HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200700158 Legacy Document 2008-02-12o� arm
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SDP 2007 -158 Vest Property/
Staff: Gerald Gatobu Senior Planner, Philip
Verizon Tier II PWSF
Custer Civil Engineer
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
February 12, 2008
N/A
Owners: Carl L Vest
Applicant: Cellco Partnership D /B /A
Verizon wireless
Acreage: 2.85 Acres
Rezone from: Not applicable
(Lease Area: 3,500 square feet)
Special Use Permit for: Not applicable
TMP: Tax Map 109, Parcel 43C1
By -right use: RA, Rural Area
Location: 5471 Murrays Lane (State Route
718) approximately 960 feet east of the
intersection of [State Route 718] Murrays
Lane and [State Route 29], Monacan Trail in
a wooded area below the ridgeline of Cook
Mountain.
Magisterial District: Samuel Miller
Proffers /Conditions: No
Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A
DA - RA - X
Proposal: Request for approval of a
Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in
treetop personal wireless service facility
Rural Area 3
with a steel monopole that would be
approximately 107 feet tall (8 feet AMSL
above the height of the tallest tree within
25 feet)
Character of Property: Forested with a
Use of Surrounding Properties: Single -
single family dwelling
family Residential
Factors Favorable: See Report
Factors Unfavorable: See Report
Zoning Ordinance Waivers and Recommendations:
1. Section 5.1.40.d Tier II Personal Wireless Facility- Staff recommends approval of this
personal wireless service facility. Based on findings presented in the staff report, staff
recommends approval at the proposed height of eight (8) feet above the reference tree.
2. Waiver of Section 4.2 — disturbance of critical slopes — Staff recommends approval of the
critical slopes waiver.
STAFF CONTACT:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
AGENDA TITLE:
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
Gerald Gatobu; Philip Custer
February 12, 2008
SDP 07 -158: Vest Property/ Verizon Wireless Tier II
Carl L Vest
Cellco Partnership DB /A Verizon wireless
PROPOSAL:
This is a proposal to install a Tier II personal wireless service treetop facility [Attachment A].
The treetop personal wireless service facility will consist of a steel monopole that would be
approximately 107 feet tall [8 feet AMSL above the height of the tallest tree within 25 feet].
Supporting ground equipment and an emergency stand alone generator will be contained within a
prefabricated equipment shelter measuring 12' x 30'x 10.58' (W x L x H) at the base of the
tower. The lease area for the proposed facility is located on property described as Tax Map 109,
Parcel 43C I, which is approximately 2.85 acres and is zoned RA, Rural Areas (Attachment B).
The site is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on 5471Murrays Lane (State Route
718) approximately 960 feet east of the intersection of (State Route 718) Murrays Lane and
(State Route 29) Monacan Trail.
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 RA residential zoning
district. This application also includes a request for a modification of Albemarle County Code
Section 4.2 in order to allow disturbance of critical slopes for the construction of this facility.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Rural Area in Rural Area 3.
CHARACTER OF THE AREA:
The proposed site is located approximately 960 feet east of the right -of -way for US 29 in a
heavily wooded area below the ridgeline of Cook Mountain [Attachment B]. Access to the
personal wireless facility will be provided from the eastern side of US 29 by way of Murrays
Lane [State Route 718] along a private gravel road that provides access for both a dwelling and
an existing Alltel personal wireless facility on an adjacent parcel (TMP 109/43D).
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
There is no planning and zoning history related to this property.
DISCUSSION:
The lease area is in an open space below the Cook Mountain ridge line. The property is
predominantly composed of areas of critical slopes, therefore the applicant has requested a
waiver of section 4.2 in order to allow disturbance of critical slopes for an access way and
grading related to the siting of the tower [Attachment C]. The Planning Commission will need to
act on the critical slopes waiver request, and make findings on the appropriateness of the
proposed personal wireless facility. This staff report addresses each item separately. The
Planning Commission must act on both items. Items to be addressed are:
N
1. Section 5.1.40.d Tier II Personal Wireless Service Facilities
2. Waiver of Section 4.2 — disturbance of critical slopes
1. REVIEW OF TIER II PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY
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 D
and E]. Architectural Review Board review is not required for this submittal because the parcel is
in the entrance corridor.
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 107 feet
above ground level (AGL) or 917.5 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the
reference tree is approximately 909.5 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and is located 23.5 feet
east of the proposed monopole.
A balloon test was conducted on January 4th, 2008 [Attachments D and E]. 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 Murrays Lane and U.S Route 29, but minimally so.
When visible, it was seen for a short distance on the US Route 29. Surrounding trees provided a
backdrop for the balloon, preventing the balloon from being skylighted. The low level of
visibility is not expected to have a negative impact on the surrounding properties.
The location is approximately 960 feet east of [State Route 29] Monacan Trail. In addition, the
existing hillside is wooded, and the monopole will be "Java Brown" in color. The equipment
shelter will be finished with a brown color and an aggregate stone finish, which blends well with
the surrounding wooded area. This low level of visibility is not expected to have a negative
impact.
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. Portions of the parcel are located within the Mountain Overlay District. However, the
proposed lease area is not located in the District and is well below the ridgeline. The proposed
lease area is not delineated as a significant resource on the Open Space and Critical Resources
Plan. 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 degree of visibility is not
expected to have a negative impact on the Entrance Corridor and does not require review from
the Architectural Review Board. Therefore, staff feels the visibility of the monopole will not
adversely impact the resources of the entrance corridor or historic districts.
A tree conservation plan, with measures limiting impacts on remaining trees will be submitted
prior to building permit application.
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 is one other personal wireless facility located 160 feet to the northwest on an abutting
parcel.
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 site plan for this facility propose a monopole diameter not to exceed 30 inches at
the base or 18 inches at the top. 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 ofsupervisors as provided in subsection 5.1.40(d) (12).
As mentioned previously in this report, a balloon test was conducted on January 4th, 2008
[Attachments D and E]. During the site visit, staff observed a test balloon that was floated at the
approximate height of the proposed monopole. The proposed monopole would have a height of
approximately 917.5 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is
approximately 909.5 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The proposed monopole will be eight
(8) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty -five (25) feet. The height approved by the
Planning 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 10 feet above the tallest tree. Based on the
balloon test mentioned above, staff recommends approval of the proposed personal wireless
facility at the proposed height of eight (8) feet above the tallest tree.
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, fagade or fencing that: (i) is a color
5
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 monopole and all antennas will be painted Sherwin Williams Java Brown #6090. This is a
color that has been applied to previously approved personal wireless facilities. The prefabricated
shelter to be installed at the facility will have siding that is a natural dark brown color and
aggregate stone finish
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.
All coaxial cables and service lines running vertically from the transmitting equipment to the
antennas will be located inside the monopole.
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.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility.
Based on findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval at the proposed height
of 8 feet above the reference tree.
2. CRITICAL SLOPES WAIVER
The proposed facility will require the disturbance of critical slopes for the construction of the cell
tower, fenced enclosure, and access path. A modification to allow critical slopes disturbance is
necessary before the proposed personal wireless service facility site plan can be approved by the
Planning Commission. The request for a modification has been reviewed for both the
Engineering and Planning impacts. Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance restricts earth -
disturbing activity on critical slopes, while Section 4.2.5(b) allows the Planning Commission to
waive this restriction. The applicant has submitted a request and justification for the waiver
[Attachment C], and staff has analyzed this request to address the provisions of the Ordinance.
The critical slopes in the area of this request do not appear to be man -made [Attachment F].
Co
Staff has reviewed this waiver request with consideration for the concerns that are set forth in
Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, entitled "Critical Slopes." These concerns have been
addressed directly through the analysis provided herein, which is presented in two parts, based
on the Section of the Ordinance each pertains to.
Section 4.2.5(a)
Review of the request by Current Development Engineering staff:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The critical slope disturbance on parcel 109 -43C1 will be needed for the construction of the cell
tower, fenced enclosure, and access path. The disturbed critical slope is an area of mature
hardwood trees sloping towards the house at approximately 30 %.
Areas
Acres
Total site
2.85 acres approximately
Critical slopes
—2.42
85% of site
Critical slopes disturbed
—0.10
4% of critical slopes
Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without reasonable
alternative locations:
The disturbance to construct the driveway to the fenced enclosure is exempt for the critical slope
requirements. [4.2.6c] the combined area of the exempted critical slope disturbance (which has
been included in the above calculations) is 0.03 acres. This area is approximately 30% of the
critical slope disturbance.
Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18 -4.2:
"movement of soil and rock"
Construction of the building and other site features will most likely require a temporary
increased flow down the critical slopes during a rain event. Movement of soil can be caught
with an appropriate sediment trapping measure before site runoff enters the existing
stormwater system.
"excessive stormwater runoff'
The changing of site characteristics will increase storm runoff by an insignificant amount.
"siltation"
Proper stabilization and maintenance will ensure long term stability.
"loss of aesthetic resource"
Staff has analyzed the impact on aesthetic resources in previous portions of this report. No
loss of aesthetic resources is anticipated.
"septic effluent"
This site will not require septic facilities.
Based on the review above, there are no engineering concerns with the proposed disturbance to
critical slopes that cannot be alleviated with the standard engineering and erosion control
practices proposed by the applicant.
7
Review of the request by Current Development Planning staff.
Summary of review of modification of Section 4.2:
Section 4.2. S establishes the review process and criteria for granting a waiver of Section 4.2.3.
The preceding comments by staff address the provisions of Section 4.2.5(a). Staff has included
the provisions of Section 4.2.5(b) here, along with staff comment on the various provisions.
The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon
finding that:
1. Strict application of the requirements of section 4.2 would not forward the purposes of
this chapter or otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare, or that alternatives
proposed by the developer would satisfy the purposes of section 4.2 to at least an
equivalent degree; or (Added 11- 15 -89)
The applicant has chosen to locate the personal wireless facility so that the
tower /monopole is not skylighted, and is adequately screened. In order for the placement
of this facility to take advantage of the backdrop of trees, disturbance of critical slopes is
necessary. Since this is a personal wireless service facility proposal; a relatively small
area of disturbance (0.1 acres or 4 percent of critical slope disturbance) is required. Strict
application of the requirement of section 4.2 in this case would not forward the purposes
of this chapter.
2. Due to its unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or
other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interest of the developer, the
requirements of section 4.2 would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of
the property or would result in significant degradation of the site or adjacent properties.
Such modification or waiver shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety or
welfare, to the orderly development of the area, or to adjacent properties, or be contrary
to sound engineering practices; or (Added 11- 15 -89)
Requirements of section 4.2 would not effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the
use of the property and would not result in significant degradation of the site or adjacent
properties. Similarly, the approval of this critical slopes waiver shall not be detrimental
to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, or to
adjacent properties, or be contrary to sound engineering practices.
3. Granting such modification or waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import
than would be served by strict application of section 4.2. (Added 11- 15 -89)
Granting the waiver would allow Verizon wireless to offer an additional choice of
personal wireless communication to the public. The question of whether this personal
wireless service facility would serve a public purpose of greater import than would be
served by strict application of section 4.2 is debatable.
RECOMMENDATION:
The locating of this personal wireless facility at this location allows for no sky lighting and
enhances screening from adjacent roads [Murrays Lane and State Route 29]. In order for this
facility to take advantage of a natural backdrop of trees, disturbance of critical slopes is
necessary. Engineering analysis has found that minimal disturbance (0.1 acres or 4 percent of
critical slope disturbance) is required. Staff recommends approval of the critical slopes waiver
based on positive engineering and planning analysis.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified factors favorable and unfavorable to this proposal:
Factors favorable to this request include:
1. The lease area for the ground equipment and monopole are not located on significant
features identified in the Open Space Master Plan.
2. The monopole is located so that it is not skylighted, and has a significant back drop of
existing trees.
Factors unfavorable to this request include:
1. The disturbance of critical slopes is necessary for the construction of the facility.
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
C. Applicant Justification Letter
D. Balloon photos at proposed location
E. Balloon photos from US 29
F. Critical Slopes Map
X