HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201800020 Presentation Special Use Permit 2019-05-01 )t i., ,
1 Albemarle County
,ii Meeting Agenda
Board of Supervisors
Supervisor,Rivanna District Norman G.Dill
Supervisor,Rio District Ned L. Gallaway
Supervisor, White Hall District Ann H.Mallek
Supervisor,Jack Jouett District Diantha H.McKee!
Supervisor,Samuel Miller District Liz A.Palmer
Supervisor,Scottsville District Rick Randolph
County Executive,Jeffrey B.Richardson
Clerk,Claudette K.Borgersen
Wednesday,May 1,2019 1:00 PM Lane Auditorium
Regular Meeting
1. Call to Order. A-- FPOU t d
2. Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Moment of Silence.
4. Adoption of Final Agenda.
5. Brief Announcements by Board Members.
6. Proclamations and Recognitions:
6.1. 19-281 Proclamation Recognizing Brigadier General Sandra Louise Alvey.
6.2. 19-282 Proclamation Recognizing May 5-11, 2019 as Public Service Recognition
Week.
6.3. 19-283 Kronos Team Recognition.
7. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
8. Consent Agenda (on next sheet)
1:30 p.m. -Work Sessions:
9. 19-239 VDOT FY 20-25 Secondary Six-Year Plan.
(Daniel Butch, Senior Planner—Transportation)
Albemarle County Page 1 Printed on 4/30/2019
Board of Supervisors Meeting Agenda May 1,2019
10. 19-255 Yard/Property Maintenance Open-Air Burning.
(Howard Lagomarsino, Division Chief, Fire Marshal)
3:15 p.m. -Recess.
3:30 p.m. -Discussion Item:
11. 19-280 Review of Pilot Board of Supervisors Meeting Schedule.
(Jeff Richardson)
12. 3:45 p.m.-Closed Meeting.
Pursuant to Section 2.2-3711(A)of the Code of Virginia.
• Under Subsection(1), to discuss and consider appointments to
the Community Policy and Management Team and the Rivanna
Solid Waste Authority for which there are pending vacancies or
requests for reappointments;and
• Under Subsection(6), to discuss and consider the investment of public funds in an
affordable housing project in the northern portion of the Scottsville Magisterial District
and infrastructure improvements in Crozet where bargaining is involved and where, if
made public initially, would adversely affect the financial interest of the County;and
• Under Subsection(7), to consult with legal counsel and briefings by staff members
pertaining to litigation between the Board and Global Signal Acquisitions, where
consultation or briefing in an open meeting would adversely affect the negotiating or
litigating posture of the County and the Board;and
• Under Subsection(8), to consult with and be briefed by legal counsel and staff
regarding specific legal matters requiring legal advice relating to.
1 The County's duty to maintain and repair real property that it owns in the Scottsville
Magisterial District;and
2. A possible boundary adjustment with an abutting locality
*Closed Meeting motion subject to change*
13. Certify Closed Meeting.
14. Boards and Commissions:
14.1. 19-278 Vacancies and Appointments.
(Travis Morris)
6:00 p.m.
Albemarle County Page 2 Printed on 4/30/2019
a
gas- Nwe
Board of Supervisors Meeting Agenda May 1,2019
15. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
Public Hearings:
16. 19-271 CLE201800250 Elizabeth Gruss Family Day Home. PROJECT:
CLE201800250 Elizabeth Gruss Family Day Home PROPOSED: Special
exception to allow for a family day home to care for up to 12 children in a
residence. ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: PUD Planned Unit
Development—residential (3—34 units per acre), mixed with commercial,
service and industrial uses SECTION: 20.3.1 13. Family day homes
(reference 5.1.56) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: RA
Rural Area—preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and
natural, historic and scenic resources; residential (0.5 unit/acre in
development lots) ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No LOCATION: 1141 Fox
Ridge Drive TAX MAP/PARCEL: 031 B0-00-00-06800 MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT: White Hall.
(Rebecca Ragsdale, Principal Planner)
17. 19-257 SP201800022 Dogtopia. PROJECT: SP201800022 Dogtopia
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio TAX MAP/PARCEL(S): 04500000010900
LOCATION: 315 Rivanna Plaza Dr, Ste 120, Charlottesville, VA 22901
PROPOSAL: Use an existing, commercial building space as an indoor
kennel PETITION: Indoor commercial kennels are permitted by special use
permit in the Highway Commercial (HC) zone under Section 24.2.2(10) of
the zoning ordinance. This development would be located in a portion of an
existing strip commercial building on 3.32 acres of land. No dwelling units
proposed. ZONING: HC Highway Commercial—commercial and service;
residential by special use permit(15 units/acre) OVERLAY DISTRICTS:
EC Entrance Corridor—Overlay to protect properties of historic,
architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development
along routes of tourist access; AIA Airport Impact Area—Overlay to
minimize adverse impacts to both the airport and the surrounding land;
Managed Steep Slopes COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Commercial Mixed
Use which allows commercial, retail, employment uses, with supporting
residential (no maximum density), office, or institutional uses in
Neighborhood 1 of the Places29 Development Area.
(Mariah Gleason, Planner)
Albemarle County Page 3 Printed on 4/30/2019
a
Board of Supervisors Meeting Agenda May 1,2019
18. 19-179 SP201800016 EcoVillage Charlottesville- Preserved Steep Slopes.
PROJECT: SP201800016 EcoVillage Charlottesville—Preserved Steep
Slopes MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio TAX MAP/PARCEL(S):
06100000021000 LOCATION: Rio Road E, between Alwood Lane and
Rockbrook Drive; existing addressed structures on the subject property(s)
include 480 Rio Road E. PROPOSAL: Disturbance in the Preserved
Steep Slopes Overlay District to accommodate the development of
"private facilities" (new commercial entrance and parking area) for the
proposed "Ecovillage Charlottesville"development. PETITION: "Private
facilities on preserved slopes" pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Section
30.7.4.b.2. ZONING: R4 Residential, which allows residential uses by right
(4 units per acre). OVERLAY DISTRICT(S): Airport Impact Area; Steep
Slopes—(Managed) and (Preserved). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
"Neighborhood Density Residential"which calls for residential use (3-6
units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, and
other small-scale non-residential uses; in the Development Area in
Neighborhood 2 (Places29).
(Tim Padalino, Senior Planner)
19. 19-186 SP201800020 WVIR-TV Replacement of Existing TV Broadcasting
Tower. PROJECT: SP201800020—WVIR-TV Replacement of Existing
Television Broadcasting Tower MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville TAX
MAP/PARCEL: 09100000002800 LOCATION: Off Route 53, in Carters
Mountain Orchard. PROPOSAL: Replace an existing 314.25 feet tall
guy-wired television broadcasting tower with a new 314.25 feet tall
self-supporting television broadcasting tower in the same location.A
special exception to setbacks under Section 4.10.3.1 is needed.
PETITION: Section 10.2.2(6) of the zoning ordinance which allows for
communication transmission facilities in the RA, Rural Areas district.
Supplemental regulation apply to this use under Section 5.1.12. ZONING:
RA Rural Areas-agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density
(0.5 unit/acre in development lots) OVERLAY DISTRICT- Southern
Albemarle Rural Historic District, Mountain Protection Areas, and Critical
Slopes. PROFFERS- No COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Rural Areas-
preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic
and scenic resources/residential density 0.5 unit/acre in development lots.
Rural Areas 4 Comp Plan Area.
(Chris Perez, Senior Planner)
20. From the Board: Committee Reports and Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
21. From the County Executive: Report on Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
22. Adjourn to May 9, 2019,4:00 p.m., Lane Auditorium.
Albemarle County Page 4 Printed on 4/30/2019
•
*w,y, .fir
Board of Supervisors Meeting Agenda May 1,2019
CONSENT AGENDA
8. FOR APPROVAL (by recorded vote):
8.1. 19-258 Approval of Minutes. May 9, June 13, July 11, August 1, October 4, 2018;
and February 6, 2019.
8.2. 19-270 FY 2019 Appropriations.
(Andy Bowman)
8.3. 19-259 Revenue Sharing Programmatic Project Administration Agreement
Renewal.
(Jack Kelsey)
8.4. 19-267 Ordinance to Amend County Code Appendix A.1 (Acquisition of
Conservation Easements (ACE) Program.
(Richard DeLoria)
8.5. 19-273 Special Exceptions for SDP 201800067, Northside Materials Recovery
Facility.
(David Benish)
8.6. 19-289 Resolution to accept road(s) in the Estes Park Phase I and II Subdivision
into the State Secondary System of Highways. (Rivanna Magisterial
District)
8.7. 19-287 Set public hearing for June 5, 2019, on an ordinance to amend Chapter 2,
Administration, of the Albemarle County Code, to amend Section 2-202,
Compensation of board of supervisors, to increase the compensation of
the members of the Board of Supervisors by an inflation factor of 2.3%
effective July 1, 2019.
8.8. 19-288 Change start time of June 5, 2019, Meeting from 1:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m.
8. FOR INFORMATION (no vote necessary):
8.9. 19-286 Environmental Services Division Quarterly Report—3rd Quarter FY 19.
(Greg Harper)
8.10. 19-284 VDoT Monthly Report (May) 2019.
(Joel DeNunzio)
8.11. 19-285 Board-to-Board, April 2019, A monthly report from the Albemarle County
School Board to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
(Phil Giaramita)
Albemarle County Page 5 Printed on 4/30/2019
4111,
Board of Supervisors Meeting Agenda May 1,2019
Thank you for attending today's public hearing. During the 2019 Calendar Year, the Chair is Ned L. Gallaway and the
Vice-Chair is Rick Randolph.
During the time set aside for "Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda", individuals may address the Board of
Supervisors concerning any issue not listed on the agenda for Public Hearing. Individuals are allowed three minutes to
speak,unless otherwise decided.A sign-up sheet is provided at the meeting.
During Public Hearings, the Board will only acknowledge speakers addressing the item listed for Public Hearing.
Speakers are limited to one appearance of three minutes per public hearing item. A sign-up sheet is provided at the
meeting and you may sign up online in advance of the meeting at http://www.albemarle.org/bosspeakers/ Speakers will
be called forward in an alternating pattern of in person sign ups and online sign ups. Applicants are limited to a ten minute
presentation of their proposal and are allowed a five minute rebuttal at the close of the public hearing.
Time keeping is conducted through a timer and a light system at the podium. The green light will go on when you begin
speaking and this begins your allotted time, a yellow light indicates you have one minute to finish your comment; a red
light indicates your time has expired. If more than 10 speakers are signed up to speak, the time allotted to speak will be
reduced to two minutes and the yellow light will indicate you have 30 seconds to finish your comment. In order to give all
speakers equal treatment and courtesy,the Board requests that speakers adhere to the following guidelines:
When called to the speaker's podium,state your name and magisterial district;
Address comments directly to the Board as a whole;
Give written statements and other supporting material to the Clerk;
If you represent a group or organization,you may ask others present to raise their hands and be recognized;
If you exceed your allotted time,you will be asked to end your comments;
If a speaker does not use all allocated time,the unused time may not be shared with another speaker;
Speakers are permitted one opportunity to comment during each of the public comment periods per meeting;
Back-and-forth debate is prohibited;
Do not speak from your seat or out of turn;
Persons in the audience are encouraged to raise their hands to indicate their support or opposition to speakers at the
podium or any item during the meeting;
Please refrain from applause and other forms of approval or disapproval,as a courtesy to each speaker;
Signs are permitted in the meeting room so long as they are not attached to any stick or pole and do not obstruct the view
of persons attending the meeting.
All comments are live streamed,recorded and published on the Albemarle County website.
Please turn off all pagers and cellular telephones.
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville,Virginia
22902-4596
Albemarle County Page 6 Printed on 4/30/2019
New
Item recommended for deferral
Mr. Keller noted that the Woolen Mills item had been pulled from the meeting and would come
back before the Planning Commission on April 9, 2019,tentatively.
Public Hearing Items
SP-2018-00020 WVIR-TV Replacement of Existing TV Broadcasting Tower
Chris Perez addressed the Commission and stated that the item before them was a television
broadcasting tower that has been proposed for the top of Carter's Mountain. Mr. Perez said
there was an existing tower that was built in 1973 that was a television antenna that has been
proposed to be removed and replaced. Mr. Perez said the current tower did not have the
structural capacity to hold new equipment with regards to the Federal Communications
Commission's guidelines on weight, as well as all the different things required for the tower to
function. Mr. Perez said the property was owned by Crown Orchard, LLC, the applicant was
Virginia Broadcasting, LLC, and the special use permit specifically related to communication
transmission facilities in the Rural Area zoning district.
Mr. Perez said the existing tower from 1973 was built prior to the requirements for a special
use permit and only needed a building permit. Mr. Perez said as part of this current request, a
special exception was needed to permit the setback reduction because there was a one-to-one
setback from all property lines. Mr. Perez said the current facility was within 35 or 40 feet from
a property line from one adjacent owner, so the applicant will go ahead and request the special
exception. Mr. Perez stated he has reviewed the special exception request and he found it
acceptable and he will review the reasons why.
Mr. Perez showed a slide indicating that the Carter's Mountain parcel was around 300 acres,
predominantly covered in orchards, and the public was allowed on some portions of the land --
with Mr. Perez pointing out the,section of the property where the antenna farm was located.
Mr. Perez said the existing antenna was located within the existing antenna farm at the top of
the mountain. He stated that most of the surrounding properties were large and zoned for rural
uses, with some properties being 400 acres and one other being 800 acres. Mr. Perez showed
an aerial view with many trees and said the top portion of the property was where there were
smaller trees in the orchards, with a bald spot at the top of the mountain. He showed a close-
up view that included the closest property, TMP 91-18A, which was owned by Mr. Wood. Mr.
Perez said the property was where there were antennas owned by public television and that
the WVIR television replacement tower was located really close to the property line and was
unable to make the one-to-one setback based on its existing location. He noted that all of the
other towers in the antenna farm were also clustered using a conservation technique to allow
them to be put at the top of the mountain instead of being all over the mountain, which would
mean more tree clearance increased visibility of the towers.
-2-
Albemarle County Planning Commission
FINAL March 5,2019
Now vai+►'
Mr. Perez showed a slide depicting a survey from Tom Lincoln that showed that the current
tower was about 35 feet from the property line, noting that a star signified the location of the
tower that was to be replaced.
Mr. Perez said the current tower was a 314.25-foot-tall facility, with the tower itself being 240
feet and the additional footage being where the television broadcasting antenna exceeded the
height of the tower. Mr. Perez said the width of the self-supporting facility was 26 feet wide at
the base and three and a half feet wide at the top. Mr. Perez said the current tower was held
up with guy wires, and that was currently prohibited by the county's wireless policy. Mr. Perez
noted that the current tower was not a wireless facility subjected to 5140 but that he wanted
to recognize that the wireless policy prohibited guy wires in towers.
Mr. Perez showed a slide depicting what the tower looked like from Piedmont Virginia
Community College. Mr. Perez showed a slide depicting what the proposed tower would look
like from that perspective compared to the existing tower and noted that there were very few
distinguishable differences from that distance. He presented a slide from the back side of the
tower and noted that the star signified the tower that was to be replaced and that it would be
replaced with an almost identical tower. Mr. Perez said the tower would be self-supporting and
a little wider, but would be the same height and the same color based on FCC guidelines.
Mr. Perez said that staff found there would be no detrimental impacts to adjacent properties
and that reducing visibility by eliminating the guy wires was a positive finding. He noted that an
additional favorable factor was that this was a redevelopment and so no additional trees would
be removed, there was no increase in impervious surfaces, and this use would help spur
economic growth.
Mr. Perez referenced a slide depicting recommended conditions and noted that the ones listed
in the presentation were modified from the one in the staff report after input from the County
Attorney's Office. He stated that these changes were not substantive and were the result of
wordsmithing. Mr. Perez also noted that there were conditions for the special exception
allowing for the 35-foot setback reduction. He displayed a list of potential motions and noted
that the applicant approached him and said they would in the future also bring an application
to further decrease the setbacks to 30 feet in order to give them more flexibility in case the
builder needed more space. Mr. Perez said he did not find any additional impacts based on
where the antenna currently was, the height of the antenna, and the uses on the adjacent
property--which also had towers on it.
Mr. Perez asked the Commission if there were any questions.
Mr. Keller asked the Commission if there were any questions for staff.
Mr. Dotson inquired about Condition D that stated there would be no additional antennas or
support services at the site, asking if there were a physical reason for the condition since the
county encouraged colocation.
—3
Albemarle County Planning Commission
FINAL March 5,2019
Mr. Perez responded that he was mimicking conditions placed on the adjacent tower, which
was owned by a sister company, and they were generally the same conditions. He said his logic
was related to the county's wireless antenna policy, and putting additional facilities on the
tower might increase the bulk and visibility so this condition would prohibit that from
happening.
Ms. Riley said she wanted to follow up on Condition G, which pertained to the colocation of
emergency communication systems, and noted that this might negate Condition D. She asked
Mr. Perez to describe further.
Mr. Perez explained that Condition G was intended to give the county some flexibility in terms
of allowing emergency communication systems to be put on the tower, provided the county
entered into an agreement with the applicant. He said that this condition would prevent the
county's hands from being tied in the future if there were a decision to place emergency
communications facilities on the antenna.
Mr. Perez noted that this condition was also replicated in the most recent similar application.
Ms. Spain noted that Mr. Wood was concerned at the community meeting about whether the
guy wires on his property would be removed.
Mr. Perez said they would be removed from Mr. Wood's property and that when the tower first
went up in 1973, no survey was conducted -- but once one was conducted, it was discovered
the guy wires were on Mr. Wood's property. Mr. Perez said this existing condition would be
eliminated with the new tower because it would be self-supporting.
Ms. Spain asked if the tower replacement would prevent Mr. Wood from building a new home
on his property with the new one-to-one setback.
Mr. Perez responded that he asked that question of the zoning office and they said that it
would not prevent Mr. Wood from building a house there. Mr. Perez said the only thing that
would prevent him from building a house there was if the county put conditions on the new
tower of a one-to-one fall zone to put an easement over the area. He stated that without that
condition, Mr. Wood could build a house there if he met all of the other requirements. Mr.
Perez said there was currently an existing tower there, but if it were to be removed and Mr.
Wood wanted to build a house there, there would be nothing in the current application that
would stop him from doing so.
Ms. Spain asked if the county typically designated a fall zone for towers and that it never
occurred to her that they could blow over.
Mr. Perez clarified that this new tower would be self-supporting in that would fall onto itself,
but that did not weigh into his decision to not require a fall zone. Mr. Perez said there were two
—4—
Albemarle County Planning Commission
FINAL March 5,2019
r wr/ ,
reasons why he did not require a fall zone, and one was that there was an existing tower on the
adjacent property that would have a fall zone within the same area, meaning a like use to like
use situation -- which he said was why he would not put the condition on one and not the
other. He added that there was not a second reason.
Mr. Keller opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to speak.
Mr. Greg Duncan stated that he was representing WVIR-TV and was joined by Harold Wright,
general manager of the television station. Mr. Duncan said that Mr. Wright had brought local
television to Charlottesville and Albemarle County. Mr. Duncan said that WVIR now employed
nearly 100 people and had been in the community for 45 years. Mr. Duncan said one of the
main reasons for the application was because Congress had ordered the FCC to reshuffle the
bandwidth available to television stations so the excess bandwidth could be sold to the cellular
industry. Mr. Duncan said that as part of that process, WVIR was shifted to Channel 2 and they
have been ordered to be on the air on Channel 2 no later than September 6, 2019. He stated
that in order to meet this deadline, the station needed to replace the 1972 guy wire tower with
a new tower -- and given Albemarle's dislike of guy wires, they chose a self-supporting tower.
He noted that the current tower did not support the new Channel 2 antenna either from the
FCC or Federal Aviation Administration regulations for ice load for new antennas of this weight.
Mr. Duncan said the current antenna atop the tower weighed 2,660 pounds, and the new
antenna would weigh 14,661 pounds.
Mr. Duncan commented that staff had done an excellent job with their report and that he
would adopt their findings and conclusions in the special use application. He said that he hoped
the Planning Commission would recommend the special use permit, and WVIR had also asked
for a special exception for the lot line setback. Mr. Duncan said that when WVIR first erected
its tower in 1973, it was represented to them that the lessor of the property owned all of the
apple orchard -- but that turned out to be untrue. He stated that the tower that was erected in
1973 sat in very close proximity to the adjacent lot, but it was important to note that there
were no houses or any other structures on the lot within 314 feet of the tower except apple
trees that had been there for over 50 years. He emphasized that the existing tower had been in
harmony since it was built, and the new tower would continue to do so. Mr. Duncan said it was
his understanding that the adjacent landowner did not object to the special exception and that
changing the towers would benefit him because it would result in the removal of a guy wire
that had been encroaching that property for many years.
Mr. Duncan commented that staff had done an excellent job with the special exception but he
didn't support the condition of 35 feet from the adjacent property line. He said the goal was to
put the antenna -- all 78 feet of it -- in exactly the same position in the air that the current
antenna was in. He stated that this may necessitate the shifting of one or more of the feet of
the tower, and a cushion was needed for the builder of the new tower so that the 35-foot
setback wasn't breached. Mr. Duncan stated that the setback of 30 feet was recommended in
advance to ask for permission now rather than forgiveness in the future. He thanked the
Commission for their time.
^5—
Albemarle County Planning Commission
FINAL March 5,2019
No. Nue
Mr. Bivins asked if there were members of the public who wished to speak on the matter.
Mr. Hunter Wood stated that he was the owner of the adjacent lot and that his address was
135 Somerset Farm Drive. He stated that he did not have an objection to the tower now that
the guy wire was going way, and his only concern related to the fact his lot was a residential lot
and his only buildable area was on top of the point. He stated that he wanted 100 percent
assurance that anything done with the tower did not impede his property at all, and he
supported the variance as long as it did not stop him from building on his property in the
future.
Mr. Bivins asked if any of the members of the public wanted to speak.There were none.
Mr. Keller invited the applicant to speak again.
Mr. Duncan said he had nothing else to add.
Mr. Keller asked if commissioners had any additional questions. There were none, and Mr.
Keller closed the public hearing.
Mr. Bivins asked what the process would be for rebuilding if there were an active incident such
as the tornados that hit sections of Alabama over the previous weekend.
Mr. Perez clarified that Mr. Bivins was asking about whether the tower had fallen down, stating
that the applicant would just need to come back for a building permit and that the special use
permit would still stand.
Mr. Herrick said that was correct and that the special use permit would run with the land, so
the holder of the special use permit would have the ability to reconstruct the tower in the same
location under the same conditions.
Mr. Perez said the facility was not tied to a reference tree and was not a Tier II Personal
Wireless Facility.
Ms.Spain asked if there were a way to make sure that he had the ability to build in the future.
Mr. Perez said he got an email from zoning that stated that the question was in the file and that
it was possible that Ms. McCulley could write something declarative -- but to Mr. Perez, the
approval of the permit would not prohibit anything unless the county was to put a fall
easement on the neighboring property.
Ms. Spain said she thought a note clarifying this point from the head of the department would
be reassuring to Mr. Wood.
Albemarle County Planning Commission
FINAL March 5,2019
N
Mr. Keller asked if there was any further discussion from the Commission. Hearing none, he
called for a motion. He asked for Mr. Perez to redisplay the list of motions on the screen.
Ms. Riley made a motion to recommend SP-2018-00020 with conditions as stated in the staff
report.
Ms.Spain seconded the motion.
Mr. Keller asked if there was further discussion. With none, Ms. Blanton called the roll.
The motion was approved by a vote of 6:0(Ms. Firehock was absent).
Mr. Keller said the matter would be moving onto the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Herrick asked Mr. Keller if the Commission would entertain a motion on the special
exception as well.
Mr. Keller said yes and asked if there was a motion.
Ms. Riley made a motion recommending approval of the special exception to modify the
setback for the reasons outlined in the staff report,with the condition that it now read for a 30-
foot setback. Ms. Spain seconded the motion.
Mr. Perez said that the presentation had changed some of the conditions of the staff report for
both the item and noted that it was a little different.
Mr. Herrick asked the Commission for clarification as to whether the motion was to adopt the
conditions as listed in the printed staff report or if in the presentation. He said if the
Commission's wish was to adopt the conditions in the staff report, that would be different.
Ms. Spain asked which interpretation indicated a 30-foot setback.
Ms. Riley said she thought it was the interpretation.
Mr. Perez said that neither stated 30 feet, but a request from the applicant and both the
presentation and the staff report said a 35-foot setback--and the Commission could set it at 30
feet.
Mr. Keller said the Commission could possibly have a discussion.
Mr. Herrick asked if there was an interest in reconsidering the prior motion regarding the
special use permit or if the reconsideration should be related solely to the special exception.
—7—
Albemarle County Planning Commission
FINAL March 5,2019
Now
Ms. Riley said she thought the only changes in the conditions were related to the special
exception. She asked if she should restate the motion.
Mr. Keller said yes.
Ms. Riley moved to recommend approval of the requested special exception to modify the
required setback to 30 feet for the reasons outlined in the staff report, with the conditions
outlined therein.
Mr. Herrick said the last part was probably inconsistent up until the 30-foot requirement being
a condition.
Ms. Riley moved to recommend approval of the requested special exception to modify the
required setback to 30 feet for the reasons outlined in the staff report.
Ms. Spain seconded the motion.
Mr. Keller asked for any further discussion. Hearing none, Ms. Blanton called the roll.
The motion was approved 6:0(Ms. Firehock was absent).
Mr. Keller said he felt the Commission had gotten it, and the matter would move on to the
Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Dotson had a question on the previous action. He stated that staff had indicated there were
minor changes in wording in the conditions that the County Attorney's Office had provided, and
he wanted to know if the Commission moved the printed language or the modified attorney's
language.
Mr. Keller responded that his interpretation was that the Commission had approved the latter.
Mr. Herrick said his recollection of the motion was that what was approved were the conditions
in the staff report,which were the printed conditions rather than what was in the presentation.
Ms. Riley said she read it from the staff report and said she should redo the first motion as well.
Mr. Herrick said there would first need to be a motion to reconsider because the Commission
had already adopted a motion for the printed conditions.
Mr. Keller asked if there was a motion to reconsider.
Mr. Bivins made a motion to reconsider.
Ms. More seconded the motion.
—$—
Albemarle County Planning Commission
FINAL March 5,2019
yyy
toe �I�,{.
Mr. Keller asked if there needed to be a vote.
Mr. Herrick said yes.
Ms. Blanton called the roll and the motion to reconsider passed 6-0,with Ms.Spain abstaining.
Mr. Keller noted that it was moving on to the Board of Supervisors.
Ms. Riley said that she need to make a motion to proceed and needed to see the version of the
motion on the screen to match the appropriate vote.
Ms. Riley made a motion to move approval of SP-2018-020 WVIR-TV Replacement Tower with
conditions stated in the presentation.
Mr. Keller and Ms. More seconded the motion.
Mr. Keller asked if there was any further discussion.
There being none, Ms. Blanton called the roll.
The motion was approved by a vote of 6:0 (Ms. Firehock was absent).
Mr. Keller noted that this first night without Sharon Taylor and that this was the first time in his
five years that they had done any vote like that one. He thanked all the parties and said the
Commission did have it, and that the tower was recommended from the Commission to the
Supervisors for approval. He thanked the applicant and the audience.
SP-2018-00022 Dogtopia
Mr. Benish introduced Mariah Gleason, who he said had been on staff for four months now and
was doing a wonderful job. Mr. Benish said this would be Ms. Gleason's first presentation to the
Planning Commission and that she was a graduate of the University of Virginia.
Ms. Gleason said she had received both an undergraduate in Environmental Sciences and a
graduate degree from UVA from the urban planning program. Since graduation, she said she
had been working in Portland, Oregon for a private architectural firm doing master planning
work for a high-tech company.
Ms. Gleason introduced herself to the Commission and said she was the lead reviewer for the
special use permit for Dogtopia,which had a proposed location along Route 29 north of Lowe's
next to Kegler's Bowling Alley and Schewel's Furniture. Ms. Gleason said the special use permit
was to expand the commercial uses on the site to allow a commercial kennel in an existing
space that would offer daycare, grooming and boarding services. She stated that the proposal
was to build an outdoor play space adjacent to the building space. Ms. Gleason noted that the
—9—
Albemarle County Planning Commission
FINAL March 5,2019
SP201800020— WVIR-TV
Replacement of Existing Television Broadcasting Tower
Board of Supervisors
Public Hearing
May 1, 2019
SP2018-20 is a Special Use Permit request for a Communication Transmission
Facilities in the RA Zoning District. .-r' SPA /0, 2, ��
• It's a replacement application.
• Existing tower was constructed in 1973 w/a building permit (No SP)
The property is owned by: Crown Orchard, LLC
The applicant is: Virginia Broadcasting, LLC C/O Gregory S. Duncan
?At March 5th meeting: PC recommend approval of the SP and the SE to modify the
setback requirements (vote of 6 to 0).
At the meeting the applicant requested to further reduce the setbacks from 35' to 30'
to allow for the developer to rotate the placement of the tower to ensure the
antenna is placed in the same location as the existing tower. /
• Veit/
C-- -- 5 q, /0,3 , I CO
z-)r./
seAsaks
1
4
88 ac
r
Thomas Jefferson
.�. Parkway
1 148 ac 53 ac
Scottsville Road �111
172 ac
1.0W°'
0 257 ac 234 acres
28 ac
153ac s..
/ eft4/\ 160 ac
co`"
466 ac
441
Sa 33ac
VIR- James Monroe
21 __� 488 W N '4,4 Parkway
,,
21 ac r 817 ac s U^
21ac /
The site is TMP 91-28, home of Carter's Mountain
Orchard.
Which is a 234 acre site zoned RA.
Half of the site is open to the public and the other half is
not.
The half that is not is home to an antenna farm.
With a multitude of existing towers and support
equipment.
The surrounding properties are large heavily wooded
2
•
parcels that make up Carter's Mountain, ranging in size
from 21 acres to 817 acres. Some of the surrounding
parcels are vacant, others contain distant historic
properties.
The nearest residence (addressed structure 1539) is
located 3,000' from the proposed tower (marked w a
yellow star).
Green zoning - is Monticello Historic District
2
}
* Surrounding properties are large heavily wooded parcels that make up Carter's
Mountain.
3
NMI
•
Down the hill is
the public apple
p cking area
C i' Tower
9
y
TMP 91-18A Broadcasting Equipment
television station tower A
/ WVIR-TV Replacement Tower
Tower
Tower
Tower
J
)12 . c,
lam- 64,-)--ort-4°
U'atA,-(A-5)
4
314.25'
l',«...;,°*" 240.25'
T 0,2e i .''�' LEASED I ~'�
,...c µco PROPERTY / f `�
c•+u. .L. : A E j ill:
fi_•!tRB)JC
Y RrM o.toRiR
r�� y+w�e�syolMs�i; Gwtu *AU
— . _ I i..6 QLN I'
p
_.._ -...L....._............_.:....._ .. I TOWER MIOF,t r
Y.80'
Replace an existing 314.25' guy-wired TV tower w/ a new 314.25' self-supporting TV
tower in the same location.
A special exception to the (1 to 1) setbacks is required.
The tower dimensions are:
. 240.25' tall tower
total height with TV antenna 314.25'
26' wide at the base
3.5' wide at the top
30' to TMP 91 18A /'
31 1(•
ou n(I�
9 ti
Proposed
41/ Aer
kiladviarnt
Pictures taken from:
Monticello High School
Or
Piedmont Virginia Community College
6
U
Picture taken from behind the towers looking towards Scottsville Road.
7
CO 4
Po tr,
`.
iilei
it
The tower with the star is the proposed replacement tower, with almost the like
tower next to it.
8
Summary and Recommendation
Factors favorable to this request include:
• No detrimental impacts to adjoining properties.
• Reduced visibility by discontinuing the use of the existing guy wires
• The proposal is a redevelopment project which does not involve tree
clearing, grading,or increased impervious surface area.
• The proposed use generates economic activity and supports job
opportunities.
Factors unfavorable to this request include:
• None identified
Factors favorable to this request include:
No detrimental impacts to adjoining properties.
Reduced visibility by discontinuing the use of the existing guy wires
The proposal is a redevelopment project which does not involve tree clearing, grading,
or increased impervious surface area.
The proposed use generates economic activity and supports job opportunities.
Factors unfavorable to this request include:
None identified
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of SP201800020 with conditions,
and recommends approval of the special exception request (to modify the required
setback) with conditions.
9
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
Recommended Condition of Approval for the SP:
1 The development of the site.and any modifications,shall be in general accord with the 2 Prior to the issuance of a building permit.the applicant shall submit and Planning staff
conceptual plan.provided in this staff report as Attachment B.consisting of(a)a survey shall review.the final set of site drawings for construction of the facility to ensure
by Thomas B.Lincoln,dated October 17.2018.last revised October 31.2018.titled compliance with all conditions of the special use permit
'Exhibit Showing WVIR•TV SO Supporting Replacement Tower Lease Arse,"(b)a 3 The facility shall be disassembled and removed from the site within 90 days of the date
preliminary antenna design by AIlanDicli Jampro Antennas,Inc,and(c)an aerial locator its use for television transmission is discontinued.If the Zoning Administrator determines
map depicting the site location(collectively.hereafter'Conceptual Plan'),as determined at any time that surety is required to guarantee that the facility will be removed as
by the Director of Planning and the Zoning Administrator.To be in general accord with the required,the permittee shall furnish to the Zoning Administrator a certified check,a bond
Conceptual Plan,development and use shall reflect the following major elements within with surety satisfactory to the County,ore letter of credit satisfactory to the County,in an
the development essential to the design of the development,including but not limited to amount sufficient for.and conditioned upon,the removal of the facility The type of
all concealment elements and concealment technique,as shown and described on the surety guarantee shall be to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and the County
Conceptual Plan and mentioned below: Attorney.
4 The use,structure or activity for which this permit is issued shall commence no later than
a. The height of the tower may not exceed 240.25 feet and the top of any antenna September 8.2020 The term'Commence'shall mean commencement of the structure
may not exceed 314.25 feet above ground level No equipment,with the that is necessary for mounting the television antenna,
exception of any FAA required flight safety lighting.may extend more than 50
feet above the top of any antenna:
b. The width of each side of the tower may not exceed 26 feet at its base,and 3.5
feet at the top.
c The colors of the tower shall be red and white
d. Antennas that support services other than television broadcasting may not be
attached to the facility.
e. Only those satellite and microwave dishes that are necessary to support the
transmission of television signal(s)shall be permitted on the tower or the
television antenna.
f No guy w res shall be permitted. Recommended Condition of Approval for the SE:
g Notwithstanding the above conditions,additional facilities.including equipment.
antennas,and microwave dishes necessary for emergency communications I. The tower shall be located no closer than 30'to the adjacent property line(IMP 91.18A).
system(s).may be placed on this tower if the applicant and lessee of the tower
enter into an agreement with the County to do so.
Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be
made to ensure compliance with the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance
These conditions are listed in the,solutions.
co/oc4017,00.... �^ �� ��• ,
,DelT.el, +ID /9
4/fes. ,„1-,z,weiS (
rd7Lb �re.�ev'
10
Two Separate Motions:
Motion 1 for the Special Exception:
A.Should the Board of Supervisors choose to approve the requested special exception:
I move to approve the requested special exception to modify the required setback for the reasons outlined
in the staff report and with the conditions provided in the resolution.
B.Should the Board of Supervisors choose to deny the requested special exception:
I move to deny the requested special exception to modify the required setback.
Motion 2 for the Special Use Permit:
A.Should the Board of Supervisors choose to approve SP2018-20:
I move to approve the requested special use permit for the reasons outlined in the staff report
and with the conditions provided in the resolution.
B.Should the Board of Supervisors choose to deny SP2018-20:
I move to deny the requested special use permit.
11