HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201200031 Staff Report 2013-02-06AL
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SP201200031 — Verizon Wireless
Staff: Sarah Baldwin, Senior Planner
"Eastham" Fox Property Tier III PWSF
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
February 5, 2013
TBD
Owners: Harry Paul or Catherine E. Fox
Applicant: Verizon Wireless -Drew Patterson
Acreage: 1.99 Acres
Rezone from: Not applicable
Special Use Permit for: 10.2.2(48) Special Use
Permit, which allows for Tier III personal wireless
facilities in the RA Zoning District.
TMP: Tax Map 47 Parcel 18
By -right use: RA, Rural Areas, and EC Entrance
Location: 3070 Stony Point Road
Corridor
Magisterial District: Rivanna
Proffers /Conditions: Yes
Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A
DA - RA - X
Proposal: Request for installation of a 110 foot steel
Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in Rural
monopole with 2 flush mounted arrays and associated
Area 2.
ground equipment with fencing within a 2,250 square foot
lease area.
Character of Property: This property is zoned Rural
Use of Surrounding Properties: Rural Areas -
Areas, as well as all the surrounding properties. The site
single family residential and vacant containing
contains an existing dwelling unit and is located on a
both wooded and open areas.
wooded parcel.
Factors Favorable:
Factors Unfavorable:
1. The proposal will provide improved 3G and 4G
1. None identified.
wireless service for the surrounding area.
2. The Architectural Review Board staff has
recommended approval of the proposed monopole
and associated ground equipment stating that the
location is expected to sufficiently minimize its
visibility.
3. The proposal meets all of the requirements of
5.1.40 (with waivers that are supported by staff).
Zoning Ordinance Waivers and Recommendations:
1. Included are modifications for Sections 5.1.40(c)(3) and (d)6. Based on findings presented in the staff
report, staff recommends approval of SP2012 -31 and all waiver (special exception) requests with a
condition.
STAFF CONTACT:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
AGENDA TITLE:
PROPERTY OWNER:
Sarah Baldwin, Senior Planner
February 5, 2013
1:R
SP201200031: Verizon Wireless "Eastham" Fox Property
Tier III PWSF
Harry Paul or Catherine E. Fox
APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless -c /o Drew Patterson
PROPOSAL:
This is a request for installation of a 110 foot Above Ground Level ( "AGL ") steel
monopole with 2 flush mounted arrays and associated ground equipment with fencing
within a 2,250 square foot lease area that will be accessed by an existing driveway.
The 1.99 acre property, described as Tax Map 47, Parcel 18, is located in the Rivanna
Magisterial District and is zoned Rural Areas ( "RA ") and Entrance Corridor ( "EC ")
(Attachment A).
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Rural Area in Rural Area 2.
CHARACTER OF THE AREA:
This property is zoned Rural Areas, as well as all the surrounding properties. The site is
on a mostly wooded parcel. The surrounding areas contain both wooded and open
areas.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
N /A.
DISCUSSION:
The PWSF Ordinance states that facilities should be located at least 200 feet outside of
a scenic highway or by -way and is considered an avoidance area. This parcel fronts on
Route 20, which is designated as a Virginia byway. The Applicant has stated that the
tower has been sited to be located over 200 feet from the byway. A portion of the site is
also located in the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District which is considered an
avoidance area under the Ordinance. The proposed tower will be approximately 15
feet taller than the reference tree. These situations render that the tower be processed
as a Tier III Personal Wireless Service Facility requiring a Special Permit ( "SP ").
ANALYSIS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST:
Section 31.6.1 of the Zoning Ordinance below requires that special use permits be
reviewed as follows:
2
Will the use be of substantial detriment to adjacent property?
The monopole is proposed to be 110 feet AGL in a largely wooded area. A reference
tree is identified as a 94.7AGL black oak. The Applicant has requested a waiver of
the reference tree requirement as the monopine will be roughly 15 feet taller than the
reference tree. (Attachment B). It is not anticipated that the proposed monopole will
be of any detriment to the adjacent properties, aside from limited temporary
construction activity. The new tower will not substantially change the visual impact of
the existing area since it is located on a heavily wooded lot and elevation increases to
the west and portions of the north limit visibility.
Will the character of the zoning district change with this use?
As mentioned above, no substantial changes will occur with construction of this tower
aside from limited construction activity associated with the change. Although the
tower as proposed will be 15 feet taller than the reference tree visibility is limited. A
balloon test was performed on January 11, 2013 and although the balloon was visible
at certain brief points it was significantly camouflaged by trees, the elevation changes
and the winding nature of Stony Point Road (Attachment C).
Will the use be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning
ordinance?
Staff has reviewed this request as it relates to the "purpose and intent" that is set
forth in Sections 1.4. of the Zoning Ordinance, and as it relates to the intent specified
in the Rural Areas chapter of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 10.1). This request is
consistent with both sections.
Will the use be in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district?
No significant adverse impacts are anticipated, since visibility is limited. Additionally,
Staff has not received any negative comments from citizens.
Will the public health, safety and general welfare of the community be
protected if the use is approved?
The public health, safety, and general welfare of the community is protected through
the special use permit process, which assures that uses approved by special use
permit are appropriate in the location requested. The proposed tower will provide
more reliable access to the wireless communication market, to include schools,
travelling public and residences. This can be seen as contributing to the public
health, safety and welfare. Otherwise, no change to the public health, safety and
general welfare is expected.
Compliance with Section 5.1.40 of the Zoning Ordinance
The county's specific design criteria for Tier III facilities as set forth in section
5.1.40(e) are addressed as follows [Ordinance sections are in bold italics]:
Section 5.1.40(e) Tier 111 facilities. Each Tier 111 facility may be established upon
approval of a special use permit issued pursuant to section 31.6.1 of this chapter,
initiated upon an application satisfying the requirements of subsection 5.1.40(a)
and section 31.6.2, and it shall be installed and operated in compliance with all
applicable provisions of this chapter and the following:
1. The facility shall comply with subsection 5.1.40(b) subsection 5.1.40(c)(2)
through (9) and subsection 5.1.40(d)(2),(3),(6) and (7), unless modified by the
board of supervisors during special use permit review.
2. The facility shall comply with all conditions of approval of the special use
permit.
Requirements of subsection 5.1.40(a) application for approval and section 31.6.1
special use permits have been met. Compliance with Section 5.1.40(e) of the Zoning
Ordinance: The County's specific design criteria for Tier III facilities set forth in Section
5.1.40(e)(1) and 5.1.40(e)(2) are addressed as follows:
Subsection 5.1.40(b)(1 -5): Exemption from regulations otherwise applicable:
Except as otherwise exempted in this paragraph, each facility shall be subject to
all applicable regulations in this chapter.
The proposed wireless facility does not meet the required Rural Areas setbacks and the
Applicant has submitted a fall zone easement due to the narrowness of the lot. The
Application and plans meet all other area and bulk regulations and minimum yard
requirements in accordance with 5.1.40(b)(2). The site drawings, antennae and
equipment specifications have been provided to demonstrate that personal wireless
service facilities (PWSF) regulations and any relevant site plan requirements set forth in
Section 32 of the zoning ordinance have been addressed.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(2) -: The facility shall be designed, constructed and
maintained as follows: (i) guy wires shall not be permitted, (ii) outdoor lighting for
the facility shall be permitted only during maintenance periods; regardless of the
lumens emitted, each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded as required by
section 4.17 of this chapter; (iii) any equipment cabinet not located within the
existing structure shall be screened from all lot lines either by terrain, existing
structures, existing vegetation, or by added vegetation approved by the county's
landscape planner, (iv) a whip antenna less than six (6) inches in diameter may
exceed the height of the existing structure; (v) a grounding rod, whose height
shall not exceed two (2) feet and whose width shall not exceed one (1) inch in
diameter at the base and tapering to a point, may be installed at the top of facility
or the structure; and (vi) within one month after the completion of the installation
of the facility, the applicant shall provide a statement to the agent certifying that
the height of all components of the facility complies with this regulation.
The proposed monopole does not require the installation of guy wires, nor will it be fitted
with any whip antennas at this time. All other requirements have been met.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(3): Equipment shall be attached to the exterior of a structure
only as follows: (i) the total number of arrays of antennas attached to the existing
structure shall not exceed three (3), and each antenna proposed to be attached
under the pending application shall not exceed the size shown on the application,
which size shall not exceed one thousand one hundred fifty two (1152) square
inches; (ii) no antenna shall project from the structure beyond the minimum
required by the mounting equipment, and in no case shall any point on the face of
an antenna project more than twelve (12) inches from the existing structure; and
(iii) each antenna and associated equipment shall be a color that matches the
existing structure. For purposes of this section, all types of antennas and dishes
regardless of their use shall be counted toward the limit of three arrays.
The Applicant has identified that one of the proposed antennas on one of the arrays will
be approximately 1581 square inches and has requested a waiver of the requirement
since it will exceed the ordinance requirement of 1152 square inches. It is not
anticipated that the size difference will have a significant impact to the structure as it will
be flush- mounted and painted to match the tower. The proposed changes to the tower
meet all other relevant design, mounting and size criteria of this subsection.
Subsection 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.
The Applicant has stated that the installation of the proposed personal wireless service
facility will not require the removal of any significant trees. The Applicant has
acknowledged that a tree conservation plan will be submitted as required.
Subsection 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.
The Applicant has stated that the installation, operation and maintenance of the facility
will be conducted in accordance with the tree conservation plan.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(6): The facility shall be disassembled and removed from the
site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for personal wireless service
purposes is discontinued. If the agent determines at any time that surety is
required to guarantee that the facility will be removed as required, the agent may
require that the parcel owner or the owner of the facility submit a certified check,
a bond with surety, or a letter of credit, in an amount sufficient for, and
conditioned upon, the removal of the facility. The type and form of the surety
guarantee shall be to the satisfaction of the agent and the county attorney. In
determining whether surety should be required, the agent shall consider the
following: (i) the annual report states that the tower or pole is no longer being
used for personal wireless service facilities; (ii) the annual report was not filed;
(iii) there is a change in technology that makes it likely that tower or pole will be
unnecessary in the near future; (iv) the permittee fails to comply with applicable I
regulations or conditions; (v) the permittee fails to timely remove another tower
or pole within the county; and (vi) whenever otherwise deemed necessary by the
agent.
Should use of the antennae site in this location become discontinued at anytime in the
future, Verizon Wireless and /or its assignee(s) will be required to remove the facility
within 90 days.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(7): The owner of the facility shall submit a report to the
agent by no earlier than May or and no later than July 1 of each year. The report
shall identify each user of the existing structure, and include a drawing,
photograph or other illustration identifying which equipment is owned and /or
operated by each personal wireless service provider. Multiple users on a single
tower or other mounting structure may submit a single report, provided that the
report includes a statement signed by a representative from each user
acquiescing in the report.
An annual report will be submitted at the required time.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(8): No slopes associated with the installation of the facility
and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining
walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the county
engineer are employed.
The Applicant has stated that no 2:1 slopes will be created with installation of this
facility.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(9): Any equipment cabinet not located within an existing
building shall be fenced only with the approval of the agent upon finding that the
fence: (i) would protect the facility from trespass in areas of high volumes of
I
vehicular or pedestrian traffic or, in the rural areas, to protect the facility from
livestock or wildlife; (ii) would not be detrimental to the character of the area; and
(iii) would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare.
The Applicant is proposing to construct a six (6) foot board on board wood fence around
the tower. Staff has determined that a fence is necessary since an onsite visit identified
livestock on the site. Additionally, the fence will not be visible from adjacent properties
or Route 20.
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, or adjacent to a
conservation easement or open space easement, the facility shall be sited so that
it is not visible from any resources specifically identified for protection in the
deed of easement.
The tower will be located in a heavily wooded area and is adequately screened.
Portions of an adjacent property are subject to a conservation easement, but the trees
and topography will minimize visibility to the property.
Section 5.1.40(d)(3): The facility shall not adversely impact resources identified in
the county's open space plan.
This proposal does not substantially change the visual impact of the proposed tower
and does not adversely impact any resources in the open space plan.
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 no other PWSF within 200 feet of this tower.
Section 5.1.40(d)(5): The maximum base diameter of the monopole shall be thirty
(30) inches and the maximum diameter of the top of the monopole shall be
eighteen (18) inches.
The application plan lists the base of the monopole as 30 inches and the top at 18
inches.
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
7
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).
The applicant has requested a waiver of this requirement as the tower will be
approximately 15 feet taller than the identified reference tree, which is a 94.7 AGL Black
Oak. Although the height is being increased, the lot is heavily wooded and the
surrounding topography adequately screens the tower. This proposal does not
substantially change the visual impact of the tower and does not adversely impact any
resources in the open space plan.
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 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 states that the proposed tower, antennas and ground equipment will be
painted Sherwin Williams Java Brown ( #6090).
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.
The proposed tower will be designed to conceal the cables. Any remaining cables will
be affixed to the outside of the monopole on the side facing away from the street.
M
Section 5.1.40(e)2: The facility shall comply with all conditions of approval of the
special use permit.
The facility will comply with all conditions of approval of the special use permit (Section
31.6.3).
Section 704(a) (7) (b) (1) (11) of The Telecommunications Act of 1996:
This application is subject to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which provides in
part that the regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal
wireless service facilities by any State or local government or instrumentality thereof (I)
shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent
services; (ll) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal
wireless services. 47 U.S. C.
In order to operate this facility, the applicant is required to comply with the FCC
guidelines for radio frequency emissions that are intended to protect the public health
and safety. Neither the Comprehensive Plan nor the Zoning Ordinance prohibits the
provision of personal wireless services. However, both do implement specific policies
and regulations for the sighting and design of wireless facilities. The proposed facility
and mounting structure all offer adequate support for providing personal wireless
communication services. The applicant has not provided any additional information
regarding the availability, or absence of alternative sites that could serve the same
areas that would be covered with the proposed antenna additions at this site. Therefore,
staff does not believe that the special use permitting process nor the denial of this
application would have the effect of prohibiting or restricting the provision of personal
wireless services.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified factors which are favorable and unfavorable to this proposal:
Factors favorable to this request include:
The proposal will provide improved 3G and 4G wireless service to the
surrounding area.
2. The Architectural Review Board staff has recommended approval of the
proposed monopole and associated ground equipment stating that the location
is expected to sufficiently minimize its visibility.
3. The proposal meets all the requirements of 5.1.40 (with waivers that are
supported by staff).
9
Factors unfavorable to this request include:
None identified.
In order to comply with Section 5.1.40(d) of the Zoning Ordinance if recommended for
denial, 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.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this Tier III personal wireless
services facility based upon the analysis provided herein.
Special Exceptions to the Zoninq Ordinance:
Request for modifications must be reviewed under the criteria established in Section
31.8 taking into consideration the factors, standards, criteria and findings for each
request; however no specific finding is required in support of a decision. The proposed
modifications are to waive the ordinance requirements with respect to the reference tree
and antenna size. Staff is able to support all of the recommended modifications
described in the staff report. The recommended modifications are for requirements of
the ordinance that are generally meant to aid in the determination of whether a new
tower is appropriate in the proposed area. Staff is supportive of the modifications that
are listed below:
1. Section 5.1.40(c)(3)(i) -Size of antenna.
2. Section 5.1.40(d)(6)- Height of tower to reference tree.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval of this application, Staff
recommends the following condition:
Conditions of approval:
Development and use shall be in general accord with what is described in
the applicant's request and site plans, entitled "Eastham ", with a final
zoning drawing submittal date of 11/06/12 (hereafter "Conceptual Plan "),
as determined by the Director of Planning and Zoning Administrator.
Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements
above may be made to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Vicinity Map
B. Site Plan
C. Applicant Photo Simulations
10
Motion One: The Planning Commission's role in this case (SP201200031) is to make a
recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to approve or deny the modifications for
Sections 5.1.40(c)(3)and (d)(6) under the special exception criteria of Section 31.8.
A. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of the
modifications Tier III personal wireless service facilitv:
I move to recommend approval of the modifications for SP 20120031
Eastham - Verizon Wireless Tier III PWSF with the conditions outlined in the
staff report.
B. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend denial of the
modifications of this Tier III oersonal wireless service facilitv:
I move to recommend denial of the modifications for SP 201200031 -
Eastham Verizon Wireless Tier III PWSF (Planning Commission needs to
give a reason for denial).
Motion Two: The Planning Commission's role in this case (SP201200031) is to make a
recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.
A. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of this Tier
III aersonal wireless service facilitv:
I move to recommend approval of SP 20120031 Eastham - Verizon Wireless
Tier III PWSF with the conditions outlined in the staff report.
B. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend denial of this Tier III
aersonal wireless service facilitv:
I move to recommend denial of SP 201200031- EasthamVerizon Wireless
Tier III PWSF (Planning Commission needs to give a reason for denial).
11
a
ne: VZW Eastham Photograph Information:
Communication Facility Off Stony Point Rd
iy Point Road View from the South
°ville. VA 22911 Showing the Balloon Fly
a�
R�'11tr`.�y2t .
. i NB &C
ENGINEERING
SERVICES, LLC.
7360 COCA COLA DR, SUITE 106
HANOVER, MD 21076
t
v �k
II
a.F
�I
1
Anna Farm
. k
L
Stony Point lid A
+ Profit Ind
�f
r
Fosters Branch Rd
120 I
II
Sony Point Ind all a*-
s
to
.r woodcr k Ur
Off Stony Point Rd 4 �-
Riggory Ridge Rd
5
5 �
f . 4
` 5
Location Map
III I not visible - visit!
M. MMI
S ?^ i��Y' �qp..� rv� - y
�y R
4' �lL'r ica �i
• � _ -rte /" •.• W -
iLf` S,.• n� •.�. °" �r � �
1' �+•� ;
_ cam- .. �r,.
t�;
me: VZW Eastham
Photograph Information:
H ��
Communication Facility
Stony Point Rd
''
°'�f4�;�
any Point Road
View from the East
ENGINEERING
•'
�i =
:eville, VA 22911
Showing the Balloon Fly
SERVICES, LLC.
L:
.mayy`
798D COCA COLA DR, SUITE 106
F"OVER, MO 2 7676
'
'
II: \PJ \3039 \125 \CP \Sheet! \C \C -3.d.q Wed. 07 Na 2012 - 9:49 . -x y
oM
Z
o
rn
0
i
\ 1
I
_ I
z
le > I
�o
a
/�II`r to
Y
m r'y
z
v �
o
Mwq�l�
orn
z
o f'
�D
O �rn
o
m � �
R
�m
II �
�n
P�
1
r�
I
n
of �I
;F In
o I �
I /
f � v
SIR RIP
wl
�I
o
0
Sp: prU�lq —.. m m/1M." 5]
D N Z
Z
rn Km °'^o
IA
> � m
g Do ego N
a zm y�g
€� N o m� Km ig G;
g�
o trm a` sp
v
MR. �
Aim
D
a
��
i
OD D
Z
O
N
o O
D
W
z
<_
OZ
m
a
�
i
Map is for Display Purposes Only • Aerial Imagery from the Commonwealth of Virginia and Other Sources January 23, 2013
4 7 -25
Legend
1802
47 -20
(Note: Some items on map may not appear in legend)
a �uEa� ERSm
t47-2-1 �s
o REs UE S —ON
H Hi °eAnav`m
®RO��ES...oR
184
®—.orn-
®RE�REA.�RRa�RsM
47 -23
ti�
Peon Pa,�.k
1ryryP
302 1784 �4
47 -22 47 -19
,1
47 -11 G
30923
47 -17D1
5
N:�47-17D
TM: 47
7 -18 307,0 - .
�J
39
Rr vq•NNq -F,
AIR
47 -17A 31
47 -17 B
3073
47 -16A
294 ft
y of "t9e
GIS -Web
� Geographic Data Services
www.albemarle.org
(434)296 -5832
Map is for Display Purposes Only • Aerial Imagery from the Commonwealth of Virginia and Other Sources January 23, 2013