Extracted text (via pymupdf)
47312 characters
May 18, 2022
Z2021038
Page 1 of 3
Report to the Board of Supervisors
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Board Hearing Date:
May 18, 2022
Case #/Title:
Z2021038 – AZ01-114 Donut/PHO Khussa
Supervisor District:
1
Applicant/Owner:
Eric Hurley, Pinnacle Consulting, Inc./ Luis Barocio
Request:
Special Use Permit (SUP) for a new Wireless Communication
Facility in the Rural-43 RUPD Zoning District
Site Location:
SEC of Lindsay Road and Appleby Road, in the Gilbert area
Site Size:
Approximately 1.5 acres
County Island Status:
N/A
Additional
Comments:
The applicant is requesting a Special Use Permit for a new
wireless communication facility in the Rural-43 zoning district.
The request would include a 65’ (h) monopole designed as
an elm tree, 900 sq. ft. compound with an 8’ (h) solid block
wall. The request includes variations to setbacks, no sight
visibility triangles and increase antenna array diameter of
17.2’. The site is within the Town of Gilbert General Plan
designated as Residential (2 – 3.5 d.u./ac.) for suburban
single-family residential neighborhood development. The
Town of Gilbert did not provide comments. There are no
outstanding concerns from reviewing agencies.
There are 4 support comments from 2 parties and 5 opposition
comments from 6 parties. There are 2 parcels in opposition
within the 300’ buffer, staff notes that a super-majority vote
has not been triggered (14% for parcel acreage and 15% for
parcel numbers). Super-majority is triggered when both of
these figures are 20%. At the 4/21/22 Commission hearing,
there was no public input to speak in support or opposition.
Commission
Recommendation:
On 4/21/22, the Commission voted 8-0 to recommend
approval of Z2021038 subject to conditions ‘a’ – ‘i’:
a.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Site Plan
entitled “AZ01-114 Donut / PHO Khussa“, consisting of 6 full-size sheets, dated
January 4, 2022, and stamped received February 23, 2022, except as modified by
May 18, 2022
Z2021038
Page 2 of 3
the following conditions. Staff may determine slight refinements to remain in
substantial conformance with the approved site plan. Minor and major
amendments to the site plan will be determined in accordance with Chapter 3 of
the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
b.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative
Report entitled “AZ01-114 Donut / PHO Khussa”, consisting of 9 pages, dated
February 7, 2022, and stamped received February 23, 2022, except as modified by
the following conditions.
c.
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply:
1.
If combined disturbance area is 1500-sf or greater, Engineered Grading
and Drainage Plans with retention basins are required.
2.
All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with
Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance, Drainage
Policies and Standards and current engineering policies, standards and
best practices at the time of application for construction.
3.
Drainage review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design
only and does not represent final design approval nor shall it entitle
applicants to future designs that are not in conformance with Section
1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance and Drainage Policies
and Standards.
4.
The applicant should be aware that Lindsay Road is MCDOT Operated
and Maintained. Any work in the MCDOT Right-of-Way will require a
MCDOT Right-of-Way Permit.
d.
The maximum height of the Wireless Communication Facility shall be limited to 65’.
e.
This Special Use Permit allows for colocation of additional antenna, arrays and
attachments but must maintain the integrity of the stealth design concealment
elements and must maintain the setbacks (based on tower height) approved by
this Special Use Permit.
f.
The wireless communication tower shall retain the stealth properties as originally
designed. Any damaged or missing fronds or branches shall be replaced within 60
days of such damage occurring.
g.
This special use permit is valid for a period of 20 years and shall expire on May 18,
2042 or upon termination of the use for a period of 90 or more days, whichever
occurs first. All site improvements associated with the special use permit shall be
removed within 90 days of such expiration or termination of use.
h.
Noncompliance with any Maricopa County Regulation shall be grounds for
initiating a revocation of this Special Use Permit as set forth in the Maricopa County
Zoning Ordinance.
May 18, 2022
Z2021038
Page 3 of 3
i.
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the
applicant, with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows
the property to enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on
the date of application, subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply
with any condition, and at the time of expiration of the Special Use Permit, the
property shall revert to the zoning that existed on the date of application. It is,
therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due to the failure to
comply with any conditions, or the expiration of the Special Use Permit, does not
reduce any rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or
possess the property and that there would be no diminution in value of the
property from the value it held on the date of application due to such revocation
or expiration of the Special Use Permit. The Special Use Permit enhances the value
of the property above its value as of the date the Special Use Permit is granted
and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value of the property as if the
Special Use Permit had never been granted.
Presented by:
Rachel Applegate, Senior Planner
Reviewed by:
Darren Gérard, AICP, Planning Manager
Attachment:
4/21/22 P&Z Packet (46 pages)
Note:
4/21/22 Draft P&Z Minutes are not available as of the writing of this report, but can
be provided upon request later when available.
Z2021038
Page 1 of 8
Report to the Planning and Zoning Commission
Prepared by the Maricopa County Planning and Development Department
Case:
Z2021038 – AZ01-114 Donut/PHO Khussa
Hearing Date:
April 21, 2022
Supervisor District:
1
Applicant:
Eric Hurley, Pinnacle Consulting, Inc.
Owner:
Luis Barocio
Request:
Special Use Permit (SUP) for a new Wireless Communication Facility
in the Rural-43 RUPD Zoning District
Site Location:
SEC of Lindsay Road and Appleby Road, in the Gilbert area
Site Size:
1.5 acres
Density:
N/A
County Island:
Yes (Gilbert and Chandler)
County Plan:
Queen Creek – Urban Residential/Very Low (0-4 d.u./ac)
Municipal Plan:
Town of Gilbert: Residential > 2 – 3.5 d.u./ac
Municipal Comments:
None received to date
Support/Opposition:
4 support comments from 2 parties and 5 opposition comments from
6 parties
Recommendation:
Approve with conditions
Z2021038
Page 2 of 8
Project Summary:
1.
The Applicant, Eric Hurley, Pinnacle Consulting, Inc., on behalf of Verizon, Sun State
Towers and the property owner, Luis Barocio, is requesting a Special Use Permit (SUP) for
a new Wireless Communication Facility (WFC) in the Rural-43 RUPD zoning district. The
subject property is parcel 304-72-019B, located at the southeast corner of the intersection
of Lindsay Road and Appleby Road, in the Gilbert area. The subject lot split property is
rectangular, generally flat and comprises approximately 1.5 acres. The subject property
is bounded by a Rural-43 designated property to the east and south with Lindsay Road,
and Rural-43 property to the west and Appleby Road, Layton Lakes Boulevard and Town
of Gilbert designated SF-10 property to the north. The subject property and the properties
to the immediate south and east comprise apparent single-family residences and related
uses. The property to the west is vacant and the property to the north is an apparent
electrical utility facility.
2.
The WCF will comprise a 65 ft. tall monopole tower stealth designed as an elm tree
(“monoelm” or “tower”) in a 25 ft. x 36 ft. (900 sq. ft.) compound surrounded by an 8 ft.
tall solid block wall. The monoelm tower will be setback approximately 62.8 ft. from the
north property line, 142.5 ft. from the south property line, 118.2 ft. from the west property
line and 200.8 ft. from the east property line. The 25 ft. x 36 ft. compound is proposed at
the south edge of a 30 ft. wide combined ingress/egress, public utility and irrigation
easement that appears to comprise the southern portion of Appleby Rd., per the
Applicant’s site plan. The proposed placement of the tower and compound wall would
require several development standard modifications, which can be part of the SUP
approval (MCZO Art. 1301.5). The tower does not meet the 2 ft. setback from property
lines for each 1 ft. in height required in rural and residential zones because it is closer than
130 ft. to the north and west property lines (MCZO Art. 1202.3.1.1.g). Additionally, the
tower is located 12.8 ft. south of the 30 ft. wide ingress/egress, public utility, irrigation
easement, described above, which does not meet the 20 ft. street side setback required
in the Rural-43 district (MCZO Art. 503.4.1.c). The proposed placement of the 25 ft. x 36 ft.
compound would also depend on the elimination of the 25 ft. Sight Visibility Triangles
(SVTs) that are required at both sides of the driveway and at the ultimate edge of the
fronting street (MCZO Art. 1111.4). The proposed antenna array diameter is
approximately 17.2 ft. where 8 ft. is the maximum diameter allowed (MCZO
Art. 1202.3.1.1.h).
3.
The following table [next page] identifies certain base, Rural-43 district development
standards and the modifications of those standards necessary to provide for the current
request. The Applicant’s development standard modification tables, provided on Sheet
Z-1 of the proposed site plan and page 6 of the proposed narrative, do not capture all
of the necessary modifications identified by Staff in this report (Note: necessary changes
to base standards are indicated in bold).
Z2021038
Page 3 of 8
Standard
Base
Rural-43 Standards (WCF)
Proposed
SUP Standards (WCF)
Maximum Height
80’
80’
2 ft. setback from property
lines for each 1 ft. in Tower
Height1
65’ tower = 130 ft. required
setback from property lines
62’ from north property
line and 118 ft. from west
property line
Street-Side Setback2
20’
12’
25 ft. Sight Visibility Triangles
(SVTs)3
25’ Both sides of Driveway
and Ultimate Edge of
Street
No SVTs provided
Maximum Antenna Array
Diameter4
8’
17.2’
Minimum Lot Area
43,560 sq. ft.
43,560 sq. ft.
Minimum Lot Width
145’
145’
Maximum Lot Coverage
25%
25%
1 MCZO Art. 1202.3.1.1.g
2 MCZO Art. 503.4.1.c
3 MCZO Art. 1111.4
4 MCZO Art. 1202.3.1.1.h
4.
According to the Applicant, the proposed WCF would improve cell service coverage in
the area, per the following signal strength maps below.
Existing Signal Strength
(Subject WCF identified by Red Star)
Z2021038
Page 4 of 8
Proposed Signal Strength
2020 Aerial Photograph of
Subject Property (Outlined in Red)
Z2021038
Page 5 of 8
Zoning & Jurisdictions Map
Subject Property (Outlined in Red)
Existing On-Site and Adjacent Zoning / Land Use:
5.
On-site:
Rural-43 / Single-family Residential
North:
Appleby Rd., Layton Lakes Blvd., then SF-10 (Gilbert) / Utility
South:
Rural-43 / Single-family Residential
East:
Rural-43 / Single-family Residential
West:
Lindsay Rd., then Rural-43 / Vacant
Utilities and Services:
6.
Water:
NA
Wastewater:
NA
School District:
Chandler Unified School District #80
Fire:
Town of Gilbert
Police:
MCSO
Right-of-Way:
7.
The following table [next page] includes existing and proposed half-width right-of-way
and the future classification based upon the Maricopa County Department of
Transportation (MCDOT) Major Streets and Routes Plan.
Z2021038
Page 6 of 8
Street Name
Half-width Existing R/W
Half-width Proposed R/W
Future Classification
Ocotillo
Road
65-ft
75-ft
Minor Arterial
Lindsay
Road
33-ft
33-ft
Minor Arterial
Adopted Plans:
8.
Queen Creek Area Plan (adopted April 6, 1992): The subject property is identified Urban
Residential/Very Low (0-4 du/ac). This category denotes areas where higher density
residential development is appropriate and all urban services (sewer, water, law
enforcement, fire protection, schools, parks, etc.) are available or will be provided. Single
family development may be permitted, provided overall development densities do not
exceed 4.0 du/acre. Within any particular development densities greater than
4.0 du/acre may be permitted, but only if areas of lower densities offset the increase such
that an average of 4.0 du/acre or less is maintained. Convenience commercial
development may be located within the area with direct arterial street access. A
community sewer and water system will be required for development at these densities.
Staff finds the current proposal satisfies this policy by providing telecommunication
services in an area characterized by single-family residential development.
9.
Town of Gilbert: Gilbert 2020 (General Plan) (ratified August 2020): The subject property is
identified as Residential > 2 – 3.5 du/ac. This classification designates areas for suburban
single-family residential neighborhood development.
Public Participation Summary:
10.
The applicant complied with the Maricopa County Citizen Review Process with the
required posting of the site and notification by first class mail to adjacent property owners
within 300’ of the subject parcel, and to other interested parties. To date, Staff is aware
of 4 support comments from 2 parties representing 2 properties (located more than 300 ft.
from the subject property) and 5 opposition comments from 6 parties, representing 4
properties (2 of which are within 300 ft. of the subject property). The opposition comments
cite issues regarding health concerns, view impacts and negative effects on property
values.
Outstanding Concerns from Reviewing Agencies:
11.
N/A.
Staff Analysis:
12.
Staff believes the current SUP request is reasonable and necessary to maintain and
expand cell phone service in this area. The subject WCF tower would be located
approximately 40 ft. from the closest residence and 70 ft. from the next closest residence
(both of which are on the subject property), approximately 200 ft. from the next closest
residence (on parcel 304-72-021B), and 250 ft. from an apparent accessory dwelling unit
(on parcel 304-72-019A) with all other nearby residences being at least 300 ft. from the
subject WCF tower. The WCF compound bounds the nearest, apparent public roadway
Z2021038
Page 7 of 8
(Appleby Rd.) with the tower lying 12.8 ft. from the southern edge of that roadway
(according to the Applicant’s site plan). The tower may present a fall hazard for the two
residences located on the subject parcel and the southern 52 ft. of the Appleby Rd.;
however, Staff considers the possibility of tower collapse to be extremely remote.
Appleby Rd. appears to provide access to only a few residential properties, and
therefore it likely comprises low traffic volumes and speeds making the requested
elimination of SVTs reasonable and unlikely to cause significant traffic issues. In the project
narrative, the Applicant states that the setback issues stem from the relatively small lot
sized and higher density that characterize the subject area and cite similar approvals for
WCF SUPs comprising similar issues. Furthermore, the 17.2 ft. diameter antenna array is
apparently necessary to provide for the radio frequencies commonly used by modern
WCF facilities.
Recommendation:
13.
Staff recommends the Commission adopt a motion recommending that the Board of
Supervisors approve Z2021038 subject to the following conditions ‘a’ – ‘i’.
a.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Site Plan
entitled “AZ01-114 Donut / PHO Khussa“, consisting of 6 full-size sheets, dated
January 4, 2022, and stamped received February 23, 2022, except as modified by
the following conditions. Staff may determine slight refinements to remain in
substantial conformance with the approved site plan. Minor and major
amendments to the site plan will be determined in accordance with Chapter 3 of
the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance.
b.
Development of the site shall be in substantial conformance with the Narrative
Report entitled “AZ01-114 Donut / PHO Khussa”, consisting of 9 pages, dated
February 7, 2022, and stamped received February 23, 2022, except as modified by
the following conditions.
c.
The following Planning Engineering conditions shall apply:
1.
If combined disturbance area is 1500-sf or greater, Engineered Grading
and Drainage Plans with retention basins are required.
2.
All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with
Section 1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance, Drainage
Policies and Standards and current engineering policies, standards and
best practices at the time of application for construction.
3.
Drainage review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design
only and does not represent final design approval nor shall it entitle
applicants to future designs that are not in conformance with Section
1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance and Drainage Policies
and Standards.
4.
The applicant should be aware that Lindsay Road is MCDOT Operated
and Maintained. Any work in the MCDOT Right-of-Way will require a
MCDOT Right-of-Way Permit.
Z2021038
Page 8 of 8
d.
The maximum height of the Wireless Communication Facility shall be limited to 65’.
e.
This Special Use Permit allows for colocation of additional antenna, arrays and
attachments but must maintain the integrity of the stealth design concealment
elements and must maintain the setbacks (based on tower height) approved by
this Special Use Permit.
f.
The wireless communication tower shall retain the stealth properties as originally
designed. Any damaged or missing fronds or branches shall be replaced within 60
days of such damage occurring.
g.
This special use permit is valid for a period of 20 years and shall expire on May 18,
2042 or upon termination of the use for a period of 90 or more days, whichever
occurs first. All site improvements associated with the special use permit shall be
removed within 90 days of such expiration or termination of use.
h.
Noncompliance with any Maricopa County Regulation shall be grounds for
initiating a revocation of this Special Use Permit as set forth in the Maricopa County
Zoning Ordinance.
i.
The granting of this change in use of the property has been at the request of the
applicant, with the consent of the landowner. The granting of this approval allows
the property to enjoy uses in excess of those permitted by the zoning existing on
the date of application, subject to conditions. In the event of the failure to comply
with any condition, and at the time of expiration of the Special Use Permit, the
property shall revert to the zoning that existed on the date of application. It is,
therefore, stipulated and agreed that either revocation due to the failure to
comply with any conditions, or the expiration of the Special Use Permit, does not
reduce any rights that existed on the date of application to use, divide, sell or
possess the property and that there would be no diminution in value of the
property from the value it held on the date of application due to such revocation
or expiration of the Special Use Permit. The Special Use Permit enhances the value
of the property above its value as of the date the Special Use Permit is granted
and reverting to the prior zoning results in the same value of the property as if the
Special Use Permit had never been granted.
Presented by:
Sean Watkins, Planner
Reviewed by:
Matthew Holm, AICP, Planning Supervisor
Attachments:
Case Map (1 page)
Site Plan (6 pages)
Narrative Report (9 pages)
MCENG comments (1 page)
MCESD comments (1 page)
Opposition comments (10 pages)
Support comments (8 pages)
All Responses & Opposition Map (2 pages)
M
ARICO
PA CO
UN
TY
/
M
aricopa County Planning & Developm
ent - Phoenix, AZ
1
G
ross Acres: 0.0206612 approx.
G
enerated M
arch 18, 2022 06:06 AM
Z2021038
Application Nam
e:
Legal Description
AZ01-114 Donut/PHO
Khussa W
CF EDR
Applicant
Case Address
,
Eric Hurley for Pinnacle Consulting, Inc.
Applicant Phone/Em
ail
Parcel Prim
ary:
480.664.9588
eric.hurley@
pinnacleco.net
M
ap scale 1:785
Supervisor District No.
304-72-019B
65'FT M
O
NO
ELM
W
IRELESS CO
M
M
UNICA
TIO
N FACILITY W
ITH 8' FT CM
U W
ALL.
5.3585 in
Jeri Loucks, P.E.C.F.M
Planning & Development
501 North 44th Street, Suite 200
Phoenix, Arizona 85008
Phone: (602) 506-6332
Fax: (602) 506-3282
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Email address:
JeriLoucks@mail.maricopa.gov
Maricopa County
Planning & Development Department
Date:
03/17/2022
Memo To: Darren Gerard, AICP, Deputy Director, Department of Planning &
Development
Attn:
Sean Watkins, Planner, Planning & Development Services
From:
Jeri Loucks, P.E.C.F.M., Plans Examiner Engineer (Drainage),
Planning & Development Services
cc:
Michael Norris, P.E., Drainage Engineering Manager, Planning &
Development
Subject:
Z2021038 – Special Use Permit (SUP) – Verizon/Sun State Tower
(E3 Memo)
Job Site Address: 21205 S Linsay Rd Gilbert, Az 85298
APN(s):
304-72-019B
Engineering Review has reviewed the plans and report submittal date stamped
02/23/2022 for the subject application. Engineering Review has no objections to this
application provided any approval includes the following stipulations:
1. If combined disturbance area is 1500-sf or greater, Engineered Grading and
Drainage Plans with retention basins are required.
2. All development and engineering design shall be in conformance with Section
1205 of the Maricopa County Zoning Ordinance, Drainage Policies and
Standards and current engineering policies, standards and best practices at the
time of application for construction.
3. Drainage review of planning and/or zoning cases is for conceptual design only
and does not represent final design approval nor shall it entitle applicants to
future designs that are not in conformance with Section 1205 of the Maricopa
County Zoning Ordinance and Drainage Policies and Standards.
Following are comments from the Maricopa County Department of Transportation
(MCDOT):
1. The applicant should be aware that Lindsay Road is MCDOT Operated and
Maintained. Any work in the MCDOT Right-of-Way will require a MCDOT
Right-of-Way Permit.
Please contact me if you have any questions or require any additional information.
Water and Waste Management
Division
Subdivision Infrastructure &
Planning Program
1001 N. Central Avenue #150
Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Phone: (602) 506-1058
Fax: (602) 506-5813
TDD 602 506 6704
Maricopa County
Environmental Services
Department
DATE:
April 14, 2021
TO :
Sean Watkins, Planning & Development Dept.
Planner
FROM:
Souren Naradikian, P.E.
Senior Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Monoelm wireless communication facility. Z2021038
The Maricopa County Environmental Services Department (MCESD) has reviewed
documents received from the Maricopa County Planning and Development
Department for the above referenced project. This project is a request for Monoelm
wireless communication facility at APN# 304-72-019B. Water and Sewer is not
required, MCESD has no concerns.
Based on the above, MCESD raise no concern for this project to the Planning &
Development Department in Accela Automation on April 14, 2021.
Stipulations:
None
It should be noted that this document does not approve the referenced project.
Comments are provided only as advisory to Maricopa County Planning and
Development Department to assist staff to prepare a staff report. Other Maricopa
County agencies may have additional requirements. Final review and approval will be
made through Planning and Development Department procedures. Applicant may
need to submit separate applications to the Maricopa County Environmental Services
Department for approval of proposed facilities regulated by the Department. Review
of any such application will be based on regulations in force at the time of
application.
From:
Dino Pergola
To:
Brittney Malcolmson; Sean Watkins (PND)
Subject:
RE: New Cell Phone Tower Proposed in Layton Lakes, Gilbert
Date:
Tuesday, December 21, 2021 8:46:19 AM
Brittney,
Thanks for sharing with us and we appreciate your input.
Dino Pergola, Esq.
Site Acquisition Specialist
1426 North Marvin Street #101
Gilbert, AZ 85233
Office: (480) 664-9588 ext. 243
Cell: (480)773-4853
From: Brittney Malcolmson <brittmalcolmson@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, December 20, 2021 8:48 PM
To: sean.watkins@maricopa.gov; Dino Pergola <dino.pergola@pinnacleco.net>
Subject: New Cell Phone Tower Proposed in Layton Lakes, Gilbert
To Whom it May Concern,
My family and I live in the Layton Lakes neighborhood in Gilbert and were informed that there
are plans to put in a cell phone tower in our neighborhood. We would like to request that this
does NOT occur.
The most important reason we would like to request this is because of the negative health
effects associated with a cell phone tower in close proximity to one's home. There are many
articles and studies you could read through. To save you time, here is a brief synopsis of the
dangers: https://www.recorder.com/my-turn-Carpenter-Ashfield-MUST-TUESDAY-39137782.
We have a 6 month old son at home and plan to have more children as well. Not only are we
concerned about how this proposed cell tower would affect our and our neighbors health, we
are even more concerned about how this would affect our children's health.
Please let us know what steps we can take to make our voice heard and stop the addition of a
cell tower in our neighborhood of Layton Lakes in Gilbert.
Thank you so much,
Brittney Malcolmson
360-878-0408
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use
by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by
Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more
useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out
more Click Here.
From:
Gary & Tina Tong
To:
dino.pergola@pinnacleco.net; Sean Watkins (PND)
Subject:
Re: Concerned Layton Lakes Homeowner for Proposed Cell Tower on Parcel 304-72-019B
Date:
Wednesday, January 12, 2022 9:45:40 AM
Dino, I haven't heard back from the email I sent last week. I am also including Sean Watkins,
since his name was also on the letter that was sent to the Layton Lakes community.
gary
On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 11:30 PM Gary & Tina Tong <garyandtinatong@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Dino,
This is in regards to the notification for the proposed 65' monoelm on parcel 304-72-019B
(21205 S Lindsay Rd, Gilbert AZ 85298)
I am very concerned that a base station is being put up so close to my residence. I also
understand the need for trying to improve the mobile service for the surrounding community
and improving the infrastructure for emergency services, but in regards to my family's health
and safety, the location of the proposed cell tower is very concerning. I am wondering if
there were other locations that are away from residences and schools that would be more
suitable.
Base stations emit large amounts of RF power 24/7. The concern stems from living closer to
cellular transmission sites being linked to higher risk of developing certain cancers and other
ailments over a certain period of time (within 10 years) due to constant radiation. Since my
home is close to the cell tower location, I am concerned about the radiation exposure to
my family. I did not see anything in the letter provided for Layton Lakes residents that
addressed mobile tower radiation and safety of the residences from exposure of those RF
signals from the new proposed cell tower. The amount of RF power radiating, the type of
frequencies (higher the frequency, the higher the amount of radiation energy) and the
antenna direction (more radiation if the antenna is facing you) are concerning to me. The
letter only addressed that it will cover up the look of the tower, which is very minor
compared to the amount of radiation this tower will be emitting.
My child may be attending Haley Elementary next year and the cell tower is even closer to
the school than to our home. My kids would potentially be at that school for 8 years (Pre-K
to 6th Grade). The potential for radiation exposure over an 8 year period is very concerning
to me as a parent.
I do have some other questions in regards to the cell tower:
1. On parcel 304-72-019B, where will the tower be located? SE corner?
2. What type of frequencies will be transmitted from the tower?
3. Per the frequencies, what will the RF levels be transmitted from the tower?
4. How many antennas will be placed on the tower?
5. Per the antennas, what direction will they be pointed?
6. Why was this location selected? Were there other potential areas with less or no
residence within a 1 mile radius that a cell tower location could have been selected?
7. There is a relatively close by cell tower around the same area. Why is a new one being
constructed when there is already one close by?
8. How was this location chosen?
9. What did Sun State Towers and Verizon Wireless' deem as safe distances from a cell
tower location to the nearby school and residences?
10. Will Sun State Towers and Verizon Wireless guarantee in writing that there are no
current or potential negative health effects caused by cell towers and will they guarantee full
responsibility for the community who may be negatively affected?
Thank you for your time in reading over my concerns. I hope to hear back from you.
gary
From:
Gary & Tina Tong
To:
Sean Watkins (PND)
Cc:
dino.pergola@pinnacleco.net; eric.hurley@pinnacleco.net
Subject:
Re: Concerned Layton Lakes Homeowner for Proposed Cell Tower on Parcel 304-72-019B (Z2021038)
Date:
Friday, January 14, 2022 9:06:45 AM
Thank you for responding back, Sean!
Our Address and Parcel number is:
3640 E Azalea Dr, Chandler, AZ 85286
Parcel #: 313-20-092
Dino and Eric, could you acknowledge if you have received this email along with my original
email?
Thanks,
gary
On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:36 AM Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@maricopa.gov>
wrote:
Hello Mr. and Ms. Tong,
Thank you for your opposition comment. It has been made part of the project record for case
Z2021038 for consideration by Staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission (PnZ) and the
Board of Supervisors (BOS). Since you made this comment, you will receive email
notifications of the public hearings that will take place before the PnZ and BOS on dates as
yet to be determined.
I will leave it to Mr. Pergola and/or Mr. Hurley to address your specific questions because
they have to do with the location, design and operation of the proposed wireless
communication facility.
Would you like to identify your home address and/or parcel number? I ask because
comments from owners of property that are near the subject property are given more weight
that comments from owners of more distant properties. Please just reply to this email with
that information, if you please.
Thank you!
Sean Watkins
Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson Street, Suite 170
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-506-8150
sean.watkins@maricopa.gov
P&D is now 100% digital.
Find information on our new permit process here:
https://www.maricopa.gov/1629/Construction-Permit-Information
From: Gary & Tina Tong <garyandtinatong@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2022 9:45 AM
To: dino.pergola@pinnacleco.net; Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: Re: Concerned Layton Lakes Homeowner for Proposed Cell Tower on Parcel 304-
72-019B
Dino, I haven't heard back from the email I sent last week. I am also including Sean
Watkins, since his name was also on the letter that was sent to the Layton Lakes community.
gary
On Wed, Jan 5, 2022 at 11:30 PM Gary & Tina Tong <garyandtinatong@gmail.com>
wrote:
Hi Dino,
This is in regards to the notification for the proposed 65' monoelm on parcel 304-72-019B
(21205 S Lindsay Rd, Gilbert AZ 85298)
I am very concerned that a base station is being put up so close to my residence. I also
understand the need for trying to improve the mobile service for the surrounding
community and improving the infrastructure for emergency services, but in regards to my
family's health and safety, the location of the proposed cell tower is very concerning. I
am wondering if there were other locations that are away from residences and schools that
would be more suitable.
Base stations emit large amounts of RF power 24/7. The concern stems from living closer
to cellular transmission sites being linked to higher risk of developing certain cancers and
other ailments over a certain period of time (within 10 years) due to constant radiation.
Since my home is close to the cell tower location, I am concerned about the radiation
exposure to my family. I did not see anything in the letter provided for Layton Lakes
residents that addressed mobile tower radiation and safety of the residences from exposure
of those RF signals from the new proposed cell tower. The amount of RF power
radiating, the type of frequencies (higher the frequency, the higher the amount of
radiation energy) and the antenna direction (more radiation if the antenna is facing you)
are concerning to me. The letter only addressed that it will cover up the look of the tower,
which is very minor compared to the amount of radiation this tower will be emitting.
My child may be attending Haley Elementary next year and the cell tower is even closer
to the school than to our home. My kids would potentially be at that school for 8 years
(Pre-K to 6th Grade). The potential for radiation exposure over an 8 year period is very
concerning to me as a parent.
I do have some other questions in regards to the cell tower:
1. On parcel 304-72-019B, where will the tower be located? SE corner?
2. What type of frequencies will be transmitted from the tower?
3. Per the frequencies, what will the RF levels be transmitted from the tower?
4. How many antennas will be placed on the tower?
5. Per the antennas, what direction will they be pointed?
6. Why was this location selected? Were there other potential areas with less or no
residence within a 1 mile radius that a cell tower location could have been selected?
7. There is a relatively close by cell tower around the same area. Why is a new one being
constructed when there is already one close by?
8. How was this location chosen?
9. What did Sun State Towers and Verizon Wireless' deem as safe distances from a cell
tower location to the nearby school and residences?
10. Will Sun State Towers and Verizon Wireless guarantee in writing that there are no
current or potential negative health effects caused by cell towers and will they guarantee
full responsibility for the community who may be negatively affected?
Thank you for your time in reading over my concerns. I hope to hear back from you.
gary
From:
lou puleff
To:
Sean Watkins (PND)
Subject:
[SUSPECTED SPAM]65" monoelm on parcel 304-72-019B
Date:
Thursday, December 23, 2021 11:23:55 AM
Mr Watkins this e-mail is a follow up to our conversation on 12/23/2021 in regards to the
proposed 65' cell tower going up on Lindsay and e appleby road located at 21205 s.lindsay rd
Gilbert az 85298 my wife and I are opposed to this proposal as it would be in direct sight from
our yard which we are located at 879 e reliant st Gilbert az 85298 n.e. corner of Lindsay and
appleby road. It was a pleasure speaking with you on the phone and look forward to any future
conversation in these regards.
Lou puleff
6025106531
(Wife) Cherie welu
4803436445
Thanks
Lou
From:
Paul Bowerman
To:
Sean Watkins (PND)
Subject:
Objection to permit #Z2021038
Date:
Tuesday, January 4, 2022 11:13:44 AM
Hi Sean,
Please send me the drawings or reference to the proposed cell phone tower build for the
permit.
I am in opposition to this build which is next to my property on 21213 S. Lindsay Rd. This
will directly impact my view, and the overall aesthetics in the community. Also, real or
perceived effects of cell towers cause fear which will decrease property values in the area.
Many people are located in this area due to its rural nature, and this would make it more
industrialized. I also have safety concerns regarding my family's health.
Thank You,
Paul Bowerman
From:
Dino Pergola
To:
Sean Watkins (PND)
Subject:
AZ01-114 Donut-Stealth Cell Tower Letter
Date:
Thursday, December 16, 2021 1:58:05 PM
Sean,
Here is a letter that I received in support of the tower.
Dino Pergola, Esq.
Site Acquisition Specialist
1426 North Marvin Street #101
Gilbert, AZ 85233
Office: (480) 664-9588 ext. 243
Cell: (480)773-4853
From: Chris McConnell <cjmnews68@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2021 10:35 AM
To: Dino Pergola <dino.pergola@pinnacleco.net>
Subject: Stealth Cell Tower Letter
You may want to alter your letter to eliminate incorrect data in it.
A cell tower does not help WIFI service. It only provides cell service, including data, but this is not
WiFi.
I suggest changing WiFi to "cellular data" so your letter is correct and people with bad WiFi in their
house will not blame you for the WiFi not improving when the tower is installed.
I am reading the letter about the tower going in on Lindsay Rd. Love the idea! We typically have 1
bar in our house here in Layton Lakes and I tend to go outside to make phone calls. A tower is
welcome.
Chris
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use
by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by
Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more
useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out
more Click Here.
From:
Chris McConnell
To:
Sean Watkins (PND)
Subject:
Re: FW: AZ01-114 Donut-Stealth Cell Tower Letter (Z2021038)
Date:
Wednesday, December 22, 2021 10:49:06 AM
3487 E Balsam Dr, Chandler, AZ 85286
Chris
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:39 AM Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@maricopa.gov>
wrote:
Hello Mr. McConnell,
Your support comment has been added to the project record for Special Use Permit case
Z2021038.
Would you care to provide your address and or parcel number for the record?
Thank you!
Sean Watkins
Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson Street, Suite 170
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-506-8150
sean.watkins@maricopa.gov
P&D is now 100% digital.
Find information on our new permit process here:
https://www.maricopa.gov/1629/Construction-Permit-Information
From: Dino Pergola <dino.pergola@pinnacleco.net>
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2021 1:58 PM
To: Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: AZ01-114 Donut-Stealth Cell Tower Letter
Sean,
Here is a letter that I received in support of the tower.
Dino Pergola, Esq.
Site Acquisition Specialist
1426 North Marvin Street #101
Gilbert, AZ 85233
Office: (480) 664-9588 ext. 243
Cell: (480)773-4853
From: Chris McConnell <cjmnews68@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 16, 2021 10:35 AM
To: Dino Pergola <dino.pergola@pinnacleco.net>
Subject: Stealth Cell Tower Letter
You may want to alter your letter to eliminate incorrect data in it.
A cell tower does not help WIFI service. It only provides cell service, including data, but
this is not WiFi.
I suggest changing WiFi to "cellular data" so your letter is correct and people with bad WiFi
in their house will not blame you for the WiFi not improving when the tower is installed.
I am reading the letter about the tower going in on Lindsay Rd. Love the idea! We typically
have 1 bar in our house here in Layton Lakes and I tend to go outside to make phone calls.
A tower is welcome.
Chris
Disclaimer
The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for
use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby
notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this
information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by
Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more
useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find
out more Click Here.
From:
Dilia Pablo
To:
Sean Watkins (PND)
Subject:
Layton Lakes Cell Tower
Date:
Friday, December 17, 2021 8:52:23 AM
I just wanted to let you know how excited I am that there is a new cell tower going up. Been
waiting for this announcement since I moved into Layton Lakes Community.
Thank you.
Dilia Pablo
From:
Dilia Pablo
To:
Sean Watkins (PND)
Subject:
Re: Layton Lakes Cell Tower
Date:
Tuesday, December 21, 2021 2:28:43 PM
Thank you.
Dilia Pablo
On Dec 21, 2021, at 1:21 PM, Sean Watkins (PND)
<Sean.Watkins@maricopa.gov> wrote:
Hello Ms. Pablo,
Thank you for your comment, however, I need a little more information to make
certain I know which project you are referring to, if you please.
I believe this is in regard to a new cell tower located at 21205 S Lindsay Rd, near the
southeast corner of Lindsay Rd. and Layton Lakes Blvd. (just south of Gilbert),
associated with current Special Use Permit case Z2021038. Is that correct?
YES.
Would you care to tell me your address and/or parcel number?
5021 S Carlyle Dr Gilbert AZ 85298
I had bad reception since we moved into Layton Lakes so getting a tower will help a lot my
cell service.
Your comment, and any additional information you may wish to provide will be entered
into the project record for Z2021038 for consideration by Staff, the Planning and
Zoning Commission and Board of Supervisors which has the final authority on the
approval or denial of the case.
Thank you!
Sean Watkins
Planner
Maricopa County Planning & Development Department
301 W. Jefferson Street, Suite 170
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Desk: 602-506-8150
sean.watkins@maricopa.gov
P&D is now 100% digital.
Find information on our new permit process here:
https://www.maricopa.gov/1629/Construction-Permit-Information
From: Dilia Pablo <dilia2020@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2021 8:52 AM
To: Sean Watkins (PND) <Sean.Watkins@Maricopa.Gov>
Subject: Layton Lakes Cell Tower
I just wanted to let you know how excited I am that there is a new cell tower going up.
Been waiting for this announcement since I moved into Layton Lakes Community.
Thank you.
Dilia Pablo
501 North 44th Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85008, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: \\mcfs.mcaz.maricopa.gov\oet-gis-workgroup-prod$\shiloh.johnson\PlanningandDevelopment\OppositionCases\Z2021038\Z2021038.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 4/11/2022
0.06
0
0.06
0.03
Miles
All Responses
Z2021038
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
All Opposition Parcels
All Supporting Parcels
GILBERT
GILBERT
CHANDLER
CHANDLER
S
T
winleaf
Dr
E Reliant St
S Layton Lakes Blvd W
E Appleby Rd
Lindsay Rd
Layton Lakes Blvd
313
18
412
304
72
021C
313
18
412
304
72
021C
304
72
022D
304
72
019B
313
18
411
313
18
415
304
72
024A
304
72
025G
304
72
019A
304
73
191
304
72
020A
304
73
970
304
72
011B
304
72
021B
313
18
410
304
73
968
304
73
969
301 W. Jefferson St., Suite 170, Phoenix, Arizona 85003, (602) 506-3601
Document Path: \\mcfs.mcaz.maricopa.gov\oet-gis-workgroup-prod$\shiloh.johnson\PlanningandDevelopment\OppositionCases\Z2021038\Z2021038.aprx
DISCLAIMER: This map is a graphical representation designed for general reference purposes only. Viewer/User agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless Maricopa County, its officers, departments, employees and agents
from and against any and all suits, actions, legal or administrative proceedings, claims, demands or damages of any kind or nature arising out of the use of this map, or the data contained herein, in its actual or altered form.
www.maricopa.gov/planning
Maricopa County OET, GIS Division, 4/11/2022
75
0
75
37.5
Feet
Opposition and Support
Z2021038
Subject Parcel
300' Buffer
Supporting Parcel
Opposition Parcel
All Opposition Parcels
300' Buffer Selection
300' Buffer Interior
Eligible parcels: 13
Supporting parcels: 0
Opposition parcels: 2
Supporting parcels sq ft: 0
Opposition parcels sq ft: 59,926.4
Subject parcels sq ft: 58,835.5
All area inside the 300' buffer:
643,532.0
All area inside the 300' buffer -
excluding subject parcel,
ROW and excluded parcels: 415,416.2
No-response parcels sq ft: 355,489.8
Super Majority opposed parcel acres:
14%
Super Majority opposed parcel number:
15%