Correspondence 08/26/02 MON 16:34 FAX 15039639696 SBA II002
r, Ofid.00 - a °3/
%2390 5.-ke€63 1
• „„;•,.,
CITY OF TIGARD
August 20, 2002 OREGON
Ron Meckler
SBA Network Services, Inc.
123 NE 3r Avenue, Suite 215
Portland, OR 97232
RE Minor Modification Request of CUP97- 00002, Case File-No. MMD2002 -00Q21 • • ..-
Dear Mr. Meckler: . •
This letter is in response to your request for a Minor Modification (MMD2002- 00021) of the
approved site development and conditional use permit located at 12390 SW Scholls Ferry Road,
WCTM 1 S134BC, Tax Lot 00600. You have requested to add additional antenna array and
associated equipment cabinets to the existing Qwest monopole for Sprint PCS. The submitted
site and elevation plans reflect the current conditions and proposed additions.
Analysis of Modification Request:
Section 18.360.060 of the Tigard Development Code Site Development Review chapter, states;
any modification which is not within the description of a major modification as provided in section
18.360.050 shall be considered a minor modification."
• Section 18.360.050 states that the Director shall determine that a major modification(s) has
resulted if one (1) or more of the changes listed below have been proposed:
1. An increase in dwellina unit density or lot coverage for residential development.
The proposal does not involve residential property. Therefore, this standard does not
apply.
2. A change in the ratio or number of different types of dwelling units. This criterion is
not applicable, as this request does not involve a residential development.
3. A change that requires additional on -site parking in accordance with Chapter
18.765. The proposed wireless communication facility is not required to provide any
parking, pursuant to the parking demand table in TDC 18.765. Therefore, no additional
on -site parking is needed. One handicap space has been proposed to be relocated from
its present site to a location adjacent to the building. No net loss of parking will occur as
a result of the proposal.
4. A change in the type of commercial or industrial structures as defined by the
Uniform Building Code. No change in the structural occupancy type of the structure is
proposed. Therefore, this criterion is not applicable.
1312M l'r3i 9,r1tf&eS& 1 @QQ` 49I -4171 TDD (503) 684 - 2772 paop 1 of 4
•
08/26/02 MON 16:35 FAX 18039639696 SBA 0 003
• I
5. An increase in the height of the building(s) by more than 20 percent. The applicant
has proposed to establish the new antennae at 62 feet above ground level on the
existing 80 foot pole. No increase to the pole height is proposed. Therefore, this
standard is met.
6. A change in the type and location of accessways and parking areas where off -site
traffic would be affected. The accessory equipment for the additional antennae will be
located to the south of the existing enclosure. This will force one parking space and the
trash enclosure to be relocated to accommodate the additional equipment. Both will be
placed in areas that do not negatively Impact traffic or pedestrian circulation. The
relocated parking space will have no impact to off site traffic due to the distance between
it and off -site traffic. The driveway is presently 12 feet wide at its narrowest, and almost
28 feet wide in the area of the existing retaining wall. The expansion of the monopole
enclosure will not reduce the accessway width below 20 feet, and will not further reduce
the present narrow spot along this drive. No off site traffic would be affected by these
changes, therefore this criterion is satisfied.
7. An Increase in vehicular traffic to and from the site and the increase can be
expected to exceed 100 vehicles per day. The existing and proposed uses are similar
in nature in terms of traffic generation, approximately 1 trip per month. This modification
will double that trip generation to 2 trips per month, significantly below the 100 trip per
day threshold. Therefore, this criterion is satisfied.
8. An increase in the floor areas proposed for a non - residential use by more than ten
percent excluding expansions under 5,000 square feet. This expansion is
approximately 250 square feet, below the 5,000 square foot limitation. The expansion is
also not technically "floor area" as it is not covered by a roof.
9. A reduction in the area reserved for common open space and/or usable open
•
space that reduces the open space area below the minimum required by the code
or reduces the open space areas by more than ten percent. There is no common
open space required for this type of development, therefore this standard does not apply.
10. A reduction of project amenities (recreational facilities, screening; and /or,
landscaping provisions) below the minimum established by the code or by more
than ten percent where specified in the site plan. There are no specific amenities
provided by the existing development. The amount of landscaping is not affected by the
proposal, as the expansion will occur on the already Impervious asphalt driveway.
Therefore this criterion is met. •
11. A modification to the conditions imposed at the time of Site Development Review
approval that Is not the subject of criteria (B). 1 through 10 above. The site was
developed prior to the present Wireless Communications Facility Ordinance (TDC
18.798) and was approved through a conditional use process. CUP 97- 00002. The
conditions of that approval are as follows:
‘ 1. THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH AT LEAST ONE OF THE FOLLOWING TO PREVENT
PUBLIC ACCESS ONTO THE TOWER: 1. INSTALL A MINIMUM 6-FOOT HIGH FENCE AROUND AT
LEAST THE BASE OF THE TOWER. IN WHICH CASE THE SITE PLAN SHALL SHOW THE FENCE
AND ITS PROPOSED DESIGN; OR 2. DEMONSTRATE THAT THE TOWER INCLUDES AN ANTI -
CLIMBING DEVICE OR DESIGN, IN WHICH CASE DRAWINGS OF THE DEVICE OR DESIGN MAY
ACCOMPANY THE SITE PLAN.
Minor Modification Request (MMD 2002 - 00021) Page 2 of 4
08/28/02 HON 18:35 FAX 15039838898 SBA Z1004
aj
The previous applicant had provided a 6 foot tall fence surrounding the monopole. The
proposed expansion will include a separate area for equipment cabinets. While security
fencing is only required to prevent climbing the monopole, the applicant has proposed to
secure the equipment cabinets with a 6 foot fence as well.
2. THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE SPACE TO PARK ITS MAINTENANCE VEHICLE OFF THE
STREET AND NEAR THE TOWER AND ACCESSORY BUILDING. THE SPACE SHALL BE
IDENTIFIED ON A FINAL SITE PLAN. IF THAT SPACE IS OUTSIDE THE LEASED AREA, THEN
THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT AN AMENDMENT TO THE LEASE OR OTHER BINDING
AGREMENT AUTHORIZING THE APPLICANT TO PARK ITS VEHICLE IN THE SPACE SHOWN.
THAT PARKING SPACE MAY BE IN THE ACCESS DRIVEWAY, IF THE DIRECTOR FINDS IT DOES
NOT OBSTRUCT NECESSARY USE OF THE DRIVEWAY FOR OTHER PURPOSES, AND IT MAY
BE RELOCATED ELSEWHERE ON THE PARCEL THAT INCLUDES THE LEASED AREA OR
SHARED WITH OTHER USES ON THAT PARCEL WITHOUT PRIOR CITY APPROVAL, PROVIDED
ACCESS FROM THE SPACE TO THE TOWER SITE AND ACCESSORY BUILDING CONTINUES TO
BE RELATIVELY DIRECT AND CONVENIENT.
The present wireless communications facility code does not require any parking for these
uses. The site provides space for 8 vehicles. The applicant has proposed to relocate
one ADA space In order to accommodate the new equipment. Only one parking space
for both providers is necessary. A binding agreement will also be necessary to maintain
compliance with this condition.
3. THE APPLICANT SHALL PAVE A DRIVE SUFFICIENT IN WIDTH AND DESIGN TO ACCOMMODATE
SERVICE VEHICLES AND EMERGENCY VEHICLES. THE TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE AND RESCUE
DISTRICT SHALL APPROVE THE PLAN FOR THE DRIVE AND ITS IMPROVEMENT BEFORE THE
APPLICANT SUBMITS THE PLAN TO THE CITY. THE DIRECTOR MAY APPROVE A DULY FILED
APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW ALL OR A PORTION OF THE DRIVE TO BE
IMPROVED WITH A GRAVEL SURFACE, PROVIDED THE FIRE MARSHALL APPROVES THAT
SURFACE. UNLESS SUCH A VARIANCE IS APPROVED, THE APPLICANT SHALL PAVE THE
DRIVE FROM THE TOWER SITE TO THE POINT WHERE THE EXISTING PAVEMENT ENDS.
This condition was necessary as the site had not been developed with the car wash at
the time the monopole was approved. Subsequent development of the parcel has
eliminated the need for this condition. The site is in compliance with TVF&R access
requirements.
4. THE APPLICANT SHALL RESPOND IN A TIMELY MANNER TO REQUEST TO COLLOCATE
ANTENNA(S) ON THE TOWER ON THE SITE AND SHALL NEGOTIATE IN GOOD FAITH TO ALLOW
SUCH COLLOCATION SUBJECT TO REASONABLE TERMS AND CONDITIONS. IF THE TOWER
CAN ACCOMMODATE COLLOCATION, AND A PROSPECTIVE OPERATOR ACCEPTS THE TERMS
AND CONDITIONS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT FOR SUCH COLLOCATION, THE
APPLICATION SHALL ALLOW COLLOCATION OF ANTENNA(S) ON THE TOWER AND USE OF
AVAILABLE AREA IN THE ACCESSORY BUILDING, IF ANY, FOR ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT.
The present request is a collocation request, demonstrating that the previous applicant
has fulfilled this condition.
As the above conditions are not adversely impacted, and can be met with slight
modifications to the applicant's proposal, this criterion is satisfied.
Minor Modification Request (MMD 2002- 00021) Page 3 of 4
08/26/02 MON 16:35 FAX 15039639696 SBA Zoos
if
THIS REQUEST HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT TO
THE FOLLOWING LIMITATIONS. PLEASE SUBMIT A COPY OF THIS LETTER WITH YOUR
BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION.
Limitations on Minor Modification Approval
1. The applicant must submit evidence that a binding agreement between the applicant and
property owner has been executed for use of the parking space prior to issuance of any
electrical or building permits.
2. This approval is in conflict with a previous minor modification approval (MMD 2002 - 00010).
Should the other modification be constructed, this approval is void. Likewise, if the
improvements represented in this modification request are constructed, the previous
modification request will be nullified on the basis that the site has changed from the
drawings submitted.
This request is determined to be a minor modification to an existing site. The Director's designee
has determined that the proposed minor modification of this existing site will continue to promote
the general welfare of the City and will not be significantly detrimental, nor injurious to surrounding
properties provided that, development which occurs after this decision complies with all applicable
local, state, and federal laws.
If you need additional information or have any questions, please feel free to call me at
(503) 639 -4171 ext. 2428.
Sincerely,
Morgan Tracy
Associate Planner
i:\ curpin \workspacelsdr\mmd2002 -00021 (sprint scholls fer y).doc
Minor Modification Request (MMD 2002 - 00021) Page 4 of 4