No structure or part thereof shall be erected, altered or used, and no land shall be used, except for one or more of the following purposes, subject to the conditional uses permit requirements of Chapter 1262, the site plan review procedures of Chapter 1262, and the design review provisions of Chapter 1263:
(a) Business services.
(b) Personal services.
(c) Professional services.
(d) Food stores.
(e) Retail.
(f) Restaurants/food service.
(g) Financial uses.
(h) Day care.
(i) Wireless communication facilities with monopole support structures greater than 150 feet in height, subject to the following conditions:
(1) Required Information.
A. Site Plan. A site plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 1262, also showing as-built drawings for all proposed attached wireless communication facilities and/or wireless communication support structures.
B. Demonstration of Need. Demonstration of the need for the proposed wireless communication support structure due to a minimum of one of the following:
1. Proximity to an interstate or limited-access highway or major thoroughfare.
2. Proximity to areas of population concentration.
3. Proximity to commercial or industrial business centers.
4. Avoidance of signal interference due to buildings, woodlands, topography, or other obstructions.
5. Other specific reasons.
C. Service Area and Power. As applicable, a description of the planned, proposed, or existing service area of the facility, and wireless communication support structure height and type, and signal power expressed in effective radiated power (ERP) upon which the service area has been planned.
D. Map of Other Facilities Nearby. A map showing existing or proposed wireless communication facilities within the City of Davison, Genesee County, Lapeer County, and the immediate region, as appropriate, and further showing existing and known proposed wireless communication facilities within areas surrounding the borders of the County, which are relevant in terms of potential collocation or in demonstrating the need for the proposed facility. If the information is on file with the City, the applicant shall update as needed. A written request for confidentiality must be prominently stated by the applicant.
E. Data on Other Facilities Nearby. For each location identified by the applicant/provider, the application shall include the following data, if known, with the applicant/provider expected to exercise reasonable diligence to obtain such information:
1. The structural capacity and whether it can accommodate the applicant’s facility, as proposed or modified.
2. Evidence of property owner approvals.
3. Whether the location could be used by the applicant/provider for placement of its attached wireless communication facility. If the location cannot be used, a disclosure of the technological considerations involved shall be provided, with specific reference to how use of the location would prohibit the applicant/provider from providing services.
F. Fall Zone Certification. To determine the required setbacks, a Michigan registered engineer shall submit a determination and certification regarding the manner in which the proposed structure will fall.
The fall zone or collapse distance as cited in the certification shall therefore be the minimum setback required. However, in the absence of an engineer’s certification, the minimum setback shall be equal to the total height of the tower. Furthermore, in no case shall the minimum setback from a property line be less than 75 feet.
G. Description of Security for Removal. A performance guarantee may be required for the wireless communication support structure to ensure removal and maintenance, in accordance with this section. The security shall be required at the discretion of the Planning Commission and shall be in the form of a performance bond or dedicated escrow account placed with the City for coverage of stated purposes. The security shall be a promise of the applicant and owner of the property to timely remove the facility as required, with the provision that the applicant and owner shall pay costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City of Davison in securing removal.
H. Data on FCC and FAA Approval. Due to the proximity of any airport to the corporate limits of the City of Davison, an application for a wireless communication installation shall have first been submitted for review and have been approved for such facility before the appropriate Airport Zoning Board.
A copy of the application submitted to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) detailing technical parameters authorization for the facility shall be submitted to the City as part of the City’s required application packet. Approved facilities shall be subject to all FAA and FCC requirements for placement, maintenance, and operation.
I. Access to Right-of-Way. All wireless communication facilities shall have direct or deeded access to a public road right-of-way. Verification of the access shall be provided upon application for approval.
J. Vegetation. All existing vegetation shall be shown on the submitted site plan and shall be preserved during and after installation to the maximum extent possible. Furthermore, additional landscaping shall be required in accordance with the landscaping requirements described in Section 1288.22.
K. Visual Analysis. A visual analysis shall be conducted with simulated photos, graphic renderings, or similar visual aids provided to show the proposed appearance of the site from a distance upon completion of the tower installation.
L. Fencing. The perimeter of all wireless communication sites shall be fenced with appropriate material with a minimum height of six feet and a maximum height of nine feet. All support structures, wires, and accessory buildings shall be located within the fenced area.
M. Parking. All parking areas must conform to the requirements of Chapter 1290, and there shall be no more than three parking spaces permitted at the wireless communication site.
(2) Compatibility of Support Structures. Wireless communication support structures shall not be injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public safety and welfare. Support structures shall be harmonious with the surrounding areas, and aesthetically and architecturally compatible with the natural environment. In addition, all structures shall be equipped with an anti-climbing device to prevent unauthorized access.
(3) Maximum Height. The maximum height of wireless communication support structures shall be: A. 250 feet, B. the minimum height demonstrated to be necessary by the applicant, or C. such lower heights as required and approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The applicant shall demonstrate a justification for the height and provide an evaluation of alternative designs, which might result in lower heights. Accessory buildings shall be limited to the maximum height for accessory structures within respective zoning districts.
(4) Setbacks from Nonresidential Districts. Wireless communication support structures abutting any lot zoned for other than residential purposes shall have a minimum setback in accordance with the required setbacks for the principal buildings for the zoning district in which the support structure is located.
(5) Compatibility of Accessory Structures. Wireless communication facilities proposed on the roof of a building with an equipment enclosure shall be architecturally compatible with the principal building upon which it is located. The equipment enclosure may be located within the principal building or may be an accessory building, provided the accessory building conforms to all district requirements for accessory buildings and is constructed of the same or compatible building material as the principal building.
(6) Appearance of Support Structures. The color of wireless communication support structures and all accessory buildings shall minimize distraction, reduce visibility as little as possible, maximize aesthetics, and ensure compatibility with its surroundings. The applicant shall be responsible for the maintenance of the wireless communication facility in a neat and orderly condition, as well as maintaining the safety of the site and structural integrity of any structures.
(7) Federal and State Requirements. The requirements of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Michigan Aeronautics Commission shall be noted on the site plan. Structures shall be subject to any State and Federal regulations concerning non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation. Furthermore, if more restrictive State or Federal standards are adopted in the future, the antenna shall be made to conform to the extent required by such standard or the approval and permit for the structure shall be subject to revocation by the City. The cost for testing and verification of compliance shall be borne by the operator of the antenna.
(8) Lighting. Lighting on a wireless communication facility shall be prohibited unless otherwise required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The applicant shall propose a height reduction to eliminate the need for lighting, or shall submit detailed technical data demonstrating the need for the requested height, including an analysis demonstrating that other sites are unavailable or inadequate for the applicant’s purposes.
(9) Collocation. All wireless communication support structures shall accommodate no more than six attached wireless communication facilities. Support structures shall allow for future rearrangement of attached wireless communication facilities to accept other attached facilities mounted at varying heights.
A. When Collocation is not Feasible. Wireless communication support structures shall not be approved unless the applicant documents that its attached wireless communication facilities cannot be feasibly collocated or accommodated on an existing support structure or other existing structure due to one or more of the following reasons:
1. The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacity of the existing support structure or other structure, as documented by a licensed engineer, and the existing support structure or other structure cannot be reinforced, modified, or replaced to accommodate planned or equivalent equipment at a reasonable cost.
2. The planned equipment would cause interference affecting the function of other equipment on the existing supporting structure or other structure as documented by a licensed engineer, and the interference cannot be prevented at a reasonable cost.
3. Support structures and other structures within the search radius cannot accommodate the planned equipment at a height necessary for the coverage area and capacity needs to reasonably function as documented by a qualified and licensed professional engineer.
4. Other unforeseen reasons that make it infeasible to locate the planned communication equipment upon an existing support structure or other structure.
B. Determining Feasibility of Collocation. Collocation shall be deemed to be feasible when all of the following are met:
1. The applicant/ provider will pay market rent or other market compensation for collocation.
2. The site is able to provide structural support, considering reasonable modification or replacement of a facility.
3. The collocation being considered is technically reasonable and will not result in unreasonable interference, given appropriate physical adjustments.
4. The height of the structure necessary for collocation will not be increased beyond maximum height limits.
C. Refusal to Permit Collocation. If a party who owns or otherwise controls a wireless communication support structure shall fail or refuse to alter a structure to accommodate a feasible collocation, such facility shall thereafter be a nonconforming structure and use, and shall not be altered, expanded or extended in any respect.
D. Refusal of Collocation Constitutes Violation. If a party who owns or otherwise controls a facility shall fail or refuse to permit a feasible collocation, and this requires the construction and/or use of a new wireless communication support structure, the party failing or refusing to permit a feasible collocation shall be deemed to be in direct violation and contradiction of the policy, intent and purpose of this section of the zoning ordinance.
E. Violation Resulting in Prohibition of New Structures. Consequently, such party shall take responsibility for the violation, and shall be prohibited from receiving approval for a new support structure within the City of Davison for a period of five years from the date of the failure or refusal to permit the collocation.
F. Appeal of Prohibition; Variance. Such a party may seek and obtain a variance form the Zoning Board of Appeals if and to the limited extent the applicant demonstrates entitlement to variance relief which, in this context, shall mean a demonstration that enforcement of the five-year prohibition would unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent wireless communication services, or that such enforcement would have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless communication service.
G. Offer of Collocation Required. An application for a new wireless communication support structure shall include a letter from the applicant to all potential users offering an opportunity for collocation. The list of potential users shall be provided by the City of Davison based on those entities who or which have requested approval of a wireless communication facility, current FCC license holders, and other entities requesting to be on the list. If, during a period of 30 days after the notice letters are sent to potential users, a user requests, in writing, to collocate on the new support structure, the applicant shall accommodate the request(s), unless collocation is not feasible based on the criteria of this section.
(10) Removal. When a wireless communication facility has not been used for six months or six months after new technology is available which permits the operation of a facility without the requirement of a wireless communication support structure, all or parts of the wireless communication facility shall be removed by the users and owners of the facility and owners of the property.
The removal of antennas or other equipment from the facility, or the cessation of operations (transmission and/or reception of radio signals) shall be considered as the beginning of a period of non-use. The situation(s) in which removal of a wireless communication facility is required may be applied and limited to a portion of the facility.
A. Upon the occurrence of one or more of the events requiring removal, the property owner or persons who had used the wireless communication facility shall immediately apply for and secure the application for any required demolition or removal permits, and immediately proceed with and complete the demolition or removal, restoring the condition which existed prior to the construction of the facility.
B. If the partial or total required removal of the wireless communication facility or a portion thereof has not been lawfully completed within 60 days of the applicable deadline, and after at least 30 days’ written notice, the City of Davison may remove or secure the removal of the facility or required portions thereof, with its actual costs and reasonable administrative charges to be drawn or collected from the security posted at the time application was made for establishing the facility or, if necessary, through appropriate judicial remedies. Such changes, if not paid within six months, constitute a lien on the property and shall be placed in the next general tax roll and collected as a part of the general City taxes.
(11) Radio Frequency Emission Standards. Wireless communication facilities shall comply with applicable Federal and State standards relative to electromagnetic fields and the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions.
(12) Effect of Approval.
A. Subject to division (i)(12)B. below, final approval for a wireless communication support structure shall be effective for a period of six months.
B. If construction of a wireless communication support structure is commenced within two miles of the land upon which a facility has been approved, but upon which construction has not been commenced during the six-month period of effectiveness, the approval for the support structure that has not been commenced shall be void 30 days following written notice from the City of the commencement of the other support structure. Such voiding shall apply unless the applicant granted approval for the support structure which has not been commenced, demonstrates that it would not be feasible to collocate on the support structure that has been newly commenced.
(Ord. 2008-07. Passed 11-10-08; Ord. 2010-12. Passed 9-27-10.)