Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201100029 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2012-02-08Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 10:27 AM To: 'stephen.waller @gdnsites.com' Subject: Keswick Tier III Tower - CD2 Comments Stephen, As discussed over the phone on Friday Feb 3, 2012 I am providing additional comments for SP201100029. This email shall serve as the second official comment letter. 1. [ 5.1.40(a)5] Photographs, where possible, or perspective drawings of the facility site and all existing facilities within two hundred (200) feet of the site, if any, and the area surrounding the site. As previously commented on and acknowledged by the applicant with the resubmittal sheet for the elan. This application reauires photo renderinas of the existing tower and photo simulations of the proposed tower within 200 feet of the site for consideration. 2. [5.1.40 (a)(4d)] Identification of each paint color on the facility, by manufacturer color name and color number. A paint chip or sample shall be provided for each color. Currently. t�pplication requires a modification for this reauirement. Either reauest the modification pursuant to the reauirements of Section 5.1 - Supplementary ReLyulations. or revise the plan to identifv each paint color for the facilitv and provide the required paint chips. 3. [5.1.40(c)(4)] Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a tree conservation plan prepared by a certified arborist. The plan shall be submitted to the agent for review and approval to assure that all applicable requirements have been satisfied. The plan shall specify tree protection methods and procedures, and identify all existing trees to be removed on the parcel for the installation, operation and maintenance of the facility. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the agent, the applicant shall not remove existing trees within the lease area or within one hundred (100) feet in all directions surrounding the lease area of any part of the facility. In addition, the agent may identify additional trees or lands up to two hundred (200) feet from the lease area to be included in the plan. Prior to issuance of a building permit the plans shall be revised to provide a tree conservation plan for the site prepared by a certified arborist. If no trees are _going to be disturbed then a letter or some type of documentation signed by a certified arborist shall be provided which specifies tree protection methods and procedures, this letter shall state that no trees will be harmed. 4. [5.1.40(c)(5)] The installation, operation and maintenance of the facility shall be conducted in accordance with the tree conservation plan. Dead and dying trees identified by the arborist's report may be removed if so noted on the tree conservation plan. If tree removal is later requested that was not approved by the agent when the tree conservation plan was approved, the applicant shall submit an amended plan. The agent may approve the amended plan if the proposed tree removal will not adversely affect the visibility of the facility from any location off of the parcel. The agent may impose reasonable conditions to assure that the purposes of this paragraph are achieved. Prior to issuance of a building permit the plans shall be revised to provide a tree conservation plan for the site prepared by a certified arborist. If no trees are going to be disturbed then a letter or some type of documentation signed by a certified arborist shall be provided which specifies tree protection methods and procedures, this letter shall state that no trees will be harmed. 5. In both of the previous SPs of the property the original conditions of approval required that "No existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the facility shall be removed." Please include this same statement on the plan, preferably on sheet C -1. 6. During the review of the revised plan it has been noted that on sheet C -3 the proposed elevation view at 90' (the second depiction of the tower) lists the 3 relocated dualband and 3 new LTE antennas as "Flush Mounted Antenna Array Attached to Tower Legs ". However for this proposal this is not the case being alternative mounts are being utilized which deviates from the Flush Mounting style. To avoid confusion please revise the depiction's note appropriately. 7. During the review of the revised plan it has been noted that on sheet C -1 the adjacent property Tax Map 94 -39 which is split zoned RA and C -1 is labeled as 94 -41A1 and only listed as RA zoning. Please revise the depiction appropriately. 8. To better assess the alternative options for this collocation please answer the following questions: What are the alternative options for installing these additional 3 antennas on this existing tower? Can the 3 antennas be located somewhere else on the antenna in a new array which meets the 12" flush mounting requirement? If not, is the only other alternative to increase the height of the existing tower to install these 3 new antennas? All other initial comments have been addressed. A resubmittal fee is not required for the above changes. To expedite the process please send the revisions via PDF/ email. Per your request this application has been scheduled for the February 28th PC meeting, please have the revisions to me no later than February 15, 2012 for use in the staff report. If you have any questions please call me at 434.296.5832 ext. 3443. Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I County of Albemarle, Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 From: Stephen Waller [ma i Ito: stephen.waller(a cidnsites.com] Sent: Friday, February 03, 2012 5:31 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: FW: Keswick Tier III Tower Comments Chris, Please see the attached revisions to the drawings that we just spoke about. Thanks, Stephen Stephen Waller, AICP Planner / Site Development Consultant GDNsites (434)825 -0617 - Phone (757)282-5811 - Fax stephen.waller@gdnsites.com