HomeMy WebLinkAboutR17-090 Approving SUP Verizon Wireless ZS-6033 Eagle County, CO 201724185
Regina O'Brien 12/21/2017
Pgs: 10 03:04:21 PM
REC: $0.00
DOC: $0.00
Commissioner 0i1414=Nnmve �oadoption
of the following Resolution:
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO
RESOLUTION NO. 2017- CIO
RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT
FOR
VERIZON WIRELESS
FILE NO.ZS-6033
WHEREAS, on or about January 13, 2017, the County of Eagle, State of Colorado,
accepted for filing an application submitted by Verizon Wireless (hereinafter the "Applicant")
for the purpose of the installation of a 85 foot monopine wireless antennas located on an
approximately 43.94 acre parcel of real property identified as Eagle County Parcel No.
1939-343-00-003, with the address of 20801 HWY 6 (hereinafter the "Property"), in the
Resource Zone District in the unincorporated area of Eagle County,and;
WHEREAS, the Applicant requested approval of a Special Use Permit (Eagle County
File No. ZS-6033) to allow for the installation of a new 85-foot monopine cellular tower, a
prefabricated shelter with a diesel generator,four(4) Remote Radio Heads (RRHs), one(1)main
OVP (surge suppressor), one (1) Hybriflex cable, (4) Panel antenna, and one (1) four (4) foot
Microwave antenna(hereinafter the "Special Use"),and;
WHEREAS, notice of the Special Use was given to all proper agencies and departments
as required by Section 5-210.E,ECLURs—Notice ofPublic Hearings,and;
WHEREAS, public notice was posted in a newspaper of general circulation and said
notice was sent to all adjacent property owners as required by the Section 5-210.E, —Notice of
Public Hearings,ECLURs,and;
WHEREAS, at its public hearing held on October 18, 2017, the Eagle County Planning
Commission (hereinafter the "Planning Commission"), based upon its findings, recommended
approval of the proposed Special Use (Eagle County File Number ZS-6033), with conditions,
and;
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on November 14, 2017, the Board considered the
proposed Special Use; associated plans; the statements and concerns of the Applicant, the Eagle
County Community Development staff, other interested persons, and the recommendation of the
Planning Commission,and;
WHEREAS, at its regular meeting on November 14, 2017,the Board voted unanimously
to approve the Special Use,with conditions as listed herein,and;
NOW, THEREFORE, based on the evidence, testimony, exhibits, and study of the
Comprehensive Plan for the unincorporated areas of Eagle County, as well as comments of the
Eagle County Community Development Department,comments of public officials and agencies,
the recommendation of the Planning Commission, and comments from all interested parties,the
Board finds as follows:
1. That proper publication and public notice was provided as required by law for the
hearings before the Planning Commission and the Board.
2. That all standards required for approval of a Special Use Permit have been met as
required by the Eagle County Land Use Regulations.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of
the County of Eagle, State of Colorado:
THAT the Special Use Permit application for the Verizon Wireless Monopine on the
Property, located in the Resource Zone.District of unincorporated Eagle County as described
herein, be approved, subject to the following conditions, and that violation of any condition
shall be the basis for revocation of the Special Use Permit:
1. Except as otherwise modified by this development permit,all material
representations made by the Applicant(in this application and in public meeting)
shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval;and
2. Prior to building permit,the applicant shall provide necessary documentation to
the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA)to determine if any height restrictions
and/or lighting may be required by the FAA; and
3. All construction activities, including any future updates or modifications to the
tower,are precluded from December 1st to April 15th of each calendar year;and
4. The Owner/Developer shall comply with the greatest extent practicable the memo
entitled,"Recommended Best Practices for Communication Tower Design,
Siting, Construction, Operation Maintenance, and Decommissioning from the
Division of Migratory Bird Management from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service."Attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference.
THAT, this Special Use Permit shall be subject to review as provided for by the
ECLURs.
THAT, the Board directs the Planning Department to provide a copy of this Resolution
to the Applicant.
THAT, the Board hereby finds, determines and declares that this Resolution is necessary
for the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Eagle County.
2
ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of
Colorado, on this 19th day of December, 2017,nine pro tune to the 14th day of November, 2017.
COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF
cQ E%ti COLORADO, By and Through Its
is 4 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: * oo
„40IFP
cows"'
By: Alei
1/ to the Board of J. ian H. Ryan
County Commissioners Chair
• U
Kathy Ch. + -r Heiuy
Commissioner
r-CL
e McQueeney
ommissioner
Commissioner NSC QUtALI_ L'—t seconded adoption of the foregoing resolution. The roll
having been called, the vote was as follows:
Commissioner Ryan VI*
Commissioner Chandler-Henry
Commissioner McQueeney 1
This resolution passed by I 0 vote of the Board of County Commissioners of
the County of Eagle, State of Colorado
3
Exhibit A :
Recommended Best Practices
for Communication Tower
Design, Siting, Construction,
Operation, Maintenance, and
Decommissioning
Recommended Best Practices for Communication Tower
Design,Siting,Construction,Operation,Maintenance,and Decommissioning
Division of Migratory Bird Management
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Falls Church,Virginia
August 2016
NOTE:These recommendations replace all previous recommendations for communication tower
construction and operation. These recommendations have been modified and updated from previous
versions to incorporate the state of the science and the 2015 Federal Aviation Administration
Obstruction Marking and Lighting Advisory Circular AC 70/7460-1L.
Communication towers are some of the tallest structures across the landscape and birds are regularly
found dead around these towers(Longcore et al. 2012a). It is not definitively understood why this
mortality occurs,but evidence suggests that night-migrating songbirds are either attracted to or
disoriented by tower obstruction warning lighting systems,especially during overcast(i.e.,low cloud
ceiling),foggy,or other low visibility conditions(Cochran and Graber 1958,Avery et al. 1976, Ball et al.
1995,Erickson et al.2005, Evans et al. 2007,Manville 2014,Gehring et al. 2009 and 2011, Longcore et
al. 2012a). Birds aggregate in larger numbers at towers with non-flashing lights compared to those with
flashing lights, although birds aggregate at flashing lights during the"on" phase,they disperse during
the"off" phase(Larkin and Frase 1988;Gauthreaux and Belser 1999,2006;Evans et al.2007; Poot et al.
2008). Additionally, birds moving across the landscape at night(e.g.,owls and seabirds)can collide with
communication tower wires when they are placed in high movement areas.
Given the height,structural engineering needs(i.e.,guy wires),and obstruction lighting requirements,
communication towers may cause direct and indirect bird mortality through:
1. Collisions-Birds that are attracted to tower lights and aggregate in the lighting zone,circle the
tower and collide with the tower,guy wires,other birds,or fall to the ground from exhaustion
(Longcore et al.2012b,Gauthreaux and Belser 2006, Erickson et al. 2005).
2. Construction,operation,and maintenance activities-Adults,eggs,or nestlings can experience
direct mortality through:
a. Trauma or death during vegetation removal;
b. Trauma or death during tower maintenance;and
c. Death of eggs or nestlings when actions or activities cause adults to abandon nests.
3. Significant loss of fat reserves in adults due to the energy expenditure of circling towers, leading
to reduced survival during long migrations(Norris and Taylor 2006,Gehring and Walker 2012).
The following avoidance and minimization measures,when used comprehensively,reduce the risk of
bird mortality at communication towers:
SITING AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW TOWERS
1. Collocation. Co-locate communications equipment on existing communication towers or other
structures(e.g.,billboard,water and transmission tower,distribution pole,or building mounts).This
recommendation is intended to reduce the number of towers across the landscape.
2. Contact with USFWS Field Office. Communicate project plans to nearest USFWS Field Office.
www.fws.gov/offices/index.htm I
1
3. Placement. All new towers should be sited to minimize environmental impacts to the maximum
extent practicable.
a. Place new towers within existing"antenna farms"(i.e.,clusters of towers)when possible;
b. Select already degraded areas for tower placement;
c. Towers should not be sited in or near wetlands,other known bird concentration areas(e.g.,
state or federal refuges,staging areas, rookeries,and Important Bird Areas),or in known
migratory bird movement routes,daily movement flyways,areas of breeding concentration,in
habitat of threatened or endangered species,key habitats for Birds of Conservation Concern,or
near the breeding areas("leks")of prairie grouse;
d. Towers should avoid ridgelines,coastal areas,wetlands or other known bird concentration
areas;and
e. Towers and associated facilities should be designed,sited,and constructed so as to avoid or
minimize habitat loss within and adjacent to the tower"footprint". In addition,several shorter,
un-guyed towers may be preferable to one,tall guyed, lit tower.
4. Construction. During construction,the following considerations can reduce the risk of take of birds:
a. Schedule all vegetation removal and maintenance(e.g.,general landscaping activities,
trimming,grubbing)activities outside of the peak bird breeding season to reduce the risk of
bird take. Breeding seasons can be determined using online tools(e.g.,Avian Knowledge
Network [AKN), Information for Planning and Conservation system [IPaC], Birds of North
America Online)or by contacting qualified experts(e.g.,local Audubon or birding groups);
b. When vegetation removal activities cannot avoid the bird breeding season, conduct nest
clearance surveys:
i. Surveys should be conducted no more than five days prior to the scheduled activity to
ensure recently constructed nests are identified;
ii. Timing and dimensions of the area to be surveyed vary and will depend on the nature of
the project, location,and expected level of vegetation disturbance; and
iii. If active nests are identified within or in the vicinity of the project site,avoid the site until
nestlings have fledged or the nest fails. If the activity must occur,establish a buffer zone
around the nest and no activities will occur within that zone until nestlings have fledged.
The dimension of the buffer zone will depend on the proposed activity, habitat type,and
species present.The buffer should be a distance that does not elicit a flight response by
the adult birds and can be 0.5—1 mile for hawks and eagles.
c. Prevent the introduction of invasive plants during construction to minimize vegetation
community degradation by:
i. Use only native and local(when possible)seed stock for all temporary and permanent
vegetation establishment;and
ii. Use vehicle wash stations prior to entering sensitive habitat areas to prevent accidental
introduction of non-native plants.
5. Tower Design. Tower design should consider the following attributes:
a. Tower Height. It is recommended that new towers should be not more than 199 ft.above
ground level (AGL). This height increases the mean free airspace between the top of the tower
and average bird flight height,even in weather conditions with reduced cloud ceiling;
2
b. Guy Wires. We recommend using free standing towers such as lattice towers or monopole
structures. If guy wires are required for tower design:
i. The minimum number of guy wires necessary should be used;and
ii. Guy wired towers that are proposed to be located in known raptor or waterbird
concentrations areas,daily movement routes, major daytime migratory bird movement
routes,staging areas,or stopover sites should have daytime visual markers or bird flight
diverters installed on the guy wires to attempt to prevent daytime collisions.
c. Lighting System. Lights are a primary source of bird aggregation around towers,thus
minimizing all light is recommended:
i. No tower lighting is the preferred option if Federal Aviation Administration(FAA)
regulations and lighting standards(FAA 2015, Patterson 2012)permit.
ii. For some towers,the FAA can permit an Aircraft Detection Lighting System(ADLS),which
maintains a communication tower of any height to be unlit until the ADLS radars detect
nearby aircraft,at which time the tower lighting system is triggered to illuminate until the
aircraft is out of radar range.
iii. If taller(> 199 ft.AGL)towers requiring lights for aviation safety must be constructed,the
minimum amount of pilot warning and obstruction avoidance lighting required by the FAA
should be used. Unless otherwise required by the FAA,only white or red flashing lights
should be used at night, and these should follow FAA obstruction and marking standards
with regards to the minimum number of lights,minimum intensity(<2,000 candela),and
minimum number of flashes per minute(i.e.,longest duration between flashes and"dark
phase"). Avoid using non-flashing warning lights at night(FAA 2015,Patterson 2012).
Owners of existing towers lit with lighting systems that include non-flashing lights should
submit plans to the FAA explaining how and when they will transition to the new
standards.
iv. Security lighting for on-ground facilities,equipment,and infrastructure should be motion-
or heat-sensitive,down-shielded,and of a minimum intensity to reduce nighttime bird
attraction and eliminate constant nighttime illumination while still allowing safe nighttime
access to the site.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL TOWERS
1. Existing Tower Lighting. We recommend that towers be unlit,when allowed by FAA regulations.
Light impacts can be minimized by:
a. Extinguishing L-810 non-flashing red lights(USFWS 2007,2011)on towers>350 ft.AGL or
reconfiguring L-810 non-flashing red lights to flash at 30 FPM in synchrony with other flashing
obstruction lights on towers 150-350 ft.AGL(FAA 2015);
b. Extinguishing L-810 red lights and reprogramming LED L-810 lights;this can be done from the
tower transmission building or remotely and does not require climbing the tower(FCC 2015).
Currently,an FAA lighting deviation is required to implement both of these proposed light
standards,but the abbreviated FAA review and approval process is typically completed within one
week(FCC 2015).
3
2. Infrastructure Lighting. We recommend that existing infrastructure be unlit. If associated buildings
require security or operational lighting,minimize light trespass using motion sensors and down-
shielding with minimum intensity light(USFWS 2011; Poot et al. 2008; Manville 2013; FCC 2014).
3. Vegetation Management. When management of facility infrastructure is required:
a. Schedule all vegetation removal and maintenance(e.g.,general landscaping activities,
trimming,grubbing,etc.)activities outside of the peak bird breeding season to reduce the risk
of bird take. Breeding seasons can be determined using online tools(e.g.,Avian Knowledge
Network [AKN], Information for Planning and Conservation system [IPaC], Birds of North
America Online)or by contacting qualified experts(e.g., local Audubon or birding groups);
b. When vegetation removal activities cannot avoid the bird breeding season,conduct nest
clearance surveys:
i. Surveys should be conducted no more than five days prior to the scheduled activity to
ensure recently constructed nests are identified;
ii. Timing and dimensions of the area to be surveyed should depend on the nature of the
project, location,and expected level of vegetation disturbance;and
iii. If active nests are identified within or in the vicinity of the project site,the site should be
avoided until nestlings have fledged or the nest fails. If the activity must occur,a buffer
zone should be established around the nest and no activities should occur within that
zone until nestlings have fledged.The dimension of the buffer zone depends on the
proposed activity, habitat type,and species present.The buffer should be a distance that
does not elicit a flight response by the adult birds and can be 0.5—1 mile for hawks and
eagles.
4. Birds Nesting on Towers: If birds are nesting on communication towers that require maintenance
activities,contact the state natural resource protection agency and/or the USFWS for permits,
recommendations,and requirements.Schedule construction and maintenance activities around the
nesting and activity schedule of protected birds. Minimize excess wires and securely attach wires to
the tower structure to reduce the likelihood of birds becoming entangled on the tower.Consider
installing a bird nest exclusion device on the towers where birds frequently nest.
5. Tower Access: Representatives from the USFWS or researchers should be allowed access to the site
to evaluate bird use,conduct dead-bird searches,and conduct other research,as necessary.
DECOMMISSIONING
1. Tower Removal. Towers no longer in use, not re-licensed by the FCC for use,or determined to be
obsolete should be removed from the site within 12 months of cessation of use, preferably sooner.
REFERENCES
Avery,M., P.F.Springer, and J.F. Cassel. 1976. The effects of a tall tower on nocturnal bird migration—a
portable ceilometer study. Auk 93:281-292.
Ball, L.G.,K.Zyskowski,and G. Escalona-Segura. 1995. Recent bird mortality at a Topeka television
tower. Kansas Ornithological Society Bulletin 46: 33-36.
Cochran,W.W. and R.R.Graber. 1958. Attraction to nocturnal migrants by lights on a television tower.
Wilson Bulletin 70:378-380.
Erickson W.P.,G.D.Johnson,and D.P.Young. 2005.A summary and comparison of bird mortality from
anthropogenic causes with emphasis on collisions. USFS Tech. Rep. PSWGTR-191. Pp. 1029-1042.
4
Evans,W.R.,Y.Akashi, N.S.Altman,and A.M. Manville. 2007. Response of night-migrating songbirds in
cloud to colored and flashing light. North American Birds 60(4):476-488.
Federal Aviation Administration.2015.Obstruction marking and lighting.Advisory Circular AC 70/7460-
IL. U.S.Department of Transportation.
Federal Aviation Administration. 2016. FAA Acts to Reduce Bird Fatalities.
http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsid=85204
Federal Communications Commission. 2015. Opportunities to reduce bird collisions with
communication towers while reducing tower lighting costs. http://wireless.fcc.gov/migratorv-
birds/Light Changes Information Update 120415.pdf
Gauthreaux, S.A.and C.G. Belser. 1999. The behavioral responses of migrating birds to different lighting
systems on tall towers. In Transactions of the proceedings of the workshop on avian mortality at
communication towers(eds.W.R. Evans and A.M. Manville).
Gauthreaux,S.A.and C.G. Belser. 2006. Effects of artificial night lighting on migrating birds. In
Ecological Consequences of Artificial Night Lighting(eds.C. Rich and T. Longcore), pp. 67-93.Covelo,
California: Island Press.
Gehring,J., P. Kerlinger,and A.M. Manville. 2009. Communication towers, lights,and birds:Successful
methods of reducing the frequency of avian collisions. Ecological Applications 19(2):505-514.
Gehring,J., P. Kerlinger,and A.M. Manville. 2011. The role of tower height and guy wires on avian
collisions with communication towers. Journal of Wildlife Management 75(4):848-855.
Gehring,J.and K. Walter. 2012. Studies of avian collisions with communication towers: a quantification
of a bird night flight calls at towers with different structural supports and the use of acoustics as an
index of tower fatalities. Progress Report for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. MNFI Report Number:2012-
29.
Larkin,R.P.and B.A. Frase. 1988. Circular paths of birds flying near a broadcasting tower in cloud.
Journal of Comparative Psychology 102:90-93.
Longcore,T.,C. Rich, P. Mineau, B. MacDonald, D.G.Bert, L.M.Sullivan, E. Mutrie,S.A.Gauthreaux, M.L.
Avery,R.L. Crawford,A.M. Manville, E.R.Travis,and D. Drake. 2012a.An estimate of avian mortality at
communication towers in the United States and Canada. PLoS One 7(4): 1-17.
Longcore,T.,C. Rich, P. Mineau, B. MacDonald, D.G. Bert, LM.Sullivan, E.Mutrie,S.A. Gauthreaux, M.L
Avery,R.L. Crawford,A.M. Manville, E.R.Travis,and D. Drake. 2012b.Avian mortality at communication
towers in the United States and Canada:which species,how many,and where? Biological Conservation
158:410-419.
Manville,A.M. 2009. Towers,turbines,power lines,and buildings--steps being taken by the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service to avoid or minimize take of migratory birds at these structures. In Tundra to
5
tropics:Connecting habitats and people. Proceedings of the 4th International Partners in Flight
Conference(eds.T.D. Rich,C.Arizendi, D. Demarest, and C.Thompson). Pp. 1-11.
Manville,A.M. 2013. Recommended Lighting Standards and Lighting Protocols for Structures Requiring
Pilot Warning Lighting,and for Security Lighting Purposes. Technical Report, Division of Migratory Bird
Management,U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Manville,A.M. 2014. Status of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service developments with communication towers
with a focus on migratory birds: Updates to Service staff involved with tower issues. Webinar Summary
Talking Points. Pp. 14.
Norris, D.R.and C.M.Taylor. 2006. Predicting the consequences of carry-over effects for migratory
populations. Biology Letters 2006(2): 148-151.
Patterson,J.W. 2012. Evaluation of new obstruction lighting techniques to reduce avian fatalities.
Technical Note:DOT/FAA/TC-TN12/9.
Poot, H., B.J. Ens,H.de Vries,M.A.H. Donners, M.R.Wernand,and J.M.Marquenie.2008.Green light for
nocturnally migrating birds. Ecology and Society 13(2):47.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Comments of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Submitted
Electronically to the FCC on 47 CFR Parts 1 and 17,WT Docket No.03-187, FCC 06-164, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking,"Effects of Communication Towers on Migratory Birds." February 2,2007. 32 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.2011.Comments of the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service's Division of
Migratory Bird Management Filed Electronically on WT Docket NO.08-61 and WT Docket No.03-187,
Regarding the Environmental Effects of the Federal Communication Commission's Antenna Structure
Registration Program.January 14,2011. 12 pp.
6
