Planning Commission June 17, 2010

8/9/2019 Planning Commission June 17, 2010

1/818

Planning CommissionJune 17, 2010

7:00 p.m.

Sandy Springs City Hall, 7840 Roswell Road, 500 BuildingMorgan Falls Office Park, Sandy Springs, GA 30350

Planning Commission Agenda

Agenda ItemCouncilDistrict

Meeting Dates** Staff Recommendation

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

PUBLIC COMMENTApproval of previous meetings minutes 03/18/10, 04/15/10, & 05/20/10REZONINGS

1. RZ09-006/CV09-0151155 Mount Vernon HighwayApplicant: MDT Perimeter Pointe LLCTo rezone the subject property fromC-1 (Community Business District)conditional to C-1 (CommunityBusiness District) conditional, with

concurrent variance(s), toallow anew fast food restaurant.

5 DRB N/ACZIM 10/27/09CDRM - 11/18/09PC 12/17/09MCC 01/19/10

RZ09-006 ApprovalConditionalCV09-015 #1-2 ApprovalConditional

USE PERMITS

2. U10-0035500 Dupree DriveApplicant: Verizon Wireless To allow the location and operation

of a 119-foot monopole and relatedground equipment adjacent to theexisting water tank.

6 CZIM 04/27/10DRB N/ACDRM 05/26/10or 05/27/10PC 06/17/10MCC 07/20/10

U10-003 ApprovalConditional

3. U10-004/CV10-00785 Mount Vernon HighwayApplicant: Sandy Springs UnitedMethodist Church To allow a daycare and afterschool

program at the existing church, withconcurrent variances.

3 CZIM

04/27/10DRB N/ACDRM 05/26/10or 05/27/10PC 06/17/10MCC 07/20/10

U10-004

ApprovalConditionalCV10-007 ApprovalConditional

TEXT AMENDMENTS

4. An Ordinance to Amend Article 3,Definitions, of the Sandy Springs

Zoning Ordinance

CityWide

PC 05/20/10PC 06/17/10

MCC

08/03/10MCC 08/17/10

Approval

5. An Ordinance to Amend Article 4,General Provisions, of the SandySprings Zoning Ordinance

CityWide

PC 05/20/10PC 06/17/10MCC 08/03/10MCC 08/17/10

Approval

6. An Ordinance to Amend Article 18,Off-street Parking and Loading, of

CityWide

PC 05/20/10PC 06/17/10

Approval


2/818

Page 2 of 820


3/818

Planning CommissionMarch 18, 2010

Meeting Minutes

Board Members Present Lee Duncan (Chair), Susan Maziar, David Rubenstein, Steve Tar

Board Members Absent Wayne Thatcher (Vice Chair), Roger Rupnow

Staff PresentNancy Leathers, Chris Miller, Patrice Ruffin, Cesar Geraldo, DouAbaray, Gloria Goins, Mark Moore, David Schmid, and Terry Ro

CALL to Order Lee Duncan called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

ACTION: Pond moved to approved Agenda. Rubenstein seconded. (4-0, Maziar, Pond, RubenstDuncan not voting; Thatcher and Rupnow absent).

PUBLIC COMMENTNo Public Comment

PREVIOUS MINUTES

ACTION: Tart moved to approve the previous month's minutes amended to read as follows: Itemfor a 60 day deferral to allow the applicant time to provide additional and/or revised information. D

Pond, Maziar, Rupnow, and Rubenstein against; Duncan not voting; Tart abstaining).Pond seconded. Approved as amended (4-0, Maziar, Pond, Rubenstein, and Tart for; Duncan noRupnow absent).

REZONING

1. RZ10-001/CV10-0015815 Mountain Creek Road

SUMMARY/STAFF PRESENTATION: To rezone the subject property from O-I (Office anconditional to O-I (Office and Institutional District) conditional, with concurrent variance(s), to

Residence with a future transition into a Personal Care Home.Applicant Presentation:Nathan V Hendricks, 6085 Lake Forrest Dr Suite 200, Atlanta, Ga. 30328Carol Reynolds, 5800 Mountain Creek Rd, Sandy Springs, GA. 30328

(Invitation for public comment in support of and in opposition to the petition)


4/818

2. RZ10-002/CV10-0025790 & 5800 Mountain Creek Road

SUMMARY/STAFF PRESENTATION: To rezone the subject property from O-I (Office and Instituconditional to O-I (Office and Institutional District) conditional, with concurrent variance(s), to initiaResidence with a future transition into a Personal Care Home.

Applicant Presentation:Nathan V Hendricks, 6085 Lake Forrest Dr Suite 200, Atlanta, Ga. 30328Carol Reynolds, 5800 Mountain Creek Rd, Sandy Springs, GA. 30328


Support for the Petition:

Cathy Coone-McCrary, 1253 Westover Trace, NW, Acworth, GA. 30102

Against the Petition:Sharon Luger, 5795 Mountain Creek Rd, Sandy Springs, GA. 30328Barbara Kesler, 5805 Mountain Creek Rd, Sandy Springs, GA. 30328

(Close of public hearing. Planning Commission questions and discussion)

ACTION: Pond moved to Recommend approval subject to staff conditions and with concern over to properly house up to 16 people. Rubenstein seconded. Approved (4-0, Maziar, Pond, Rubenst

Duncan not voting; Thatcher and Rupnow absent).

TEXT AMENDMENT

3. TA10-001

An Ordinance to Amend Article 12B, Sandy Springs Overlay District, of the Sandy Springs Zoning

ACTION: Maziar moved to recommend approval. Tart seconded. Approved (4-0, Maziar, Pond, for; Duncan not voting; Thatcher and Rupnow absent).

4. TA10-002

An Ordinance to Amend Article 33, Signs, of the Sandy Springs Zoning Ordinance

ACTION: Tart moved to recommend approval. Rubenstein seconded. Approved (4-0, Maziar, PoTart for; Duncan not voting; Thatcher and Rupnow absent).

RESOLUTION

5.A Resolution to Amend the Local Roadway Functional Classification Map of the City of Sandy SprMaster Plan

ACTION: Tart moved to recommend approval. Rubenstein seconded. Approved (4-0, Maziar, PonTart for; Duncan not voting; Thatcher and Rupnow absent).

Meeting Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:40 p.m.


5/818

Approval Signatures

Date Approved 06-17-10

Lee Duncan, Chairman

Patrice Ruffin, Assistant Director ofPlanning and Zoning

Gloria Goins, AdministrativeCoordinator/Transcriber


6/818

Planning CommissionApril 15, 2010

Meeting Minutes

Board Members PresentLee Duncan (Chair), Wayne Thatcher (Vice Chair), Roger Rupno

and Al PondBoard Members Absent David Rubenstein and Steve Tart

Staff PresentNancy Leathers, Patrice Ruffin, Linda Abaray, Mark Moore, DougNathan Ippolito, Terry Robinson and Rita Gowdy


APPROVAL OF AGENDA

ACTION: Thatcher moved to approve agenda. Pond seconded. Approved (4-0, Maziar, Pond, Tfor; Duncan not voting; Rubenstein and Tart absent).

PUBLIC COMMENT

On behalf of the Willow Glen Condominium Association and the Sandy Springs Council of NeighbBeechey made comment to the following: There is citizen concern over the apparent insufficient pinput, and participation in the current application for the Department of Community Affairs Opportu

PREVIOUS MINUTES

ACTION: Pond moved to approve. Maziar seconded. With only 2 Commissioners considering to absence of Thatcher and Rupnow from the March 18, 2010 meeting), Duncan recommended holdprevious meeting minutes until the May 20, 2010 meeting. Therefore, no action was taken.

REZONING1. U10-001/U10-002/CV10-003

6700 Riverside Drive

SUMMARY/STAFF PRESENTATION: A Use Permit for expansion of the existing Retreat Faestablish a Cemetery (columbaria), and Concurrent Variance(s).Applicant Presentation:Ted Benning, 4695 South Atlanta Rd. SE. Smyrna, GA. 30080


S


7/818

sufficient and regulations allow it, the owner shall install standard sidewalks opposite the subjsouth and east side of Riverside Drive at a length that would have been required at the time of LaThe aforementioned sidewalk shall be installed before the issuance of a Certificate of OccupancApproved (4-0, Maziar, Pond, Thatcher, and Rupnow for; Duncan not voting; Rubenstein and Tart

ORDINANCE

SUMMARY/STAFF PRESENTATION: An Ordinance to Adopt the CoSS Zoning Map.

ACTION: Rupnow moved to recommend approval. Pond seconded. Approved (4-0, MaziarRupnow for; Duncan not voting; Rubenstein and Tart absent).


Approval Signatures

Date Approved 06-17-2010


Patrice Ruffin, Assistant Director ofPlanning and Zoning

Gloria Goins, AdministrativeCoordinator/Transcriber


8/818

Planning CommissionMay 20, 2010

Meeting Minutes

Board Members Present Lee Duncan (Chair), Wayne Thatcher (Vice Chair), , David Ruben

Board Members Absent Susan Maziar, Roger Rupnow and Steve Tart

Staff Present Patrice Ruffin, Doug Trettin, Gloria Goins, and Terry Robinson


APPROVAL OF AGENDA

ACTION: Thatcher moved to approve. Rubenstein seconded. Approved (4-0, Duncan, Pond, Rubenstein for; Maziar, Rupnow, and Tart absent).

PUBLIC COMMENTNo Public Comment

PREVIOUS MINUTES

ACTION:Approval of March 18, 2010 Minutes: With only 3 Commissioners considering to vote (due to the aand Rupnow from the March 18, 2010 meeting), Duncan recommended holding the vote on the p

minutes until the June 15, 2010 meeting. Therefore, no action was taken.

Approval of April 15, 2010 Minutes: With only 3 Commissioners considering to vote (due to the aband Tart from the April 15, 2010 meeting), Duncan recommended holding the vote on the previousthe June 15, 2010 meeting. Therefore, no action was taken.

REZONING1. RZ09-013/CV09-021

216 East Belle Isle Road

SUMMARY/STAFF PRESENTATION: To rezone the subject property from C-2 (Commercial Dis(Commercial District) conditional, with concurrent variance(s), to continue the Veterinary Cadditional uses under C-2 that would require 12 parking spaces or less.Applicant Presentation:Ted Schobert, DVM, 216 E Elle Isle Rd., Atlanta, GA. 30342



9/818

2. RZ10-003465, 475, 485, 490, 500 Tanacrest Drive

SUMMARY/STAFF PRESENTATION: To rezone the subject properties from R-2 & R-3 (Single-fato R-3 (Single-family Dwelling District).

Applicant Presentation:Jerome Felton, 465 Tanacrest Dr., Sandy Springs, GA. 30328


Support for the Petition:None

Against the Petition:None

(Close of public hearing. Planning Commission questions and discussion)

ACTION: Pond moved to recommend approval subject to staff conditions. Thatcher seconded. APond, Thatcher, and Rubenstein for; Maziar, Rupnow, and Tart absent).

DISCUSSION ITEM3. Discussion: TA10-005

An Ordinance to Amend Article 3, Definitions, of the Sandy Springs Zoning Ordinance

COMMENTS: Mr. Pond asked whether the definition for cemetery should use the term animal verwith the City Attorney's office on a response.

Discussion: TA10-006An Ordinance to Amend Article 4, General Provisions, of the Sandy Springs Zoning Ordinance

COMMENTS: No comments

Discussion: TA10-007An Ordinance to Amend Article 18, Off-street Parking and Loading, of the Sandy Springs Zoning O


Discussion: Planning Commission By-LawsPlanning Commission By-Laws



Approval Signatures

Date Approved 6/17/2010


Patrice Ruffin Assistant Director of


10/818Page 10 of 820


11/818

PC Board Member AttendancePC 2010

NAME 1/21 2/18 3/18 4/15 5/20 6/17 7/15 8/19 9/16 10/14 11/18 12/18

Total

Meetings

Tot

Absen

Roger Rupnow

Post 1Term Exp:

1/31/12 1 1 0 1 0 5 2Lee Duncan

Post 2Term Exp:

1/31/12 1 1 1 1 1 5 0Wayne

Thatcher

Post 3Term Exp:

1/31/12 1 1 0 1 1 5 1

Al PondPost 4Term Exp:

1/31/13 1 1 1 1 1 5 0David

Rubenstein

Post 5Term Exp:

1/31/13 1 1 1 0 1 5 1Don Boyken

Post 6

Term Exp:

1/31/10 1 1 0Steve Tart

Post 6Term Exp:

1/31/14 1 1 0 0 4 2Susan Maziar

Post 7Term Exp:

1/31/14 0 1 1 1 0 5 21 = Present 0 = Absent * = MTG Cancelled ** = Special Called MTG

Page 11 of 820


12/818Page 12 of 820


13/818

Rezoning Petition No. RZ09-006/CV09-015

HEARING & MEETING DATESCommunity Zoning

InformationMeeting

Community DeveloperResolution Meeting

Planning CommissionHearing

May

October 27, 2009 November 18, 2009 December 17, 2009February 18, 2010

June 17, 2010

JanMJ

APPLICANT/PETITIONER INFORMATIONProperty Owners Petitioner ReMDT Perimeter Pointe LLC Wendys Arbys Group W

PROPERTY INFORMATIONAddress, Land Lot,and District

1155 Mount Vernon HighwayLand Lot 19, District 17

Council District 5

Frontage and Area

Approximately 1,000 feet of frontage along the southeast side of Mt.

620 feet along the northeast side of Perimeter Center West. 1155 Mouhas a total area of approximately 30.41 acres (1,324,660 sq.ft.).

Existing Zoning andUse

C-1 (Community Business District) conditional under zoning case Z9property is developed with a shopping center.

Overlay District Perimeter Community Improvement Design District

2027ComprehensiveFuture Land Use

Map Designation

Living-Working Regional (LWR), Node 6: PCID (Perimeter CommuDistrict Live Work Regional only)

Proposed Zoning C-1 (Community Business District) conditional to allow a new fast fo

INTENTTO REZONE TO C-1 (COMMUNITY BUSINESS DISTRICT) CONDITIONAL, WITH

VARIANCE(S), TO ALLOW A NEW FAST FOOD RESTAURANT.

The current zoning conditions, under Z93-066, allow for no more than one fast food restaur1155 Mount Vernon Highway (Perimeter Pointe Shopping Center). The applicant is req

subject property from C-1 (Community Business District) conditional to C-1 (Communconditional to allow an additional fast food restaurant on the subject property.

Additionally, the applicant is requesting two (2) concurrent variances as follows:

1. Variance from Section 4.13.C. of the Zoning Ordinance to allow an existing o


14/818

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDAT

RZ09-006 APPROVAL CONDITIONALCV09-015 #1 - APPROVAL CONDITIONALCV09-015 #2 APPROVAL CONDITIONAL

The applicant continues to work with neighborhood groups, as well as the Landlord, to addrraised at community meetings. The issues raised, that are being addressed, include traffic floentire shopping center.

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

The petition was heard at the December 17, 2009 Planning Commission meetingrecommended denial of the request (4-0, Maziar, Rupnow, Pond, and Rubenstein for; Duncan and Boyken absent). The Commission expressed the following concerns:

1) Traffic flow within the Perimeter Pointe Shopping Center and vehicular traffic fshopping center and Perimeter Center West may be negatively impacted2) The proposed project and overall shopping center lack sufficient Green Space3) An additional fast-food restaurant having a drive-thru window would not promote4) The overall shopping center design was not planned to include the proposed proje

The petition was heard at the February 18, 2010 Planning Commission meetingrecommended denial of the request. Approved (5-0, Thatcher, Pond, Maziar, Rupnow,

Duncan not voting; Tart abstaining). The Commission recognized the opposition Homeowners Association and other community associations and their request to enforcecondition(s) limiting the shopping center to one [drive-through] fast food restaurant and th

The Commission recommended to express the following issue regarding the aforeRZ09-009/CV09-015: Lack of pedestrian connectivity to the adjacent Crown Pointhe east. Approved (5-0, Thatcher, Pond, Maziar, Rupnow, and Rubenstein for;Tart abstaining).

The Commission recommended to express the following issue regarding the aforeRZ09-009/CV09-015: The insufficient overall green space of only 11.84% (with thenot meeting the policy standard of 15% for the entire shopping center. Approved Maziar, Rupnow, and Rubenstein for; Duncan not voting; Tart abstaining).


15/818

Center West. Approved (5-0, Thatcher, Pond, Maziar, Rupnow, and Rubenstvoting; Tart abstaining).

The Commission recommended to express the following issue regarding the aforeRZ09-009/CV09-015: Deficiency in traffic circulation in and around the Ch

Approved (5-0, Thatcher, Pond, Maziar, Rupnow, and Rubenstein for; Duncabstaining).

The Commission recommended to express the following issue regarding the aforeRZ09-009/CV09-015: Lack of true pedestrian access from the MARTA facility to thand to the shopping center as a whole. Approved (5-0, Thatcher, Pond, MRubenstein for; Duncan not voting; Tart abstaining).

MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION

January 19, 2010 Hearing: The petition was deferredto the March 16, 2010 City Council happlicant time to provide additional and/or revised information regarding:

1) Traffic flow within the Perimeter Pointe Shopping Center and vehicular traffic fshopping center and Perimeter Center West.

2) The proposed project and overall shopping center Green Space.3) How an additional fast-food restaurant having a drive-thru window would affect p4) With the inclusion of the proposed project, how would the overall shopping center

After community/developer meetings, the applicant provided additional material, includiplan having a new site layout, that addressed items numbered 1 through 3.

March 16, 2010 Hearing: The petition was deferredto the July 20, 2010 City Council heariapplicant time to provide additional and/or revised information regarding:

1) Lack of pedestrian connectivity to the adjacent Crown Pointe office property to the2) The insufficient overall green space of only 11.84% (with the proposed Wendy's) no

standard of 15% for the entire shopping center.3) Insufficient quality of traffic circulation and directional/way-finding signage for

center.4) Lack of thoughtful provision for employee parking for the proposed Wendy's p

adjacent to and west of the throat of the vehicular ingress/egress on Perimeter Cen5) Deficiency in traffic circulation in and around the Chick-Fil-A outparcel.6) Lack of true pedestrian access from the MARTA facility to the proposed Wendy's

t h l


16/818

Location Map


17/818

BACKGROUNDThe subject site is located east of the intersection of Mount Vernon Highway and PeCenter West. The property is zoned C-1 (Community Business District) conditionazoning case Z93-066/VC93-103. The property is developed with a mixture of uses retail, restaurant, and entertainment. The 30.41 acre subject property currently has

building area of 361,272 S.F. and a density of 11,880 S.F./Acre.

Under Z93-066/VC93-103, the subject property was conditioned to include the foll

To a specific site plan To a maximum of three (3) outparcels To no more than one (1) fast food restaurant on the total site To a concurrent variance allowing the existing Chick- Fil-A outparcel to ha

than the required 200 feet of frontage abutting a public right-of-way (MounHighway)

Note: The above concurrent variance allowing the existing Chick- Fil-A outparceless than the required 200 feet of frontage abutting a public right-of-way (Mount VeHighway) is now currently being considered under CV09-015.

EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING OF ABUTTING PROPERTY

SUBJECTPETITION

RZ09-006/CV09-

015

RequestedZoning

Proposed UseLandArea

(Acres)

SquareFootage

Dens(Squ

FootagAcr

C-1 Shopping Center 30.41364,972

S.F.

12,002 S.F

Location inrelation to

subjectproperty

Zoning UseLandArea

(Acres)

SquareFootage

orNumberof Units

Dens(Square Units Pe

NorthA-L

ConditionalZ94-119

Windsor at Mt.Vernon

Apartments7.3 96 units 13.15 U.P


18/818

SouthO-I

ConditionalZ85-102

MARTA --- ----- -----

SouthC-1

Conditional

Z94-050

Shopping Center 7.44 90,507 S.F. 12,165 S.F

SouthO-I

ConditionalZ88-198

Office Complex 25.461,782,000

S.F.69,992 S.F

WestO-I

Conditional

Z87-128

Northpark OfficeComplex

42.343,799,103

S.F.89,728 S.F


19/818

Zoning Map

Future Land Use Map


20/818


21/818

Subject Property Subject Prope

North of the Subject Property (Windsor at Mt. VernonApartments)

East of the Subject PropertyDunwoody


22/818

East of the Subject Property (Crown Pointe officecomplex and Embassy Suites in Dunwoody)

South of the Subject Prop


23/818

South of the Subject Property (Office Complex) West of the Subject Property (


24/818

SITE PLAN ANALYSISThe site plan submitted shows three (3) existing outparcels, on the west side of threstaurants currently operating on them. The site plan also shows the main parcel, conshaving an existing shopping center. The proposed 3,700 square foot fast food restauraover a detention area located at the south east corner of the subject property. The Wen

not become an additional outparcel, but would become part of the existing shoppinaforementioned open detention area would be made into an underground detention facilit

PARKING AND TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSISSection 18.2.1, Basic Off-street Parking Requirements, requires a minimum amount of pafollowing uses: Retail Establishments, Restaurants, and Entertainment/Recreational. Bsubject property and the aforementioned uses, including the proposed Wendys, the applan) has provided 1,905 off-street parking spaces where 1,879 (with 15% MARTA reductiospaces are required.

NOTE THE FOLLOWING:

Current total required parking (per Citys shared parking): 2172 15% MARTA re Current total existing parking = 1,971 With new Wendys, total required parking (per Citys shared parking): 2210 15%

= 1879

Total provided parking with new Wendys = 1905 (31 of which serve new Wendys With MARTA reduction, there are 26 spaces over the required amount.

LANDSCAPE PLAN ANALYSISCurrently on the overall subject property there exists 185,781 S.F. (14.02%) of Green Sdetention/retention pond areas). Including the proposed Wendys, the site plan forindicates there would be 194,653 S.F. (14.69%) of Green Space (not including detention/reThe subject property is in an area designated by the 2027 Comprehensive Future LandWorking Regional (LWR), Node 6: PCID (Perimeter Community Improvement District only). The Comprehensive Plan recommends an excess of 20% Open and Green recommendation must be green space. The overall project does not meet this recommend

notes the proposed Wendys would be a part of an existing shopping center and would beexisting detention area that does not technically qualify as either Open or Green Space.ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ANALYSISThe Environmental Site Analysis Report is sufficient and satisfies the requirements ofZoning Ordinance. The reporting on all items of the analysis stated either positenvironmental issues.


25/818

DEPARTMENT COMMENTS

The staff held a Focus Meeting on November 4, 2009 at which the following departmeprovided:

Sandy SpringsAssistant Director ofBuilding andPermitting

There are no building and permitting requiremenaddressed at this time.

BUILDING&

DEVELOPM

ENT

DIVISIO

N

Sandy SpringsDevelopment Plan

Review Engineer

There are no site development requirements that neat this time.

Sandy SpringsLandscapeArchitect/Arborist

The site is part of a previously developed site. Thepond would not require a buffer.

FIRED

EPT.

Sandy Springs FireProtection Engineer

No fire hydrants are shown on the building sitemodification to the 2003 IFC, 508.5.1 Where require

of the facility or building hereafter constructed or mthe jurisdiction is more than 500 feet (152 m) from apparatus access road, as measured by an approveexterior of the facility or building, on-site fire hydrprovided where required by the local responding agency.

Exceptions:1. For group R-3 and Group U occupancies, the di

shall be 600 feet (183 m).2. For buildings equipped throughout with an asprinkler system installed in accordance with Se903.3.1.2, the distance requirement shall be 600 feet (18Fire hydrants may not be omitted unless written apresponding fire department or agency is submitted to

Refer to Sandy Spring Fire ordinance Sec. 22-34. S

requirements. 1.11.2 All new commercial buil5,000 square feet or with an occupant load greateshall be protected throughout with an approvprotection system .

ON

S d S i P id t d di t d tb d l f th f ll th


26/818

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENTRequired MeetingsThe applicant attended the following required meetings:

Community Zoning Information Meeting held October 27, 2009 at the Sandy Sprin Community/Developer Resolution Meeting held November 18, 2009 at the Sandy

Public Comments (no attached letters)

Community input includes the following:

Traffic flow within the Perimeter Pointe Shopping Center and vehicular traffic flshopping center and Perimeter Center West may be negatively impacted

(The applicant has addressed this concern be redesigning the site layout)

The proposed project and overall shopping center lack sufficient Green Space(The applicant has provided elevation renderings showing the proposed developm

An additional fast-food restaurant having a drive-thru window would not promot(The applicant has addressed this concern be redesigning the site layout)

The overall shopping center design was not planned to include the proposed projeThe City Public Works Department has the following response to traffic flow:

Provide two dedicated outbound lanes for the full throat length of the entrance onWest.

Notice RequirementsThe petition was advertised in the Daily Report on December 10, 2009 and December 24,posted signs issued by the Department of Community Development along the frontag

Highway and Perimeter Center West on November 13, 2009.

Public Participation Plan and ReportThe applicant met the Public Participation Plan requirements. The applicant suParticipation Report seven (7) days prior to the Mayor and City Council Hearing on JaP bli P ti i ti R t b itt d b f J 12 2010

The staff has not received any additional comments from the Fulton County Board of Edu

ZONING IMPACT ANALYSIS


27/818

Per Article 28.4.1, Zoning Impact Analysis by the Planning Commission and the Department, twritten record of its investigation and recommendation on each rezoning petition following factors:

A. Whether the zoning proposal will permit a use that is suitable in view of the use and developnearby property.

Finding: The staff is of the opinion that the proposed use is suitable in view of the uof adjacent and nearby property. The surrounding area consists of multi-fto the north, multi-family/office/hotel developments to the east, Mdevelopments to the south, and an office development to the west. The pproper transition between these areas.

B. Whether the zoning proposal will adversely affect the existing use or usability of adjacent or neFinding: The staff is of the opinion that the proposal will not have an adverse im

usability of adjacent or nearby property.

C. Whether the property to be affected by the zoning proposal may have reasonable economic use aFinding: The staff is of the opinion that the subject property has a reasonable econo

zoned.

D. Whether the zoning proposal will result in a use which will or could cause an excessive burdstreets, transportation facilities, utilities, or schools.

Finding: The staff is of the opinion that the proposal will not result in a use wexcessive or burdensome use of the existing infrastructure.

E.

Whether the zoning proposal is in conformity with the policies and intent of the land use plan.Finding: The staff is of the opinion that the proposed use is generallyFuture Land Use Map, which designates the property as Live Work Regionland use designation recommends a density of over 25,000 square feet perand office uses plus over 20 residential units per acre. The overall project, the proposed Wendys, would have a commercial density of 12,002 sqTherefore, the overall project does not meet this recommendation; howeproposed Wendys would be a part of an existing shopping center and,

would actually add to the density of the overall site. The complete projeoverall intent of the LWR designated areas that are intended for high denmixed land uses along major transportation corridors and/or rail transit serve larger areas and to provide larger commercial uses with a signconcentration. The Comprehensive Plan recommends an excess of 20% Op15% of this recommendation must be green space Currently on the ove

Open or Green Space. The subject site is located in Living Working


28/818

p p j g gCommunity Improvement District (PCID), which is made up of high regional office, and commercial developments.

F. Whether there are other existing or changing conditions affecting the use and development of tsupporting grounds for either approval or disapproval of the zoning proposal.

Finding: The staff is of the opinion that there are no existing or changing conditioand development of the property, which give supporting grounds for apprapplicants proposal.

G. Whether the zoning proposal will permit a use which can be considered environmentally aresources, environment and citizens of Sandy Springs.

Finding: The staff is of the opinion that the proposal will not permit a use which environmentally adverse to the natural resources, environment, or citizens

VARIANCE CONSIDERATIONS

The applicant is requesting two (2) concurrent variances as follows:

1. Variance from Section 4.13.C. of the Zoning Ordinance to allow an existing outparright-of-way to have less than 200 feet of frontage on that public right-of-way.

The applicant states this request was previously approved under Z93-066/VC93-

Chick-Fil-A outparcel currently has less than the required 200 feet of frontage abuof-way (Mount Vernon Highway).

The staff is of the opinion relief from this requirement is in harmony with the intent of and there is a hardship due to the physical characteristics of the subject property becpreviously approved under Z93-066/VC93-103 and the existing Chick-Fil-A outparcel cthe required 200 feet of frontage abutting a public right-of-way (Mount Vernon Highwaythese reasons, the staff recommendsAPPROVAL of this concurrent variance request.

2. Variance from Article 33, Section 26, Subsection F(2) of the Zoning Ordinance tsign.

The applicant has indicated this variance will not result in any harm to the healgeneral public. The applicant has indicated that this variance is in harmony w


29/818

CONCLUSION TO FINDINGS

The staff recommends APPROVAL CONDITIONAL of the request to rezone to C-1 (cdistrict) conditional, with concurrent variance(s), to allow a new fast food restaurant.

STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS


30/818

Should the Mayor and City Council decide to approve the petition to rezone the subjec(Community Business District) conditional to C-1 (Community Business District) conadditional fast food restaurant on the subject property, the staff recommends the approfollowing conditions. The applicants agreement to these conditions would not change staThese conditions shall prevail unless otherwise stipulated by the Mayor and City Council.

1. To the owner's agreement to restrict the use of the subject property as follows:

a. Retail, service commercial and/or office and accessory uses, including all exterbeverage service areas, at a maximum density of 12,002 gross square feet of tota

zoned or a total floor area of 364,972 gross square feet, in no more than seven bis less, but excluding adult entertainment establishments, car washes, conveniestations, grocery stores, commercial amusements and billboards or any uses whoperations.

b. A maximum of three outparcels shall be allowed on the subject site as shown onreferenced in condition 2.a. The total gross square footage of the outparcel devecalculated as part of the total floor area allowed in condition 1.a.

c. No more than two (2) fast food restaurants, having drive-through windows, on

d. Limit the height of the buildings to no more than two stories or 60 feet, excludinand roof-top screening, whichever is less.

2. To the owner's agreement to abide by the following:

a. To the overall site plan and Wendys site plan detail and Chick-Fil-A site plan dDepartment of Community Development dated May 26, 2010. Said site plans aand must meet or exceed the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance and these cthe approval of a Land Disturbance Permit. Unless otherwise noted herein, comconditions shall be in place prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.

b. To be in accordance with the two (2) elevation renderings received by the DepaCommunity Development dated February 2, 2010.

3. To the owner's agreement to the following site development considerations:

a. The owner/developer shall dedicate fifty-five (55) feet of right-of-way from ceVernon Highway and Perimeter Center West along the entire property frontag( ) f f b k f b h h h f d

d N di f M V Hi h i h l Th


31/818

d. No direct access from Mt. Vernon Highway to service the outparcels. The permshall gain access via internal drives. Said access points to the outparcels from thcuts shall be located at least 100 feet from the new dedicated right-of-way of an

e. Each outparcel which abuts a public right-of-way shall have a minimum of 200said public right-of-way, except the outparcel labeled on the site plan as B, shof 160 feet of frontage; however, direct access to said right-of-way shall be proh

f. Variance from Article 33, Section 26, Subsection F(2) of the Zoning Ordinance tosign (CV09-015).

g. Light sources of any exterior illumination on the site shall not be directly visiblresidential property lines.

h. Any lighting of the parking lot shall be limited in height to a 30 foot mast.i. Provide 100% opaque screening around all trash dumpsters subject to the appr

of Community Development. Said dumpsters shall not be located within bufferor parking and loading areas, nor within 150 feet of property zoned or developup service shall be limited to the hours between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monda

j. Provide 100% opaque screening around all delivery truck bays subject to the apDirector of Community Development.

k. Provide screening of any roof top mechanical equipment from adjacent propertapproval of the Director of Community Development.

l. The owner/developer shall provide two dedicated outbound lanes for the full entrance onto Perimeter Center West.

AttachmentsLetter of Intent dated received October 6, 2009First Amendment to the Rezoning Application received May 26, 2010Applicant Zoning Impact Analysis dated received October 6, 2009

Site Plan dated received February 2, 2010Overall Site Plan dated received May 26, 2010Two (2) elevation renderings received February 2, 2010Site Plan Detail dated received February 18, 2010Wendys Site Plan Detail dated received May 26, 2010Chick-Fil-A Site Plan Detail dated received May 26, 2010


32/818

Page 32 of 820


33/818

Page 33 of 820


34/818

Page 34 of 820


35/818

Page 35 of 820


36/818

Page 36 of 820


37/818

Page 37 of 820


38/818

Page 38 of 820


39/818

Page 39 of 820


40/818

Page 40


41/818

Page 41


42/818

Page 42


43/818

Page 43 of 820


44/818

Page 44 of 820


45/818

Page 45 of 820


46/818

Page 46 of 820


47/818

Page 47 of 820


48/818

Page 48 of 820


49/818

Page 49 of 820


50/818

Page 50 of 820


51/818

Page 51 of 820


52/818

Page 52 of 820


53/818

Page 53 of 820


54/818

Page 54 of 820


55/818

Page 55 of 820


56/818

Page 56 of 820


57/818

Page 57 of 820


58/818

Page 58 of 820


59/818

Page 59 of 820


60/818

Page 60 of 820


61/818

Page 61 of 820


62/818

Page 62 of 820


63/818

Page 63 of 820


64/818

Page 64 of 820


65/818

Page 65 of 820


66/818

Page 66 of 820

Rezoning Petition No. U10-003


67/818

HEARING & MEETING DATESCommunity Zoning

Information MeetingCommunity Developer

Resolution MeetingPlanning Commission

HearingMay

April 27, 2010 May 26, 2010 June 17, 2010 Ju

APPLICANT/PETITIONER INFORMATIONProperty Owners Petitioner Re

City of Atlanta Verizon Wireless Dav

PROPERTY INFORMATION

Address, Land Lot, andDistrict 5500 Dupree DriveLand Lot 174, District 17

Council District 6

Frontage and Area300 feet of frontage along the north side of Old Powers Ferry Roafrontage along the west side of Dupree Drive. The subject prope2.412 acres (105,066.72 square feet).

Existing Zoning andUse

R-1 (Single-family Dwelling District). The subject property is cura City of Atlanta water tank.

Overlay District N/A2027 ComprehensiveFuture Land Use MapDesignation

R1-2 (Residential 1 to 2 units per acre), Protected Neighborhood

Proposed Use

Use Permit to allow the location and operation of a 115-foot monrelated ground equipment adjacent to the existing water tank.

INTENTA USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE LOCATION AND OPERATION OF A 115-foot MON

AND RELATED GROUND EQUIPMENT ADJACENT TO THE EXISTING WA

This is a Use Permit to allow the location and operation of a 115-foot monopole antennequipment adjacent to the existing City of Atlanta water tank. Of the 2.412 acre parcel, thlease a 17 x 35 area of land from the City of Atlanta in order to locate the proposed antenn30 equipment shelter.

DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATU10-003 APPROVAL CONDITIONAL

Location Map


68/818

BACKGROUNDThe site is located northwest of the intersection of Dupree Drive and Old Powers Ferry Rzoned R-1 (Single-family Dwelling District). The subject property is currently developedtall City of Atlanta water tank. The water tank currently has a 15 foot (approximately) The antenna is used by the City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management solel


69/818

y y gwireless monitoring and control of the tank and water system.

EXISTING LAND USE AND ZONING OF ABUTTING PROPERTY

SUBJECTPETITION

U10-003

CurrentZoning

Proposed UseLandArea

(Acres)

Square footage orNumber of

Units/Rooms

R-1

City of Atlanta waterfacility & 115-footmonopole antennaand related ground

equipment

2.412acres

--------------

Location in

relation tosubject

property

Zoning UseLandArea

(Acres)

Square Footageor Number of

Units

NorthR-2A

Z97-134

Single-familyresidence @ 5520

Dupree Dr.0.97 acres 1 unit

East R-1

Single-family

residence @ 5535Dupree Dr.

1.78 acres 1 unit

East R-1Crossroads Primitive

Baptist ChurchCemetery

1 acres --------------

SouthR-2

Z84-202

Single-family @ 986

Old Powers Ferry Rd.

1.26 acres 1 unit

WestR-2A

Z90-042Single-family @ 985

Old Powers Ferry Rd.0.62 acres 1 unit

Zoning Map


70/818

CHURCH &CEMETERY

Future Land Use Map


71/818

CHURCH &

CEMETERY

Photographs


72/818

Subject Property (looking northwest) Looking northeast up Dupree D

Dr.


73/818

South of subject property (intersections of Old PowersFerry Rd., Dupree Dr., Mt. Vernon Hwy., and Powers

Ferry Rd.)

South of subject property (SOld Powers Fer


74/818

The tank looking west The tank looking s


75/818

Looking north @ 5520 Dupree Dr. Sign

Sign

SITE PLAN ANALYSIS

The site plan (Petition Packet #1, Exhibit C) indicates the subject property, a portion oleased area, to be 2.412 acres. The subject property is currently developed with a fifty Atlanta water tank. The water tank currently has a 15 foot (approximately) antenna on tois used by the City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management solely for the


76/818

y y p g y

monitoring and control of the tank and water system. It also indicates a proposed telecomhaving a 115 tall monopole and existing perimeter landscaping.

The site plan provided by the applicant indicates the following in a development statistics

2,320 SF of fenced area, landscape buffer and gravel path

345 SF shelter

420 SF of impervious surface

660 SF of landscape buffer outside the fenced area1,060 SF of undeveloped/open space

In addition to the required site plan, the applicant has provided materialdrawings/renderings, maps, letters, and affidavits, supporting and detailing and not limit

There are no concurrent variances requested meaning the applicant has submmeets the design/construction standards that exceed the requirements of

zoning district.

The construction of the proposed monopole would include three (3) flush mantennas, the applicant however has provided a written agreement profferingtower designed as a man made tree (also known as a monopine). (Petition Pac

Area maps detailing Verizons current wireless telecommunications coverage proposed cell tower as being good, fair, and limited. Area mapspotential wireless telecommunications coverage, assuming construction of theas being good, fair, and limited. The applicant has provided their dfair, and limited.(Attachment #3)

Written by a Senior Radio Frequency Design Engineer, a letter with exhibits dsearch area (Verizons identified area of needed improvement to its wirefair & limited service bounded generally Mt. Vernon Highway, Northside

limits, and Mt. Paran Road & Long Island Drive. Various factors, includinfluences to Verizon rating the service in the search area as fair & limitattachments documents the lack of opportunity and suitable opportunity in tcollocation. This letter with attachments also documents the lack of oppoopportunity in the search area for new cell tower construction in zoning

An affidavit from a telecommunications industry professional (Ms. Karen LeSearch Ring that was studied for potential Verizon cell tower locations. Vethe Search Ring as surrounding the intersection of Dupree Drive and Old Powein a southeasterly direction, across Mount Vernon Highway and down Powtheir definitions, the applicant has indicated Verizons wireless phone coverag


77/818

, pp p g

as being fair at the most northwest part of the search area and turning into the search area continues across Mount Vernon Highway and down Powers mile. (Petition Packet #5)

The aforementioned affidavit indicates the following failed attempts at locatitower at sites in the Search Ring other than the water tank facility:

Holy Innocents Episcopal Church not having a roof with enoug

Holy Innocents Episcopal School not having available ground sequipment shelter.

Mt. Vernon Baptist Church not believing the cell tower wouldtheir plan for future expansion. Additionally, their steeple compatible for a co-location.

Northwest Unitarian Universalist Congregation was recently dSandy Springs, an application for a cell tower proposed by T-MVerizon studied an option provided to them for utilizing an expole, but the pole was determined structurally unsuitable for exp

NOTE: The cell tower application at the Northwest UnCongregation was not denied by the City of Sandy Springs; rawas withdrawn by T-Mobile.

A letter under seal from a registered engineer explaining the structural integmonopole. (Petition Packet #5)

A letter from an environmental consultant stating the proposed tower heighadverse effect on any environmental resources. (Petition Packet #5)

A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) among the Federal CommunicationGeorgia State Historic Preservation Officer, and Verizon Wireless regarding tcommunications tower in Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia. (Petition Packet #5

An affidavit by a Senior Radio Frequency Design Engineer documenting the ne

ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ANALYSISThe Environmental Site Analysis Report is sufficient and satisfies the requirements oZoning Ordinance. The reporting on all items of the analysis stated either positenvironmental issues. The analysis in its entirety is in the case file as a matter of record.

USE PERMIT CONSIDERATIONS


78/818

The applicant is requesting a use permit to allow the location and operation of a 115-fooand related ground equipment adjacent to the existing water tank.

Per Article 19.2.4, Use Permit Considerations, the City Council shall consider each of the follo

A. Whether the proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and/or Revitalization plans adopted by the City Council;

Finding: The staff is of the opinion that the proposed use is consistent with the Fuwhich designates the property as R1-2 (Residential 1 to 2 units per acre). Ththrough the use permit requirements for telecommunications towerscompatibility of such uses within residential districts.

The subject property is currently being used as a public utility by the opAtlanta water tank.

Within the City, there are examples of residentially zoned properties wherefacilities (cell towers) currently exist. PLEASE SEE THE ATTACHE

STRUCTURE REGISTRATION (ASR) REPORT. (Attachment #6)

B. Compatibility with land uses and zoning districts in the vicinity of the property for whproposed;

Finding: The applicant has provided a series of documents analyzing the process by

tower location was determined to be the best available site.

First, the area south of I-285, west of Roswell Road (SR 9), east of the Chattnorth of the City of Sandy Springs southern boundary was determined to b

Verizon Wireless due to dropped call and other service delivery issues. (At

Once the area of need was determined, the applicant reviewed which arearea would be the best to locate a tower. This review included a look at the

properties, and range of projected signal strength. (Attachment #4)

Finally, the applicant approached various property owners within the smadetermine whether there was an interest in a leasing opportunity for a f ili h i Si h i f h h i

The Zoning Ordinance, through the use permit requirements for telecomprovides for the compatibility of such uses within residential districts. Theof the requirements of Section 19.4.7., Antenna Tower, and Associated S

Microwave Broadcasting, Etc.) to Exceed the District Height. Additionally,tower at the proposed site would be on a property currently being used a


79/818

may provide better telecommunications serving the Sandy Springs commun

After analyzing all the documentation submitted as a part of this applicopinion the applicant has demonstrated the subject property at 5500 Dprovide a suitable opportunity for locating a cell tower within Verizonneeded improvement to its wireless service.

C. Whether the proposed use may violate local, state and/or federal statutes, ordinances or

land development;

Finding: The staff is of the opinion the proposed uses would not violate any local, statutes, ordinances, or regulations.

Local Statutes

Article 2, Purpose and Title, of the City of Sandy Springs Zoning Ordinance

calls for adequate provision of communications facilities.

The Zoning Ordinance defines a Use Permit as follows:

Use Permit. A permit approved by the City Council, pursuant to a pauthorizes a use which must meet certain standards which exceed the district as-a-whole.

The aforementioned certain standards are spelled out in the Zoning Ordinanc(Use Permits), specifically in Section 19.4.7. as follows:

ANTENNA TOWER, AND ASSOCIATED STRUCTURE (RADIO, T.V., MICBROADCASTING, ETC.), TO EXCEED THE DISTRICT HEIGHT (amended013, Ord. 2009-06-34).

INTENT

Pursuant to Section 704(a) of the Federal Telecommunications Policy Act ofintent of this section to prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provisiwireless services in Sandy Springs.

1. Towers must be set back a distance equal to the height of the toweresidentially or AG-1 zoned or used property. (i.e., a 200-foot towefoot setback from any residential district and/or AG-1 district used

The proposed overall height of the tower structure is 115 feet. This is th


80/818

this location of the property that would meet the setback adjacent to residproperty. The setback line as shown on the site plan is located completelyAtlanta property or within City of Sandy Springs right-of-way. (PetitioExhibit C and Attachment #7)

2. Height shall not exceed 300 feet from existing grade and shall be caall appurtenances (e.g. light, marking) required by Federal Aviatio(FAA) for towers 200 feet or taller.

The proposed overall height of the tower structure is 115 feet. The propotower does not exceed the 300 foot height limitation. (Attachment #7)

3. Tower and associated facilities shall be enclosed by fencing not lesheight and shall also be equipped with an appropriate anti-climbin

The applicant would meet the fence enclosure requirement. (Petition Pa

and Petition Packet #5)

4. A minimum 10 foot landscape strip planted to buffer standards shsurrounding the facility exterior to the required fence unless the SaArborist determines that existing plant materials are adequate.

After consulting with the City Arborist (see staff recommended condition

would meet the landscape buffer requirement. (Petition Packet #1, E

5. Antennas or towers shall not have lights unless required by federa

Lights are not required by the FAA and would be restricted under staff r2.c.

6. Towers shall not be located within one-quarter of a mile from any telecommunication tower above the district height, excluding alter

The water tank currently has a 15 foot (approximately) antenna on top ofused by the City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management solelwireless monitoring and control of the tank and water system. By the defOrdinance neither the City of Atlanta water tank nor the monitoring an

microwave towers, common carrier towers, cellular telephone towelike excluding amateur radio antenna.

7. The tower shall comply with applicable state and local statutes andincluding, but not limited to, building and safety codes. Towers wunsafe or dilapidated shall be repaired or removed pursuant to aplocal statutes and ordinances


81/818

local statutes and ordinances.

The applicant would be obligated to comply with applicable state and locaordinances, including, but not limited to, building and safety codes. Stafcondition 2.d. would further ensure proper maintenance of the subject pr

Federal Statutes

According to the Federal Telecommunications Act, 47 U.S.C. Section 332 (c)(7)(

No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the pconstruction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such fthe Commissions regulations concerning such emissions.(Attachment #8)

D. The effect of the proposed use on traffic flow, vehicular and pedestrian, along adjoining stre

Finding: The staff is of the opinion that the proposal will not result in a use that wior burdensome use of the existing infrastructure. Public Works does noproposed use permits will cause an excessively burdensome use oftransportation facilities.

E. The location and number of off-street parking spaces;

Finding: The staff is of the opinion the existing all-weather surface (paving) is suvehicles required for necessary maintenance.

F. The amount and location of open space;

Finding: The site plan (Petition Packet #1, Exhibit C) provided by the applicant inin a development statistics summary chart:

2,320 SF of fenced area, landscape buffer and gravel path345 SF shelter

420 SF of impervious surface

660 SF of landscape buffer outside the fenced area

1 060 SF of undeveloped/open space

Staff has recommended condition 3.a., which requires the applicant to plarequired landscape buffer as per the City Arborist instruction, should tCouncil decide to approve the application.

H. Hours and manner of operation;


82/818

Finding: The Verizon site would be totally automated and a service technician womonth.

I. Outdoor lighting; and

Finding: It is not an FAA requirement that the monopole have lighting and stafcondition 2.c. restricting any lighting.

J. Ingress and egress to the property.

Finding: The applicant will utilize an existing access and utility easement running fthe proposed site.

DEPARTMENT COMMENTSThe staff held a Focus Meeting on May 5, 2010 at which the following departmental comm

BUILDING&

DEVELOPMENT

DIV

ISION

Sandy SpringsBuilding Officerand/or ADACompliance Officer

There are no Building Code and/or ADA requiremeaddressed at this time.

Sandy Springs Chief

Engineer

There are no Site Development requirements that ne

at this time.

Sandy SpringsLandscapeArchitect/Arborist

Should the Mayor and City Council decide to approadd the condition: That the landscape buffer be plaArborist instruction.

F

IRE

D

EPT.

Sandy Springs Fire

Protection Engineer

There are no Fire Department requirements that nee

this time.

ATION

Sandy SpringsTransportation

Public Works does not anticipate that the proposed ran excessively burdensome use of existing streets or facilities.

PUBLIC INVOLVEMENTRequired Meetings

The staff has not received any additional comments from the Fulton County Board of Edu


83/818

The applicant attended the following required meetings:Community Zoning Information Meeting held April 27, 2010 at the Sandy Springs

Community/Developer Resolution Meeting was held May 26, 2010 at the Sandy Sp

Public Comments

The public comments received regarding this case include the topics of concern written be

The proposed cell tower in this location would be a detriment to health, safety, welthe neighborhood.

The applicant has provided detail on why this location is the most suitable, available properarea of need.(Attachments #4 and Attachment #9)

The proposed cell tower in this location would decrease the value of surrounding pneighborhood.

The Department of Community Development does not have an expert on staff that can respeffect on property values.

The proposed cell tower in this location would be aesthetically displeasing and unhneighborhood.

It is the opinion of the staff that while the proposed tower will be visible from surrounding p

is currently a utility property used for a City of Atlanta water tank. Additionally, the applito screen the base of the tower as required by the Zoning Ordinance.

Structural Integrity of the proposed cell tower.

The applicant will be required to meet all structural requirements of the citys Building Codpermitting, which will include a structural review.

Financial arrangement and terms of the lease with the City of Atlanta.

The applicant has not provided this information.

How many Verizon towers currently serve Sandy Springs?

The applicant has provided a map detailing the current locations of towers that are near, buneed. (Attachment #3)

What is Verizons justification and demonstrated need to locate the tower where it


84/818

The applicant has provided a series of documents analyzing the process by which the proposdetermined to be the best available site.(Attachment #4)

A precedent would be set allowing future cell towers in residential areas.

There are existing towers located within residential areas throughout the city. (Attachmen

Security (TSA) of the facility.

The Verizon site would be totally automated and a service technician would come out once applicant would provide a six (6) foot tall perimeter fence around the lease area.

Applicant should provide zip codes of those who had dropped calls.

The applicant has not provided dropped calls detail by zip code.

Proper maintenance of the subject property.

The facility would be subject to the Citys Property Maintenance Codes. Staff recommendefurther ensure proper maintenance of the subject property.

Notice RequirementsThe petition was advertised in the Daily Report on June 10, 2010 and will be advertised o

applicant has posted signs issued by the Department of Community Development alongPowers Ferry Road and Dupree Drive on May 14, 2010.

Public Participation Plan and ReportThe applicant will meet the Public Participation Plan requirements. The applicant was reqPublic Participation Report seven (7) days prior to the Mayor and City Council Hearing onPublic Participation Report will be submitted on or before July 6, 2010.

CONCLUSION TO FINDINGSIt is the opinion of the staff that the petition for Use Permit to allow the location and operamonopole antenna and related ground equipment adjacent to the existing water tank is in policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the intent of the Future Land Use Map. Thereforereasons, the staff recommends APPROVAL CONDITIONAL of the petition for the Use Pconditions.


85/818

STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS

Should the Mayor and City Council decide to grant the Use Permit and Concurrent Varianrecommends that the approval be subject to the following conditions. The applicants agreconditions would not change staff recommendations. These conditions shall prevail unlesstipulated by the Mayor and City Council.


86/818

1. To the owners agreement to restrict the use of the subject property as follows:

a. One monopole telecommunications tower and associated accessory structures (U10

b. The telecommunications tower shall have flush mounted antennas and shall nheight, including any required tower lighting, lightning rods, or other tower extens

2. To the owners agreement to abide by the following:

a. To the site plan received by the Department of Community Development dated Msite plan is conceptual only and must meet or exceed the requirements of the Zothese conditions prior to the approval of a Land Disturbance Permit. Unless othcompliance with all conditions shall be in place prior to the issuance of a Certificate

b. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations as pertinent to telecomm

residential areas.

c. Lighting on the proposed cell tower is prohibited.

d. The owner/developer shall maintain the appearance and structural soundnessrequired by the Director of Community Development and the International PrCode.

e. The approval of U10-003 shall be subject to the applicant/developer gaining the and agreements from the City of Atlanta, the owner of the subject property.

3. To the owners agreement to provide the following site development standards:

a. The owner/developer of the telecommunications tower shall install a minimum testrip planted and maintained to buffer standards surrounding the facility, extefence, subject to the approval of the Sandy Springs Arborist.

Attachments

Petition Packet #1 - Letter of Intent/Applicant Use Permit Considerations and Sitereceived March 31, 2010Petition Packet #2 Written Agreement Monopine dated received May 26, 2010Attachment #3 Area Maps dated received June 7, 2010

A h #4 L f R di F E i d d i d J 9 2010


87/818

Attachment #4 Letter from Radio Frequency Engineer dated received June 9, 2010Petition Packet #5 Search Ring Affidavit dated received May 4, 2010Attachment #6 Existing Antenna Registration dated received June 2, 2010Attachment #7 Revised Tower Height letter dated received June 9, 2010Attachment #8 Federal Telecommunications Act excerpt dated April 1, 2010Attachment #9 Area Analysis Map dated received June 8, 2010Attachment #10 FCC form 620 dated received June 8, 2010

Petition Packet #11 E-mails dated as shownConcerned Neighbor Packet #1 Communications dated as shownConcerned Neighbor Packet #2 Communication dated received June 3, 2010Neighbor/Applicant E-mails dated as shownLetter Fulton County Dept. of the Environment & Community Development receivLetter City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management received May 17, 201Letter Fulton County Dept. of Health Services dated received June 10, 2010

Letter City of Atlanta Department of Watershed Management received June 9, 2010


88/818

Page 88 of 820


89/818

Page 89 of 820


90/818

Page 90 of 820


91/818

Page 91 of 820


92/818

Page 92 of 820


93/818

Page 93 of 820


94/818

Page 94 of 820


95/818

Page 95 of 820


96/818

Page 96 of 820


97/818

Page 97 of 820


98/818

Page 98


99/818

Page 99


100/818

Page 10


101/818

Page 10


102/818

Page 10


103/818

Page 10


104/818

Page 10


105/818

Page 10


106/818

Page 10


107/818

Page 10


108/818

Page 10


109/818

Page 10


110/818

Page 11


111/818

Page 11


112/818

Page 11


113/818

Page 11


114/818

Page 11


115/818

Page 11


116/818

Page 11


117/818

Page 11


118/818

Page 11


119/818

Page 11


120/818

Page 12


121/818

Page 121 of 820


122/818

Page 122 of 820


123/818

Page 123 of 820


124/818

Page 124 of 820


125/818

Page 125 of 820


126/818

Page 126 of 820


127/818

Page 127 of 820


128/818

Page 128 of 820


129/818

Page 129 of 820


130/818

Page 130 of 820


131/818

Page 131 of 820


132/818

Page 132 of 820


133/818

Page 133 of 820


134/818

Page 134 of 820


135/818

Page 135 of 820


136/818

Page 136 of 820


137/818

Page 137 of 820


138/818

Page 138 of 820


139/818

Page 139 of 820


140/818

Page 140 of 820


141/818

Page 141 of 820


142/818

Page 142 of 820


143/818

Page 143 of 820


144/818

Page 144 of 820


145/818

Page 145 of 820


146/818

Page 146 of 820


147/818

Page 147 of 820


148/818

Page 148 of 820


149/818

Page 149 of 820


150/818

Page 150 of 820


151/818

Page 151 of 820


152/818

Page 152 of 820


153/818

Page 153 of 820


154/818

Page 154 of 820


155/818

Page 155 of 820


156/818

Page 156 of 820


157/818

Page 157 of 820


158/818

Page 158 of 820


159/818

Page 159 of 820


160/818

Page 160 of 820


161/818

Page 161 of 820


162/818

Page 162 of 820


163/818

Page 163 of 820


164/818

Page 164 of 820


165/818

Page 165 of 820


166/818

Page 166 of 820


167/818

Page 167 of 820


168/818

Page 168 of 820


169/818

Page 169 of 820


170/818

Page 170 of 820


171/818

Page 171 of 820


172/818

Page 172 of 820


173/818

Page 173 of 820


174/818

Page 174 of 820


175/818

Page 175 of 820


176/818

Page 176 of 820


177/818

Page 177 of 820


178/818

Page 178 of 820


179/818

Page 179 of 820


180/818

Page 180 of 820


181/818

Page 181 of 820


182/818

Page 182 of 820


183/818

Page 183 of 820


184/818

Page 184 of 820


185/818

Page 185 of 820


186/818

Page 186 of 820


187/818

Page 187 of 820


188/818

Page 188 of 820


189/818

Page 189 of 820


190/818

Page 190 of 820


191/818

Page 191 of 820


192/818

Page 192 of 820


193/818

Page 193 of 820


194/818

Page 194 of 820


195/818

Page 195 of 820


196/818

Page 196 of 820


197/818

Page 197 of 820


198/818

Page 198 of 820


199/818

Page 199 of 820


200/818

Page 200 of 820


201/818

Page 201 of 820


202/818

Page 202 of 820


203/818

Page 203 of 820


204/818

Page 204 of 820


205/818

Page 205 of 820


206/818

Page 206 of 820


207/818

Page 207 of 820


208/818

Page 208 of 820


209/818

Page 209 of 820


210/818

Page 210 of 820


211/818

Page 211 of 820


212/818

Page 212 of 820


213/818

Page 213 of 820


214/818

Page 214 of 820


215/818

Page 215 of 820


216/818

Page 216 of 820


217/818

Page 217 of 820


218/818

Page 218 of 820


219/818

Page 219 of 820


220/818

Page 220 of 820


221/818

Page 221 of 820


222/818

Page 222 of 820


223/818

Page 223 of 820


224/818

Page 224 of 820


225/818

Page 225 of 820


226/818

Page 226 of 820


227/818

Page 227 of 820


228/818

Page 228 of 820


229/818

Page 229 of 820


230/818

Page 230 of 820


231/818

Page 231 of 820


232/818

Page 232 of 820


233/818

Page 233 of 820


234/818

Page 23


235/818

Page 235 of 820


236/818

Page 236 of 820


237/818

Page 237 of 820


238/818

Page 238 of 820


239/818

Page 239 of 820


240/818

Page 240 of 820


241/818

Page 241 of 820


242/818

Page 242 of 820


243/818

Page 243 of 820


244/818

Page 244 of 820


245/818

Page 245 of 820


246/818

Page 246 of 820


247/818

Page 247 of 820


248/818

Page 248 of 820


249/818

Page 249 of 820


250/818

Page 250 of 820


251/818

Page 251 of 820


252/818

Page 252 of 820


253/818

Page 253 of 820


254/818

Page 254 of 820


255/818

Page 255 of 820


256/818

Page 256 of 820


257/818

Page 257 of 820


258/818

Page 258 of 820


259/818

Page 259 of 820


260/818

Page 260 of 820


261/818

Page 261 of 820


262/818

Page 262 of 820


263/818

Page 263 of 820


264/818

Page 264 of 820


265/818

Page 265 of 820


266/818

Page 266 of 820


267/818

Page 267 of 820


268/818

Page 268 of 820


269/818

Page 269 of 820


270/818

Page 270 of 820


271/818

Page 271 of 820


272/818

Page 272 of 820


273/818

Page 273 of 820


274/818

Page 274 of 820


275/818

Page 275 of 820


276/818

Page 276 of 820


277/818

Page 277 of 820


278/818

Page 278 of 820


279/818

Page 279 of 820


280/818

Page 280 of 820


281/818

Page 281 of 820


282/818

Page 282 of 820


283/818

Page 283 of 820


284/818

Page 284 of 820


285/818

Page 285 of 820


286/818

Page 286 of 820


287/818

Page 287 of 820


288/818

Page 288 of 820


289/818

Page 289 of 820


290/818

Page 290 of 820


291/818

Page 291 of 820


292/818

Page 292 of 820


293/818

Page 293 of 820


294/818

Page 294 of 820


295/818

Page 295 of 820


296/818

Page 296 of 820


297/818

Page 297 of 820


298/818

Page 298 of 820


299/818

Page 299 of 820


300/818

Page 300 of 820


301/818

Page 301 of 820


302/818

Page 302 of 820


303/818

Page 303 of 820


304/818

Page 304 of 820


305/818

Page 305 of 820


306/818

Page 306 of 820


307/818

Page 307 of 820


308/818

Page 308 of 820


309/818

Page 309 of 820


310/818

Page 310 of 820


311/818

Page 311 of 820


312/818

Page 312 of 820


313/818

Page 313 of 820


314/818

Page 314 of 820


315/818

Page 315 of 820


316/818

Page 316 of 820


317/818

Page 317 of 820


318/818

Page 318 of 820


319/818

Page 319 of 820


320/818

Page 320 of 820


321/818

Page 321 of 820


322/818

Page 322 of 820


323/818

Page 323 of 820


324/818

Page 324 of 820

8/9/2019 Plannin

Documents

Planning Commission June 17, 2010