MINUTES OF MEETING - The Village of Indian Hill

MINUTES OF MEETINGINDIAN HILL PLANNING COMMISSIONDECEMBER 20, 2011The regular meeting of the Indian Hill Planning Commission was held on Tuesday,December 20, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Village Administrationbuilding.Members Present:Members Absent:Officials Present:Visitors Present:Paul F. MaddenJane G. KoppenhoeferRichard C. WiggersAbbot A. ThayerMark D. KuenningNoneMichael W. Burns, City ManagerDavid M. Couch, Assistant City ManagerJohn Scola, Cincinnati Bell Wireless, LLCTom Breidenstein, Law Offices of Thomas W. BosseMark Tullis, 6620 Wyman LaneAndy and Julie Webster, 5535 Miami RoadSusan Glaser, Susan Glaser DesignsJoe Fries, 7740 Indian Hill RoadChairman Madden called the meeting to order and asked for anyone planning to speak onbehalf of the cases being presented tonight, to please stand, raise their right hand, and besworn in prior to speaking.Chairman Madden asked for comments or corrections to the October 18, 2011 PlanningCommission minutes. There being none, Mrs. Koppenhoefer made a motion to approvethe minutes. Mr. Wiggers seconded, and the minutes were approved by a unanimousvoice vote.Item Number 1: Cincinnati Bell Wireless, LLC, at 201 East Fourth Street, Cincinnati,Ohio, under the continuing jurisdiction of the Planning Commission is requesting specialexception approval for three (3) micro-cells located along the right of way at 4635 MiamiRoad, 5535 Miami Road, and 7705 Indian Hill Road to remain permanently.Mr. John Scola, Real Estate Director with Cincinnati Bell Wireless, LLC, comes before theCommission and introduces himself and Mr. Tom Breidenstein, attorney with the LawOffices of Thomas W. Bosse.Mr. Scola states that he and Mr. Breidenstein are in support of the Staff report and arehere to answer any questions related to the case.

Village of Indian HillMinutes of Planning Commission MeetingDecember 20, 2011Page 2Staff Report: Mr. Couch states that Cincinnati Bell Wireless is requesting the status of thethree (3) micro-cells located at 4635 Miami Road, 5535 Miami Road, and 7705 Indian HillRoad be granted permanent status. There are no modifications being proposed to theexisting micro-cells.Mr. Couch reviews seven (7) previous Planning Commission meetings related to themicro-cell towers as follows:• October 21, 2003 – The Planning Commission tabled the Cincinnati BellWireless request to install three micro-cell facilities and directed Village Staff tohire an RF Engineer to review the proposal before rendering a decision. TheCommission directed Staff to contact other carriers and gather information thatmight best serve the Village’s problem with dropped calls.• December 16, 2003 – A continuation of the October 21, 2003 meeting was held.After reviewing the information presented by Cincinnati Bell Wireless and theVillage’s RF Engineer’s report, the Commission granted the special exceptionrequest for the three (3) micro-cell antennas to be located on utility poles at thedesignated locations. The approval was subject to Staff and the Village’s RFEngineer’s review. The poles were to be removed after eighteen (18) monthsunless the Commission granted an extension.• January 20, 2004 – The Village’s RF Engineer’s preliminary findings werepresented regarding the conditional approval by the Commission to permitCincinnati Bell Wireless to install the three (3) micro-cell towers along the MiamiRoad corridor. The RF Engineer’s review found that the Planning Commissionmade a reasonable decision in granting the temporary micro-cells to be installedfor an eighteen (18) month period. The Engineer’s review will continue duringthe eighteen (18) month period.• November 16, 2004 – Cincinnati Bell Wireless made an informal presentationupdating the Commission on test results performed on the three (3) micro-celllocations. It was found that the micro-cells helped provide coverage in someareas, but worsened dropped calls in other areas and are not a permanentsolution to coverage problems in the Village. The Commission agreed thatfurther discussion should be postponed until the end of the eighteen (18) monthperiod.• October 18, 2005 – Cincinnati Bell Wireless requested a twenty-four (24) monthextension permitting the three (3) temporary micro-cells to remain. Theextension would allow time for the Distributed Antennae System (DAS) study tobe completed.

Village of Indian HillMinutes of Planning Commission MeetingDecember 20, 2011Page 3• November 20, 2007 – Cincinnati Bell Wireless requested a twenty-four (24)month extension permitting the three (3) existing micro-cells to remain. TheCommission granted the request.• December 15, 2009 – Cincinnati Bell Wireless requested a twenty-four (24)month extension permitting the three (3) temporary micro-cells to remain with nomodifications. The Commission granted the request unanimously.For the past several years the Planning Commission has reviewed options to increase cellphone coverage in the Village including seven previous meetings regarding the microcells.In 2004, the Village hired an RF Engineer who found that the Commission made areasonable decision in approving the micro-cells, and further research should continueuntil a permanent solution for comprehensive coverage is found.In 2005 the Village’s RF Engineer recommended that the Village consider a DistributedAntennae System (DAS) as a permanent solution to coverage issues. A study wascompleted, and in 2006 a contract was signed to install a Distributed Antennae System.However, the contractor was delayed in installing the system due to difficulty reachingagreements with other carriers. Finally, in 2008 the contractor completely backed out ofthe contract. In 2009 these actions prompted Cincinnati Bell Wireless to return to theCommission for another twenty-four (24) month extension, which the Commission granted.These previous actions bring us up to date for the request to make the micro-cellspermanent fixtures.Staff points out that the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires that local zoningauthorities allow for the development of high quality personal wireless service facilities. Tocomply with federal law, Village Council passed an ordinance on December 17, 1997amending Section 101.42 “Special Exceptions Authorized” by adding number (14)“Personal Wireless Service Facilities” (PWS).Mr. Couch notes that there are approximately 1,350 cell phone calls made daily with theaid of the micro-cells which translates to approximately 485,000 calls per year.Over the past several years Staff has received calls from residents who live on MiamiRoad and Indian Hill Road noting that they now have cell coverage where before theinstallation of the micro-cells they did not.Mr. Couch mentions that he received a call from an elderly resident, Helen Faulknerresiding at 7795 Indian Hill Road. Mrs. Faulkner asked Mr. Couch to speak on her behalfat the Planning Commission meeting. During the call she pointed out that whenever thereis a power outage, without the use of her cell phone she has no way of communicatingwith anyone. Mrs. Faulkner also pointed out that when workers are at her house she doesnot want them to have to enter her home to use the phone. Now, with cell coverage theworkers can use their cell phones rather than having to enter her home to use the phone.

Village of Indian HillMinutes of Planning Commission MeetingDecember 20, 2011Page 4Mr. Couch notes that Mr. Burns received a call from Mrs. Julie Webster, residing at 5535Miami Road, expressing opposition to the location of the micro-cell located in front of theirhome.In closing, Staff finds that the micro-cells provide an essential service to residents of theVillage and those individuals and organizations who subscribe to Cincinnati Bell Wireless.In recognizing that future technologies may become available and provide acomprehensive wireless coverage plan for the Village, Staff recommends that the requestbe granted with the condition that if new technology becomes available that would providecomprehensive cell phone coverage in the Village, and is cost effective, that Cincinnati BellWireless would be agreeable to removing the micro-cells and consider being a part of suchtechnology.Mrs. Julie Webster, at 5535 Miami Road, comes before the Commission to express heropposition to permanent approval of the micro-cell located in front of her home.Mrs. Webster asks if the “permanent” cell tower at 5535 Miami Road would be the samepole that’s currently there or would it be a pole of a different height.Mr. Scola responds that the permanent cell tower would be exactly as it is today. Nochanges would be made.Mrs. Webster expresses her support for an alternative future technology for cell phonecoverage that would be more compact, not as tall, and less intrusive than what currentlyexists in front of her home.Mrs. Webster reads a letter she prepared asking the Commission to refrain from grantingCincinnati Bell Wireless permanent approval. She requests instead that the Commissionhonor its existing agreement by renewing the temporary designation for a period of three(3) to five (5) years. This will keep the door open to a more aesthetic solution for thecommunity as a whole.Mr. Couch reminds those in attendance that this case is under the continuing jurisdiction ofthe Planning Commission and at any time can be brought back before the Commission forreview.Mrs. Koppenhoefer asks Mr. Scola if the DAS is still a possibility or if there are any othernew technologies that might result in a permanent solution.Mr. Scola responds by stating that the DAS is not the solution for the Village. Althoughtechnology is constantly changing, he does not see any replacement for the micro-cells inthe next five (5) to seven (7) years.

Village of Indian HillMinutes of Planning Commission MeetingDecember 20, 2011Page 5After further discussion, Mrs. Koppenhoefer made a motion to approve the specialexception with the condition that there be triennial status reviews of the technology andsystem needs. Mr. Wiggers seconded, and the motion was approved by a unanimousvoice vote.Item Number 2: Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Fries, residing at 7740 Indian Hill Road, arerequesting variance approval to construct a second floor addition within the required sideyard setback.Mr. Fries comes before the Commission to request a variance to construct a second flooraddition to their home. Mr. Fries also introduces his architect, Susan Glaser, with SusanGlaser Designs.Ms. Glaser briefly explains the addition and states that they are not expanding the footprintof the home in any way. The entire addition will cover what currently exists. Ms. Glasernotes that in reviewing the site plan, there are no other alternatives for expansion.Staff Report: Mr. Couch states that Mr. and Mrs. Fries reside at 7740 Indian Hill Roadand are requesting a variance to the side yard setback to construct a second floor additionto their home.The property predates current zoning and is located in District “C” – one acre, having a lotarea of .66 acres. The home and the lot are both non-conforming to the Indian Hill ZoningOrdinance per Section 73.1 Lot Area, Lot Frontage and Yards.The lot has a non-conforming frontage of 88'. The required frontage for District “C” is aminimum of 150'. The lot area is also non-conforming containing .66 acres, and therequired lot area for District “C” is a minimum of one (1) acre.The Hamilton County Auditor’s records indicate that the home was constructed in 1948.However, Staff believes the original home predates the 1945 Zoning Ordinance, and canfind no records of a variance being granted for the non-conforming location of the home.The rear corner of the existing garage is located approximately 18' from the west propertyline. The required minimum setback for District “C” is 20'. The east side of the home isalso located less than 20' from the side yard lot line, but no work is being performed onthat side of the house.The Fries are proposing to construct a second floor addition over the existing garage. Theproposed addition will provide a new master bath and bedroom for the children, along withan area for laundry and closet space. The project also includes a shed dormer added tothe front of the upstairs providing a sitting area.

Village of Indian HillMinutes of Planning Commission MeetingDecember 20, 2011Page 6Staff finds that the variance request arises from an undue hardship and exceptionalpractical difficulty created by the non-conforming lot and home. Staff also finds that thenon-conforming conditions are by no actions of the current owners, and the addition willprovide much needed living space for the Fries family.Furthermore, the proposed project will not worsen the existing non-conforming conditions,and the addition will not extend beyond the existing building lines.Staff recommends the variance be granted on the basis of an undue hardship andexceptional practical difficulty created by the non-conforming location of the house.Mr. Thayer made a motion to approve the variance request. Mr. Kuenning seconded, andthe motion was approved by a unanimous voice vote.There being no further business to come before the Commission, Mr. Thayer made amotion to adjourn. Mrs. Koppenhoefer seconded, and the motion was approved by aunanimous voice vote.Respectfully submitted,Paul F. Madden, ChairmanATTEST:Michael W. Burns, Secretary