Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200700064 Legacy Document 2007-08-28of ALg� �'IRGIl`11P ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SDP 07 -064: Verizon Staff: Megan Yaniglos, Brent Nelson Wireless — Mechums River/ Barrell Estate Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Hearing: September 4, 2007 N/A Owners: Herbert Crafts Barrell Estate, C/O Applicant: Cellco Partnership D /B /A Verizon Frances Barrell Wireless Acreage: 34.23 Acres Rezone from: Not applicable (Lease Area: 2,182 square feet) Special Use Permit for: Not applicable TMP: Tax Map 72, Parcel 43B By -right use: RA, Rural Areas and EC, Location: South of Crozet at the end of Entrance Corridor Zoning Shelton Mill Road (Route 683), between the end of state maintenance and 1 -64. Magisterial District: White Hall Proffers /Conditions: No Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A DA - X RA - Proposal: Proposal to install a Tier 11 Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in personal wireless service treetop facility Rural Area 3 with 109 -foot tall steel monopole tower Character of Property: Pasture/ agricultural Use of Surrounding Properties: Single - field and forested land; The site also contains family Residential and Agriculture two existing personal wireless facilities. Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1. No clearing or significant grading is none necessary for installation of the facility because the access has already been established. 2. The lease area for the ground equipment and monopole is not located on critical slopes or other significant features identified in the Open Space Plan. 3. The Architectural Review Board has approved the location. 4. Two existing monopoles are established within proximity to the proposed monopole. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. STAFF CONTACT: PLANNING COMMISSION: AGENDA TITLE: PROPERTY OWNER: Megan Yaniglos; Brent Nelson September 4, 2007 SDP 07 -064: Mechums River/ Barrell Estate- Verizon Wireless Herbert Crafts Barrell Estate, C/O Frances Barrell APPLICANT: Cellco Partnership D/B /A Verizon Wireless PROPOSAL: This is a proposal to install a Tier II personal wireless service treetop facility (Attachment A). The proposed facility consists of a 109 -foot tall steel monopole, painted with Sherwin Williams Java Brown, which is a matte enamel color that has been previously approved as an appropriate color for Tier II facilities at other sites in Albemarle County. The top elevation of the monopole is 729 feet, measured above sea level (ASL). The proposed monopole will be 4 feet higher than the identified reference tree located 40 feet southwest of the lease area. The monopole will be equipped with an array featuring three (3) flush - mounted panel antennas, as well as a two (2) foot long lightning rod. Supporting ground equipment will be contained within a prefabricated equipment shelter measuring 12'x30' at the base of the tower. This shelter will be surrounded by a six foot tall screening fence which will also be painted matte brown. The lease area for the proposed facility is located on property described as Tax Map 72, Parcel 43B, which is approximately 34 acres and is zoned RA, Rural Areas and EC, Entrance Corridor (Attachment B). The site is located south of Crozet at the end of Shelton Mill Road (Route 683), between the end of state maintenance and I -64. This application has been submitted in accordance with Section 10.2.1(22) of the Zoning Ordinance, which allows for Tier II wireless facilities by right in the Rural Areas. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area in Rural Area 3. CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The proposed site is located on a hillside approximately 940 feet north of the I -64 right -of -way at the Mechums River Crossing, 100 feet above the westbound lane. The proposed lease area is situated in close proximity to two (2) existing wireless facilities (T- Mobile, Alltel) and is adjoined along the south edge by a tree line running down the hillside. The parcel includes a residence with outbuildings and other farm structures. All properties adjacent to the subject parcel are zoned Rural Areas (RA). The nearest dwellings to this site are 750 feet away to the northeast of the site. PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: SP 99 -062 CFW CV Route 638 / Interstate 64 (T- Mobile) Approval granted for request to install a 95- foot tall monopole tower with associated equipment cabinet. This tower is still in place and will remain after installation of the new facility. SP 00 -029 Alltel/ Mechums River Approval granted for request to install a 95- foot tall monopole tower with associated equipment cabinet. This tower is still in place and will remain after installation of the new facility. STAFF COMMENT: Section 3.1 provides the following definitions that are relevant to this proposal: Tier II personal wireless service facility: A personal wireless service facility that is a treetop facility not located within an avoidance area. Treetop facility: A personal wireless service facility consisting of a self - supporting monopole having a single shaft of wood, metal or concrete no more than ten (10) feet taller than the crown of the tallest tree within twenty -five (25) feet of the monopole, measured above sea level (ASL), and includes associated antennas, mounting structures, an equipment cabinet and other essential personal wireless service equipment. Avoidance area: An area having significant resources where the siting of personal wireless service facilities could result in adverse impacts as follows: (i) any ridge area where a personal wireless service facility would be skylighted; (ii) a parcel within an agricultural and forestal district; (iii) a parcel within a historic district; (iv) any location in which the proposed personal wireless service facility and three (3) or more existing or approved personal wireless service facilities would be within an area comprised of a circle centered anywhere on the ground having a radius of two hundred (200) feet; or (v) any location within two hundred (200) feet of any state scenic highway or by -way. Section 5.1.40(d), "Tier II facilities" states: "Each Tier II facility may be established upon commission approval of an application satisfying the requirements of subsection 5.1.40(a) and demonstrating that the facility will be installed and operated in compliance with all applicable provisions of this chapter, criteria (1) through (8) below, and satisfying all conditions of the architectural review board. The commission shall act on each application within the time periods established in section 32.4.2.6. The commission shall approve each application, without conditions, once it determines that all of these requirements have been satisfied. If the commission denies an application, it shall identify which requirements were not satisfied and inform the applicant what needs to be done to satisfy each requirement. " The applicant has submitted an application that satisfies the requirements set forth in Section 5.1.40(a) and has performed a balloon test at the location of the proposed facility (Attachments C and D). The Architectural Review Board reviewed this request for compliance with the County's design guidelines for the entrance corridor and recommended approval. Section 5.1.40(d)(1): The facility shall comply with subsection 5.1.40(b) and subsection 5.1.40(c)(2) through (9). Staff has determined that the proposed facility's location complies with all of the exemptions of Section 5.1.40(b) and the proposed equipment meets all relevant design, mounting and size criteria that are set forth in Section 5.1.40(c)(2) and (3). The remainder of subsection (c) provides requirements that are subject to enforcement if the facility is approved. 3 Section 5.1.40(d)(2): The site shall provide adequate opportunities for screening and the facility shall be sited to minimize its visibility from adjacent parcels and streets, regardless of their distance from the facility. If the facility would be visible from a state scenic river or a national park or national forest, regardless of whether the site is adjacent thereto, the facility also shall be sited to minimize its visibility from such river, park or forest. If the facility would be located on lands subject to a conservation easement or an open space easement, the facility shall be sited to so that it is not visible from any resources specifically identified for protection in the deed of easement. The proposed facility includes a monopole that would have a height of approximately 729 feet above sea level (ASL). The height of the reference tree is approximately 725 feet ASL and is located 40 feet southwest of the proposed monopole. The existing Alltel monopole tower has an approximate height of 661 feet ASL. The existing T- Mobile monopole has an approximate height of 590 feet ASL. During the site visit, staff observed a test balloon that was floated at the approximate height of the proposed monopole. The balloon was visible from the I -64 entrance corridor, but minimally so. When visible, it was seen for a short distance from the westbound lane through trees and from the eastbound lane above trees. The trees did not provide a backdrop for the balloon, so when it was visible, it was sky -lit. The low level of its visibility is not expected to have a negative impact on the I -64 entrance corridor. Based on the information above, it is staff's opinion that the proposed facility will be minimally visible from adjacent parcels and streets. Section 5.1.40(d)(3): The facility shall not adversely impact resources identified in the county's open space plan. Staff's analysis of this request addresses the concern for the possible loss of aesthetic or historic resources. The proposed lease area is not delineated as a significant resource on the Open Space Plan Map (Attachment F). In addition, the installation of this tower within the 2,182 square foot lease area will not require the removal of any existing trees, according to the applicant. Therefore, staff believes there is no significant loss of resources related to the installation of the tower. The County's wireless service facilities policy encourages facilities with limited visibility, facilities with adequate wooded backdrop, and facilities that do not adversely impact Avoidance Areas (including Entrance Corridors and historic resources). The proposed pole is expected to be visible for a relatively short period of time when traveling on I -64 (an entrance corridor). The degree of visibility is not expected to have a negative impact on the EC based on these findings. The Architectural Review Board has approved the location with conditions (Attachment G). Therefore, staff feels the visibility of the monopole will not adversely impact the resources of the entrance corridor or historic districts. Section 5.1.40(d)(4): The facility shall not be located so that it and three (3) or more existing or approved personal wireless service facilities would be within an area comprised of a circle centered anywhere on the ground having a radius of two hundred (200) feet. There are two existing personal wireless service facilities located adjacent to the lease site for the proposed facility. El Section 5.1.40(d)(5): The maximum base diameter of the monopole shall be thirty (30) inches and the maximum diameter at the top of the monopole shall be eighteen (18) inches. Notes on the construction plans for this facility propose a monopole that will have a base dimension of maximum 30 inches and top dimension of maximum 18 inches. These dimensions comply with the maximum width requirements for treetop monopoles serving Tier II facilities. Section 5.1.40(d)(6): The top of the monopole, measured in elevation above mean sea level, shall not exceed the height approved by the commission. The approved height shall not be more than seven (7) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty-five (25) feet of the monopole, and shall include any base, foundation or grading that raises the pole above the pre- existing natural ground elevation; provided that the height approved by the commission may be up to ten (10) feet taller than the tallest tree if the owner of the facility demonstrates to the satisfaction of the commission that there is not a material difference in the visibility of the monopole at the proposed height, rather than at a height seven (7) feet taller than the tallest tree; and there is not a material difference in adverse impacts to resources identified in the county's open space plan caused by the monopole at the proposed height, rather than at a height seven (7) feet taller than the tallest tree. The applicant may appeal the commissioner's denial of a modification to the board of supervisors as provided in subsection 5.1.40(d)(12). As mentioned previously in this report, the proposed monopole that would have a height of approximately 729 feet above sea level (ASL). The height of the reference tree is approximately 725 feet ASL. Therefore, since the proposed monopole is only four (4) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty -five (25) feet, the proposed monopole meets this requirement. Section 5.1.40(d)(7): Each wood monopole shall be a dark brown natural wood color; each metal or concrete monopole shall be painted a brown wood color to blend into the surrounding trees. The antennas, supporting brackets, and all other equipment attached to the monopole shall be a color that closely matches that of the monopole. The ground equipment, the ground equipment cabinet, and the concrete pad shall also be a color that closely matches that of the monopole, provided that the ground equipment and the concrete pad need not be of such a color if they are enclosed within or behind an approved structure, facade or fencing that: (i) is a color that closely matches that of the monopole; (ii) is consistent with the character of the area; and (iii) makes the ground equipment and concrete pad invisible at any time of year from any other parcel or a public or private street. The applicant is proposing the installation of a facility with a metal monopole. The proposed color for the tower and for the screening fence is a brown paint that has been used previously in Albemarle County. A note on the construction plans identifies the proposed flat dark brown color of the antennas, ground equipment, and antennae for this facility as Java Brown, manufactured by Sherwin Williams. Section 5.1.40(d)(8): Each wood monopole shall be constructed so that all cables, wiring and similar attachments that run vertically from the ground equipment to the antennas are placed on the pole to face the interior of the property and away from public view, as determined by the agent. Metal monopoles shall be constructed so that vertical cables, wiring and similar attachments are contained within the monopole's structure. 0 Schematic drawings provided in the construction plan packet indicate that the vertical wires extending from the ground equipment to the antennas shall be contained within the monopole structure. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of The Telecommunications Act of 1996: The regulation of the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless facilities by any state or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. The Telecommunications Act addresses concerns for environmental effects with the following language, "No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commissions' regulations concerning such emissions." In order to operate the proposed facility, the applicant is required to meet the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions. These requirements will adequately protect the public health and safety. It is staff's opinion that the denial of this application would not have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless communication services. SUMMARY: Staff has identified factors which are favorable and unfavorable to this proposal: Factors favorable to this request include: 1. No clearing or significant grading is necessary for installation of the facility because the access has already been established, 2. The lease area for the ground equipment and monopole is not located on critical slopes or other significant features identified in the Open Space Plan. 3. The Architectural Review Board has approved the location based on lack of visibility from the I -64 Entrance Corridor. 4. Two existing monopoles are established within proximity to the proposed monopole. Factors unfavorable to this request include: none Staff recommends approval for this submittal. In order to comply with Section 5.1.40(d) of the Zoning Ordinance, the Planning Commission is required to provide the applicant with a statement regarding the basis for denial and all items that will have to be addressed to satisfy each requirement. ATTACHMENTS: A. Site Plan B. Vicinity Map C1 C. Applicant Justification Letter D. Balloon photos at proposed location E. Balloon view from I -64 F. Composite Map from Open Space Plan G. ARB action