Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201100041 Legacy Document 2011-08-18o� arm ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SDP 2011- 41 Cantrell Property Staff: Gerald Gatobu, Principal Planner (Ntelos) Tier II PWSF Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Hearing: August 23, 2011 N/A Owners: Cantrell, Robert W or Lee Y Applicant: Cantrell, Robert W or Lee Y Acreage: 8.41 Rezone from: Not applicable (Lease Area: 2,500 square feet) Special Use Permit for: Not applicable TMP: Tax Map 43, Parcel 16G By -right use: RA, Rural Areas Location: Approximately 650 feet east of Owensville Road [Route 676] approximately 0.20 miles north of the intersection of Owensville Road and Old Ballard Road [Route 6771. The property address is 1925 Owensville Road. Magisterial District: Samuel Miller Proffers /Conditions: No Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A DA - RA - X Proposal: Proposal to install Treetop personal Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in Rural Area 1 wireless service facility with a steel monopole that would be approximately 112 feet tall (7 feet above the height of the reference tree), and ground equipment, within a 2,500 square foot lease area. Character of Property: The proposed site is Use of Surrounding Properties: located on a parcel with an entrance off Owensville Rural area single family residential uses. Road [State Route 676]. The lease area is wooded and there are existing rural /agricultural structures on the property. Factors Favorable: Proposal meets the Factors Unfavorable: none identified requirements of Section 5.1.40 Recommendation: Section 5.1.40 Personal Wireless Facility- Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility at the proposed height of seven (7) feet above the reference tree. STAFF CONTACT: PLANNING COMMISSION: AGENDA TITLE: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: Gerald Gatobu August 23, 2011 SDP 2011 -41: Cantrell Property (Ntelos) Tier 11 PWSF Cantrell, Robert W or Lee Y Cantrell, Robert W or Lee Y PROPOSAL: Request for approval of a treetop personal wireless service facility with a steel monopole that would be approximately 111.6 feet tall (seven (7) feet above the height of the reference tree), and ground equipment within a 2,500 square foot lease area. This application is being made in accordance with section 10.2.1.(22) of the Zoning Ordinance, which allows for Tier II personal wireless service facilities by right in the Rural Area zoning district. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Areas in Rural Area 1 CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The proposed site is located on a parcel with an entrance off Owensville Road [State Route 676]. The lease area is wooded and there are existing rural /agricultural structures on the property. The proposed personal wireless service facility will be located closer in distance to the abutting lot line than the height of the tower. The tower will be on Tax Map 43, Parcel 16G and will require a fall zone easement from the adjacent property [Tax Map 43, Parcel 16]. The applicant has submitted a fall zone easement prohibiting development on the abutting lot [Tax Map 43, Parcel 16] within the monopoles fall zone area. [Attachment E] 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 (ASL), and includes associated antennas, mounting structures, an equipment cabinet and other essential personal wireless service equipment. Section 5.1.40(d), "Tier II facilities" states: "Each Tier H 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 N 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 D]. 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. 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 111.6 feet above ground level (AGL) or 720.6 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is about 104.5 feet above ground level (AGL) or approximately 713.58 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and is located 18.92 feet south of the proposed monopole. A balloon test was conducted on June 30, 2011 [Attachment D]. During the site visit, the balloon was launched at the proposed monopole location. The balloon was raised to the same elevation as the proposed pole, seven (7) feet above the reference tree. The balloon was visible for a short period from the North and South bound lanes of Owensville Road [State Route 676]. The balloon was also slightly visible from Old Ballard Farm Road [State Route 677]. Photos were taken from Old Ballard Farm Lane [Private], and the balloon was minimally visible at various locations between houses in the Ballard Field subdivision. The balloon was minimally visible above the trees. The monopole and antennas will be sufficiently mitigated when painted to match the surroundings. The monopole at the proposed elevation of seven (7) feet above the reference tree is not expected to have an adverse visual impact on Owensville Road [State Route 676] and Old Ballard Farm Lane [Private] due to its limited visibility. The ground equipment will not be visible from Owensville Road [State Route 676]. The "Umbra" color of the monopole and antennas will help mitigate views from the road and surrounding properties. 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 and Critical Resources Plan. Staff believes there is no significant loss of resources related to the installation of the tower. This tower will not impact adjacent properties, and there will be no significant loss of historical and scenic resources related to the installation of the tower. 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 Scenic byways). The proposed monopole will be visible for a relatively short period when traveling on Owensville Road [State Route 676], Old Ballard Farm Road [State Route 677], and Old Ballard Farm Lane [Private]. As mentioned above, the degree of visibility is not expected to have a negative impact. The visibility of the monopole will not adversely affect any historical or scenic resources. A tree conservation plan, with measures limiting the impacts to existing trees remain will be submitted prior to building permit application. 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 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 site plan for this facility propose a monopole diameter not to exceed 30 inches at the base or 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 approximately 720.6 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is approximately 713.58 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The proposed monopole will be about seven (7) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty -five (25) feet. There is no adverse visual impact to resources identified in the county's open space plan caused by the monopole at the proposed height of seven (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, fa(ade 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 is proposing the installation of a facility with a steel monopole. The proposed color for the tower and equipment cabinet is Sherwin Williams (Umbra) paint to match existing surroundings. 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. A note on the site plan indicates that coax cables will run inside the monopole. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of The Telecommunications Act of 1996: The regulation of the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless facilities by any state or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. 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. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility. Based on findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval at the proposed seven (7) feet above the reference tree. PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION 5 Staff recommendations: A. Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility at the proposed height of seven (7) feet above the reference tree. The Planning Commission needs to approve or deny the personal wireless service facility at the proposed height of seven (7) feet above the tallest tree. Motion : Approve /Deny the personal wireless service facility (tower) at the proposed height of seven (7) feet above the reference tree. A. Should the Planning Commission choose to approve the personal wireless service facility: I move to approve SDP2011 -41 Cantrell Property (Ntelos) Tier II Personal Wireless Facility at the proposed height of seven (7) feet above the reference tree. B. Should the Planning Commission choose to deny the personal wireless service facility I move to deny SDP2011 -41 Cantrell Property (Ntelos) Tier II Personal Wireless Facility for the following reason(s): 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 per section 5.1.40(d). ATTACHMENTS: A. Site Plan B. Vicinity Map C. Applicant Justification Letter D. Balloon photos at proposed location E. Fall Zone Easement Document Co