Town of Cary , North Carolina
Development Plan Staff Report
American Tower Telecommunications Tower 09-SP-062
Town Council Meeting
April 14, 2011

The applicant has requested Town Council consideration of a site plan for development of a 110-foot freestanding telecommunications tower (monopole) on a 2.64-acre parcel located at 51 Kilmayne Drive. This request is accompanied by a request for a special use permit to allow establishment of a freestanding telecommunication tower (monopole) use in the Mixed Use Overlay District, as required by Section 5.2.4(D) of the Land Development Ordinance.

The applicant, American Tower Corporation, has requested Town Council consideration for review and approval of a site plan for development of a 110-foot freestanding telecommunications tower adjacent to the existing waste container enclosure at 51 Kilmayne Drive. All associated ground equipment would be housed in an enclosure adjacent to, and consistent architecturally with, the existing waste container enclosure. The site plan is associated with the Applicant’s request for approval of a special use to establish a freestanding telecommunications tower (monopole) at the subject location. On June 9, 2010, after conducting a quasi-judicial hearing on the proposed special use and considering the application materials, testimony and evidence presented at the hearing or otherwise appearing in the record, the Town Council voted to deny the application for the special use permit, as stated in the “RESOLUTION Denying SPECIAL USE PERMIT (09-SU-007)”, signed/dated June 24, 2010. The Applicant appealed said Decision to Wake County Superior Court, case number 10-CVS-13326, in accordance with applicable statutes. On March 15, 2011, a Judgment and Order was issued by the Court that reversed the decision of the Town Council denying the Special Use Permit application, remanding such matter to the Council for the Town to “issue the special use permit to the Petitioner according to the findings on remand and consistent with the terms, conditions and plans as contained and set forth in the Petitioner’s Application”.

Streams: According to the Town of Cary’s GIS maps, there are no streams located either on or in the immediate vicinity of the property.
Floodplain: According to the Town of Cary’s GIS maps, there is no floodplain or flood hazard area either on or in the immediate vicinity of the property.
Wetlands: According to the applicant’s site plan, there are no wetlands located on the property.
Topography: The property slopes gently downward from Kilmayne Drive toward the southern property line.
Surrounding Land Uses:
North – Office (Re/Max building), Institutional (Greenwood Forest Baptist Church), and vacant, non-residential property
South – Life Care Community (Woodland Terrace)
East – Vacant non-residential parcel (Office approved in Kilmayne MUSP)
West – Retail (CVS) and Office (multiple buildings)

Pre-application Conference
The applicant attended a pre-application conference with the Town of Cary Development Review Committee on August 26, 2009.

Notification
On April 27, 2010 the Planning Department mailed notification of the site plan and special use to property owners within 400 feet of the subject property.

A. Land Use Plan
The Land Use Plan, a volume of the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, designates the land use of the subject parcel as Office/Institutional (OFC/INS). The site is also within the boundary of the Mayfair Community Mixed Use Center.

B. Parks & Greenways Master Plan
According to the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Facilities Master Plan there are no issues related to this site.

C. Growth Management Plan
The Growth Management Plan is not applicable to this special use request.

D. Affordable Housing Plan
The Affordable Housing Plan is not applicable to this special use request.

E. Comprehensive Transportation Plan
There are no issues related to the site as it is already developed.

F. Open Space and Historic Resources Plan
There are no issues related to the site as it is already developed.

Traffic
The proposed telecommunications tower would not be a staffed facility and would not generate enough peak-hour vehicle trips to trigger the ordinance requirements for a traffic study.

Open Space
No additional open space is required beyond the perimeter buffers and streetscapes.

Buffers and Streetscapes
The site is located in the vicinity of the property’s western perimeter buffer, which is required to meet a Type C (aesthetic) performance standard. The proposed telecommunications tower would not impact the surrounding buffers on the existing office site.

Architectural
The proposed ground enclosure would be architecturally consistent with the existing waste container enclosure. The tower itself would be bronze in color to match the existing light poles and would use internal-mounted panel antennae to minimize the visual impact of the structure.

The proposed telecommunications tower is an incidental use on a site predominantly used for office uses. The overall site met the Cary Design Guidelines that were applicable at the time of the original development plan approval for the existing site. The nature of the currently proposed use and the relatively small land area impacted makes consistency with the Cary Design Guidelines difficult, therefore the site will not be evaluated against the current Design Guidelines.

Section 3.9.2(I) of the LDO establishes criteria that must be considered in reviewing Site and/or Subdivision Plans:

1. The plan is consistent with Comprehensive Plan goals and objectives.

2. The plan complies with all applicable requirements of this Ordinance, including the development and design standards of Chapters 7 and 8 as well as the dedication and improvements provisions of Chapter 8 (Note: Plans within Planned Developments may be subject to different requirements based on approval).

3. The plan adequately protects other property, or residential uses located on the same property, from the potential adverse effects of the proposed development;

4. The plan provides harmony and unity with the development of nearby properties;

5. The plan provides safe conditions for pedestrians or motorists and prevents a dangerous arrangement of pedestrian and vehicular ways; and

6. The plan provides safe ingress and egress for emergency services to the site.

Staff recommends approval of the site plan without additional conditions based on the information and analysis contained in this staff report.