Airport Board of Adjustment Minutes - 06/27/2001MINUTES
AIRPORT BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
June 27, 2001
PRESENT:
Stephen Scarlott, Chairman
Ken Birck
Rick Boone
Preston Giles
David Mitchell
David A. Clark, Director of Community Development
Steve Seese, City Planning Administrator
Paul Stillson, Planner II
I. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Scarlott at 1:30 p.m.
RE=CEIVED IN
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Date `fl- LA - Cf
By PC Time �l Oft
♦ Members
♦ City Staff
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Giles made a motion with Mr. Birck seconding to approve the minutes of the July 29, 1998
meeting. The vote was unanimous in favor of approval.
II. REGULAR AGENDA
1. Communications Tower
4729 Jacksboro Highway
Case ABOA 01 =01
Applicant ............ ..........................Denny Redmon, for Land Acquisitions, Inc.
Requested Action .. .......................Variance
Purpose ........... .............................To locate a 90 -foot communications tower within a 50 foot
buffer area of a transitional surface.
Property ...................... ..................Approximately 0.432 acres out of Block 5, Kemp and Newby
Sub., Cherokee School Lands, Wichita Falls, Texas.
Proposed Lot 1, Block 1, Smith Walker Addition.
Location ............... ........................Located 172.5 feet north, and 230 feet east of the
intersection of Jacksboro Highway and Echo Lane.
Planning & Zoning Commission June 27, 2001 Page 1
Existing Land Use ..... ...................Contractor's office, zoned LI
Surrounding Land Uses & Zoning N: Big State Grinding, LI
S: Dog Grooming & Taxidermy, LI
E: Kickapoo Airport, LI
W: Offices, Mini - Storage, GC
Commentary.
The issue before the Board deals with the interaction of providing service versus regulations
intended to protect public health and safety and future development of an airport as it relates to
height obstructions caused by a tower.
Airports are governed by imaginary or control surfaces that define the maneuvering areas of
aircraft. These surfaces are defined under Part 77 of Chapter 36, Federal Aviation
Regulations. The FAA is responsible for evaluating proposals that fall within a 100:1 slope of a
runway. A City may also adopt regulations, using Part 77 as minimum standards. The Airport
Zoning Regulations recognizes Part 77 descriptions but, following consultation with an airport
consultant retained by the City to produce a master plan for Kickapoo Airpark, contains a
higher level of standard — a 50 foot buffer below the defined surface. The City owns Kickapoo
Downtown Airpark.
The Board must determine in its findings that all the below criteria are met prior to awarding a
variance.
A literal application or enforcement of the regulation would result in practical difficulty or
unnecessary hardship; and
2. The granting of the relief would:
a. result in substantial justice being done;
b. not be contrary to the public interest; and
C. be in accordance with the spirit of the regulation.
The attached has been provided by the applicant in support of this request for a variance and
in response to the above evaluating criteria.
Recommendation:
Authorities with the City responsible for evaluating potential height obstructions to Kickapoo
Airpark have reviewed this request. They have determined "No significant impact" will result.
The following was submitted by the applicant:
Planning & Zoning Commission June 27, 2001 Page 2
RE: 6455 -C Additional Use Restrictions
am requesting to construct an 85' monopole plus a 5' lightning rod.
believe 6455 -C is restricting anything [above] 50' AGL. If this is the case,
am requesting a variance for a 40.'
1. The proposed location of the tower is East of 4729 Jacksboro Highway
approximately 218' and North of Echo Lane approx. 172.' This is an
area governing under the New Airport Zoning Regulations.. The (RF)
Radio Frequency Engineers for U.S. Cellular have determined that the
height of 85' is essential to provide adequate coverage for transmission,
reception encryption, and translation of voice and data signals and to
handoff this data to it's other towers within the City of Wichita Falls.
2. The customers of U.S. Cellular and the citizens of you community call
our office and explain to us where and when they can make or received
calls or if in fact they are having a conversation and all of a sudden the
call is terminated or discontinued. These are coverage or capacity
deficiencies. We are attempting to rectify these deficiencies by the
tower placement at this location.
3. We are mandated to provide coverage and capacity for our customers.
This why they have a contract with U.S. Cellular. This tower will have
the capacity to allow three (3) carriers. One @ 82' center, another @
67' center and still another @ 52' center. As the number of wireless
telephones continue to increase daily, the issue is not only coverage for
all wireless carriers, whether they be Cellular or PCS, but capacity as
well. USCC does not feel they have been singled out with this
ordinance. This location happens to be the area that requires
maximum improvement and is the best location to enhance their
coverage and capacity. Even a tower at close proximity could use this
tower location to improve their capacity.
4. USCC is providing a tower that will co- locate a minimum two (2)
additional carriers. I believe that this attests that we will not be the only
carrier benefiting from this tower of 90' height when approved.
Mr. Seese informed the Board that the City is allowed to have more restrictive regulations
concerning airports than the FAA. This issue concerns the proposed tower will protrude into
the 50' buffer zone by 28 or 29 feet. Towers of 62.8 feet or less do not require approval by this
Board. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of this tower at their
June meeting despite the neighborhood opposition. The applicant has appealed that decision
to City Council. If the decision is negative from this Board, then the maximum height of this
board can only be 62.8 feet. Staff recommends denial of this request.
Ms. Kelly Balman, representative for the applicant, stated that staff's position was understood,
however, FAA has given their approval of a 90 foot tower. The tower is needed at the site in
order to provide coverage in the area and to off -load capacities of overloaded towers nearby.
Planning & Zoning Commission June 27, 2001 Page 3
A tower of 62.8 foot will not have the capacity to relieve the problem. An 85 foot tower would
have additional space for two other providers beside U. S Cellular. When asked if the tower
would interfere with home electronics, she replied the tower's wattage is similar to that of a
toaster or light bulb and would not interfere.
Mr. Seese commented that radio interference and health issues are considered by the FCC,
not the FAA. The FAA has given clearance but the City's regulations are more restrictive and
community oriented.
Mr. Boone asked to see the submission to Shepard and FAA and asked how they were
advised of additional power frequencies, transmitters, and receivers. Ms. Balman stated the
submission included the co- location and rated weight for two other providers. Mr. Boone
stated he would have preferred to read this submission in the agenda packet. Ms. Balman
clarified that the misunderstanding about the FAA and FCC by stating she thought the question
concerned interference with transmission from the airport.
Chairman Scarlott reminded the Board that they were to only consider the height of the tower,
whether to grant a variance of 27.2 feet over the acceptable maximum of 62.8 feet.
Mr. Giles stated that the regulations have been written for a purpose and we should comply
with them. Granting a variance could set a precedence.
Mr. Birck asked why an additional safety zone was needed. Mr. Seese replied that Shepard is
an Air Force training base and Kickapoo provides civilian flight training. The buffer zone was
established as an extra margin of safety for aircraft and land uses in and around both airports.
When asked when this regulation was passed, Mr. Seese responded that it was passed about
90 days ago; it was prior to U. S. Cellular application being submitted.
Mr. Boone asked if this regulation would prohibit an ILS approach at Kickapoo. Mr. Seese
responded that it would not. Different approaches will be considered in the future at Kickapoo.
Mr. Boone asked if U. S. Cellular had discussions prior to the regulations being adopted; Mr.
Seese replied there was considerable. Twenty -one contacts were made prior to the ordinance
being passed with tower providers, service providers, amateur radio operators, etc.
Negotiation with these groups took place and the City addressed the issues of concern, with
the exception of frequencies, output, and control features. The result was the conditional use
process in several different zones.
Ms. Balman stated that U. S. Cellular did not apply for a tower until the moratorium was lifted.
Mr. Seese explained that City Council was concerned that there were not enough regulations
to protect the City. During the development of the regulations, the moratorium was
established.
Mr. Boone inquired about the tower being able to service the new Stone Lake Subdivision and
it was stated by Mr. Denny Redmon, Site Acquisition, that it would. He continued by stating
that his search area was about % mile in each direction of the airport. The tower was designed
to be between other towers than could evenly distribute or hand -off signals to it. Towers
located in downtown, Barnett Road, the southwest area, and Parker Square will all hand -off to
Planning & Zoning Commission June 27, 2001 Page 4
this location. There was discussion regarding the types of towers and the type of coverage
provided.
The following citizens expressed concerns based on safety and helicopter traffic:
Raymond Meyers, 5000 Joyce Lane
Barbara Holtzer, 5009 Joyce Lane
Jane Frie, 5011 Joyce Lane
All acknowledged Mr. Giles comment about the maximum height being set for a reason which
should not be varied.
Mr. Redmon stated that FAA regulations state that planes should not be flown over residential
areas. He explained that the tower needs to be 85 feet to function efficiently. There are seven
carriers per market and this tower will accommodate three of them. Chairman Scarlott asked if
there were lighting requirements; Mr. Redmon replied there were none. Mr. Robert
Henderson, Operations Manager with U. S. Cellular, stated that if a light were requested on the
tower, it could be done but none is required.
Mr. Mitchell stated this is a difficult decision but he does agree with Mr. Giles. Mr. Boone
stated it was unfortunate that this is a new ordinance and he commented that there were no
supporters of the higher tower height. Mr. Birck stated this issue is centered around progress
and safety; he stated he was leaning towards upholding the ordinance.
Mr. Giles made a motion to deny the variance which would dictate that the maximum height of
the tower shall be 62.8 feet. Mr. Birck seconded the motion. The vote was five (5) in favor and
none (0) opposed. The variance was not granted.
IV. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 2:25 p.m.
Stephen Scarlott, Chairman
ATTEST:
Steve Seese, City Planning Administrator
Date
Date
Planning & Zoning Commission June 27, 2001 Page 5