AI- 6889
3.
P&Z Agenda
- Meeting Date:
- 01/11/2023
- Title:
- SU22-29 (Acacia)
- Submitted By:
- Robert Kirschmann, Development Services
- Department:
- Development Services
Presentation:
PowerPoint
NAME
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Robert Kirschmann
TITLE
of PRESENTER:
of PRESENTER:
Planner II
Agenda Item Text:
Docket SU22-29 (Acacia) The Applicant requests a Special Use Authorization to approve a wireless communication tower of 34 feet and associated equipment.
Background:
The Applicant, Dakota Pro, represented by Ms. Latoya Phipps requests a Special Use Authorization to approve a wireless communication tower of 34 feet and associated equipment.
The project is located at 3182 W Acacia Lane, Benson, Arizona. The property is also identified as Assessor Parcel Number 124-02-006R consisting of approximately 4 acres.
The establishment of a communications tower that exceeds 30-feet in height is subject to site development standards in Article 18 of the Zoning Regulations and requires Special Use Authorization from the Planning and Zoning Commission in a rural zoning district.
The Applicant proposes a 34-foot-tall communication tower on a 4-acre rural zoned parcel. The tower is composed of factory-built steel assembled onsite and placed on a poured concrete base. The project will also include solar panels and battery backup. The final product and services will be the provision/maintenance of new Dakota Pro Service.
All new telecommunication towers require:
? Approval from the local governing authority for the proposed site (in this case, the planning and zoning commission through a special use authorization)
? Compliance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules implementing NEPA
? In the interest of aviation safety, the following may also be required:
? Federal Aviation Administration notification and/or
? Antenna Structure Registration.
The Federal Communications Act (Section 332 (c)(7)) preserves state and local authority over zoning and land use decisions for personal wireless service facilities but sets forth specific limitations on that authority. Specifically, local governments may not:
• Unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services,
• Regulate in a manner that prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services, must act on applications within a reasonable period of time,
Any application denial must be in writing and supported by substantial evidence in a written record. The statute also preempts local decisions that are premised directly or indirectly on the environmental effects of radio frequency (RF) emissions, assuming that the provider complies with the Commission's RF rules.
The project is located at 3182 W Acacia Lane, Benson, Arizona. The property is also identified as Assessor Parcel Number 124-02-006R consisting of approximately 4 acres.
The establishment of a communications tower that exceeds 30-feet in height is subject to site development standards in Article 18 of the Zoning Regulations and requires Special Use Authorization from the Planning and Zoning Commission in a rural zoning district.
The Applicant proposes a 34-foot-tall communication tower on a 4-acre rural zoned parcel. The tower is composed of factory-built steel assembled onsite and placed on a poured concrete base. The project will also include solar panels and battery backup. The final product and services will be the provision/maintenance of new Dakota Pro Service.
All new telecommunication towers require:
? Approval from the local governing authority for the proposed site (in this case, the planning and zoning commission through a special use authorization)
? Compliance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules implementing NEPA
? In the interest of aviation safety, the following may also be required:
? Federal Aviation Administration notification and/or
? Antenna Structure Registration.
The Federal Communications Act (Section 332 (c)(7)) preserves state and local authority over zoning and land use decisions for personal wireless service facilities but sets forth specific limitations on that authority. Specifically, local governments may not:
• Unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services,
• Regulate in a manner that prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services, must act on applications within a reasonable period of time,
Any application denial must be in writing and supported by substantial evidence in a written record. The statute also preempts local decisions that are premised directly or indirectly on the environmental effects of radio frequency (RF) emissions, assuming that the provider complies with the Commission's RF rules.