33To:
Via:
From:
Date:
South Miami
AIIIrfa'i
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER - OFFICE MEMORANDUM 2001
The Honorable Mayor Stoddard and Members of the City Commission
Hector Mirabile; Ph.D., City Manager
Thomas J. Vageline, Director
Planning and Zoning Department 104 OW
November 16, 2010
ITEM No.
Subject:
An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida, amending
the South Miami Land Development Code by amending Section 20 -10, entitled "Siting Regulations
for Telecommunications Towers and Antennas" in order add a new Section 20 -10.11 to be entitled
"Collocation Exceptions to Required Regulations" which as required by Florida State Statutes will
exempt from review telecommunication facilities which are collocated on existing facilities;
providing for severability, providing for ordinances in conflict; and providing an effective date
BACKGROUND
The placement of telecommunications antennae on buildings or towers is regulated by Article X (Section
20 -10) entitled "Siting Regulations for Telecommunications Towers and Antennas ". This section
specifies that certain antenna can be approved administratively (City Manager or staff) and certain
locations and antenna types require a special use - public hearing process in order to obtain approval.
The Planning and Zoning Department recently met with representatives from Verizon Wireless
concerning the placement of additional (collocated) wireless antennae on the Gulliver Academy South
Miami Campus at 8512 SW 57 Avenue. The company wished to place six stealth antennae on the face of
the current building which already has another group of telecommunications antennae (T- Mobile) located
there. It was the position of City staff that collocated antennae were required to obtain special use
approval in accordance with LDC Section 20- 10.6(A)(pp. 214 -215). The company challenged this
position and provided legal justification stating that collocated antennae were exempt under Florida
Statutes from any form of design review or public hearings in order to obtain a building permit.
FLORIDA LEGISLATION
In 2005 the State did enact the Emergency Communications Act (E911 Act) which includes specific
provisions relating to the siting of wireless communications facilities, specifically including new language
to facilitate collocation by wireless communications. An attorney representing the wireless company
provided a background letter dated June 24, 2010 which explains the situation and requests that the
collocation application for Gulliver School be approved administratively without any further public
hearing.
A review of the legislation by the Department and the City Attorney indicates that Florida Statutes do
provide authority which mandates that local government may not require a public hearing, special
approval or design review for placement of an antenna tower or an antenna on a structure which already
has a telecommunications antenna (collocation). Attached is a copy FS Section 365.172(12) which
prohibits local government review other than an administrative review or a building permit review. This
regulation eliminates special use hearings and reviews by the Environmental Review and Preservation
Board for any telecommunications antenna collocated on an existing building or tower. In order to assure
that the Land Development Code is not in conflict with State Statutes and that future users of the Code are
aware of this legislation, a clarification amendment is required.
PROPOSED LDC AMENDMENT
It is proposed that the Land Development Code be amended as follows:
Article X. Siting Regulations for Telecommunications Towers and Antennas
Section 20-10.11 Collocation Exceptions to Required Regulations.
(A) Pursuant to Florida State Statute Section 36517202)(a)(b)(c) the collocation of
telecommunications equipment or a facility on a tower or building containing existing
telecommunications equipment or facility shall not be subiect to a special use approval process or
review by the Environmental Review and Preservation Board as set forth in this section.
(B) A collocated facility is subject to administrative review in order to determine compliance with
FS Section 365172(12) and will require the issuance of a building permit.
(new wording shown in bold/underlined)
PLANNING BOARD ACTION:
The Planning Board at its meeting on September 23, 2010 conducted a public hearing and then failed to
adopt a motion to approve the proposed amendment by a vote of 1 ayes 4 nays (Mr. Cruz, Mrs. Young,
Mrs. Beckman and Mr. Whitman).
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the proposed amendment to Section 20 -10 as set forth above and in the attached
draft ordinance be approved.
Attachments:
Draft Ordinance
Communication from Holland and Knight 6 -24 -10
FS 365.172 (12)(a)(b)
Planning Dept. Staff Report 9 -23 -10
Planning Board Minutes Excerpt 9 -23 -10
LDC Section 10
TJV /SAY
X: \Comm Items\2010 \11 -1 -10 \LDC Amend Exempt Colocated Tele CM Report.doc
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
ORDINANCE NO.
An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami,
Florida, amending the South Miami Land Development Code by amending Section
20 -10, entitled "Siting Regulations for Telecommunications Towers and Antennas"
in order add a new Section 20 -10.11 to be entitled "Collocation Exceptions to
Required Regulations" which as required by Florida State Statutes will exempt from
review telecommunication facilities which are collocated on existing facilities;
providing for severability, providing for ordinances in conflict; and providing an
effective date.
WHEREAS, the placement of telecommunications antennae on buildings or
towers is regulated by Article X (Section 20 -10) entitled "Siting Regulations for
Telecommunications Towers and Antennas" which specifies that certain antenna in certain
locations and antenna types require a special use - public hearing process in order to obtain
approval; and
WHEREAS, it was recently brought to the attention of staff that certain provisions
of this section were in conflict with Florida Statutes which exempts collocated antennae
from any form of design review or public hearings in order to obtain a building permit; and
WHEREAS the Emergency Communications Act (E911 Act) adopted in 2005
includes specific provisions relating to the siting of wireless communications facilities,
specifically including new language to facilitate collocation by wireless communications;
and
WHEREAS, that Florida Statute Section 365.172(12) mandates that local
government may not require a public hearing, special approval or design review for
placement of an antenna tower or an antenna on a structure which already has a
telecommunications antenna (collocation); and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Department has prepared an amendment to
Land Development Code which clearly states that any telecommunications antenna
collocated on an existing building or tower is exempt from special use hearings and
reviews by the Environmental Review and Preservation Board; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board at its September 23, 2010 meeting after public
hearing, failed to adopt a motion to approve the proposed amendment by a vote of 1 aye 4
nays; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. That Section 20 -10, entitled "Siting Regulations for Telecommunications
Towers and Antennas." is hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 20-10.11 Collocation Exceptions to Required Regulations.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
2
(A) Pursuant to Florida State Statute Section 365.172(12)(a)(b)(c) the collocation of
telecommunications equipment or a facility on a tower or building containing existing
telecommunications equipment or facility shall not be subject to a special use
approval process or review by the Environmental Review and Preservation Board as
set forth in this section.
(B) A collocated facility is subiect to administrative review in order to determine
compliance with FS Section 365172(12) and will require the issuance of a building
permit.
(new wording shown in bold/underlined)
Section 2. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this
ordinance are hereby repealed.
Section 3. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shall not
affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 4. This ordinance shall be effective immediately after the adoption hereof.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
1St Reading —
2nd Reading —
READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM
AND SUFFICIENCY:
CITY ATTORNEY
day of 2010
.76.11• O
MAYOR
XAComm Items\2010 \11- 140\LDC Amend Exempt Colocated Tele Ord.doc
COMMISSION VOTE:
Mayor Stoddard:
Vice Mayor Newman:
Commissioner Palmer:
Commissioner Beasley:
Commissioner Harris:
Holland & Knight
One East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1300 1 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 1 T 954.525.1000 1 F 954.463.2030
Holland & Knight LLP I www.hklaw.com
Janna P. Lhota
(954) 468 -7841
janna.lhota@hklaw.com
June 24, 2010
VIA EMAIL AND REGULAR MAIL
Laurence Feingold, City Attorney
City of South Miami
------ ______ 407 Lincoln_RQad, -Sui -8
Miami Beach, FL 33143
Re: Verizon Wireless /Gulliver Academy — Collocation of Wireless Facilities
Dear Mr. Feingold:
Holland & Knight LLP represents Verizon Wireless Personal Communications LP
d/b /a Verizon Wireless ( "Verizon Wireless ") in connection with an application for the
collocation of wireless facilities at the Gulliver Academy South Miami Campus located at
8512 S.W. 57t1 Avenue (the "Property ") in the City of South Miami. On May 27, 2010,
Verizon Wireless applied for a building permit from the City of South Miami (the "City ") to
allow the attachment of six (6) wireless antennae to the Gulliver School Gymnasium (Permit
No. 10 -464) located on the Property. A copy of the building permit application and related
construction plans (the "Application ") are attached at Tab 1. On June 3, 2010, the
Application was placed on hold by City staff. Citing Section 20- 10.6(A) of the Land
Development Code, staff has taken the position that Verizon Wireless must first obtain
ERPB approval and approval of the collocated wireless facility as a Special Use that requires
approval after public hearing from the Planning Board and City Commission as a condition
to issuance of any building permit.
In reviewing Chapter 20, Article X (Siting Regulations for Telecommunication
Towers and Antennas) of the City's Land Development Regulations, it is readily apparent
that the City's current regulations have not been amended to incorporate revisions to the
Emergency Communications Number E911 Act ( "E911 Act ") adopted by the Florida
Legislature in 2005. The E911 Act, codified at Section 365.172, Florida Statutes, provides
specific provisions relating to the siting of wireless communications facilities. The
expressed purpose of the E911 Act is to facilitate collocation among wireless providers
throughout the State of Florida. See Section 365.172(12)(a), Florida Statutes. In
furtherance of this goal, Section 365.172(12), Florida Statutes, outlines circumstances where
the collocation of wireless facilities can be subject to no more than a building permit review.
Specifically, Section 365.172(12)(b) provides as follows:
Laurence Feingold, City Attorney
June 24, 2010
Page 2
b. Except for a historic building, structure; site, object, or district, or a
tower included in sub - subparagraph a., collocations on all other existing
structures that meet the requirements in sub - sub - subparagraphs (I) -(II)
shall be subject to no more than building permit review, and an
administrative review for compliance with this subparagraph. Such
collocations are not subject to any portion of the local government's land
development regulations not addressed herein, or to public hearing
review, This sub- subparagraph shall not preclude a public hearing for any
appeal of the decision on the collocation application.
(I) The collocation does not increase the height of the existing
structure to which the antennae are to be attached, measured to the
highest point of any part of the structure or any existing antenna
attached to the structure;
(II) The collocation does not increase the ground space area,
otherwise known as the compound, if any, approved in the site plan
for equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities;
(1II) The collocation consists of antennae, equipment enclosures,
and ancillary facilities that are of a design and configuration
consistent with any applicable structural. or aesthetic design
requirements and any requirements for location on the structure, but
not prohibitions or restrictions on the placement of additional
collocations on the existing structure or procedural requirements,
other than those authorized by this section, of the local government's
land development regulations in. effect at the time of the collocation
application; and
(IV) The collocation consists of antennae, equipment enclosures,
and ancillary facilities that are of a design and configuration
consistent with all applicable restrictions or conditions, if any, that
do -not conflict with sub - sub - subparagraph (III) and were applied to
the initial antennae placed on the structure and to its accompanying
equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities and, if applicable,
applied to the structure supporting the antennae.
[Emphasis added].
The attachment of wireless facilities by Verizon Wireless on the Gulliver School
Gymnasium is a collocation covered by the provisions of Section 365.172(12)(b), Florida
Statutes. T- Mobile presently maintains wireless antenna of a similar design and
configuration on the Gulliver School Gymnasium pursuant to a Special Exception approval
Laurence Feingold, City Attorney
June 24, 2010
Page 3
granted by the City Commission by Resolution No. 185 -07- 12570. A copy of Resolution
No. 185 -07 -12570 is attached at Tab 2. Verizon Wireless seeks to attach antenna which will
not increase the height of the existing structure and which is of a similar design, and
configuration as the existing T- Mobile antenna located on the Gulliver School .Gymnasium.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 365.172(12)(b), Florida Statutes, the Application is
subject to no more than a building permit review by the City. The fact that the City's
current LDRs do not address the requirements of Section 365.172 is irrelevant. Section
365.172(12)(c), Florida Statutes, specifically provides that "[rjegulations, restrictions,
conditions, or permits of the local government, acting in its regulatory capacity, that limit the
___ number of c411ocations or M iire review processes inconsistent with this subsection shall not _
apply to collocations addressed in this subparagraph."
Based on the foregoing facts and statutory authority, we respectfully request that the
City acknowledge that the Application to collocate wireless facilities on the Gulliver School
Gymnasium is not required to undergo review as a special use, but rather will, be subject to
no more than a building permit review as provided by Section 365.172(12(b), Florida
Statutes. Should you have any questions or require any additional information, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely yours,
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
By:?:�n,�
Jadna P. Lhota, For the Firm
Tom Vageline, Planning Director, (via. e-mail)
Randy Witt, City Manager (via e -mail)
Ines Marrero - Priegues (via e -mail)
Diondra Miles, Communication Development Services, Inc. (via e -mail)
Mark Baesch, SBA Network Services, Inc. (via e-mail)
Josephine Conde, Verizon Wireless (via-e -mail)
# 9556581_vI
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine
Page 10 of 15
and expenses required to develop and maintain all information, including ALI and ANI databases and
other information source repositories, necessary to property inform call takers as to location address,
type of emergency, and other information directly relevant to the E911 call- taking and transferring
function. Moneys derived from the fee may also be used for next - generation E911 network services,
next - generation E911 database services, next - generation E911 equipment, and wireless E911 routing
systems.
(c) The moneys may not be used to pay for any item not listed in this subsection, including, but not
limited to, any capital or operational costs for emergency responses which occur after the call transfer
to the responding public safety entity and the costs for constructing, leasing, maintaining, or renovating
buildings, except for those building modifications necessary to maintain the security and environmental
integrity of the PSAP and E911 equipment rooms.
(10) LIABILITY OF COUNTIES. —A county subscribing to 911 service remains liable to the local
exchange carrier for any 911 service, equipment, operation, or maintenance charge owed by the county
to the local exchange carrier. As used in this subsection, the term "local exchange carrier" means a
local exchange telecommunications service provider of 911 service or equipment to any county within its
certificated area.
(11) INDEMNIFICATION AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. —Local governments are authorized to
undertake to indemnify local exchange carriers against liability in accordance with the lawfully filed
tariffs of the company. Notwithstanding an indemnification agreement, a voice communications services
provider is not liable for damages resulting from or in connection with 911 or E911 service, or for
identification of the telephone number, or address, or name associated with any person accessing 911 or
E911 service, unless the voice communications services provider acted with malicious purpose or in a
manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of the rights, safety, or property of a person when
providing such services. A voice communications services provider is not liable for damages to any
person resulting from or in connection with the provider's provision of any lawful assistance to any
investigative or law enforcement officer of the United States, this state, or a political subdivision
_thereof, or of any other state or political subdivision thereof, in connection with any lawful investigation
�r other law enforcement activity by such law enforcement officer.
2>0 FACILITATING E911 SERVICE IMPLEMENTATION. —To balance the public need for reliable E911
services through reliable wireless systems and the public interest served by governmental zoning and
land development regulations and notwithstanding any other law or local ordinance to the contrary, the
following standards shalt apply to a local government's actions, as a regulatory body, in the regulation
of the placement, construction, or modification of a wireless communications facility. This subsection
shatt not, however, be construed to waive or alter the provisions of s. 286.011 or s. 286.0115. For the
purposes of this subsection only, "local government" shall mean any municipality or county and any
agency of a municipality or county only. The term "local government" does not, however, include any
airport, as defined by s. 330.2 (2), even if it is owned or controlled by or through a municipality,
county, or agency of a municipality or county. Further, notwithstanding anything in this section to the
contrary, this subsection does not apply to or control a local government's actions as a property or
structure owner in the use of any property or structure owned by such entity for the placement,
construction, or modification of wireless communications facilities. In the use of property or structures
owned by the local government, however, a local government may not use its regulatory authority so as
to avoid compliance with, or in a manner that does not advance, the provisions of this subsection.
(a) Collocation among wireless providers is encouraged by the state.
http: / /www. leg .state.fl.us /statuteslindex.cfm? App_ mode = Display _Statute &Search_String =... 9/13/2010
atatutes & Uonsriturion : View Statutes: Online Sunshine
Page 11 of 15
1.a. Collocations on towers, including nonconforming towers, that meet the requirements in sub -
sub- subparagraphs (I), (II), and (III), are subject to only building permit review, which may include a
review for compliance with this subparagraph. Such collocations are not subject to any design or
placement requirements of the local government's land development regulations in effect at the time of
the collocation that are more restrictive than those in effect at the time of the initial antennae
placement approval, to any other portion of the land development regulations, or to public hearing
review. This sub - subparagraph shall not preclude a public hearing for any appeal of the decision on the
collocation application.
(1) The collocation does not increase the height of the tower to which the antennae are to be
attached, measured to the.highest point of any part of the tower or any existing antenna attached to
the tower;
(11) The collocation does not increase the ground space area, commonly known as the compound,
approved in the site plan for equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities; and
(Ili) The collocation consists of antennae, equipment enclosures, and ancillary facilities that are of a
-- --i- --
design and configuration consistent with all applicable regulations, restrictions, or conditions, if any,
applied to the initial antennae placed on the tower and to its accompanying equipment enclosures and
ancillary facilities and, if applicable, applied to the tower supporting the antennae. Such regulations
may include the design and aesthetic requirements, but not procedural requirements, other than those
authorized by this section, of the local government's land development regulations in effect at the time
the initial antennae placement was approved.
b. Except for a historic building, structure, site, object, or district, or a tower included in sub -
subparagraph a., collocations on alt other existing structures that meet the requirements in sub -sub-
subparagraphs (I) -(IV) shall be subject to no more than building permit review, and an administrative
review for compliance with this subparagraph. Such collocations are not subject to any portion of the
local government's land development regulations not addressed herein, or to public hearing review. This
sub - subparagraph shall not preclude a public hearing for any appeal of the decision on the collocation
application.
(1) The collocation does not increase the height of the existing structure to which the antennae are
to be attached, measured to the highest point of any part of the structure or any existing antenna
attached to the structure;
(II) The collocation does not increase the ground space area, otherwise known as the compound, if
any, approved in the site plan for equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities;
(III) The collocation consists of antennae, equipment enclosures, and ancillary facilities that are of a
design and configuration consistent with any applicable structural or aesthetic design requirements and
any requirements for location on the structure, but not prohibitions or restrictions on the placement of
additional collocations on the existing structure or procedural requirements, other than those
authorized by this section, of the local government's land development regulations in effect at the time
of the collocation application; and
(IV) The collocation consists of antennae, equipment enclosures, and ancillary facilities that are of a
design and configuration consistent with all applicable restrictions or conditions, if any, that do not
conflict with sub - sub - subparagraph (III) and were applied to the initial antennae placed on the structure
and to its accompanying equipment enclosures and ancillary facilities and, if applicable, applied to the
structure supporting the antennae.
c. Regulations, restrictions, conditions, or permits of the local government, acting in its regulatory
http: / /www. leg .state.fl.us /statuteslindex.cfm? App_ mode = Display _Statute &Search_String =... 9/13/2010
To: Honorable Chair &
Planning Board Members
From: Thomas J. Vageline, Director ox
Planning and Zoning Department
South Miami
AII- AR101080Y
i ®'
2001
Date: September 23, LUJU
Re: LDC Amendment
Cell Tower Collocation Exemption
PB -10 -026
Applicant: City of South Miami
An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida, amending
the South Miami Land Development Code by amending Section 20 -10, entitled "Siting Regulations
for Telecommunications Towers and Antennas" in order add a new Section 20- 10(11) to be entitled
"Collocation Exceptions to Required Regulations" which as required by Florida State Statutes will
exempt from review telecommunication facilities which are collocated on existing facilities;
providing for severability, providing for ordinances in conflict; and providing an effective date
BACKGROUND
In the past several months the Planning and Zoning Department has been meeting with representatives
and attorney from Verizon Wireless concerning the placement of additional (collocated) wireless antennae
on the Gulliver Academy South Miami Campus at 8512 SW 57 Avenue. The placement of
telecommunications antennae on buildings or towers is regulated by Article X (Section 20 -10) entitled
Siting Regulations for Telecommunications Towers and Antennas ". This section specifies that certain
antenna can be approved administratively (City Manager or staff) and certain locations and antenna types
require a special use - public hearing process in order to obtain approval.
The company wished to place six antennae on the face of the current building which already has another
group of telecommunications antennae (T- Mobile) located there. This collocation process is encouraged
by the City's own regulation in LDC Section 20- 10.4(9) (pp. 210 -211). However, it was the position of
City staff that collocated antennae were still required to obtain special use approval in accordance with
LDC Section 20- 10.6(A)(pp. 214 -215). The company challenged this position and provided legal
justification stating that collocated antennae were exempt under Florida Statutes from any form of design
review or public hearings in order to obtain a building permit.
FLORIDA LEGISLATION
In 2005 the State enacted the Emergency Communications Act (E911 Act) which includes specific
provisions relating to the siting of wireless communications facilities, specifically including new language
to facilitate collocation by wireless communications. An attorney representing the wireless company
provided a background letter dated June 24, 2010 which explains the situation and requests that the
collocation application for Gulliver School be approved administratively without any further public
hearing. A review of the legislation by the Department and the City Attorney indicates that Florida
Statutes do provide authority which mandates that local government may not require a public hearing,
special approval or design review for placement of an antenna tower or an antenna on a structure which
already has a telecommunication antenna (collocation). Attached is a copy FS Section 365.172(12)
which prohibits local government review other than an administrative review or a building permit review.
This regulation eliminates special use hearings and reviews by the Environmental Review and
Preservation Board for any telecommunications antenna collocated on an existing building or tower. In
order to assure that the Land Development Code is not in conflict with State Statutes and that future users
of the Code are aware of this legislation, a clarification amendment is required.
PROPOSED LDC AMENDMENT
It is proposed that the Land Development Code be amended as follows:
— Article R -Siting Regu atlons of r Telecornmunrca ions owers an An ennas
Section 20- 10(11) Collocation Exceptions to Required Regulations.
(A) Pursuant to Florida State Statute Section 365172(12)(a)(b)(c) the collocation of a
telecommunications equipment or facility on a tower or building containing extstin
telecommunications equipment or facility shall not be subject to a special use approval process or
review by the Environmental Review and Preservation Board as set forth to this secttonq '�4j c P C
(B) A collocated facility is subject to administrative review in order to determine compliance with
FS Section 365172(12) and will require the issuance of a building permit.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the amendment as set forth above be approved.
Backup Documentation:
LDC Article X (Section 20 -10.1 - 10.10)
Communication from Holland and Knight 6 -24 -10
FS 365.172 (12)(a)(b)
Public Notices
TJV /SAY
X:\PB\PB Agendas Staff Reports\2010 Agendas Staff Reports \9- 23- 10 \PB -10 -026 LDC Amend Exempt Colocated Tele from .doe
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD
Regular Meeting
Meeting Minutes
Thursday, September 23, 2010
City Commission Chambers
7:30 P.M.
EXCERPT
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:56 P.M.
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison.
II. Roll Call
Action: Chair Yates requested a roll call.
Board members present constituting a quorum: Mrs. Yates, Mr. Cruz, Mrs. Young, Mr.
Whitman and Mrs. Beckman. Board members absent: Mr. Farfan and Mr. Morton.
City staff present: Thomas J. Vageline (Planning & Zoning Director), Sanford A. Youkilis
(Planning & Zoning Consultant), Marcus Lightfoot (Permit Facilitator) and Lourdes Cabrera -
Hernandez (Principal Planner).
City Attorney: Mr. Mark Goldstein
III. Planning Board Applications/Public Hearings
PB40 -026
Applicant: City of South Miami
An Ordinance of the Mayor and City Commission of the City of South Miami, Florida,
amending the South Miami Land Development Code by amending Section 20 -10, entitled
"Siting Regulations for Telecommunications and Antennas" in order add a new Section
20- 10(11) to be entitled "Collocation Exceptions to Required Regulations" which as
required by Florida State Statutes will exempt from review telecommunication facilities
which are collocated on existing facilities; providing for severability, providing for
ordinances in conflict; and providing an effective date.
Planning Board Meeting
September 23, 2010
Page 2 of 3
Action: Mr. Cruz read the item into the record.
Mr. Youkilis informed the Board that the item has come before them since Verizon Wireless
wanted to place wireless antennas on Gulliver school. Staff informed the applicant that they had
to go through the special use approval process. The company attorney challenged our attorney
stating that the State law recently adopted prohibits the city from doing any review on the
antenna if it was a collocated facility. The Emergency Communications Act (E911 Act) created
Florida Statute Section 365.172(12), which prohibits local government review other than an
administrative review or a building permit review. Staff is proposing a technical amendment as
follows:
Section 20 -10 (11) Collocation Exceptions to Required Regulations
(A) Pursuant To Florida State Statute Section 365.172(12)(A)(B)(C) The Collocation Of A
Telecommunications Equipment Or Facility On A Tower Or Building Containing Existing
Telecommunications Equipment Or Facility Shall Not Be Subiect To A Special Use Approval
Process Or Review By The Environmental Review And Preservation Board As Set Forth In This
Section.
(B) A Collocated Facility Is Subject To Administrative Review In Order To Determine Compliance
With Fs Section 365.17202) And Will Require The Issuance Of A Building Permit.
Staff recommends that the amendment as set forth above be approved.
The Chair opened the public hearing.
Speakers:
NAME ADDRESS SUPPORT/OPPOSE PROJECT
Sharon McCain Oppose
Ms. McCain questioned if the antenna will be hidden. Mr. Youkilis responded yes, but this item
is just an amendment to the LDC text.
The Chair closed the public hearing.
Mr. Whitman questioned the definition of collocation and can the structure be modified. Mr.
Youkilis responded that when more than one FCC licensed provider uses a telecommunication
antenna support structure, the next one to attach to the same structure is considered collocated.
It can only be on that one approved structure. Mr. Vageline responded that Florida Statue states
that the collocation does not increase the height of the existing structure.
Mrs. Beckman requested to defer the item in order to provide the Board with visuals, to see what
is currently there and what could potentially go there. Mr. Youkilis commented that it is
prohibited to even consider it at all. She commented that this is a very serious issue and the real
need should be established.
Planning Board Meeting
September 23, 2010
Page 3 of 3
Mrs. Beckman commented that there is a health issue with cellular phone towers, if we do not
have any measurements of what tower might look like this should not be considered. The
property value could decrease due to the cell towers. Mr. Whitman commented that the Florida
Legislature has past a law so that local government cannot review it.
Mrs. Yates commented that this item is to only bring the new legislation into the Land
Development Code (LDC).
Mr. Goldstein commented that if the City Commission would like to challenge the Florida
Legislature based on the health and safety of the community that would be an expensive long
shot. Ms. Beckman questioned if there have been any cities challenging this. Mr. Goldstein
responded no.
Mr. Cruz questioned if there is any requirement by the legislature that municipalities make those
changes within a certain time. Mr. Goldstein responded that there is no requirement. This is a
situation where the LDC Code is not enforceable. All the item is doing is to bring the LDC up to
date.
Mr. Youkilis commented that the antenna could only be brought to administration, but not any
Boards or Committees.
Mrs. Yates informed staff that the background information provided in the report has in many
situations caused confusion, however it is very informative. She asked if there is another way so
that the Board is not confused on the application being for one specific site.
Motion: Mr. Whitman moved to approve the application. Mrs. Yates seconded.
Vote: 1 Ayes 4 Nays (Mr. Cruz, Mrs. Young, Mrs. Beckman and Mr. Whitman)
TJV/sAY
W:\PB\PB Minutes\2010 Minutes\ 9- 23- 2010\PB.Minutes.9.23.2010.doe
SITING REGULATIONS FOR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS 20 -10.2
ARTICLE X. SITING REGULATIONS FOR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS AND
ANTENNAS
20 -10.1 Intent.
The regulations and requirements of this Article are intended to:
(A) Promote the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens by regulating the siting
of wireless communication facilities;
(B) Accommodate the growing need and demand for wireless communication services;
(C) Provide for the appropriate location and development of wireless communication
facilities within the City of South Miami;
(D) Minimize adverse visual effects of wireless communication facilities through careful
' - - - - -' - "� –` design; siting, lascape screemng and mnovaG�ie ca iouil�giagteclmYques;
(E) Encourage the location and collocation of antennas on existing structures thereby
minimizing new visual impacts and reducing the need for additional antenna support
structures; and
(F) Minimize potential damage to property from telecommunications towers and telecom-
munications facilities by requiring such structures be soundly designed, constructed,
modified and maintained; and
(G) Require owners of telecommunication facilities to construct new facilities, and replace
existing facilities, whether primary, supporting or associated facilities, with the best
available, feasible technology, and to include provision in leases between the City of
South Miami and owners to give effect to this requirement.
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
20.10.2 Definitions.
Accessory equipment building Any building, cabinet or equipment enclosure constructed
for the primary purpose of housing the electronics, backup power, power generators and other
free standing equipment associated with the operation of antennas.
Antenna —A transmitting and/or receiving device mounted on a telecommunications tower,
building or structure and used for wireless communication services which radiates or captures
electromagnetic waves, digital signals. analog signals, radio frequencies (excluding radar
signals), wireless telecommunication signals or other communication signals, including
directional antennas, such as panel and microwave dish antennas, and omni- directional
antennas such as whips, but excluding radar antennas, amateur radio antennas, satellite
earth stations, and single - family use of television antennas.
Antenna support structure —A facility that is constructed and designed primarily for the
support of antennas, which shall include the following types: (i) monopole and (ii) stealth
tower.
Supp. No. 4 205
20 -10.2 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPNEi NT CODE
Collocation —When more than one FCC licensed provider uses a telecommunication tower
antenna support structure to attach antennas.
Existing structures —Any lawfully constructed man -made structure including but not
limited to antenna support structures, buildings, utility structures, light poles, clock towers,
bell towers, steeples, water towers and the like, which allow for the attachment of antennas.
FAA. —The Federal Aviation Administration.
FCC —The Federal Communications Commission.
Microwave Antenna A dish -like antenna used to link wireless communication services sites
together by wireless transmission of voice or data.
Monopole tower Atelecommunication tower consisting of a single pole or spire self - supported
by a permanent foundation, and constructed without guy wires and ground anchors.
antenna An array of antennas designed to concentrate a radio signal in a particular
area.
Professional Engineer —A person technically qualified and professionally licensed by the
State of Florida to practice engineering.
Provider —An FCC licensed communications company.
Roofline —The overall ridge line of the structure which does not include cupolas, elevator
towers, clock towers or other features that are permitted to exceed the maximum height of the
building.
Search ring —A geographic area in which a provider intends to locate an antenna to serve
the provider's coverage area.
Stealth facility —Any telecommunication facility which is designed to blend into the
surrounding environment. Examples of stealth facilities include, but are not limited to,
architecturally screened, roof - mounted antennas, antennas integrated into architectural
elements, and telecommunication towers designed to look like light poles, power poles or trees.
Stealth tower —A structure designed to support one or more antennas and blend into the
existing surroundings.
Telecommunication facility —A facility that is used to provide one or more telecommunica-
tions services, including, without limitation, radio transmitting telecommunications towers,
other supporting structures, and associated facilities used to transmit telecommunications
signals. An open video system is not a telecommunications facility to the extent that it provides
only video services; a cable system is not a telecommunications facility to the extent that it
provides only cable service.
Telecommunication tower —A monopole or stealth tower constructed as a free - standing
structure, containing one or more antennas intended to be used for personal wireless services,
telephone, radio or a similar communication service. The term includes, but is not limited to,
radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common carrier towers, cellular l
Supp. No. 4 206
SITING REGULATIONS FOR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS 20 -10.4
telephone towers and stealth towers. The term does not include a tower that provides only open
video services, radar towers, amateur radio support structures licensed by the FCC, or
single - family residential use of satellite dishes, television antennas and satellite earth stations
installed in accordance with applicable codes.
Whip antenna —A cylindrical antenna that transmits signals in 360 degrees.
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
20.10.3 Applicability.
(A) All new towers or antennas, and modifications to existing towers and antennas, in the
City shall be subject to these regulations, except as provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2, below:
1. These regulations shall not apply to any tower, or installation of any antenna, that is
of an open video broadcast -only facility, or is owne an operated y a
federally - licensed amateur radio station operator, or is used exclusively for receive-
only antennas.
2, Pre - existing towers and pre - existing antennas shall not be required to meet the
requirements of these regulations, except to comply with the requirements of the
non - conforming provisions of the Land Development Code.
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
20 -10.4 General requirements and minimum standards.
(A) Applicants regulated by this Ordinance may request a pre- application conference with
the City. Such request shall be submitted with a non - refundable fee of $500.00 to reimburse the
City for the cost and fees incurred by the conference.
(B) Each applicant shall apply to the City for a permit providing the information as
required by this Ordinance and a nonrefundable fee of $1,500 to reimburse the City for the
costs of reviewing the application.
(C) The City shall review the application and determine if the proposed use complies with
applicable Sections of this Ordinance and other regulations. Every new telecommunication
tower and antenna shall be subject to the following minimum standards:
1. Lease Required.
a. Any construction, installation or placement of a telecommunications facility on
any property owned, leased or otherwise controlled by the City shall require a
Lease Agreement executed by the City and the owner of the facility. Any lease of
public property shall be considered and acted on in accordance with the require-
ments of the Charter and Code of Ordinances of the City of South Miami.
The City may require, as a condition of entering into a Lease Agreement with a
telecommunications service provider, the dedication of space on the facility for
Supp. No. 4 207
20 -10.4 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE /
public health, safety and communication purposes, as well as property improve-
ment on the leased space. Any dedications and improvements shall be negotiated
prior to execution of the lease.
b. Any construction, installation, or placement of a telecommunication facility on
any property owned, leased or otherwise controlled by a private property owner
shall require a Lease Agreement or letter of consent executed by the property
owner and the owner of the facility, unless the property owner and owner of the
facility are the same.
2. Principal or Accessory Use. Towers and antennas may be considered either principal or
accessory uses. A different existing use of an existing structure on the same lot shall
not preclude the installation of a tower or antenna on the same lot.
3. Lot Size. For purposes of determining whether the installation of a tower or antenna _
- - - - - -- coii�phes wrih zoning regu ations, the dimensions of the entire lot shall control, even
though the towers or antennas are proposed to be located on leased parcels within such
lot.
4. ERPB Review. The Environmental Review and Preservation Board (ERPB) shall
review and recommend approval, disapproval or modification on all site plans, projects
and specifications relating to applications for new telecommunication towers and
antennas, and modifications to existing towers and antennas. The ERPB's review shall
include, but not be limited to, those design criteria specifically enumerated by this
ordinance and all other applicable criteria, as outlined by the Land Development Code.
5. Height. All towers shall be as low in height as technologically and economically
feasible, provided that no tower shall exceed 125 feet in height.
6. Setbacks. Towers must be setback a minimum distance of 110% of the height of the
telecommunications tower from the property line. This requirement may be waived by
the City Manager, at the direction of the City Commission, with respect to stealth
towers.
7. Inventory of Existing Sites. Each applicant shall review the City's inventory of existing
telecommunications towers, antennas, and approved sites. All requests for sites shall
include specific information about the proposed location, height and design of the
proposed telecommunications tower, structure, or state of the art technology that does
not require the use of new telecommunications towers, or new structures can
accommodate, or be modified to accommodate, the applicant's proposed antenna.
Evidence submitted to demonstrate that no existing, telecommunications tower, struc-
ture or state of the art technology is suitable shall consist of any of the following:
a. An affidavit demonstrating that the applicant made diligent efforts to seek
permission to install or collocate the applicant's telecommunications facilities on
City -owned telecommunications towers or usable antenna support structures
located within a 1%2 mile radius of the proposed telecommunications tower site.
G
Supp. No. 4 208
SITING REGULATIONS FOR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS 20 -10.4
b. An affidavit demonstrating that the applicant made diligent efforts to install or
collocate the applicant's telecommunications facilities on towers or useable
antenna support structures owned by other persons located within a 1/2 mile
radius of the proposed telecommunications tower site.
C. An affidavit demonstrating that existing towers or structures located within the
geographic search area as determined by a radio frequency engineer do not have
the capacity to provide reasonable technical service consistent with the applicant's
technical system, including but not limited to, applicable FCC requirements.
d. Existing towers or structures that are not of sufficient height to meet applicable
FCC requirements.
e. Existing towers or structures do not have sufficient structural strength to support
applicant's proposed antenna and related equipment.
-- — " f- -The app icant's propose�lc an enna wo cause e ectromagnetic or ra�ho frequency
interference with the antenna on the existing towers or structures, or the antenna
on the existing towers or structures could cause interference with the applicant's
proposed antenna.
g. The fees, cost, or contractual provisions required .by the owner in order to .share
an existing telecommunications tower or structure or to adapt an existing
telecommunications tower or structure for sharing are unreasonable [ "unreason-
able" means a cost in excess of the cost to construct a new telecommunications
tower].
h. The applicant demonstrates that there are other limiting factors that render
existing towers and structures unsuitable.
i. The applicant demonstrates that state of the art technology used in the wireless
telecommunications business and within the scope of applicant's FCC license, is
unsuitable. Costs of state of the art technology that exceed new telecommunica-
tions tower or antenna development shall not by itself be presumed to render the
technology unsuitable.
j. Any additional information required by the City. If the City does not accept the
full evaluation as provided as accurate, or if the City disagrees with any part of
the evaluation, the City may hire the appropriate professionals to assess the
submitted evaluation at the applicant's expense.
This information is public record. The City does not warrant or represent that the
information is accurate or that the sites are available or suitable.
8..: Engineering Report. All applicants for new towers and antennas, or for towers and
antennas which are to be modified or reconstructed to accommodate additional
antennas, or for which a special use is required, must present a certified report by a
professional engineer, which shall include the following:
a. A site plan which includes, -without limitation, a legal description of the parent
tract and leased parcel, if applicable; on -site and adjacent land uses and zoning
Supp. No. 4 209
20 -10.4 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
l
classifications; and, a visual impact analysis and photo digitalization of the
telecommunications tower and all attachments including associated buildings
and equipment containers, close -up and at distances of 250 feet and 500 feet from
all properties within that range, or at other. points agreed upon in a pre -
application conference.
b. An analysis of any additional impacts on adjacent properties.
C. If applicable, a narrative of why the proposed telecommunications tower cannot
comply with the requirements as stated in this Section.
d. Type of telecommunications tower and specifics of design.
e. Current wind - loading capacity and projection of wind - loading capacity using
different types of antennas as contemplated by the applicant. No telecommuni-
cations tower shall be permitted to exceed its wind loading capacity as provided
f A statement of non - interference, which states that the construction and operation
of the tower, including reception and transmission functions, will not interfere
with public safety communication, or with the visual and customary transmission
or reception of radio, television, or similar services, as well as other wireless
services enjoyed by adjacent properties.
g. A statement of compliance with all applicable building codes, associated regula-
tions and safety standards as provided herein. For all towers attached to existing
structures, the statement shall include certification that the structure can
support the load superimposed by the telecommunications tower. Except where
provided herein, all towers shall have the capacity to permit multiple users; at a
minimum, monopole towers shall be able to accommodate 2 users.
h. Any additional information deemed by the City to be necessary to assess
compliance with this Ordinance.
9. Collocation. Pursuant to the intent of this Ordinance, collocation of telecommunication
antennas by more than one provider on existing telecommunication towers shall take
precedence over the construction of new telecommunication towers. Accordingly, in
addition to submitting the information required by Section 20- 10.4(C)(7), each appli-
cant shall comply with the below criteria:
a. Each application shall include a written report certified by a professional
engineer, stating:
i. the geographical service area requirements;
ii. mechanical or electrical incompatibility;
iii. any restrictions or limitations of the FCC that would preclude the shared
use of the telecommunication tower; and
iv. any additional information required by the City.
Supp. No. 4 210
SITING REGULATIONS FOR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS 20 -10.4
b. To encourage a reduction in the number of towers that may be required to site
antennas in order to meet the City's increasing demand for wireless service, new
towers shall be structurally designed to accommodate the collocation of antennas
as follows:
i. All towers over 80 feet and up to 126 feet in height shall be structurally
designed to accommodate at least two providers.
10. Incentive for Use of Existing Structures. Pursuant to the intent of this Ordinance, the
City shall provide the following incentives to service providers:
a. The review of all applications submitted by providers seeking to collocate on a
pre - existing telecommunications tower or to rent space on a proposed new
telecommunications tower, shall be completed by the City no more than 30 days
following the filing of a completed application, provided that the application does
not re uire s ecial use arroroval. -
b. The review of all applications submitted by providers for the placement of
antennas on existing structures shall be completed by the City no more than 30
days following the filing of a completed application, provided that the application
does not require special use approval.
11. Aesthetics. Towers and antennas shall meet the following requirements:
a. All applications for the installation of new towers, antennas or accessory
equipment buildings, or the modification of existing towers, antennas or acces-
sory equipment buildings shall be reviewed by the ERPB as provided in this Code.
b. Towers shall either maintain a galvanized steel finish or, if allowed by FAA
standards, shall be painted a neutral color to reduce visual obtrusiveness.
C, The design of accessory buildings and related structures shall use materials,
colors, textures, screening, and landscaping that will blend them into the natural
setting and surrounding buildings to minimize visual impact, as determined by
the ERPB.
d. All telecommunications tower sites must comply with any landscaping require-
ments of the City Land Development Code and all other applicable aesthetic and
safety requirements of the City, and the City may require landscaping in excess
of those requirements in order to enhance compatibility with adjacent residential
and non - residential land uses.
e. If an antenna is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and
supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a color that is neutral,
identical to, or compatible with the color of the supporting structure, as deter-
mined by the ERPB, to make the antenna and related equipment as visually
unobtrusive as possible.
f. No signals, artificial lights or illumination shall be permitted on any tower or
antenna unless required by the FAA. If lighting is required, the lighting
alternatives and design chosen must cause the least disturbance to the surround-
ing views. To the maximum extent possible, lighting shall be oriented away from
residential districts.
Supp. No. 4 211
20 -10.4 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE
12. Local, State or Federal Requirements. The construction, operation, maintenance and
repair of telecommunications facilities are subject to the regulatory supervision of the
City, and shall be performed in compliance with all laws and practices affecting the
subject, including, but not limited to, the Land Development Code, building code and
safety codes. The construction, operation and repair shall be performed in a manner
consistent with the applicable industry standards, including the Electronic Industries
Association. All towers and antennas must meet or exceed current standards and
regulations of the FAA and the FCC, including emission standards. They must meet
the requirements of all federal, state and local government agencies with the authority
to regulate towers and antennas prior to issuance of a building permit by the City. If
such standards and regulations are changed and require retroactive application, then
the owners of the towers and antennas governed by this Ordinance shall bring such
facilities into compliance with such revised standards and regulations within six
___ _ . —_ _____months - of- their- effective- dater unless- a- di €ferent- eemplianc-- sc-hedule-is- mandated -by --
the controlling agency. Failure to bring towers and antennas into compliance with such
revised standards and regulations shall constitute grounds for removal of the tower or
antenna at the owner's expense.
13. Building Codes & Safety Standards.
a. To ensure the structural integrity of telecommunications towers, the owner shall
construct and maintain the telecommunications tower in compliance with the
South Florida Building Code, and all other applicable codes and standards, as j
amended from time to time. A statement shall be submitted to the City by a
professional engineer certifying compliance with this subsection upon completion
of construction and, or, subsequent modification. Where a pre - existing structure,
including light and power poles, .is requested to be used as a stealth facility, the
facility, and all modifications to it, shall comply with all requirements, as
provided in this Ordinance. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the City may
require the taking of soil borings at the proposed site, at the expense of the
applicant, to assist in the professional analysis and review of the telecommuni-
cation tower's foundation in order to evaluate the design of the foundation.
b. The City reserves the right to conduct periodic inspection of telecommunications
towers to ensure structural and electrical integrity. If, upon inspection, the City
concludes that a tower fails to comply with any building or safety codes and
industry construction or maintenance standards, or constitutes a danger to
persons or property, then upon notice, the owner of the tower shall have 30 days
to bring the tower into compliance. Failure to bring the tower into compliance
within 30 days from receipt of notice shall constitute grounds for imposing a fine
and for removal of the tower or antenna at the owner's expense.
14. Signage. No signs, including commercial advertising, logo, political signs, flyers, flags,
or banners, whether or not posted temporarily, shall be permitted on any part of an
antenna or telecommunication tower, except for warning, danger or other signs
designed to maintain public safety and Federal, State, or Municipal Flags located on a
stealth facility designed to look like a flagpole.
Supp. No. 4 212
SITING REGULATIONS FOR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS 20 -10.5
15. Measurement. For purposes of measurement, telecommunication tower setbacks and
separation distances shall be calculated and applied to facilities located in the City
irrespective of municipal and county jurisdictional boundaries.
16. Not Essential Services. Towers and antennas shall be regulated and permitted
pursuant to this Ordinance and shall not be regulated or permitted as essential
services, public utilities or private utilities.
17. Franchises and Licenses. Owners and, or, operators of towers or antennas shall certify
that all franchises and licenses required by law for the construction or operation of a
wireless telecommunication system in the City have been obtained and shall file a copy
of all such franchises and licenses with the City.
18. Inspections; Reports; Fees.
a. Telecommunication tower owners shall provide written certification to the
P1.
every two years confirming the structural ana electrical incegr-Y va
tion. The certification shall be signed and sealed by a professional engineer.
The City may conduct periodic inspection of telecommunications towers, at the
owner's expense, to ensure structural and electrical integrity and compliance
with the provisions of this Ordinance. The owner of the telecommunications tower
may be required by the City to have more frequent inspections should there be an
emergency, extraordinary conditions or other reason to believe that the structural
and electrical integrity of the telecommunication tower is jeopardized. There shall
be a maximum of one inspection per year unless emergency or extraordinary
conditions warrant. additional inspections.
19. Bonding. The owner of a telecommunications tower shall, prior to commencing
construction, post a bond equal to an amountno less than $25,000, which bond shall be
posted to insure the obligation identified in Section 20- 10.10.
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
20 -10.5 Uses requiring administrative approval.
(A) The following uses may, be approved by the City Manager [or the Manager's designee]
after the ERPB, or the City Commission per Section 20 -6.2, has recommended approval:
1. Stealth Facilities.
a. Stealth rooftop or building mounted antennas, not exceeding 25 feet above the
roofline and 10 feet above the maximum height of the applicable zoning district,
shall be permitted as an accessory use in the following zoning districts:
MO
SR
TODD
Supp. No. 4 213
Medium- Intensity Office
Specialty Retail
Transit- Oriented Development District
20 -10.5 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE .
b. Stealth towers not exceeding 125 feet in height shall be permitted as a principal
or accessory use in the following zoning districts:
MO Medium - Intensity Office
SR
TODD
Specialty Retail
Transit- Oriented Development District
C. A stealth tower and antenna designed to look like a light pole may replace a light
pole, which existed before the adoption of this Ordinance, located in the PR
district, provided that the height of the stealth tower and antenna do not exceed
the height of the existing light pole by more than ten (10) feet.
d. Upon receipt of the appropriate application, the City Manager, at his or her sole
discretion, will determine the application's consistency with the definition of a
Non - Stealth Facilities.
a. Non - Stealth antennas mounted to buildings or rooftops, not exceeding 15 feet
above the roofline and 5 feet above the maximum height of the applicable zoning
district, shall be permitted as an accessory use in the following zoning districts:
WW Ye00
Transit- Oriented Development District {
I
b. Any non - stealth building or rooftop antennas approved administratively shall
only be permitted on buildings in excess of 40 feet in height.
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
20 -10.6 Uses requiring special use approval.
(A) The following uses may be approved pursuant to the special use process, as regulated by
the Land Development Code:
1. Stealth Facilities.
a. Stealth rooftop or building mounted antennas, not exceeding 25 feet above the
roofline and 10 feet above the maximum height of the applicable zoning district,
shall be permitted as an accessory use pursuant to special use approval in the
following zoning districts:
RM -24 Medium Density Multi- Family
PI Public/Institutional
LO Low Intensity Office
GR General Retail
H Hospital
PUD Planned Unit Development
b. Stealth towers not exceeding 125 feet in height shall be permitted as a principal
or accessory use pursuant to special use approval in the following zoning district:
Supp. No. 4 214
SITING REGULATIONS FOR TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS 20 -10.7
PI Public/Institutional
C. Stealth towers not exceeding 125 feet in-height shall be permitted as an accessory
use pursuant to, special use approval in the following zoning districts:
H Hospital
PUD Planned Unit Development
d. Upon receipt of the appropriate application, the City Manager, at his or her sole
discretion, will determine the application's consistency with the definition of a
stealth facility.
e. Residential Planned Unit Developments shall not be a permitted location for
telecommunication facilities.
2. Non - Stealth Facilities.
a. Non - Stealth antennas mounted to buildings or rooftops, not exceeding 15 feet
above the roofline and 5 feet above the maximum height of the applicable zoning
district, shall be permitted as an accessory use pursuant to special use approval
in the following zoning districts:
RM -24 Medium Density Multi - Family
MO Medium - Intensity Office
SR Specialty Retail
MU- 4/MU- 5/TODD Transit- Oriented Development District
PI Public/Institutional
b. Any non - stealth building or rooftop antennas permitted pursuant to special use
approval shall only be permitted on buildings in excess of 30 feet in height.
C. Monopoles not exceeding 125 feet in height maybe permitted in the following
zoning districts pursuant to special use approval:
PI Public/Institutional
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
20 -10.7 Procedure for special use.
Any of the permitted special uses in this Article may be approved and permitted by the City
Commission at a public hearing, upon an affirmative vote of four of the Commissioners, after
a recommendation by the Planning Board, provided that the use complies with the require-
ments of this Article, Section 20- 3.4(A), entitled "General Requirements," Section 20 -5.8,
entitled "Special use approvals, and any . other requirements and conditions the City
Commission may consider appropriate and necessary.
Supp. No. 4 215
20 -10.8 SOUTH MIAMI LAND DEVELOPMENT; CODE j
20 -10.8 Prohibitions and exceptions.
(A) The location of a new antenna in any zoning district . other than those districts specified
in this section shall be prohibited, except as specified below:
1. Antenna and or microwave dishes may be located on franchised utility poles or poles
owned by the City pursuant to the following regulations:.
a. Special use approval shall be required.
b. The utility poles shall be located within public easements or public rights -of -way.
C. Fees related to utility pole installation:
(1.) A license application fee shall be paid
(2) An Engineering permit fee shall be paid if the pole is replaced to accommo-
date telecommunications equipment.
T_�ant�nnaandfog _dish - shall- be- of- a- si -ze- and- plaeement that is-structurally -- —
compatible with the engineering design of the pole pursuant to the South Florida
Building Code and certified by a professional engineer.
e. The antenna or dish shall not extend more than 10 feet above the existing pole
height. If the pole is replaced to withstand the addition of telecommunications
equipment, then the same restriction shall apply except that the utility pole may
be 10 feet higher than the adjacent pole heights.
C. Placement of an antenna and, or, a dish on a utility pole shall only be on poles
owned or operated by a city franchisee or the City.
g. No commercial advertising shall be allowed on the antenna or dish.
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
20 -10.9 Accessory equipment building.
Accessory equipment buildings used in conjunction with the operation and maintenance of
antennas shall be permitted subject to the following requirements:
(A) ERPB review is required.
(B) Must conform to the applicable zoning district's dimensional standards.
(C) If the site is already occupied by a principal building, the provider shall attempt to
utilize the existing building for its antenna - related equipment. If the provider is
unable to use the existing building, it must provide a report to the City describing the
reasons which disallow it from using the existing building.
(D) Shall be designed, constructed, and installed in compliance with this Code, the South
Florida Building Code, and all other applicable codes.
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
20 -10.10 Removal of abandoned telecommunication facilities.
(A) At the time of building permit application, the applicant shall enter into a contractually
enforceable agreement with the City that requires the applicant, or the owner of the facility, to
remove the telecommunication tower structure, at his or her §ole cost, upon its abandonment.
Supp. No. 4 216
SITING REi ATIONS FO R'TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS 20 -10.10
(B) In the event the approved use of a telecommunication tower has been discontinued for
a period of 180 consecutive days, the tower, shall be deemed to be abandoned. Determination
of the date of abandonment shall be made by the City Manager, who shall have the power to
request documentation and, or, affidavits from the owner regarding the use.
(C) The City Manager shall provide the owner with written notice, by certified mail, of an
abandonment determination. The failure or refusal by the owner to respond within 60 days of
receipt of the notice shall constitute prima facie evidence that the telecommunication tower
has been abandoned.
(D) If the owner fails to respond or fails to demonstrate that the tower is not abandoned, the
City Manager shall render a finding that the tower is abandoned and the owner of the antenna
shall have an additional 120 days within which to G) reactivate the use of the tower or to
transfer the tower to another owner who makes actual use of the tower within the time period,
-" -' '— ` — " - -or (ii)�i'smantle and remove e tower: - t e ear ier of ays om e ate o t e entry
of a finding of abandonment, without reactivation, or upon completion of. dismantling and
removal, any special use approval shall automatically expire.
(Ord. No. 24 -98 -1672, § 2, 11- 17 -98)
[The next page is 3511
Supp. No. 4 217