§ 3-208. Additional criteria to consider.

In addition to the standards enumerated for special use approval generally, the following factors shall also be considered when acting on an application for special use approval:

(a)

Appropriateness of the height of the proposed tower.

(b)

Whether a monopole or concealed support structure is proposed.

(c)

Proximity of residential uses.

(d)

Topography of the surrounding area.

(e)

Existing tree cover and vegetation.

(f)

The visual obtrusiveness of the proposed use, or whether visual obtrusiveness can be reduced or eliminated with changes in design. This may include the fit with the context of its surroundings, considering the location, height, type of facility, color and materials proposed.

(g)

Whether there exist or have been approved other suitable towers or tall structures within the geographic area required to meet the proposed service provider's engineering requirements. The lack of suitable alternatives may be demonstrated by one or more of the following:

1.

That existing towers or tall structures are not located within the necessary geographic area.

2.

That existing towers or tall structures are not of sufficient height to meet system engineering requirements.

3.

That existing towers or tall structures do not have the structural capacity to support the service provider's antennae or do not have sufficient ground or interior space for related equipment.

4.

That the proposed service provider's antennae would cause interference with antennae on existing towers or tall structures or that existing systems would cause interference with the proposed service provider's signal.

5.

That other limiting factors, not including economic considerations, render existing towers or tall structures unsuitable.

(h)

Whether a denial of the application would have the effect of prohibiting wireless services in the jurisdiction or area or would unduly restrict competition among wireless providers.

(i)

Whether the tower or wireless facility would be engineered and constructed to accommodate additional communication service providers.

(j)

Whether the tower or wireless facility would pose an unreasonable risk to adjoining properties, including consideration of a fall area where ice or other debris may fall off the tower without harm.

(k)

Whether the application demonstrates compliance with the regulations established in this division.

(Ord. No. 17-003 , § 1, 10-2-2017)