The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutARB201200107 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2012-09-24ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Project #/Name ARB- 2012 -107: VA Dept of Forestry (Verizon) Buckingham Tier 3 PWSF Review Type 9/12/2012 1 ARB- 2012 -107 Special Use Permit Parcel Identification Tax Map 76, Parcel 17A Location 908 Natural Resources Drive, south of the Rt. 29 Bypass, east of I64, north of the Norfolk Southern Railroad tracks, at the end of Natural Resources Drive, just southeast of the Forestry Department building. Zoned Commercial Office (CO), Entrance Corridor (EC) Owner /Applicant Virginia Public Building Authority c/o VA Department of Forestry /Stephen Waller Magisterial District Samuel Miller Proposal To install a telecommunications facility consisting of a 110 -foot tall "monopine" with associated antennas and ground equipment. Context The site lies within the following Entrance Corridors: Rt. 29/250 Bypass, Fontaine Avenue Extended, I -64. The immediate context of the site is an office building, its associated structures and parking areas, and adjacent wooded areas. ARB Meeting Date October 1, 2012 Staff Contact Margaret Maliszewski PROJECT HISTORY Date Application/Discussion Result 9/12/2012 1 ARB- 2012 -107 A balloon test was conducted for the current proposal. PROJECT DETAILS • Install a 110' tall structure designed to look like a pine tree, with the pole painted Java Brown (SW 6090). "Limbs" added to the "trunk" to screen the antennas. Maximum spread of monopine is 16'. • Install a generator and an equipment shelter to house the base station equipment. Shelter to have a dark brown aggregate stone finish and to measure 22' x 13'4" x 10' 11" high. • Install 12 antennas in a triangular configuration — not flush mounted. Antennas measure: 94.6" x 11.2" x 4.5 "; 96.1" x 6.1" x 4.1 "; 71" x 11.2" x 5.5 ". Antennas and antenna mounts to be painted Java Brown (SW 6090). ADDITIONAL INFORMATION • The applicant indicates that the intent is for the monopine to blend with surrounding vegetation when viewed from distances outside the property. The applicant believes the monopine will demonstrate how this type of facility is appropriate for "environmentally sensitive" lands. • The antennas are not attached in the preferred method (flush- mount), but the applicant believes the tree limbs will screen the antennas and help them blend with surrounding vegetation. • The proposed height of the monopine is not based on a reference tree. At 110' tall (616' AMSL), the proposed monopine would be much taller than any of the surrounding trees within 25' of the facility. The top elevations of trees in the vicinity range from 542' to 569' AMSL. There are no trees within 25' of the proposed monopine location. The dripline of the tallest tree included in the inventory (569' AMSL) is approximately 60' away from the monopine site. The proposed monopine would be 47' taller than the tallest tree in the inventory. • The applicant was asked to provide the following information, but it has not been received: 1. What type of pine tree is the monopine modeled after? 2. What other "trees" are available? 2 ANALYSIS FOR THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE GROUND EQUIPMENT AND BASE STATION A Certificate of Appropriateness from the ARB is required for the base equipment portion of a proposed telecommunications facility in the Entrance Corridors. The ARB may impose conditions on the Certificate of Appropriateness, based on the EC Guidelines, and consistent with Section 5.1.40 of the Zoning Ordinance. Ref Guideline Issue Recommendations Accessory structures and equipment 17 The following should be screened to Due to the distance from the EC, topography, and vegetation, the None. eliminate visibility from the Entrance proposed equipment shelter and ground- mounted equipment are proposed location of the Corridor street: e. Mechanical equipment not expected to be visible from the EC. facility will minimize ANALYSIS REGARDING VISIBILITY OF THE MONOPOLE/MONOPINE The ARB may act in an advisory capacity to the Planning Commission on the Planning Commission's determination as to whether the facility is being sited to minimize its visibility. Ref Guideline Issue Recommendations Development pattern 33 The relationship of • The balloon was not visible from the Fontaine or Bypass corridors. It was The ARB finds that the buildings and other visible from the I -64 corridor at the location of the bridge over the proposed location of the structures to the Norfolk Southern Railroad tracks, at a distance of approximately 1000'. facility will minimize Entrance Corridor • When viewed from I -64, the balloon was flying well above the trees, visibility such that no street and to other with the balloon and a length of string skylit. A wooded area stands significant negative development within between the EC and the site, but there was no backdrop for the balloon. impact on the Entrance the corridor should be • If constructed as proposed, the monopine would be seen rising above the Corridor will be created. as follows: trees. It would appear to have a narrow, nearly consistent span along its f. The placement of height. The photosimulations and photos of the Greenbrier Hotel structures on the site monopine suggest that several branches would be visible given the should respect existing proposed height above the trees. views and vistas on • The consistently narrow span of the monopine is not characteristic of and around the site. pines in this region, and a sufficient amount of the monopine would be visible for this uncharacteristic condition to be detected from the I64 EC. However, given the limited duration of the available view along the 3 Ref Guideline Issue Recommendations corridor, the angle of the view, the distance from the corridor, and the typical speed of travel along this non - pedestrian corridor, a significant negative impact is not anticipated on the I64 Entrance Corridor. • Because the monopine does not resemble a native tree and because it will be visible, the following recommendations are offered should a further reduction in impacts be desired: • Choose an alternate location that would allow less of the monopine to be visible; • Reduce the height of the monopine so that only the topmost branches are visible; • Choose a monopine with a combination of reduced height and a more graduated branching structure that is characteristic of trees of this region. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Regarding the Certificate of Appropriateness for the ground equipment and base station: Because the proposed facility is consistent with all applicable guidelines, staff recommends approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as proposed. Regarding visibility of the monopole: Staff recommends that the ARB forward the following recommendation to the Planning Commission: The ARB finds that the proposed location of the facility will minimize visibility such that no significant negative impact on the Entrance Corridor will be created. 2 ILLUSTRATION A The arrow indicates the location of the I -64 bridge over the train tracks and the location where the balloon was viewed. The star indicates the general location of the proposed monopine. U 5 TABLE A This report is based on the following submittal items: Sheet # Drawing Name Drawing Date/Revision Date G -1 Cover Sheet 8/13/2012 C -1 Site Plan 8/13/2012 C -lA Area Map 8/13/2012 C -2 Tree Inventory 8/13/2012 C -3 Elevation View 8/13/2012 C -4 Enlarged Site Plan 8/13/2012 C -5 Grading Plan 8/13/2012 C -6 Civil Details 8/13/2012 C -7 Details 8/13/2012 A -1 Shelter Elevations 8/13/2012 E -1 Site Layout Plan 8/13/2012 Photos of Monopine at Greenbrier Resort Balloon test photos, key maps and simulations