HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200800014 Legacy Document 2011-07-27o��OF atg���H
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SDP 08- 014:Gentry Property
Staff: Gerald Gatobu Senior Planner, Brent
( Verizon) Tier II PWSF
Nelson (ARB)
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
March 25, 2008
N/A
Owners: Dallas and Emma Gentry
Applicant: Cellco Partnership D /B /A Verizon
Wireless
Acreage: 9.956 Acres
Rezone from: Not applicable
(Lease Area: 3,600 square feet)
Special Use Permit for: Not applicable
TMP: Tax Map 121, Parcel 89
By -right use: RA, Rural Area, and (EC)
Location: 1842 Coles Rolling Rd.: 490'
Entrance Corridor
northeast of Scottsville Rd. (Route 20 South),
on the north side of Coles Rolling Rd. (Route
712).
Magisterial District: Scottsville
Proffers /Conditions: No
Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A
DA - RA -X
Proposal: To install a Tier II personal
Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in
wireless service treetop facility; the
Rural Area 4
proposed facility consists of a 102.75
foot tall monopole
Character of Property: Residential farmland
Use of Surrounding Properties: Single -
parcel with significant mature tree canopy.
family Residential
Factors Favorable:
Factors Unfavorable:
• Monopole will be (seven) 7' feet above
The application plan proposes the
the reference tree which mitigates the
removal of 5 existing trees: two 8"
visual impacts of the tower.
Persimmons, one 8" Oak, one 10"
Oak and one 12" Maple to allow for
the monopole and equipment shelter.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility.
Based on findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval at 7 feet above
the reference tree.
STAFF CONTACT:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
AGENDA TITLE:
PROPERTY OWNER:
APPLICANT:
PROPOSAL!
Gerald Gatobu, Brent Nelson
March 26, 2008
SDP 08 -0014: Gentry Property ( Verizon) Tier II PWSF
Dallas and Emma Gentry
Cellco Partnership DB /A Verizon Wireless
This is a proposal to install a Tier II personal wireless service treetop facility (Attachment A).
The proposed facility consists of a 102.75 -foot tall steel monopole, painted with Sherwin
Williams Java Brown, which is a matte enamel color that has been previously approved as an
appropriate color for Tier II facilities at other sites in Albemarle County. The top elevation of the
monopole is 102.75 feet, measured above mean sea level (AMSL). The proposed monopole will
be 7 feet higher than the identified reference tree. The monopole will be equipped with three (3)
flush - mounted antennas, a two (2) foot long lightning rod, and coaxial cables that will be run
within the monopole's interior. Supporting ground equipment will be contained within a
prefabricated equipment shelter measuring 12'x 30'x 10.92 (W x L x H) at the base of the tower.
The lease area for the proposed facility is located on property described as Tax Map 121, Parcel
89, which is approximately 9.956 acres and is zoned RA, Rural Area (Attachment B). The site is
located on 1842 Coles Rolling Rd. 490' northeast of Scottsville Rd. (Route 20 South), on the
north side of Coles Rolling Rd. (Route 712). This application has been submitted in accordance
with Section 10.2.1(22) of the Zoning Ordinance, which allows for Tier II wireless facilities by
right in the Rural Areas.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area in Rural Area 4.
CHARACTER OF THE AREA:
The proposed site is on a 9.956 acre lot with a single family dwelling located approximately 490'
northeast of the intersection of State Route 20 South and Coles Rolling Road. The lease area is
heavily wooded with access provided at the north side of Coles Rolling Road (State Route 712)
by way of an existing driveway leading into the proposed 20' wide access /utility easement. The
intersection of State Route 20 South, State Route 712 and State Route 715 contains several
commercial and residential structures. The Green Mountain Country Store sits in the north corner
of the intersection, between the EC and the proposed site area.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
SP 1998 -30: Proposal to construct a personal wireless telecommunication facility on approx 9.5
ac zoned RA and EC in accord with Section 10.2.2(6) of the Zoning Ordinance. Tax Map 121,
Parcel 89 is located on the east side of Rt. 20 at its intersection with Rt. 712 in the Scottsville
Magisterial District. This application was withdrawn/ indefinitely deferred August 19, 1998
0
STAFF COMMENT:
Section 3.1 provides the following definitions that are relevant to this proposal:
Tier II personal wireless service facility: A personal wireless service facility that is a treetop
facility not located within an avoidance area.
Treetop facility: A personal wireless service facility consisting of a self - supporting monopole
having a single shaft of wood, metal or concrete no more than ten (10) feet taller than the crown
of the tallest tree within twenty -five (25) feet of the monopole, measured above sea level (ASQ,
and includes associated antennas, mounting structures, an equipment cabinet and other essential
personal wireless service equipment.
Avoidance area: An area having significant resources where the siting of personal wireless
service facilities could result in adverse impacts as follows: (i) any ridge area where a personal
wireless service facility would be skylighted; (ii) a parcel within an agricultural and forestal
district; (iii) a parcel within a historic district; (iv) any location in which the proposed personal
wireless service facility 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; or (v) any location within two hundred (200) feet of any state
scenic highway or by -way.
Section 5.1.40(d), "Tier II facilities" states:
"Each Tier II facility may be established upon commission approval of an application satisfying
the requirements of subsection 5.1.40(a) and demonstrating that the facility will be installed and
operated in compliance with all applicable provisions of this chapter, criteria (1) through (8)
below, and satisfying all conditions of the architectural review board. The commission shall act
on each application within the time periods established in section 32.4.2.6. The commission
shall approve each application, without conditions, once it determines that all of these
requirements have been satisfied. If the commission denies an application, it shall identify which
requirements were not satisfied and inform the applicant what needs to be done to satisfy each
requirement. "
The applicant has submitted an application that satisfies the requirements set forth in Section
5.1.40(a) and has performed a balloon test at the location of the proposed facility (Attachment
C).
Section 5.1.40(d)(1): The facility shall comply with subsection 5.1.40(b) and subsection
5.1.40(c)(2) through (9).
Staff has determined that the proposed facility's location complies with all of the exemptions of
Section 5.1.40(b) and the proposed equipment meets all relevant design, mounting and size
criteria that are set forth in Section 5.1.40(c)(2) and (3). The remainder of subsection (c)
provides requirements that are subject to enforcement if the facility is approved.
3
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, the facility shall be
sited to so that it is not visible from any resources specifically identified for protection in the
deed of easement.
The proposed facility includes a monopole that would have a height of approximately 667 feet
above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is 660 feet above mean sea level
(AMSL) and its dripline is located within 25 of feet of the proposed monopole. A balloon test
was conducted on February 8, 2008._The balloon was visible for a distance of approximately
350' along the Route 20 South Entrance Corridor at the proposed elevation, 670 AMSL, 10'
above the top of the reference tree. As a comparison, the balloon was lowered so that it was only
7' above the reference tree, 667 AMSL. The balloon was visible for the same distance along the
EC. At both elevations the trees did not provide a backdrop for the balloon, so when it was
visible, it was sky -lit. There was a material difference in the visibility of the balloon when the
height was reduced from 7' to 10' above the canopy of the reference tree. At 7'feet above the
reference tree, the sky -lit appearance of the pole was less pronounced. The ground equipment is
not expected to be visible due to the dense vegetation and existing single family residence
located between the state road and the facility.
Based on the information above, it is staff's opinion that the proposed facility will be minimally
visible from adjacent parcels and streets.
Section 5.1.40(d)(3): The facility shall not adversely impact resources identified in the county's
open space plan.
Staff's analysis of this request addresses the concern for the possible loss of aesthetic or historic
resources. The proposed lease area is not delineated as a significant resource on the Open Space
Plan Map. However, the installation of this tower within the 3,600 square foot lease area will
require the removal of five trees. None of the trees to be removed significantly contribute to the
screening of the facility. An arborist report certifying that the proposed removal of 5 existing
trees, 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 must be submitted
before the final site plan is approved. A tree conservation plan with measures proposed that
would limit impacts of this proposal on all existing trees designated to remain is also required per
the Architectural Review Board (ARB).Similarly, for the proposed access to the tower, an
erosion and sediment control plan will have to be submitted before final site plan approval is
granted.
The County's wireless service facilities policy encourages facilities with limited visibility,
facilities with adequate wooded backdrop, and facilities that do not adversely impact Avoidance
Areas (including Entrance Corridors and historic resources). The proposed pole is visible when
traveling on State Route 20, but at 7' (seven) feet above the reference tree, the sky -lit appearance
of the pole was significantly mitigated. Staff believes the visibility of the monopole does not
adversely impact open space plan resources and fully complies with the county's wireless service
facilities policy.
El
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 is no other existing personal wireless service facility located within an area comprised of a
circle centered anywhere on the ground having a radius of two hundred (200) feet.
Section 5.1.40(d)(5): The maximum base diameter of the monopole shall be thirty (30) inches
and the maximum diameter at the top of the monopole shall be eighteen (18) inches.
Notes on the construction plans for this facility propose a monopole that will have a maximum
base dimension of 30 inches and a maximum dimension of 18 inches at the top. These
dimensions comply with the maximum width requirements for treetop monopoles serving Tier II
facilities.
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).
As mentioned previously in this report, the proposed monopole would have a height of 102.75
feet approximately 667 feet above mean sea level (AMSQ. The height of the reference tree is 95
feet tall or 660 feet above mean sea level (AMSQ. The proposed monopole will be (7) feet taller
than the tallest tree within twenty -five (25) feet (measured at the dripline). The height approved
by the Planning 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 10 feet above the tallest tree. Based
on the balloon test mentioned above, staff determined that there would be a material
difference in the visibility of the monopole at a height of (10) feet, rather than at a height of
7 feet taller than the tallest tree.
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, facade 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
W
parcel or a public or private street.
The applicant is proposing the installation of a facility with a metal monopole. The proposed
color for the tower and screening fence is a brown paint that has been previously used and
approved in Albemarle County. A note on the construction plans identifies the proposed brown
color of the antennae and ground equipment for this facility as Sherwin Williams Matte "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.
Schematic drawings provided in the construction plan packet indicate that the vertical wires
extending from the ground equipment to the antennas shall be contained within the monopole
structure.
Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) 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; (II) shall not prohibit or have
the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. 47 U.S.C.
The Telecommunications Act addresses concerns for environmental effects with the following
language, "No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement,
construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the
environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with
the Commissions' regulations concerning such emissions." In order to operate the proposed
facility, the applicant is required to meet the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions.
These requirements will adequately protect the public health and safety.
It is staff's opinion that the denial of this application would not have the effect of prohibiting the
provision of personal wireless communication services.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified factors which are favorable and unfavorable to this proposal:
Factors favorable to this request include:
• Monopole will be (seven) 7' feet above the reference tree which mitigates the visual
impacts of the tower.
Factors unfavorable to this request include:
• The application plan proposes the removal of 5 existing trees: two 8" Persimmons, one 8"
Oak, one 10" Oak and one 12" Maple to allow for the monopole and equipment shelter.
C1
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility.
Based on findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval at 7 feet above the
reference tree.
In order to comply with Section 5.1.40(d) of the Zoning Ordinance, 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.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Site Plan
B. Vicinity Map
C. Balloon photos at proposed location
D. ARB approval
7