Environmental AssessmentMonopole Communication Tower, Houston, TX

10/18/00 i WO No. BK308.00.01

TABLE OF CONTENTS

E.0 Executive Summary...................................................................................... 1

1.0 Purpose and Need.......................................................................................... 2

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives................................................................ 3

2.1 Site Location....................................................................................... 32.2 Project Description ............................................................................ 32.3 Zoning Classification Statement and Local Issues.............................. 62.4 Alternatives and No Action Alternative .............................................. 6

3.0 Affected Environment and Impact Assessment........................................... 7

3.1 National Parks, Forests and Wilderness Areas .................................. 73.2 Wildlife Preserves............................................................................... 73.3 Threatened and Endangered Species.................................................. 73.4 Archeological and Historical Sites ..................................................... 73.5 Native American Cultural Sites .......................................................... 83.6 Floodplains ........................................................................................ 83.7 Wetlands and Surface Features .......................................................... 93.8 Lighting and Radiofrequency Emissions ............................................ 9

4.0 Conclusions .................................................................................................. 10

5.0 Finding of No Significant Impact ............................................................... 11

6.0 References .................................................................................................... 12

7.0 List of Preparers.......................................................................................... 13

Appendix A: Building Permit

Appendix B: Consultation Records


10/18/00 1 WO No. BK309.00.01

E.0 Executive Summary

Nextel Communications, Inc. (Nextel) has proposed construction of a telecommunicationsstructure at the West Orem site (Site# TX1456B) in Houston, Texas. In 2000, Nextelconducted an environmental review of the communications tower site at 4951 SimsbrookDrive, Houston, Texas 77045. The structure will be co-located inside a 40-foot by 65-foottract of undeveloped, grassed land with an existing self-supported tower, which wasconstructed by the Houston Cellular Telephone Company.

The FCC through its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations (47 CFR1.1306), requires that applicants for telecommunications structures prepare a NEPA-compliant Environmental Assessment (EA) for actions affecting wilderness areas, wildlifepreserves, threatened and endangered species, historical sites and archeological resources,Native American religious sites, floodplains, or surface features and wetlands. An EA alsowill be prepared for structures having high intensity white lights in residential areas orexcessive radiofrequency emissions. The West Orem site lies within the 100-yearfloodplain (zone AE) as shown on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) Community-Panel Number 482101C1005K.

FCC regulations require Nextel to prepare an Environmental Assessment pursuant to FCC(47 CFR 1.1301, et seq.) and Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40CFR 1500) implementing NEPA. Of the sensitive resources identified in the FCC NEPAregulations, no additional analysis or consultation with a local or federal agency isnecessary, aside from that conducted for compliance with Section 106 of the NationalHistoric Preservation Act (NHPA) and Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).These consultation letters indicate that the project would have no significant impact onhistorical or archeological resources listed or eligible for listing on the National Register ofHistoric Places (NRHP) or any federally-listed threatened or endangered species or theircritical habitat.

Based on this information, we conclude that the project would have no significant impacton the human environment and does not require an Environmental Impact Statement.


10/18/00 2 WO No. BK309.00.01

1.0 Purpose and Need for Action

Nextel Communications, Inc. (Nextel) has proposed construction of a telecommunicationsstructure at the West Orem Site in Houston, Texas. Nextel would locate thetelecommunications equipment as part of an overall regional telecommunications servicingplan to provide communication service to the area around Houston, TX. Currently, there isinadequate service in the area around the site, impairing communications for a largenumber of customers.

The installation of antennas on telecommunication towers is regulated by the FederalCommunications Commission (FCC) and is subject to compliance with the NationalEnvironmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969. FCC delegates compliance of its activities toits licensees.

The FEMA/FIRM indicated that the site is located within Zone AE. Zone AE lies withinthe 100-year floodplain and, pursuant to FCC regulations implementing NEPA, whichrequires that Nextel, as the FCC licensee, prepare an Environmental Assessment (EA) forthe project. Pursuant to NEPA, the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations andFCC Regulations Implementing NEPA, this Environmental Assessment (EA) has beenprepared to address the potential adverse environmental impacts associated with theproposed action and determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement is required.


10/18/00 3 WO No. BK309.00.01

2.0 Proposed Action and Alternatives

2.1 Project DescriptionNextel, the applicant for the referenced telecommunications structure, has indicated thatthe structure will be co-located inside a 40-foot by 65-foot tract of undeveloped, grassedland with an existing, self-supported tower constructed by Houston Cellular TelephoneCompany. An equipment shed will be constructed next to the monopole in a 25-foot by40-foot parcel of undeveloped grassed land.

The height of the compound and the concrete equipment pad will be 3 feet above theground elevation. The communication equipment will be 3.5 feet above the concreteequipment pad.

2.2 Project SettingThe site is located in a mixed property use area within the City of Houston, approximately650 feet west of the intersection of Simsbrook Drive and Stancliff Street. The site isapproximately 55 feet above mean sea level with a relatively flat topography. The sitelatitude and longitude is 29.619500 N and 95.455700 W respectively. The site of theequipment shed is located immediately south of the existing 40-foot by 65-foot fencedenclosure which contains a Houston Cellular Telephone Company equipment building, a120 foot monopole tower, and a metal platform with the electrical equipment. The groundwithin the fenced enclosure is graveled. The existing compound was reportedlyconstructed in 1993.


10/18/00 4 WO No. BK309.00.01

Figure 1: Site Location Map – West Orem Site, TX


10/18/00 5 WO No. BK309.00.01

Figure 2: Location Map - West Orem Site, TX


10/18/00 6 WO No. BK309.00.01

2.3 Zoning Classification Statement and Local IssuesNextel obtained the required local zoning approvals prior to construction. The buildingpermit for this structure is provided in Appendix A. Additionally, local regulations requirethat structures be placed such that the floor elevations be at least 1 foot above the baseflood elevation.

2.4 Alternatives and No Action AlternativeIn developing cellular networks, Nextel considers a variety of placement options beforeselecting sites for antenna placement. Selection of this site optimizes service coverage andminimizes new construction disturbance by co-locating the structure with a previouslyconstructed tower. No other site was considered in detail because of the presence of anexisting tower in the desired service area. The environmental impact of this proposedaction will be limited as a result of it being co-located with an existing structure.

Under the no action alternative, the structure would not be constructed and servicecoverage would not be obtained.


10/18/00 7 WO No. BK309.00.01

3.0 Affected Environment and Impact AssessmentThis section discusses the affected environment relative to the eight resource areasidentified in the FCC NEPA regulations. Any responses received from governmentorganizations as part of the consultation process are included in Appendix B.

3.1 National Parks, Forests and Wilderness AreasThe site does not lie within or near a National or State Park, Forest or Wilderness area(Department of the Interior web site, October 2000).

3.2 Wildlife PreservesThe site does not lie within or near a National or State Wildlife Preserve (Department ofthe Interior web site, October 2000).

3.3 Threatened and Endangered SpeciesWe reviewed the Endangered Species List for Harris County, TX. Two species on the list,the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) and the Texas prairie dawn flower (Hymenoxystexana), are known to appear in Harris County. The site does not offer any habitat for thebald eagle, or Texas prairie dawn flower since the proposed site is the current location ofan existing telecommunications tower.

Through Section 7 consultation, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) alsoconcluded that the proposed action will have no effect on federally-listed or proposedspecies or their habitats (USFWS, August 9). The consultation letters are given inAppendix B.

3.4 Archeological and Historical SitesDue to the location of the site adjacent to a previously constructed telecommunicationstower, the proposed project is expected to have no adverse effect on any properties on, oreligible for, listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

We consulted with the Texas Historical Society (SHPO) to determine whetherarcheological sites or other historic properties would be impacted by the proposed action.The SHPO concluded that there are no historic properties affected within the referencedproject’s area of potential effect (SHPO, August 2). The consultation letters are given inAppendix B.

3.5 Native American Cultural SitesThe site does not lie within an Indian Reservation or an area protected by treaty rights.

3.6 FloodplainsExecutive Order 11988 requires that federal agencies consider the effects of their actionson floodplains. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) delineates floodzones as part of a nationwide program.The site lies within Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood InsuranceRate Map (FIRM) Zone AE, which lies within the 100-year floodplain, as defined byFEMA.

MitigationMitigation refers to those actions that would reduce or eliminate potential adverse impactsdue to a proposed project. Mitigation measures are required to ensure that the constructionof the tower is designed to withstand any potential flooding that may occur, and minimizeany adverse affects on floodplain resources.

The Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) has defined mitigation in 40 CFR Part1508.20 to include: (1) Avoiding impacts; (2) minimizing impacts; (3) rectifying impacts;


10/18/00 8 WO No. BK309.00.01

(4) reducing impacts over time; and (5) compensating for impacts. These mitigationmeasures can be categorized as avoidance, minimization, and compensation, and aredescribed below as they pertain to the transmission tower’s potential location in afloodplain.

Non-residential construction within a 100-year floodplain is feasible and allowed by thelocal government provided that the FEMA-coordinated local ordinances are met and thestructure meets requirements of other local ordinances and guidelines. Since this proposedaction has required permitting in the AE flood zone, various design standards must be metin order to ensure that a flood event does not cause adverse environmental impacts. Thedesign must meet federal guidelines (Section A (2)(i) of Executive Order No. 11988) andlocal ordinances. Local regulations require that the platform be constructed at least onefoot above the Base Flood Elevation (BFE).

Permits for construction within a 100-year floodplain are issued for the structurefoundation, not for the tower itself. The structure usually consists of a modular buildingon a concrete slab. There are two options for non-residential construction within afloodplain: 1) elevation of the structure foundation above BFE; or 2) flood-proofing thestructure.The equipment platform is elevated one foot above the BFE. The equipment platformwould not result in a rise in the base year flood elevation.

3.7 Wetlands and Surface FeaturesExecutive Order 11990 on Wetlands Protection and Section 404 of the Clean Water Actprovide for the protection of wetlands and regulation of significant filling activitiesassociated with federal actions. The FCC NEPA regulations further include deforestationor other activities that would alter surface features within its required NEPA review.

Construction disturbance of the site is minimal since a structure will be co-located with anexisting tower.

3.8 Lighting and Radiofrequency EmissionsThere are no lights associated with the telecommunications facility. The facility does notemit unusual or high amounts of radiofrequency (RF) radiation and is typical for this typeof equipment. The equipment conforms to FCC RF emission guidelines for bothuncontrolled and controlled exposure (47 CFR 1.1307(8)(b)).

The tower is shorter than the 200 foot limit, above which the Federal AviationAdministration (FAA) requires special lighting; therefore there is no lighting associatedwith the telecommunications facilities.


10/18/00 9 WO No. BK309.00.01

4.0 ConclusionsOf the resource areas of concern discussed previously in this document, the project has nopotential to affect any key resource area. The only concern with this site location is thatthe literature and record search (FEMA/FIRM Community-Panel No. 48201C1005K)indicate that the facility would be located within the 100-year floodplain. The initialconstruction of the site addressed the floodplain concerns by building the structure suchthat the top of the foundation is at least one foot above the base flood elevation.


10/18/00 10 WO No. BK309.00.01

5.0 Finding of No Significant Impact

Based on the impact assessment of these resource areas, we find that the construction,operation, and maintenance of telecommunications equipment at the South Conroe site(Site# TX1456B) would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting thequality of the human environment, since the proper mitigation will be performed for theconstruction in the floodplain. For this reason and pursuant to the FederalCommunications Commission regulations implementing NEPA (47 CFR 1.1306), noEnvironmental Impact Statement is required.


10/18/00 11 WO No. BK309.00.01

6.0 References

ATC Associates, Phase 1 Environmental Assessment, August 20,2000.

Department of the Interior websites: http://www.doi.gov

State Historic Preservation Office, Consultation Letter Response, August 2, 2000.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Consultation Letter Response, August 9, 2000.


10/18/00 12 WO No. BK309.00.01

7.0 List of Preparers

Kevin Groppe, 2 years experience (BS, MS Environmental Science)-Soils and Geology,Noise, Site Development Issues, Water Resources

Carol A. Young, P.E., 15 years experience (BS, ME Civil Engineering) – Soils andGeology, Noise, Site Development Issues, Water Resources


10/18/00 13 WO No. BK309.00.01

Appendix ABuilding Permit


10/18/00 14 WO No. BK309.00.01


10/18/00 15 WO No. BK309.00.01

Appendix BConsultation Letters


10/18/00 16 WO No. BK309.00.01


10/18/00 17 WO No. BK309.00.01

Telecommunication Structure West Orem Site

Documents

Transcript of Telecommunication Structure West Orem Site