that the petitioner has made a diligent effort with the City of Carmel to locate on an existing structure. According to Mr. Burroughs, there are no other structures of any significant that can be used for the purpose intended. The tower would not generate any traffic or any other kind of activity surrounding the property. There are currently 11 sites within Hamilton County where Omnipoint towers are located. The proposed tower will be of sufficient size and strength capable of accommodating six service providers. Cellular One has expressed an interest in locating their antennae on this tower. Mr. Burroughs explained that the service tower needs to be located at this site in order to provide continuous service to its customers; if the towers were located closer together, it would cause interference farther apart would cause gaps in service. The tower needs to be a certain height for radio frequency purposes. Mr. Burroughs stated that if the proposed tower is denied, it will cause an unnecessary hardship. There are no other structures in the area tall enough to accommodate this use. The approval of the Special Exception does not interfere substantially with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Burroughs stated that public properties, i.e. properties owned by any governmental entity, is not subject to the zoning requirements for cell towers. According to Mr. Burroughs, the Fire Department and the Parks Department were not interested in co- location. Also, the ordinance contains a requirement that there be at least 4 service providers to locate on a tower. Will Stump, real estate appraiser, appeared before the Board and explained that the tower would have no adverse effect on property values. There are two issues with regard to the tower; the effect of the tower on other uses within the neighborhood and the effect on property values. Homes within the Geist area that have a clear view of an existing tower have sold in comparatively the same amount of listing time and competitive prices as those without the view of the tower. Mr. Stump cited several instances where homes have sold at competitive prices within the same subdivision in an equal amount of time, and still within view of radio or communications towers. After looking at six residential areas, the conclusion is that the cell towers have no adverse effect on property values. The public has accepted the towers as a part of today's technology. Members of the public were invited to speak in favor of the cell towers; no one appeared. Members of the public were invited to speak in opposition to the proposed cell tower; the following appeared: Claudia Pryor, 3525 West 141 Street asked for clarification as to the exact address fot the proposed tower. Ms. Pryor stated that she had received a letter solociting use of her property for a cell tower at a price of $25,000. for placement of a tower. Mrs. Pryor's husband is an electrical engineer and very concerned about the potential hazards. The Pryors certainly do not want the tower now, with no compensation. Ms. Pryor stated that she had done research that shows their property value could be reduced 30 to 40% with the addition of a cell tower. As the value of the land increases with the installation of infrastructure, the loss will be even greater. Mrs. Pryor also cited a possible health hazard associated with towers. In addition to the health issues, the tower would soar 15 stories in an area where most of the homes are single story. The diesel generators that provide power to the tower would create air and noise pollution. Mrs. Pryor requested a postponement on this case to provide more time for persons to research and review the tower proposal. Mrs. Pryor asked if the Communications company would guarantee that the property owners will be compensated for their loss in property value and agree to compensate area property owners for any medical bills as a result of the tower. Also, there are grain bins in the area that could perhaps be used to locate the towers. Mrs. Pickram, West 146 Street, stated that she has four acres just north of the tower structure area. The primary focus is on the health concerns rather than property value. At this point, there is quite a lot of documented evidence linking cancer deaths in children to power frequency fields. Ms. Pickram asked that this be postponed. Bon Boone, 3121 West 141 Street, was surprised that he had not received public notice. The current proposal makes no mention that the tract does not have 200 foot street frontage; it is an undersized tract, less than 12% of the size required by ordinance. The petitioner is also requesting permission to build an accessory building on the site; Mr. Boone did not think this was possible without any main building on the site. Also on the agenda, the petitioner intends to build a similar structure in east Clay Township -the site at that location has an elevation of 750 feet -the proposed site has an elevation of 900 feet. Mr. Boone did not understand why the petitioner had to appear before the Board.