15-03 - R TOWN OF PROSPER, TEXAS RESOLUTION NO. 15-03
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF PROSPER,
TEXAS, MAKING WRITTEN AND EVIDENTIARY FINDINGS RELATIVE TO
THE DENIAL OF A REQUEST FROM VERIZON WIRELESS FOR A SPECIFIC
USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL ANTENNA ON THE EAST SIDE OF
PROSPER COMMONS BOULEVARD, SOUTH OF RICHLAND BOULEVARD,
IN THE TOWN, CASE NO. S14-0004; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE
DATE.
WHEREAS, Verizon Wireless ("Verizon") has requested approval of a Specific Use
Permit, Case No. S14-0004, to locate a commercial antenna and support structure, 100 feet
(100') in height, on an approximate 5.4 acre tract located on the east side of Prosper Commons
Boulevard, approximately 300 feet (300') south of Richland Boulevard, and to establish
equipment cabinets inside an approximate 552 square foot lease area internal to the site; and
WHEREAS, on October 7, 2014, after the conclusion of a public hearing, the Town's
Planning and Zoning Commission considered Verizon's request for a specific use permit, and
after extensive discussion of the merits of the application, requested, among others, that the
applicant provide additional information relative to the proposed specific use permit ("SUP"); and
WHEREAS, since additional information was requested, including alternatives
acceptable sites for the antenna, the visual impacts of the antenna, compliance with the Town's
Comprehensive Plan and safety issues, and with the concurrence of the applicant, a motion to
postpone consideration of the SUP application was approved, with the public hearing continued
until November 4, 2014, and
WHEREAS, on November 4, 2014, the Planning and Zoning Commission reconvened,
additional testimony and evidence were presented during the public hearing before the Planning
and Zoning Commission, which evidence and testimony the Planning and Zoning Commission
considered during its deliberations; and
WHEREAS, by a unanimous vote of 6-0, the members of the Planning and Zoning
Commission denied the requested SUP; and
WHEREAS, thereafter the Verizon SUP application was noticed for Town Council
consideration at a public hearing at the Town Council's December 9, 2014, meeting; and
WHEREAS, at the Town Council meeting on December 9, 2014, Verizon's
representative presented additional comments related to its application for a specific use permit
and the Town Council conducted a public hearing relative to said SUP application; and
WHEREAS, after the presentation of substantial evidence and testimony, on December
9, 2014, the Town Council voted to deny the SUP application request from Verizon; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Town of Prosper to fully comply with all applicable
provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (specifically 47 U.S.C. § 332 et seq.) relative
to the siting of the proposed 100' antenna and support structure; and
WHEREAS, federal law provides, in 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iii), that a local
government that denies a request to place, construct or modify a cell tower must put the denial
in writing, setting forth the basis for the denial, supported by substantial evidence; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this Resolution is to provide the substantial evidence in
writing for the reasons undergirding the Town Council's denial of Verizon's application for a
specific use permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
PROSPER, TEXAS, THAT:
SECTION 1
All of the above premises are hereby found to be true and correct legislative and factual
findings of the Town of Prosper and they are hereby approved and incorporated into the body of
this Resolution as if copied in their entirety.
SECTION 2
The Town Council of the Town of Prosper, Texas, hereby makes the following legal and
factual findings:
1. Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, while preserving local authority over
the siting and construction of wireless communications facilities, there are five limitations on
local authorities when dealing with cell towers and telecommunications carriers. A local
government:
(1) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of service [47
U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II)];
(2) may not unreasonably discriminate between providers of functionally equivalent
services [47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(1)];
(3) must act within a reasonable time after a request is filed [47 U.S.C.
§ 332(c)(7)(B)(ii)];
(4) any decision by the local government must be in writing and supported by
substantial evidence [47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iii)]; and
(5) any decision is subject to judicial review [47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(v)].
2. For purposes of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Town considered the
following substantial evidence in support of its denial of Verizon's application for an SUP for the
100 foot (100) antenna and support structure in question.
3. The property on which the antenna is proposed to be located is zoned for
Commercial (C) uses. Pursuant to Section 21.2(C) of the Town's Zoning Ordinance, the
Resolution No. 15-03,Page 2
maximum height foraotK|oiVreinaConlnnerca| Disthotio4Ofeet (4K}l The proposed antenna
and support structure is 100' in height, exceeding the maximum permitted height byGOfeet
(60'). A structure exceeding the height limitations by 60' would cause a visual height impact to
the surrounding area.
4. The Future Land Use Plan inthe Town's Comprehensive Plan recommends that
this site be designated US Highway 380 0oth{t /^380 [}ia[riu[^\. The 380 District generally
provides for wide setbacks, large landscape buffers and significant landscaping in order to
protect the visual appearance ofthe USHighway 3OOcorridor. The proposed antenna support
structure and gnJUOd equipment have minimal setbacks—approximately one foot /1'\ from both
the north and south boundaries ofthe lease area. Additionally, the applicant proposed minimal
|andocapin8, with only three (3) shrubs along the north side of the lease area. Further, the
eight-font masonry screening vvmU proposed to screen the nine-foot, two-inch high equipment
canopy with m metal roof is not of an adequate height to screen the equipment canopy.
5. The proposed 100-font antenna and support structure are located within 100 feet
(100') of an existing office/mini-warehouse deve|opment, including parking rows and pub//c
access drive aisles. The existing development on the site is within the fall zone of the proposed
antenna and consequently, there are significant safety issues with this location. The Town has
proposed that the antenna belocated iDmOarea that provides adistance greater than the height
of the antenna (nnona than 100') away from existing and future structures and public access
areas, all in an effort to prevent safety hazards associated with any potential failure of the
antenna, particularly in high-wind events,
6. In the immediate vicinity of the proposed antenna site /that is, less than 2.000
feet away from the proposed antenna and support structure\, there are existing overhead
electric transmission lines and related support strUoturea, an elementary Gohmp|, a middle
achoo|. Town park light structures, a 3-story multi-family development, an elevated water
storage tower and commercial buildings. At the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on
October 7. 2014. it was requested that the applicant contact the foregoing landowners to
determine the suitability of an antenna be/ng placed on top of, adjacent to, or on one of those
nearby structures in order to minimize the impact of the proposed antenna on the surrounding
area.
7. The applicant did not verify the availability /or lack thereof]l of any of the
proposed alternative antenna sites. In correspondence dated October 28, 2014. the applicant
addressed only three /3\ alternative mites, and provided no verification related thereto. With
regard to the antenna being placed on the elevated water storage tovver, the applicant wrote
thet ''[t]he dose proximity to our existing antenna site precludes this site from being a viable
site." With regard tOthe park light structunas, the applicant wrote that "this site is too far north"
and with regard to a park site for the antenna, the applicant wrote that its ^naa| estate
representative felt that the location of the park adjacent to single family homes would be met
with a lot of opposition. The [real estate representative's] concern was that if there is
commercial property that would serve [the proposed antenna] then the commercial property
should beuoed."
noso|vuo^No.16'03.Page
8. The applicant provided no verification or justification for not considering
alternative, nearby locations for the proposed antenna. With regard to uU|bcjng overhead electric
transmission lines support structures for the antenna (which locations have been utilized for
other similar commercial antennas in the Town), the applicant stated that he believed the power
company no longer wished to do so. Sinni|ar|y, the applicant stated he believed the school
district did not desire any antennas on its property and other commercial areas had not been
explored. AddiUona||y, areas south of US Highway 380, which would be ideal locations due tO
the lack of development in the area, similarly were not explored or considered by the applicant.
8. In no event did the applicant provide any documentation verifying its statements
that the school district property, the park areas, other adjacent or nearby private property, or the
electric transmission line support structures were not g/ternadvg, available sites. In tm{t, the
applicant simply concluded that ''[Ohe proposed site is a good site" and ''[o]eDeoai/y, antennas
are located on commercial property or property that is not developed with single family homes."
|twas apparent that the applicant had taken Dosteps to investigate the possibility oynearby
alternative sites for the proposed aOteOna, even though the Planning and Zoning Commission
on two (2) occasions had so requested, as did the Town Council at its December 9, 2014. Town
Council meeting.
10. The Town Council requested that the applicant provide photographs or pictures
ofthe proposed antenna toreview and evaluate its site compatibility. The applicant was unable
to provide any photographs or pictures ofsimilar antennas and concern was expressed by the
Town Council that such information had not been made available tothe Town prior tothe Town
Council's consideration ofthe SUP application. /\ similar concern exists that nophotographs or
pictures were provided tothe Planning and Zoning Commission.
11. In considering any SUP app|ioadon, pursuant to Section 25.3 of the Zoning
Ordinance, the Planning and Zoning CoDlD1iSSioO and TOvvO Council "shall consider the
following criteria in determining the validity of the SUP request:
1. Is the use harmonious and compatible with its surrounding existing uses
orproposed uses?
2. Are the activities requested by the applicant normally associated with the
requested use?
3. |sthe nature ofthe use reasonable?
4. Has any impact onthe surrounding area been rnibgated?^
12. Both the Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council determjned, as
reflected in the agenda materials for the December S Town Council moeting, as follows with
regard tnthe proposed antenna:
111. Is the use harmonious and compatible with its surrounding existing uses
orproposed uses?
The proposed Commercial Antenna in adjacent to undeveloped property
zoned for CoOnnOaroia| (C) with a Specific Use Permit (SUP) for mini-
warehouse to the north, undeveloped property zoned Planned
Resolution No. Is'oa.Page 4
Development-2 (PD-2) for Corridor District uses to the east and west, and
an existing office/mini-warehouse development to the south. For the
aforementioned reasons regarding nonconformance to the height
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, the intended character of the US
380 District called for in the Future Land Use Plan (FLUP), and concerns
with safety of the surrounding area, the proposed Commercial Antenna is
not harmonious and compatible with the surrounding existing uses or
proposed uses.
2. Are the activities requested by the applicant normally associated with the
requested use?
The activities requested by the applicant of a Commercial Antenna . . .
are normally associated with the use of a Commercial Antenna.
3. Is the nature of the use reasonable?
The property is currently zoned Commercial (C) and the Future Land Use
Plan (FLUP) recommends US 380 District uses for the property. The
proposed use is reasonable for the C District, but it is not reasonable for
the character called for in the FLUP in the US 380 District.
4. Has any impact on the surrounding area been mitigated?
The proposed 100-foot Commercial Antenna is adjacent to and within 100
feet of an existing office/mini-warehouse development, and because the
existing development is located within the fall zone of the proposed
antenna the impact on the surrounding area has not been mitigated."
13. Verizon did not demonstrate that existing or proposed antennas within the
proposed service area cannot accommodate the proposed antenna.
14. Verizon did not produce any evidence or testimony of efforts to co-locate with
other carriers on existing antennas within the service area.
15. Verizon did not provide evidence of alternative locations within the proposed
service area on which to locate an antenna.
16. The propagation maps provided by Verizon reflect certain "dead spots" in
coverage within its service area, but those propagation maps did not reflect a significant gap in
service.
17. While Verizon provided a propagation map relative to the location of an antenna
at the proposed site, no other alternative or co-location sites were presented to the Town for
consideration.
Resolution No.15-03,Page 5
18. Verizon did not present evidence that "further reasonable efforts are so likely to
be fruitless that it is a waste of time even to try" to comply with Town guidelines, zoning
regulations and service-related concerns expressed by the Town in denying this application.
19. It is Verizon's burden, not the Town's burden, to show and verify that alternative
sites do, or do not, exist to accommodate Verizon's service requests.
20. None of the evidence presented by Verizon reflects a "significant gap" in service
and indeed, Verizon provided no evidence of such gap, either in terms of physical size,
geographic location or number of users.
21. In making these findings, the Town relied upon the SUP application and all
related submittals to date by Verizon, the evidence adduced at all public hearings before the
Planning and Zoning Commission and Town Council, as well as statements and related
information from representatives of Verizon, included correspondence and documentation
presented by Verizon, all of which is incorporated by reference.
SECTION 3
This Resolution is effective immediately upon its passage.
DULY PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF
PROSPER, TEXAS, THIS 13TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2015.
Ray Smith; Mayor
i
ATTEST:
{' 66yn Ba ftle, ToW6 Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
Terrence S. Welch, Town Attorney
Resolution No.15-03, Page 6
` P DTR _c6MMorvs BE«r LIT-
,a
MAP
U PEC p C 7u 412 ZONING COMMERCIAL P INCTRACT a .,,,�
FLUP US38001STRICT BENG a t Rornson to n Survey,ADetract vo 460 COII�n L unry,7—A, LI 'V
-�1 �-
ois .ac` umea n`Ma miaot odd
O °be.ny ai uu A,Con eyvnce PI t per Commons Mtl.Lon...
YWI
own C1 unlv.pTavos d Lntve Ad I.gAOV par BYOPudy 0 tlLLL Va e.nq i6 P le5peciol Worr � �1 I SITE
_ _45J 82' _ —___ _ ^ 0eetl w n or'a ly 'os OctoAN]�201-,r u n�05001506690,oD LLLrry..
�d c'.1 r. .aha a g 9e p1— r est ead cr e.....m Ba„ma as falrowe �” em.e.r
\`Iro Ac f n t
Poc I'll T", �o Ni at ra I s. q:h
_ `¢o coat ng o woy I.,,of Pn.per Lom -Bw—do(e 60 arfighl l�.1 Y)eacomer ciao being.v In.
R A , Ft 2 r d '
w a btoc ua :T - d "ITENCEq 1QTgq tt (ont I.r.n°ffs°m-4.apo A. e/1 l v,xw Im Int 2e e81-A, ;
I PR06PEP COMMONS PUDRICN ,yr rtN 6 e 9 m.nu Seco azt a em o kl
vOL
11111
PG U2 s ` outhe9st ca of smd Lol 2,aocF A,aso beln9 noaM1w at hBne otltehat oce tract conv tl to
a.G i 4 ,�5 IM1e City Of Iry n9 by Valun.e 5165,Page 2935,De.a h-.1 s,-S,Coan y.Teva, o
p40V PROSP- PROPERTY'OwNfk,LLCM' smeMCDt Al.4,nBlccek P thew follownn elu es I.n a.a G1Y of Irv.rq tract,same M.n9 me[erh Ines o.
C I
NOT NO R04C 001506890 / CITY TRACT 1
IRa'1 R.tAS no 9 woM1(2lecouerses
1 n 1 1 I t S»tl.50 a gree..52 r-1,04 aawnde Wnet,°d.slonc.al 152)D feet tau 1/2'uon rod found,
J I J VOL 51168`AG 2935
e nrrrr '..aro w.�tr r,u C 2 ..'cafe teunenea 0 Ecnrq on55 c 11 rtes Eort,o e�sOfnlnot fcarto 9t r aloha conveyers
Mu.ton9-M.4woy Plano,.. .By InaF-0 No 96-387530 Dead R—,.,Callen County,tliar.9e,
/�h - �3• p FNCEL°ong°t .ne a.BN,ck A zc.e Murzon- away
A r eE" `�o t I 11 n W Leg note`5 dseEael '33)B9 feet to°Pa.n1
Dadrg Cvol- me Lot a oleo Be v caro nS the mPP a p
recoreeAb Jem u s 00).I—s)1atl PlotR.—I.ellr4wlln eco�slyPriexoT—,
s�rt
aN�cti o e ° - non 's'oe sac>
I°&c•A,ofhsad Prf 1.1d I t1--1, oAedlt, Eauth 9 ttlegreae 32 m
tl,otance of 42656 feet to a I/2°won rad found on the soca nqn[-ol-war linet ofd Prosper
amman�
w I THENCE along Me ri911-1 way I.n Cmon
1 P— r om .—1—d.North 00 s 30 mnule
VER 7_ON WIRELESS SITEof 5202)efw POINT OF"BEGINNING h.,eu.and ceonla. q 5A569s
VIN caz'n; �\\\/ ac eew� f Ione, Ins
P16s E41.n�°.-a feet ugns ��ati or
w o�iy1 4 1 R
ws -wPY PUN`.
TPN`-MI
LUNINS COMMER1,IA, ,,, T n0.96-CO]8)53 TD
FOLl
FLUP US 380 U.SI NICT n
ZONING P038RETAII
� Iw F1 UP 05380 DISTRICT
S14-0004
SPECIFIC USE PERMIT
N LL i I .ro _vo -
0Pf0i EXHIBITA
ANTENNA COMMERICAL
1
I I I PROSPER COMMONS ADDITION
LOT 4BLOCK A
s e<r]2J6�w.2e s6' HARRISON IAMISON SURVEY
----- _�----- ABSTRACTNO.480
tP sPc°al c'oMNI INS AGOITON P Pea �'Mu Aoo N AUGUST 15,2014
RO VOL 200;,PG 571
PRI
zOOZOGc 5)1}10
I LPRccr 1\1Y'` W iNACI ACREAGt Sfl15 ACRES
F- ZONING COMMM ERCIAL I
FI UP US SBO OISTRiCT CONING COMMtTRICT LL "N
LEASE ACREAGE 0012-AC/553508
H FLUP US 38D 01STICT LEASE
ACREAGE.0025%OF GROSS ACREAGE
N
I O
( / O OWNER 2DV�ERLOWRAUOPWYOKPRI STEL pR LLC
G
BY
OTYoFOIF A 100 NESTONC NAIY IC BETON ZB E'% M(:RINNEY T%)50)0
AOOTSIFF c1 A O 111006-PLAIN AS SNOWN B'FIRM 9)2-54)0238
I1NItt�PM 1 NUMD —230}.BATED'GN 02 APPLICANT 20NE SYS1I_G INC
MPP COM eR 48 e' 162D HANULEY DRIVE STE A
1009 N rry IN . TX 75208
214 1
214 94,4646
_5 rIe SURVEYOR WLBB SURVEYING INC
6513 PRESTON ROAD STE 200
® wrynsu-.�r..S In: .an:suvay.,s PLPNO TX 75D24
J
s>z)n,-BeoD
SITE PLAN SCA1E 1' — 4o' REFER ro cRAPNc'scu-c y.
Resalunon No 15-0],Page]
VICINITY MAP
1 '
(N)TRANSFORMER
t3RICK WALL YA IH
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT DOES NOT DIFi'ERENCE FOUNDATION
CONFUCI WIIHOTIL171ES IN CONSTRUCTION t / , \
SITE PLAN NOTES.
1 / \ mmm a mirvq %w.sore Qarn'awc'n.cv,
wifl.0 wmv
ANTENNA-
MOUNTED ON NEW POLE MOUNT / 1� anw,�rrs as vxnwmwwnH,ao-:a..M,:�aea..
AT 95'-0"h 85'-0'INSIDE(N)
STEALTH MONOPOLETOWER ' "'^� `_ _ \� :u",c ye,»r. ,man snslae ure asff3.«:.tl•
(t, OF 3 PER SECTOR)
(SEE A-1 AND A-2 FOR DETAILS)-- ,i wrer.nunw7«nN„n.na a zwm,.,aars>.s
34'-6”%40,-6" l,' (N)15"-0"WIDE ,+Averynj ax;mwnw'.m.aAs .aw^+mow me Tom
LEASE AREA SEE SURVEY FOR / ACCESS/UTLiTY
EPSEMENT. awa,Nm,aaw�..aosrear�m.Xax+rewrcaa.
LEGAL O£SCRIPP,ON - st:=m<saw,rw'.»s.esswesre,mancmaa nvme.re xy rca
^( SEE SURVEY FOR ,
Olt i�Lk STEVEN- a5Ga�5,+uc LEGAL DFSCRiPTION - 6+ ir<wrcsn�n.vaywn,:.«nur.:wv^w"yr !.,.>s
/ A Tru.vm. N.fl'd lY nssn'end W,^.e npe2lxumes
A>�0 +< 9 >„aJwwv,.meQaznwwm+.su'emmneoarn
r naacar.a:,mava�metm�+cawwm:B+wn,mw
1 9p \ �flreNna�a�.,4:�anK.aG �a,a�6NmN,re«,�:
COA%IAL CABLES
kOU1fD BELOW(N)ICE BRIDGE
Ar
N CANOPY ABOVE A2+,120'� G �'” u.mm a4vymw.".s.,,acw,+mar+em.a
a ,wre!s.d,x>n
{ ) � _ — PS a=.�e.a�ae,rv�x aim rwre«on�w,�Rw�,q
^\ ANTENNA MOUNTED ' artaceonsa,bf«u",.W:mwN+ev�e+vamm.wa
.,.- ammknuimw.a+dw,e muarfi.uatae W.aeeae,;e.:sUC>V=
43.8'X 146 CONCRETE PAD — i TO ICE BRIDGE POS,.\.
W/tN)OU DOR EQUIPMENT
R FOOT BRICK WAIL sy ~TM j _{ / ( ICE BRIDGE_ / �•«m „�a«rcm"�!wa,ce�a�mn awfl...,.,,.w�amp:
mL'
TQ MATCH ADJACENT BUILDMO♦
CONCRETE PAD COMPOUND fi ! PARKING
it I 1
/ 4459
/ $1Q-0004
F,BER MUX .— 12'-0.W SPECIFIC USE PERMIT
DOU
200A i-METER BLE svnND GATE, EXHIBIT B
/ {SEE i/C-8 FOR OCTA(
/ COMMUNITY RACK WITH
EXISTING BUILDING. TE
BOX FOR TELCO. ANTENNA COMMERICAL
;SEE I/E-2 FOR DETAIL)
PROPER COMMONS ADDITION
SCALE' -,'_+ LOT 4 BLOCK A
HARRISON JAMISON SURVEY
ABSTRACT NO.480
AUGUST 15,2014
SITE DATA SUMMARY TABLE
VERtZON LEASE ACREAGE:0.0127 AC/553 SQ.ET,
ZONING COMMERCIAL
PROPOSED USE ANTENNA COMMERICAL M6 R Aov criUsrFK PaO:'rmrOwntu uc
LOT ARFA 00127 AC1553 SO FT 2600[IDORAGt3YKrVY $11,110
MGKINAEY IX'W",
WALL HE113H” BFT 972-=470236
BUILDING HEIGHTMANOPY} 92 AP—NT ZOWSYSTEMS,-
9UILDING AREA(CONCRETE PADN 260 SQ FT tIWO MANDLEY DRIVE NTE A
'LAS TX;5206
_10. '—N
ANTENNA HEIGHT 100 FT
6'I+TiVEVOfl I, SUPVEYI
LOT COVERAGE OF LEASE U 0025`N OF GROSS "6Jt3 VHESTGN H.,,D
wU STE 2%
5PACL P'LANO 0 15024
PARKING 972 AN.00
LANDSCAPING NRS 45GAl6FTOC
OPEN SPACE nO%OF LEASE AREA
ftesolaarn IN 15-03��ge 6
-HIGHEST APPURTENAN^E
ELE31.10At.l -
s4530 IRS-
.TE
MS-
.TEN�NA5 MWnTEC _ Uv ON
.N NEW Pal!AI s-C" .L on —ELFrf6.'a' " ..
IW'-0'STEALTH MONOOOIE TOWEP 844 30 Als,
ITw JF ANTENN 45 FEF YCIUR)- RIC
I - ' I'I
BK WALL /
NAS MOUN'TEC ANTFNYA CE TERUNE
GN NEW PS,"EAA TON 1 ACL ON � INN
N:'0.-0'STEAL-4 MQNUPOIF TOWEP M 1 ...�
(' OF 1 ANTENNAS PER SECTOR) 839]0 d SL
,1-1-
LL WITH GAT
; ES / j1 /-e � I
(NIIw'-0'STEM IH rC
(SCE TOWER M NUFAC•U -
N,AWIN4E FO 9Y 90NPl
GORMAT ON)R A
VICINITY MAP
-TINS fagatle plan 1s fol wnceplual purposes only, N
Structure Is surrounded by brick wall 8 feet in height All IIIbuildIg plans as D(S review antl approval ham the _ y-`���. 'B n
dulltling Inspections Department �JJJ 1
Canopy is 9'2'In helghL -All mechanical equipment shall be screened from public _ SITE
Ni R Stevens Holly will be planted on TWO walls n accordance with coning ordnance 2
-Where permitted exposed utility dozes and conduits �°� CANOPY SECTION
using 45 gallon srze..led at 6 feet O C shall bepain ted to match the building r +wroii,oA
-All sgnage area and locations are sublecl to approval by I
the Building Inspections Department
n
-Pole will be anted Pro er Brown 5amewIras the
o
CityWater Tower on East First Street
.Nr,ETE P
W/(N)OUTDOOR EWIPNEN-
BRICK WALL B a
S14-0004
® antl E 3 6.d 6 -N'I1r W SPECIFIC USE PERMIT
�A T, —
o � na
ElEvnnoN > 3a AM<,I .,....-.. EXHIBITC
0
SCALE
4j,_ ANTENNA COMMERICAL
1"=1' ,.., .„.. ...,.,..
PROPER COMMONS ADDITION
LOT 4 BLOCK A
HARRISON JAMISON SURVEY
ABSTRACTNO.480.
ti e4. AUGUST 15,2014
VERIZON LEASE ACREAGE: 0.0127 AC/553 SQ,FT.
S 'jam. OWNER ASV P
-'. c(f't..�.>Y�ti�.i.�°,•\ySi�3iZ'lt"-r.:-..r.�-.r__y...>':YnJ'.s�.' �"`•C':.':>'.'"'.`;�(.:. b.e_:a'1.'�, Y.i1•
PROPE
RT
I I f,
NVMCKINNEY TX 15)70ZSCRELCORADoSTE I1p
9]2-50236
APPLICANT ZONE AND SYSTEM INC
,:. YYY...'..`ry Lt.ir'7Ty(.' - LXG AS TX 152DIVE BTE A
rYF{^. 2 HI IAS T%/5208
E V,
I --_ .,..• <��,}�vC;<fN(vy5' .,,,.., 2145dIJ4d0
VP CURVE YOR WEBS SURVEYING INC
I 631.E FRES ION ROAD STE 2110
PLANO TX]5024
I - -- 912 181 6600
\ u I
BRICK WALL SECTION I BRICK WALL SECTION
I FIBERMUXDETAIL
Reaolulion ria 1S-OJ,Page 9
wm
SEES,,
100 FT.RADIUS
"M
-fh16 laotide plan IS tar,PpUal PUMOSAS wry
rig Ways t
B.AlIN I-PW-S Lea.,Et
A
VERIZON WIRE-ESS SITE —Iag rd.A-
"'!AREA .Where PS"ItWel exposed aeltY bOXESS anal lead—
.1.11.pared t.—,'ch 11A be4dag
�All.,gn.ge a,..Sao 1-1—are subject to app—al by
I ICRES the 814id'as il-SPOC—DSIGE—t
A
pOEE,a k BF PAINTED PROOt"8E`Gv—`
—.P
S14-0004
SPECIFIC-IC USE PERMIT
EXHIBIT D
ANTENNA COMMERICAL
6'BRICK WALLPROSPER COMMONS ADDITION
SCALE I W
LOT 4 BLOCK A
HARRISON JAMISON SURVEY
0 TOWER ELEVATION ABSTRACT NO.480
2 AUGUST 15,2014
OWNER AM PROSPER MOPE RI OWNER t11
zWFL00rtPWPKWY STLIIG
'x .,-e
972-7 o2oo
wl"41
161 NANUUY OWL STI A
UALEAS TX 75208
21x.1-1
SURVFYOR WrEIBSUHVEYINI,INC
"3PRE$tOn ROAD
s'c zoo
IjI,N6T%15C21
0]2"",
EB 10
MAP
VIGiNt3Y '
SITE
tow
g
5
RSTEVENs -
LANDSCAPE
.mu'vi/'aY�amv�t�„yprx..w1�aw.✓+'+<'Mt ° ma'-,�r - 4>a�1 '�.
wvx'n��b.n.rv.✓,d°' sz °°',qas c•n.r Mm +`{"`aeAs�;v. , —�3.r � 1
�. "ted•"�:,��;«::�M.>m,e ° .,.c ,� `�� _�'
,n°Mass carts,r,a��na�f�s,rot'-mad reNn0.p sew v .xe,rn
E""NG tlUIIDiNG _ _
r
yw rr^o-,.n .riz WM'mro^",wuxc,^>•'-m 'sW
5140004EE RMtl N
DSGAPE PLA
r u°^"y'.4 <,< NoscaPE IBtS FE RIGAL
zz,s ^,'" '� m.�°;,,�,.a°.•n' r Y. � EXH MM
P; a _
AN}ENNAGO
MOSAppll'ION
MN
GO
ARO
OGK A RVEV
LOS48lN1AMi5ON5U
NO 4R0
85LRA 4� t.
AUGUST 15,201 350.E
A �
G 55
AN
iRRtGAS14N PL
VERIZON LEASE ACREAGE p•0127
,a Fsce"�'a;�'ise's'e'ssi RPROPER SOEJNE0.L4t'.
, 4a"nrn.vd^"w:�.rfi'x-0a•.ex a�yurr.ansna�nm.n,ar.+f"' OMfNER �KNlN�RtX I50IC'
a""Jrfwd.a a "ew 9i2.54I.02N1 S tNE A
.xus"y " wt�<�m'Mun ONE SYS;EE pR.NE SiE
a,i;Ln,s<°�Y wx. ,,,,�^. APPl1GAM 7610 RRND�i5200
SF-10 k �P
oil A
x.
^r.
+. RICHLANU-BL VD
C
C
S-2
P
C
S-2/S-4
0
m Verizon Wireless Site
U)
z
O
COR 2 S14-0004 COR
PD-2 o PD-2
C
w S-4
a
U)
O
a
r
{
C
AMMUCOM
tkl
.T
E UNIVERSITY DR .�:�. ::
1311111
1 inch=250 feet N
0 125 250 375 /t
Feet N
COMMUNITY CHARACTER
Highway 380
Land Use
Of the three major corridors, Highway 380 contains the
longest stretch of potential development. Generally
speaking,land uses along the Highway 380 Corridor were
seen to be more commercial in nature. Unlike Preston Road
and the Dallas North Tollway,big-box retail scored relatively
well along Highway 380,in addition to office, hotel uses,
retail centers and service uses,such as a gas station and fast
food restaurant. Similar to the other categories,industrial
uses,including warehouses,were not seen as a highly
appropriate use along the Highway 380 corridor. Due to the
length of the corridor,a variety of land uses will be located
along the corridor. Typically speaking,retail and service a
establishments will locate adjacent to Highway 380 and
along major intersections,in a nodal pattern of activity. %+
Such uses capitalize on higher traffic counts and require a
higher degree of visibility. Big box uses may also be located
along the corridor,but pad sites should be located adjacent
to Highway 380 to capitalize on visibility and pass-by trips.
Residential uses,such as patio homes,snout homes and
townhomes and brownstones may be located within this
district. Such uses will likely be used as a buffer between
more intense uses along Highway 380 and lower intensity
residential neighborhoods to the north. Such uses may also
be located mid-block, reserving major intersections for retail
and commercial uses.
Character
The character of Highway 380 will be much more
commercial in nature. Wide setbacks with large
landscape buffering will protect the visual appearance of
the corridor,while still allowing more intense
commercial land uses to operate. Big Box retailers may
be permitted, but they should be designed to the highest
possible quality, incorporating significant landscaping,
z� high quality materials,such as stone and brick,and
should contain architectural enhancements and building
• articulation.
Medium and high density residential options may be
included within the Highway 380 corridor but such uses
should be carefully designed to protect,enhance and
buffer low density neighborhoods to the north from
more intense development along Highway 380.
Town of Prosper
• Comprehensive Plan Resolution No.15-03,Page 13
ZONE SYSTEMS, INC.
October 28, 2014
Mr. Alex Glushko
Senior Planner
Town of Prosper
Prosper, TX 75078
RE: Verizon Wireless
Proposed antenna at American Self Storage
Dear Mr. Glushko:
The Prosper Planning and Zoning Commission asked me to provide information as to the
potential use of three sites that are north of the site on which we propose to locate a mobile
telephone antenna. Those sites are the City elevated water storage tank that is on First Street
east of Preston Road, the new park at First Street and Coit and the Folsom Park adjacent to the
elementary school on the southeast corner of White River Drive and Sommerville.
1. Elevated water storage tank. The elevated water storage tank is near our antenna site
at First Street and First Street and Craig Road. The close proximity to our existing
antenna site precludes this site from being a viable site.
2. Park at Coit and First Street. This site is too far north. The site is approximately 3/ mile
north of our site.
3. Folsom Park. Folsom Park was considered for this site. The Real Estate representative
for Verizon Wireless met with city staff a number of months ago. The real estate
representative felt that the location of the park adjacent to single family homes would be
met with a lot of opposition. The concern was that if there is commercial property that
would serve then the commercial property should be used.
The proposed site is a good site. The site is in a self-storage facility. The site will be
surrounded by buildings. The use of the stealth structure will further minimize the profile of the
structure. There will be no lighting of the pole and it will have a color to match the water tower
on First Street and Craig Road.
The site is on commercially zoned property. Generally, antennas are located on commercial
property or property that is not developed with single family homes.
Please contact me if you have any questions that I can answer.
Sincerely,
Peter Kavanagh
Enc.
1620 HANDLEY DRIVE, SUITE A • D,4LLS(0Y'i%VRS SD b888E2441 941.4440 1 FAX(21 4)941-5259
s ^
7
tt
r/
w
x
J
— ..
79
m
'✓ � Ceda•�}p ergs Dr r � {��
��� �. _" �� fiS��XGr ''h ee Rrv?�.5•D' `��. J�r"P o+�,��a``�C,��t.
F
.n
* a
Wh:l� F�"h�•Jr ''i//er5 Creek: y � � ��� �r ��.
�a y - rcniand0w
,+....r,., FUnyVer•sltyir., cc'0��...�wJrS�*380
72
Gj
S f earth000
• km
Resolution No.15-03,
Pa15
.-
Verizon Wireless
Land Use Statement
Verizon Wireless strives to provide the best wireless telecommunications service
possible. The effort is constantly recognized by JD Power and others for the
quality of its service. The quality in mobile telephone service depends on the
strategic location of antennas throughout the system to provide coverage and
enough capacity to handle the volume of calls.
The proposed site at the Advantage Storage property at Prosper Commons is a
good site because it is a commercial tract.
Verizon Wireless originally was working with the Town of Prosper to locate on a
TXU transmission tower. TXU gave preliminary approval to allow use of its
transmission tower in Prosper near our current location. The property on which
the tower is located is owned by the Town of Prosper. Verizon Wireless was
working with the town on a ground lease for the ground equipment at the base of
the tower. In February of this year TXU decided that since these towers in
Prosper carry 345KV lines that it will not allow antennas on the towers.
Verizon Wireless must construct its own antenna structures when no other
structure is available to locate antennas. This area is an area in which no other
structure is available.
This site is a well disguised mini-warehouse development with a retail area facing
State Highway 380. We plan to locate a stealth monopole antenna adjacent to
the mini-warehouse building. The monopole will not have the traditional mast or
platform at the top. The antennas will be internal to the pole. The pole will be
the same color as the central water tower on First Street near Preston Road.
The pole will be surrounded by a brick wall that will match the mini-warehouse
brick.
The pole will be 101 feet in height. Verizon Wireless will locate its antennas near
the top of the pole. The pole is designed to provide space for a second carrier.
The benefit of the site will be very good coverage for Verizon Wireless customers
who live or work in this general area. The objective is to provide in-building
coverage to the entire town as it gets developed. This site will provide the
needed coverage and capacity to this general area.
Resolution No.15-03,Page 16
0
Prosper South Coverage
Before andAfter Plots
August 13th, 2014
Resolution No. 15-03, Page 17
Confidential and proprietary materials for authorized Venzon personnel and Outside agencies only.Use.dISGIOSUre or distribution of this material is not permitted to any unauthorized persons or third partiesexcept by written agreement,
s
verl2n
w
1>N�� � ■
!
r«
�
�,►
IN OwmI
Ng
w
a ••
lvt 71
W2.
Niter
t x
r`
5k
�4 t
it
I a9�ee",e„t.
x � or th��d Pa��es except by�ntten
page 19 anY
Pei
i nauthon�e
d Persons
_ _ . ReSO�Ut�o�No'15-p3 ut 5 mater at s not m ned to
. e d�sdosure or distrEbution
ersorv,ei and o�dsrde aaenc�es or�� Us
Uont�deniu'rt and Plop
neia\y„,atenatstor authonzedvenzonP
;ISPER.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
OWN OF P.O.Box 307
Prosper,TX 75078
Phone:972-346-3602
Fax:972-347-2842
Piwsper is it place where everyone rrraffers.
REPLY FORM
SUBJECT:
Specific Use Permit Case S14-0004: -The Town of Prosper has received a request for a Specific Use Permit(SUP)
for a Commercial Antenna,on 5.4±acres.
LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY:
The property is located on the east side of Prosper Commons Boulevard,300±feet south of Richland Boulevard,
DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST:
A Specific Use Permit is an opportunity to approve,conditionally approve,or deny identified specific uses that may
be permitted in specified zoning districts. These uses generally have, among other things, unusual nuisance
characteristics or are of a public or semi-public character and are often essential or desirable for the general
convenience and welfare of the community.
I OPPOSE the request as described in the notice of public hearing.
` u I DO NOT OPPOSE the request as described in the notice of public hearing.
COMMENTS(ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECESSARY)- tle— 0,-1 b
o
"zoo
- -- -- -------- - - ------ --
"Lp�R 5Vd?AMe-ro JT1 cr
Name(please print) Signature
sly
Addressss Date 3
City,State,and Zip Code E-mail Address
Resolution No. 15-03,Page 20