Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201300022 Staff Report��F arm �ti dry C r ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SP201300022 Verizon Wireless Staff: Sarah Baldwin, Senior Planner "Hydraulic Road" (Comcast Property) Tier III PWSF (Jack Jouett Magisterial District) Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Hearing: March 18, 2014 TBD Owners: Cable Holdco Exchange V LLC Attn: Property Applicant: Stephen Waller, AICP Tax Dept. 32nd Floor Acreage: 0.61 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 43 Parcel 16A By -right use: RA, Rural Areas Location: 1658 Earlysville Road Magisterial District: Jack Jouett Proffers /Conditions: No Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A DA - RA - X Proposal: Request for installation of a two (2) new flush- Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in Rural mounted antenna arrays on an existing 140' lattice tower, Area 1. associated equipment and structural upgrades. This will bring the total number of arrays on the tower to five (5). Character of Property: This property is zoned Rural Use of Surrounding Properties: Rural Areas - Areas, as well as all the surrounding properties, and is single family and vacant residential land. located in the Entrance Corridor. The site is located in a heavily wooded area that provides screening from the equipment. Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: None identified. 1. The proposal is on an existing facility and the additional antenna arrays will not increase or cause any new impacts to adjacent properties or important resources. 2. The proposal meets most of the requirements of Section 5.1.40 except for the current Ordinance requirement that limits the number of antenna arrays to three (3). 3. The proposed improvements are not expected to be noticed from the entrance corridor. The proposal will not increase the visual impact of the existing tower. Zoning Ordinance Waivers and Recommendations: 1. Included is a modification for Sections 5.1.40(c)(3)(i). Based on findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval of SP201300022 and the modification requests with a condition. STAFF CONTACT: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Sarah Baldwin, Senior Planner March 18, 2014 TBD PETITION: PROJECT: SP201300022 — Verizon Wireless "Hydraulic Road" ( Comcast Property) Tier III Personal Wireless Service Facility (Jack Jouett Magisterial District). PROPOSED: Request for installation of 2 additional arrays each containing 3 flush mounted antennas on an existing 140 foot monopole and associated equipment. ZONING CATEGORY /GENERAL USAGE: RA, Rural Areas- agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit /acre in development lots); EC Entrance Corridor — Overlay to protect properties of historic, architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along routes of tourist access; AIA Airport Impact Area — Overlay to minimize adverse impacts to both the airport and the surrounding land. SECTION: 10.2.2.48 Tier III personal wireless facilities COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE /DENSITY: Rural Areas in Rural Area 1 - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (0.5 unit/ acre in development lots). ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: YES LOCATION: 1658 Earlysville Road TAX MAP /PARCEL: 04500- 00- 00 -016A0 CHARACTER OF THE AREA: This property is zoned Rural Areas, as well as all the surrounding properties. The site is located in a heavily wooded area which screens the existing equipment. PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: The tower was originally constructed in 1979 as a radio tower (SP1974 -400). Subsequent special use permits approved dishes, other equipment and antenna on the tower (SP1979 -32, SP1990 -19). There were several site plans approved which established Adelphi Cable improvements (SDP1991 -29, 1999 -53). A site plan amendment was approved for Comcast for a minor expansion of the facility (SDP2010 -18). DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL: This is a proposal to install two (2) additional antenna arrays containing three (3) flush- mounted antennas on an existing lattice Personal Wireless Service Facility ( "PWSF ") and supporting ground equipment that will be contained within the existing facility. The addition of the two (2) new arrays will bring the total number of arrays on this tower to five (5). Although this is a collocation proposal, allowing five (5) arrays is considered a substantial change under current ordinance requirements and requires a special use permit. The applicant is also proposing structural upgrades to the tower, since the tower predates current safety standard upgrades. The 0.61 acre property, described as Tax Map 43, Parcel 16A, is located in the Jack Jouett Magisterial District and is zoned Rural Areas ( "RA "), Airport Impact Area ( "AIA ") and Entrance Corridor ( "EC ") (Attachment A). 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: No Substantial detriment. The proposed special use will not be a substantial detriment to adjacent lots? It is not anticipated that the proposed addition of two (2) antenna arrays will be of any detriment to the adjacent properties as they will be located below the existing antennas. All 2 proposed ground equipment will be placed inside the existing fenced area and no clearing or new construction will occur. The new antenna arrays, limited equipment and structural upgrades will not substantially change the visual impact of the existing tower. Since this facility is in the EC, the ARB design planner reviewed the proposal and does not expect the additional equipment to increase the negative visual impact of the overall facility. Character of the district unchanged. The character of the district will not be changed by the proposed special use? As mentioned above, no substantial changes will occur with the addition of two (2) antenna arrays, equipment and structural upgrades. The character of the RA, Rural Area Zoning District or EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District will not be impacted by this proposal. Harmony. The proposed special use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Staff has finds that this request is consistent with the "purpose and intent" 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). ...with the uses permitted by right in the district. Since this request only involves an addition of two (2) antenna arrays, limited structural and equipment upgrades, no significant adverse impacts are anticipated. ...with the public health, safety and general welfare. 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 increase in antenna arrays will provide more reliable access to the wireless communication market, to include schools 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 with approval of the additional antenna arrays. ...with the regulations provided in section 5 as applicable 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 33.4, 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 (8) and subsection 5.1.40(d)(2),(3) 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 33.4 special use permits have been met, with the exception of the modification detailed below. 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 setbacks; however, a determination has been made that setbacks do not apply to existing facilities. Attached 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 (Attachment B). 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 changes to the tower do not require the installation of guy wires, nor will it be fitted with any whip antennas. The proposed antenna arrays will be flush- mounted panel antennas. All other requirements of this subsection 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 proposed additional antenna arrays will bring the total number of antenna arrays to five (5) and requires modification of this condition. The proposed changes to the tower meet all other relevant design, mounting and size criteria of this subsection. Due to the limited additional visual impact from the installation of the additional two (2) arrays to this tower facility, staff recommends approval of this proposal. 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. M The installation of the proposed antenna array for this personal wireless service facility will not require the removal of any trees. 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. As stated above, this is an existing tower where no changes are proposed that will require the removal of any trees. Subsection 5.1.40(c)(6): Within thirty (30) days after a facility's use for personal wireless service purposes is discontinued, the owner of the facility shall notify the zoning administrator in writing that the facility's use has discontinued. 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 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 this facility discontinue 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): 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. This is an existing facility. No steep slopes are affected are affected by this proposal. Subsection 5.1.40(c)(8): 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 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 existing facility contains a fenced area that will also house the new ground equipment; therefore, this proposal will not be detrimental to the character of the area, or to the health, safety or general welfare of the public. 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 existing facility has been in place for over 20 years and has limited visibility. The proposed changes are not expected to increase the negative impact on the Entrance Corridor. Section 5.1.40(d)(3): The facility shall not adversely impact resources identified in the county's open space plan. The existing facility has been in place for over 20 years. 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)(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 of supervisors as provided in subsection 5.1.40(d)(12). No changes to the height of this facility are proposed. 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. This is an existing lattice tower all proposed equipment will comply with the requirements. 0 Section 5.1.40(e)2: The facility shall comply with all conditions of approval of the special use permit. The facility complies 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 (1) 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. In its current state, the existing facilities and their 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 is on an existing facility and the additional antenna arrays or associated equipment will not increase or cause any new impacts to adjacent properties or important resources. 2. The proposal meets most of the requirements of Section 5.1.40 except for the current Ordinance requirement that limits the number of antenna arrays to three (3). 3. The proposed improvements are not expected to be noticed from the entrance corridor. The proposal will not increase the visual impact of the existing tower. 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. Zoning Ordinance Modifications: The proposed modifications are for certain required information to be provided on supporting plan documents. The application is for an additional antenna array on the existing tower are part of a larger project to improve Verizon Wireless' existing network of facilities by adding fourth generation ( "4G ") services to the existing cellular services. The recommended modifications are 7 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 of the County or whether a height increase is appropriate, these specific requirements are not applicable for an existing towers seeking the addition of antennas. Listed below are the recommended modifications: 1. Section 5.1.40(c)(3)(i) -total number of arrays shall not exceed three(3). Staff is able to support the recommended modification described in the staff report because this is an existing facility and the addition of two (2) new antenna arrays and related equipment will not substantially change the visual impact of the existing lattice tower. If the Planning Commission recommends approval of this application, Staff recommends the following conditions: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Based upon the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of SP201300022 Verizon Wireless "Hydraulic Road" (Comcast Property) Tier III PWSF with the following condition: 1. Development and use shall be in general accord with what is described in the applicant's request and site plans, entitled "Hydraulic Road ", with a final zoning drawing submittal date of 11/3/13 (hereafter "Conceptual Plan "), as determined by the Director of Planning and Zoning Administrator. To be in accord with the Conceptual Plan, development and use shall reflect the design of the development as shown on the Conceptual Plan. Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be made to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. Motion One: The Planning Commission's role in this case (SP201300022) is to make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to approve or deny the modification for Section 5.1.40(c)(3)(i) of the Zoning Ordinance. A. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval modification of Section 5.1.40(c)(3)(i): I move to recommend approval granting the modification for reasons outlined in the staff report. B. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend denial of the modification for this Tier III oersonal wireless service facilitv: I move to recommend denial of the modification outlined in the staff report. (Planning Commission needs to give a reason for denial) Motion Two: The Planning Commission's role in this case (SP201200022) is to make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. A. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of this Tier III personal wireless service facility: I move to recommend approval of SP201300022 Verizon Wireless "Hydraulic Road" (Comcast) Tier III PWSF with the conditions outlined in the staff report. B. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend denial of this Tier III personal wireless service facility: I move to recommend denial of SP201300022 Verizon Wireless "Hydraulic Road" (Comcast) Tier III PWSF (Planning Commission needs to give a reason for denial). ATTACHMENTS: A. Vicinity Map B. Site Plan 9