Minutes P&Z 06/07/2001MINUTES OF A
PUBLIC HEARING & REGULAR SESSION
FOR THE
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB
7 JUNE 2001
The Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Trophy Club, Texas met in a Public
Hearing and a Regular Session on 7 June 2001, at 6:30 pm in the Boardroom of the
Trophy Club Administration Building, 100 Municipal Drive, Trophy Club, Texas 76262.
COMMISSIONERS ATTENDANCE:
Chairman Hill
Vice Chairman Gilliland
Commissioner Ashby
Commissioner Reed
Commissioner Rodgers
Commissioner Shegon
Commissioner Sheridan
STAFF AND GUESTS PRESENT:
Kerin C. Fleck
Dan Boutwell
Bill LeGrand
Jim Barnett
Mike Crain
Mike Esfandi
James Connel
Dwayne L Baker
Stephanie Cline Smith
K. Brock Bailey
James Duffey
Anne Duffey
Kathleen Anderson
Mark Hernandez
Tiffany Hernandez
Traci L Love
JC Sampson
excused
present
present
present
present
present
present
Planning & Zoning Coordinator
Planning Consultant
Director of Public Works
Applicant/ Sprint PCS
Applicant/ Sprint PCS
Applicant/ Sprint PCS
Applicant/ Sprint PCS
Applicant/ Sprint PCS
Applicant/ Sprint PCS
Attorney representing Sprint PCS
Property Owner - 4 St. Andrews Court
Property Owner - 4 St. Andrews Court
Property Owner - 13 Brook Hollow Court
Property Owner - 7 St. Andrews Court
Property Owner - 7 St. Andrews Court
Property Owner - 8 St. Andrews Court
Property Owner - 5 St. Andrews Court
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM.
Vice Chairman Gilliland called the meeting to order at 6:32 pm, and announced a
quorum was present.
PUBLIC HEARING
2. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION TO OPEN PUBLIC HEARING.
A motion was made to open the public hearing.
Planning & Zoning Public Hearing & Regular Session 7 June 2009
Motion: Reed
Second: Ashby
Ayes: Gilliland, Rogers, Shegon, Sheridan
Nays: None
Action: 6-0
Motion carried.
3. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION TO CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING RELATIVE TO
THE FOLLOWING:
A. REQUEST FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CO -LOCATED, WIRELESS ANTENNA
FACILITY, LOCATED GENERALLY TO THE NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 114 AND
SOUTH OF 7 SAINT ANDREWS COURT, WITHIN A TXU EASEMENT. APPLICANT:
SPRINT PCS. (CUP -01-002)
Mr. Boutwell addressed the Commission. The antenna facility is a stealth facility tower,
but due to the height of the proposed tower, it will require a conditional use permit. The
applicant is proposing to change out an existing TXU pole with a new pole able to hold
the weight of the antenna equipment, and extend the tower fifteen (15) feet in height.
Staff has asked that the tower be as stealth as possible, recommending the "low profile
extended arm" antenna.
Staff has also asked the applicant to provide the Town with the decorative wall and
landscaping detail that will be used to screen the equipment. TXU will be more likely to
approve the screening wall in their easement if the Town has approved the structure
first.
The lights proposed on the equipment building are unacceptable. Mr. Boutwell would
not recommend any lamp greater than one hundred (100) watt.
Mr. Barnett addressed the Commission and handed out a detail of what the screening
will look like. Sprint is proposing a concrete/masonry, pre -fab wall. It's designed to look
very similar to the fences currently in the area, except it will be much more sturdy than
the current wood fences. As far as the lighting that is proposed on the plan, it is the
generally proposed lighting for Sprint's towers, however a timed switch with auto cut-off
is possible. The tower is proposed to be raised to one hundred (100) feet.
The following property owners addressed the Commission:
Jim Duffey - 4 St. Andrews Court
What is the height of a low profile antenna vs. the proposed one hundred (100) plus,
foot antenna?
Why was this site picked when there are other alternative sites that won't have a direct
effect on the personal property of these homeowners?
Vice Chairman Gilliland responded to the first question by stating that the height of the
antenna is not significantly different one way or the other. What is being discussed is
N:\kfleck\Private\PLANNING & ZONING\Minutes\2001\June\06072001 PH & REG SESSION.doc [7/30/01 8:55:43 AM]
FA
Planning & Zoning Public Hearing & Regular Session 7 June 2001
the mounting brackets at the top of the pole. The only difference is how they are
attached to the pole.
Pictures of "low profile" antennas and "high profile" antennas were shown to Mr. Duffey
in order to further explain the difference between the two classifications.
Mr. Boutwell informed the members of the audience that the Commission was referring
to the Town's wireless antenna facilities ordinance. Ms Fleck will provide a copy to
anyone requesting a copy.
Vice Chairman Gilliland discussed the second question asked by Mr. Duffey. Mr.
Boutwell further explained how a site is chosen.
Mr. Barnett stated that the proposed site was chosen basically for it's height and
elevation. Also, it's not in the main entry -way into the Town.
Mr. Duffey asked how the height of the tower would fit in with the other existing poles.
Mr. Barnett said it will be the same as what was done on the Voice Stream tower.
Anne Duffey - 4 St. Andrews Court
How close is the top of the antenna to the fences backing up to SH 114?
Vice Chairman Gilliland said it will be approximately one hundred (100) feet high.
Mrs. Duffey stated concern for the property values.
Mr. Boutwell discussed the passing of the Telecommunications Act passed in 1996 by
the Federal Government.
Kathleen Anderson - 13 Brook Hollow Lane
Why isn't the pole being proposed in a more commercialized area?
Mr. Crone, Fossil Creek Land Company addressed the Commission. He went on to say
his company was retained by Sprint to acquire the property in question. Approximately
eight (8) areas were discussed. However, much of the locating of the towers was
based on an RF medium, therefore, most of the areas were not as good as the area
being proposed.
Mr. Esfandi explained how the proposed site is chosen.
Mr. Crane said that two (2) other TXU structures were looked at, however, based on the
expansion of SH 114 space at the base of the structure was limited and the two (2) sites
were eliminated.
JC Sampson - 5 St. Andrews Court
Are there any guide wires that will be running up the tower?
N:\kfieck\Private\PLANNING & ZONING\Minutes\2001\June\06072001 PH & REG SESSION.doc [7/30/01 8:55:43 AM]
3
Planning & Zoning Public Hearing & Regular Session 7 June 2001
Vice Chairman Gilliland reiterated that the tower will be exactly like the TXIJ poles that
are currently in place.
Mark Hernandez - 7 St. Andrews Court
What is the square footage of the base structure?
Will there be any leveling requirements?
As technology changes is there a commitment or restriction that can be placed on the
application so that the pole will be removed or replaced?
Mr. Barnett said the dimensions of the screened equipment are proposed to be twenty
-five (25) feet long, from north to south and twenty (20) feet wide.
Vice Chairman Gilliland asked the applicant how the screening structure will be
situated in the thirty five (35) foot easement.
Mr. Barnett said it would be on the outward side of the berm, closest to SH 114 and
referred further questioning to Mr. James Conner.
Mr. Conner addressed the Commission. To level the berm, they will cut into the berm
and build a retaining wall so that the berm will stay in place. The retaining wall will be
approximately a maximum of three (3) feet in height.
JC Sampson - 5 St. Andrews Court
Mr. Sampson asked why the tower could not be built to the west?
Mr. Boutwell further explained the Federal Communication Act and discussed the
requirements that must be met under the Town's wireless antenna ordinance.
Anne Duffey - 4 St. Andrews Court
By right, could Sprint put any structure on and/or below the tower? Also, whom will the
tower accommodate, emergency 9-1-1 calls or other non -emergency phone call?
Vice Chairman Gilliland responded that as long as it met the requirements of the
ordinance. Mr. Boutwell stated that the tower will have the capacity to receive
emergency, and non -emergency calls, as well as all other devices that use the same
signal.
Tiffany Hernandez - 7 St. Andrews Court
Will the tower be removed if if is no longer needed?
Mr. Boutwell said that there was no way that aspect could be enforced because a
contract could not be required of applicant.
Traci Love - 8 St. Andrews Court
Will the ground facility be maintained?
Vice Chairman Gilliland stated that the ground equipment will be required to be
maintained in order to meet the requirements of the Town.
N:\kfleck\Private\PLANNING & ZONING\Minutes\2001\June\06072001 PH & REG SESSION.doc [7/30/01 8:55:43 AM]
M
Planning & Zoning Public Hearing & Regular Session 7 June 2001
4. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND/OR
CONTINUE TO A DATE CERTAIN.
A motion was made to close the public hearing.
Motion:
Ashby
Second:
Reed
Ayes:
Gilliland, Rodgers, Sheridan, Shegon
Nays:
None
Action:
6-0
Motion carried.
5. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION TO CONVENE INTO A REGULAR SESSION.
*REGULAR SESSION
6. DISCUSSION AND CONSIDERATION OF APPROPRIATE ACTION RELATIVE TO THE
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN COUNCIL
REGARDING THE ADOPTION OF THE FOLLOWING:
A. REQUEST FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CO -LOCATED, WIRELESS ANTENNA FACILITY,
LOCATED GENERALLY TO THE NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 114 AND SOUTH OF 7
SAINT ANDREWS COURT, WITHIN A TXU EASEMENT. APPLICANT: SPRINT PCS. (CUP -
01 -002)
Commissioner Shegon asked the height of the walls and the berm.
Mr. Conner said the top of the berm will be five (5) feet above the existing service road.
The top of the wall will be about three (3) feet above the top of the berm. Sprint is
working with TXDOT in relation to how the drainage in the area will be effected.
Commissioner Shegon requested a site plan showing a cross section thru the area, a
drainage plan, a landscape plan and a detail on the construction materials that will be
used for the site.
Commissioner Rodgers asked for further explanation as to why the applicant is
requesting fifteen (15) additional feet.
Mr. Esfandi explained further and said they could change the antenna design from a
triangle top design to a lower profile, flush -mount antenna design.
Commissioner Reed addressed the audience and explained the options available to
the Town regarding the placement to antenna facilities.
Commissioner Sheridan asked the applicant how they would be able to get the
masonry wall approved.
N:\kfleck\Private\PLANN1NG & ZONING\Minutes\2001\June\06072001 PH & REG SESSION.doc [7/30/01 8:55:43 AM]
5
Planning & Zoning Public Hearing & Regular Session 7 June 2001
Mr. Barnett said the type of equipment Sprint has, cabinets on steel platforms, will not
be effected by rainfall or water -flow. The equipment is right at, or just below the eight
(8) foot masonry wall. Sprint has installed fences and walls similar to the proposed wall
in the past. Lights are needed for maintenance at night. The equipment is in cabinets
and the size of the components is very small. Trucks with lights are not easily driven up
to the area due to space confinements.
Commissioner Sheridan asked about the drainage plan.
TXDOT is currently reviewing the drainage plan submitted by the applicant.
Commissioner Sheridan suggested the Commission wait to hear back from the
applicant about the following items:
The equipment not exceed eight (8) feet
No photo -cell, the light should be on a switch
Further details on the masonry wall
Commissioner Ashby pointed out typographical errors in the construction notes, asked
for further details on the generator and foundation.
Mr. Boutwell said the setbacks for the drive cut in relation to Precinct Cline Road are
being reviewed by Parsons Engineering on behalf of the Town of Westlake to ensure the
proper distances are approved.
Mr. Baker said the lights will be placed below the fence line, instead of raised above
the fence.
Commissioner Ashby asked what the minimum wattage of the lights is in order to work
safely within the cabinets at night.
Mr. Baker stated Sprint could install drop lights at a lower wattage.
Commissioner Sheridan asked Mr. Boutwell whether or not TXDOT has indicated they will
install a sound barrier wall along that section of SH 114, and if they do what side of the
equipment would it go on.
Mr. Boutwell said he did not have any knowledge of TXDOT's plans.
Mr. LeGrand said TXDOT has indicated they won't install any sound walls, however if
they did they would accommodate TXU's accessibility to the power lines by putting it
along the back side of the easement.
Commissioner Ashby had no further comments.
Vice Chairman Gilliland stated that he would like to see additional details before a
recommendation is made to the Town Council. He went on to ask about the mounting
position of the GPS lights. Mr. Baker said the lights could be moved to the top of the
tower.
N:\kfleck\Private\PLANNING & ZONING\Minutes\2001\June\06072001 PH & REG SESSION.doc [7/30/01 8:55:43 AM]
r
Planning & Zoning
Public Hearing & Regular Session 7 June 2001
A motion was made to table this item and continue discussion in order to see additional
details on grading, drainage, lighting, elevations, materials and landscaping.
Motion:
Shegon
Second:
Ashby
Ayes:
Gilliland, Reed, Sheridan, Rodgers
Nays:
None
Action:
6-0
Motion carried.
The motion was amended to table this item to a date certain, 12 July 2001, in order to
see additional details on grading, drainage, lighting, elevations, materials and
landscaping and also change the regular session meeting date from Thursday 5 July
2001, to Thursday 12 July 2001.
Amended
Motion:
Shegon
Second:
Ashby
Ayes:
Gilliland, Reed, Sheridan, Rodgers
Nays:
None
Action:
6-0
Motion carried.
7. REPORTS AND COMMISSIONER'S DISCUSSIONS; OTHER MATTERS.
There were no comments or reports from the Commission.
8. REPORTS FROM STAFF.
There were no comments or reports from staff.
9. ADJOURNMENT.
Vice Chairman Gilliland adjourned the meeting at approximately 8:37 pm.
Ri k Gilliland, Vice Chairman
Kerin C. Fleck, Planning 4 Zoning Coordinator
N:\kfleck\Private\PLANNING & ZONING\Minutes\2001\June\06072001 PH & REG SESSION.doc [7/30/01 8:55:43 AM]
N