HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB200800065 Staff Report 2008-06-06ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
Project #: Name
ARB- 2008 -65: Easton Estate (Verizon Wireless) Tier II
Review Type
Preliminary Review of a Site Development Plan
Parcel Identification
Tax Map 79A1, Block C, Parcel 35
Location
3492 Richmond Road, on the north side of Route 250 East, across from the
entrance to Glenmore
Zoned
Rural Areas (RA), Entrance Corridor (EC)
Owner
Raymond H. Easton Estate c/o Augusta Crawford Easton
Applicant
Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless (Stephen Waller, AICP)
Magisterial District
Scottsville
Proposal
To construct a treetop personal wireless service facility consisting of an
84.5'- tall steel monopole and related ground equipment.
ARB Meeting Date
June 16, 2008
Staff Contact
Brent Nelson
SITE/PROJECT HISTORY
• The Architectural Review Board has not reviewed any previous proposals for this parcel.
• SDP 2008 -75, Easton - Verizon, Application for Preliminary Site Development Plan to be reviewed by
the Albemarle County Planning Commission on July 12, 2008.
PROJECT DETAILS
The applicant proposes to establish a telecommunications facility consisting of the following items in a 50' x
50' (2,500 sf) lease area:
• Proposed steel monopole, painted SW #6090 Java Brown, 84.5' tall (489 AMSL), height 10' above
top of reference tree (Tree #296, 18" caliper). Reference tree drip line is 5' from the pole.
• Proposed ground equipment to be in 6 steel cabinets, painted SW #6090 Java Brown, located on a steel
platform (10' wide x 30' long) supported by 6 concrete piers. The lease area is located near a large
drainage swale, and this arrangement would allow the applicant to more easily remove the equipment
in the event of a flood.
• Generator on 6'x10' concrete pad.
• Coaxial cables, internal to pole.
• Three panel antennas painted SW #6090 Java Brown, each measuring 72.22" x 6.06" x 4.13 ",
installed with pipe mounts permitting down tilting not to exceed a maximum of 12" between face of
pole and face of antenna. Top elevation of each antenna same as top elevation of monopole.
• 1" diameter lightning rod to extend no more than 2' above top of monopole.
• Wooden privacy fence and gate.
ARB 6/16/2008 Easton (Verizon) - Page 1
Other pertinent information:
0 Access to site provided by an existing private driveway on the north side of Route 250E.
• Ground elevation of pole is 404.0.
0 18' reference tree is 73' tall (479' AMSL).
CONTEXT
The proposed site is located on a residential parcel adjoining the north side of the Route 250E EC and the
south side of the I -64E EC. The parcel is located directly across from (north of) the entrance to the Glenmore
subdivision. The lease area is situated at the rear (north) end of the parcel, 39' south of the I -64E right -of -way.
The section of the site containing the lease area is heavily wooded and situated approximately 25' below the
elevation where Route 250E adjoins the property, and approximately 10' below the elevation of the adjacent I-
64E travelway.
ANALYSIS based on Civil Drawings T -1, BT -I, C -1, C -IA, C -113, C -2, C -2A, C -213, C -2C, C -213, C -3, C -4,
A -1 all with a latest revision date of 4/25/08.
Issue: Visibility
Comments: ARB staff attended a balloon test on May 30, 2008. In an effort to avoid tree branches directly
above the proposed tower location, the balloon was launched from a location approximately 8' north of the
location of the proposed tower. The balloon was raised to the same height as the proposed pole, 10' above the
reference tree. The balloon was not visible from any point along the eastbound or westbound lanes of 1 -64.
Staff considers the location of the balloon a sufficient approximation of the pole location. The balloon was
visible for a distance of approximately 20' along the Route 250E EC. As a comparison, the balloon was
lowered so that it approximated the pole at only 7' above the reference tree. At both elevations the balloon was
sky -lit; however, there was not a material difference in the visibility of the balloon at the 2 heights. Visibility of
this pole at either height is not expected to have any negative impacts on either the Route 250E or I -64
Entrance Corridors. The ground equipment is not expected to be visible from either the Route 250E EC or I -64
EC.
Recommendations: None.
Issue: Concrete Piers/Proposed Grading/Impacts on Existing Trees to Remain
Comments: Sheet C -2A Grading Plan shows proposed fill grades beyond the limits of the lease area. The
applicant is proposing a gravel surface inside the equipment yard with a wooden fence and gate along the
perimeter. Adverse impacts from the gravel surface and fencing on the existing trees to remain are expected to
be negligible. Possible impacts on the trees from the concrete piers, generator pad, and proposed fill grades are
not clear from the information provided in this application. Verification is needed from a certified arborist that
the proposed fill, and the grading and/or digging required to install the concrete piers and concrete generator
pad would not be detrimental to the health of the trees designated as remaining. The applicant has indicated
that a tree conservation plan, with measures limiting impacts on existing trees to remain, will be submitted
prior to the application for the building permit. The tree conservation plan will need to be reviewed and
approved before the Certificate of Appropriateness can be issued.
Recommendations: Provide verification from a certified arborist that the proposed fill grades, and digging
required to install the concrete piers and generator pad will not be detrimental to the health of any trees
designated to remain. Provide a tree conservation plan with measures proposed that would limit impacts of this
proposal on all existing trees designated to remain. Include any additional recommendations from the arborist
for maintaining the health of the trees on the drawings.
ARB 6/16/2008 Easton (Verizon) - Page 2
Issue: Missing/Incorrect Information
Comments:
• Sheet C -3 Elevation View contains Note 5 New shelter to have an aggregate finish. The applicant is
not proposing the use of an equipment shelter.
• The application drawings refer to the reference tree as a Persium tree; however, there is no such
species.
• The applicant has verbally indicated that dead pine trees located south of the lease area would be
removed to allow for access by construction equipment. This tree removal is not expected to increase
visibility of the pole; however, the location of these trees, and the intention to remove them, should be
noted on the application drawings.
Recommendations:
• Revise Sheet C -3 Elevation View by removing Note 5 New shelter to have an aggregate finish.
• Revise all applicable drawings by correctly indentifying the reference tree species.
• Revise all applicable drawings by showing the location of the existing dead pine trees and noting their
removal. Revise the Tree Inventory on Sheet C -lA to list the trees that are to be removed.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion:
1. Anticipated visibility of the monopole from the EC.
2. Impacts, by grading and site design, on existing trees to remain.
Staff recommends approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness, with the following conditions:
1. Provide verification from a certified arborist that the proposed fill grades, and digging required to install
the concrete piers and generator pad will not be detrimental to the health of any trees designated to remain.
Provide a tree conservation plan with measures proposed that would limit impacts of this proposal on all
existing trees designated to remain. Include any additional recommendations from the arborist for
maintaining the health of the trees on the drawings. Revise Sheet C -3 Elevation View by removing Note 5
New shelter to have an aggregate finish.
2. Revise all applicable drawings by correctly indentifying the reference tree species.
3. Revise all applicable drawings by showing the location of the existing dead pine trees and noting their
removal. Revise the Tree Inventory on Sheet C -lA to list the trees that are to be removed.
ARB 6/16/2008 Easton (Verizon) - Page 3