Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20063437.tiff cr(114.-.1%.* DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING SERVICES 1555 N. 17`h AVENUE f ' - RI I?: ? GREELEY, COLORADO 80631 gWEBSITE: www.co.weld.co.us C E-MAIL: cgathman @co.weld.co.us PHONE (970)3FAX (9700) 304-6498 COLORADO November 29, 2006 Kirk Goble The Bell 5 Land Company 71011 ti)Avenue, Suite 107 Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Timeframe of(Federal Aviation Approval) FAA approval for(Amended Use By Special Review) AMUSR-1508 Dear Mr. Goble, The Board of County Commissioners approved AMUSR-1508 on November 15, 2006. Upon recording of the AMUSR-1508 plat, the height of the two broadcast towers originally approved under USR-1508 would be authorized to increase in height from 1,180 feet to 1,459 feet in height. Based on the fact that FAA approval is required before the height of the towers could increase, a condition of approval prior to recording the plat was attached to the AMUSR-1508 resolution stating the following: "The applicant shall provide written verification from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) that the proposed increase in tower height proposed under this amended USR has been approved."The Department of Planning Services understands that the review and appeals process through the FAA for these requests can be lengthy. Therefore, the Department of Planning Services will allow sufficient time for the applicant to complete the FAA review process. The Department of Planning Services will not place the AMUSR-1508 application into the violation process for not finalizing and recording the AMUSR-1508 plat provided that it is evident that the proposed tower height increase is still involved in the FAA review and/or appeals process. Upon completion of the FAA process, if approved, the AMUSR-1508 plat shall be submitted for recording in a timely manner. Sincerely, A a(Lodt Chris Gathman Planner II -AICP 2006-3437 /1i0aoo 6 r'L 1785 • Page 1 of 1 • Chris Gathman From: Chris Gathman Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 12:59 PM To: 'reply@bell5.com' Subject: RE: USR-1508 Modification Kirk, I took your letter to staff regarding USR-1508 this morning. Planning staff consensus was that a Use by Special Review Permit would be required. If you have any questions, feel free to call or e-mail me. Sincerely, Chris Gathman From: Kirk Goble [mailto:kirk@bell5.com] Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 10:28 AM To: Chris Gathman Subject: USR-1508 Modification TO: Chris Gathman, Weld County Department of Planning Services Chris —Attached please find a letter to WCDPS regarding a relatively minor modification in the tower design for USR-1508, Longmont Broadcasting, LLC as we discussed on the phone a couple of days ago. Please review with staff and provide a reply at your earliest convenience. Please contact me if you have questions or need clarification of any issue. Thank you. Kirk Goble, Broker Accredited Land Consultant The Bell 5 Land Company 710 11th Avenue, Suite 107 Greeley, CO 80631 PHONE 970-356-1618 FAX 970.392-1618 04/21/2006 JTheBeIl5 Land Company 710 11th Avenue, Suite 107, Greeley, CO 80631 PHONE 970-356-1618 FAX 970-392-1618 April 20, 2006 Chris Gathman Weld County Department of Planning Services 918 10th Street Greeley, CO 80631 *** via e-mail *** RE: USR-1508, Longmont Broadcasting, LLC Chris - This letter is to serve as courtesy notice to the Weld County Department of Planning Services regarding a proposed change in the design of the broadcast towers approved under USR-1508 for Longmont Broadcasting, LLC. The original application and approval was for 2 towers of approximately 1,280 feet in height each. The tower height was approved by the Federal Aviation Administration. Longmont Broadcasting, LLC proposes to increase the tower height of each by approximately 300 feet for a total tower height of approximately 1,500 feet. The increase in height is necessary and timely due to the following circumstances: • The Federal Aviation Administration has undergone an organizational change that makes the timing and likelihood of approval of the additional tower height (the applicant would provide proof of the FAA's written approval when applying for building permit). • From a technical standpoint, the target population of the tower operators will receive a substantially better signal with this relatively minor increase in height, thus greatly improving the services to the public for which the towers were approved. • Additional users (tenants) could conceivably be placed on the added tower height section to enhance and abide by the Weld County Code requirement that the facility accommodate additional users in order to reduce the total number of towers required throughout the area. This serves the requirements and intent of the Weld County Code as well as maintaining the economic viability of this expensive facility. • There are 2 adjacent projects planned or under construction in the immediate area that will create signal blockage for any broadcast or radio antenna located on the lower section of the towers, effectively reducing the useable portion of the towers as originally proposed and approved. These projects are: a natural gas power plant planned for property immediately adjacent to the Longmont Broadcasting tower site (petition for annexation filed with Town of Frederick); and the placement of additional water towers/tanks being constructed on the adjacent "Tsunami" property and assumed to be part of the Central Weld Water District tank farm at that location. The water tanks and the power plant vent stacks are of sufficient height and girth to block some signal from the lower portions of the tower(s), creating radio broadcast "shadows" that will reduce signal quality, or in some cases block the signal entirely within the normal cellular usage area. This unforeseen circumstance reduces the potential tower usage and capacity as originally planned, proposed and approved. The proposed additional tower height will offset this unpredicted decrease in capacity and return the tower project to its original intended and permitted capacity. • While the project is currently under construction, with prompt action the construction plan can be modified so that the tower can be increased in height. Construction would not be continuous without creating an impact to the required on-air date of the current tenant. Prompt approval of the increased height by county officials would decrease the risk environment in making the investment in the added cost related to the revised construction plan. The applicant respectfully submits that this modification will not constitute a substantial change in the terms of approval for USR-1508 due to the following: • This modification in tower design makes virtually no change in the proposed "footprint" of the facility on the surface as shown on the recorded USR Plat. The additional total tower height with the attendant guy anchors are the only changes proposed. • This modification in tower design creates no additional impact to mineral interests with whom the applicant has already entered into surface agreements. There is no additional surface development proposed, thus the change meets both the spirit and intent of the state statute requiring notification of severed mineral interests. The statute references the State Legislation's intent that this notification requirement is for applications that are in anticipation of new surface development. Clearly, there is no new surface development proposed that would create any impact other than that which has already been addressed and approved through previous notifications and the existing surface agreements. The applicant can and will abide by the existing surface agreements. • This modification in tower design creates no additional impact to roads, utilities, emergency response, health and safety, or any other agencies or individuals who responded to the referrals obtained through the original application process. • The tower "fall radius" would not change and the requirements to address the concerns of adjacent properties (specifically Wilson) regarding the potential "debris field" still exist and will be completed as originally required. This issue applies only in the extremely unlikely occurrence of a catastrophic tower structural failure as addressed in the original application. The applicants have maintained good communications with Ms. Wilson as the project proceeds. • • The applicant deems that the preceding paragraphs have provided compelling reasons to allow this relatively minor change to occur without requiring a Substantial Change hearing or Application for Amended USR. Requiring the applicant to submit a full application for Amended USR and to be required to go back through the entire process of notifications and hearings seems onerous in this case since most of the issues to be addressed in such an application would be redundant, repetitive, and unnecessary. A full application and the associated process would have a major impact on construction time and could create delays in placing this necessary and expensive facility into full operation. The net negative effects of this modification to the public you serve would be negligible or non-existent and barely noticeable. The economic impact to Weld County should not be ignored. At this time, the building permit for the tower under construction (not including the permit for support structures and building) is the single most expensive permit issued by the Southwest Weld County office. The sooner the facility can be made operational and populated with broadcast tenants, the sooner the resultant revenues and tax assessments can be realized. The attached Review of Current Tower Capacities (Attachment "A") is a good indicator of the number and type of users awaiting the completion and activation of this facility. The applicant has demonstrated their cooperation and willingness to seek proper approvals and provide timely notices to WCDPS throughout the permitting and construction process thus far and respectfully requests staff approval of the additional tower height. Please contact me if you have questions or need further information. I look forward to your approval of this request. Sincerely, Kirk Goble, ALC Broker Representative for Longmont Broadcasting, LLC in USR-1508 Attachment: Review of Current Tower Capacities • • Attachment A Review of Current Tower Capacities Longmont Broadcasting LLC Tower Nine (9) Television or FM Radio Broadcasting Transmitting Antennas, with related feed lines at or near the top. Two ENG Microwave receive systems, with related feed lines at the 1,000 foot level. One additional side-mounted Television or FM Radio Transmitting antenna, between the 980 foot and 950 foot levels with related feed lines. Two Low-power Television Transmitting Antennas side mounted between the 950 foot and 825 foot level with related feed lines A multi-user, multi frequency, Two-way Communications System between the 825 foot and 755 foot level with related feed lines. Seventeen, eight foot, microwave dish locations between the 755 foot level and 200 foot level with related feed lines. Three Cellular-PCS locations at and below the 200 foot levels with related feed lines (these locations are at risk to the new construction of the power plant and water tanks). All capacity items are subject to variation and usage dependent on equal or varied design load as approved by design study. Page 1 of 1 1,\Z_- I 5 Chris Gathman From: Chris Gathman Sent: Monday, April 10, 2006 12:10 PM To: 'kirk@bell5.com' Subject: Longmont Broadcasting Tower lighting (USR-1508) Kirk, Planning staff reviewed the proposed tower lighting modification and determined that it was not a substantial change. The lighting of this tower would be consistent with the lighting currently used by the existing tower at the adjacent site. Sincerely, Chris 04/10/2006 Chris —Attached are 2 e-mails regarding the Longmont Broadcasting Tower USR. One is describing the change in tower lighting that I discussed with you. The other is confirmation of"natural" color selection for the building roof. Neither of these items should rise to the level of"substantial change," but the applicants want to be sure to keep WCDPS informed of modifications. Thanks— please call with any questions. Kirk Goble, ALC The Bell 5 Land Company 710 11th Avenue #107 Greeley, CO 80631 a 5u D51 oL,\ �/? 5 • Message • • Page 1 of 1 Kirk Goble From: Marguerite Romero [Marguerite@thissenconstruction.com] Sent: Monday, April 03, 2006 3:46 PM To: Blairmedia@aol.com Subject: Roofing submittal I am going to approve the roofing submittal and select Sierra tan as the color for the cap flashing, scuppers and downspouts. Thank you. Marguerite Romero Project Manager Thissen Construction Corporation 970-353-8242—office 970-371-3175--cell 970-351-0530—fax marguerite@thissenconstruction.com 4/4/2006 • • Page 1 of 1 Kirk Goble From: Blairmedia@aol.com Sent: Saturday, March 04, 2006 7:14 PM To: Kirk@bell5.com Subject: Three stage lighting for the New Fort Lupton Tower Kirk, we need to formally notify Weld County that we would like to change the tower lighting to a "Day/Night (Dual Lighting) System". Discussion with the lighting suppler and conversation with our FAA consultant leads us to believe that a Day/Night lighting system would be safer than the red and white paint with red night lights. While the maintenance requirements for a dual lighting system are higher the daytime visual effect may in fact be less than the red and white striping. The system would consist of bright strobe lights pointed upward during daylight hours, medium strobe lights pointed upwards in the twilight time period and red markers at night. I asked Mrs Wilson if she had ever been bothered by the current towers strobe lights during daylight. She said only one time in the time frame she had lived there and at that time one of the light units had been misadjusted. If Kevin needs more information let me know. In the meantime I am going prepare the filing for the change with the FAA. Dirk B Freeman Technical Consultant Longmont Broadcasting LLC PO Box 753 Wheat Ridge, CO 80034 Phone 303 940 4886 Fax 303 940 1229 E-mail blairmedia@aol.com 4/4/2006 r ' • • Chris Gathman From: Chris Gathman Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 2:05 PM To: 'David Nemeth' Subject: RE: Richland Towers Longmont Site Dave, we discussed this at this morning's staff meeting. The staff decision was, given the height of the tower, location of the proposed antenna, and the small size of the antenna relative to the overall tower height, that an antenna that is painted "orange" would be permitted. The only remaining item would be to apply for the appropriate building permit (s) for this antenna. Sincerely, Chris Gathman Planner III Original Message From: David Nemeth [mailto:dnemeth@rtowers.com] Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 1:50 PM To: Chris Gathman Subject: RE: Richland Towers Longmont Site Chris: Thank you for looking into this for me. Please let me know what the decision is. • Dave Nemeth Original Message From: Chris Gathman [mailto:cgathman@co.weld.co.us] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 4:47 PM To: David Nemeth Subject: RE: Richland Towers Longmont Site O.K. David. I will check with staff on this. Thanks, Chris Original Message From: David Nemeth [mailto:dnemeth@rtowers.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 1:01 PM To: Chris Gathman Subject: Richland Towers Longmont Site Chris: Thank you for speaking with me today regarding the color of future antennas on our broadcast tower located at 6870 CR 17, Fort Lupton, CO 80621. Our preference would be that the color of the antenna be "orange" versus "white" and wanted to check with the county to see if there were any zoning regulations that would prohibit the use of "orange" for the antenna. The tower would not be painted and it would remain the galvanized steel color. Only the antenna would be painted. etvM-M4.6,721-Ce.it d W 1 aO610 -.3q2; N /7d',j The proposed antenna will be at the 925 foot level and will be about 35.7 feet in length. This is a broadband antenna which will serve multiple broadcasters, and thus reduces the number of antennas required if each broadcaster installed their own. There is a site located near ours that has this type of antenna painted orange. Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have any questions or I can be of any additional assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me. Dave Nemeth Richland Towers 813-579-4243 Direct 813-728-0688 Mobile dnemeth@rtowers.com 2 4D • Chris Gathman From: Chris Gathman Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 1:06 PM To: Lin Dodge Subject: FW: use permit Here is the Trinity Broadcast detail re: the tenant finish. I am fine with releasing this permit. Sincerely, Chris Original Message From: James Riddle [mailto:JRiddle@tbn.org] Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 10:32 AM To: Chris Gathman Subject: use permit Dear sir: Trinity broadcasting has a rental agreement with Richland towers. Richland is the owner of the building at 6870 Weld county road 17. We will be using the building for a third Digital TV transmitter. The transmitter will cover the Greeley/ Denver area on channel 38. We are adding about 20 tons of air conditioning, 2 walls and electrical equipment. The building will be remotely monitored and visited about once a week. If you have any other questions please ask. Thanks James Riddle Chief Engineer KPJR Trinity Broadcasting 9020 Yates street Westminster, CO 80031 303-650-5515 1 Hello