Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201100016 Legacy Document 2011-09-23o��OF atg���H ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SDP2011 -016 Panorama Farms/ Staff: Megan Yaniglos- Senior Verizon Wireless- Tier II PWSF Planner Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Hearing: April 19, 2011 N/A Owners: Panorama Farms Incorporated Applicant: Cellco Partnership /Verizon Wireless - Stephen Waller Acreage: 706.512 Acres Rezone from: Not applicable (Lease Area: 3,998 square feet) Special Use Permit for: Not applicable TMP: Tax Map 45, Parcel 1 By -right use: RA, Rural Area, Airport Location: At the end of Panorama Road [Route Impact Area, Flood Hazard Overlay 844] approximately 0.75 miles from its intersection District with Earlysville Road [Route 743]. Magisterial District: Rio Proffers /Conditions: No Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A DA - RA - X Proposal: Treetop personal wireless service facility Comp. Plan Designation: Rural with two steel /metal monopoles that would be Area in Rural Area 1 approximately 110 feet tall (10 feet above the height of two reference trees), and ground equipment, within a 3,998 square foot lease area. Character of Property: The property is a large Use of Surrounding Properties: farm off of Panorama Road. The lease site is Single- family Residential located in a heavily wooded area within the farm. Factors Favorable: Proposal meets the Factors Unfavorable: none requirements of Section 5.1.40 identified Recommendation: Section 5.1.40 Personal Wireless Facility- Staff recommends approval of both monopoles at the proposed height of ten (10) feet about the reference tree(s). STAFF CONTACT: Megan Yaniglos PLANNING COMMISSION: April 19, 2011 AGENDA TITLE: SDP2011 -016: Panorama Farms- Verizon Wireless Tier II Personal Wireless Service Facility PROPERTY OWNER: Panorama Farms Incorporated APPLICANT: Stephen Waller, Verizon Wireless PROPOSAL: Request for approval of a treetop personal wireless service facility [Attachment A] with two steel monopoles that would be approximately 110 feet tall each (10 feet AMSL above the tallest tree within 25 feet), with a 12x20 equipment shelter located at the base of the towers, within a 3,998 sq 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 wireless facilities by right in the Rural Areas. The property, described as Tax Map 45, Parcel 1, contains 706.512 acres is located in the Rio Magisterial District, and is zoned RA, Rural Areas. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Areas in Rural Area 1. CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The property is a large farm off of Panorama Road. The lease area is situated in a heavily wooded area. The adjacent properties are zoned Rural Areas, and are single family residential lots. The property is also bordered by the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir on the west side. STAFF COMMENT: Section 3.1 provides the following definitions that are relevant to this proposal: Tier H 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. 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 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 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 two monopole that will have heights of approximately 110 feet above ground level each (AGL) or 591 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The lease site is located in a heavily wooded area, and will require the removal of thirty (30) trees of measurable size. Staff has found that the remaining trees, along with the proposed fence inclosure will provide adequate screening for the proposed monopoles and equipment shelter. There are two reference trees, one for each of the monopoles. Both trees are located within twenty -five (25) feet of the proposed monopoles. A balloon test was conducted on March 11, 2011 [Attachment D]. Since the property is so large, during the site visit Staff drove to immediately adjacent properties where Staff thought the balloons could be viewed. Due to the terrain, distance, and existing tree coverage, the ballons were not visible from immediately adjacent properties.. Staff drove down Earlysville Road, as well as Woodlands Road, and into properties along both of those streets, and could not see the balloons. 3 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 [Attachment E]. Staff believes there is no significant loss of resources related to the installation of the towers. A tree conservation plan, with measures limiting the impacts to existing trees remain will be submitted prior to application for the building permit. 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 monopoles would have heights of approximately 591 feet above mean sea level (AMSQ. The height of the reference trees are approximately 581 feet above mean sea level (AMSQ, and 582 feet above mean sea level, respectfully. The proposed monopole will be ten (10) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty -five (25) feet. 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 El 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 parcel or a public or private street. The applicant is proposing the installation of a facility with two steel monopoles and an equipment shelter. The proposed color for the towers and antenna is a brown paint (Java Brown) to match existing surroundings. The prefabricated equipment shelter will have an exposed aggregate finish siding that is a natural brown earth -tone color. 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 vertical cables, wiring and similar attachments will be located 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 of both monopoles at the proposed height of ten (10) feet above the reference trees. ATTACHMENTS: A. Site Plan B. Vicinity Map C. Applicant Justification Letter 5 D. Balloon test photos E. Open Space and Critical Resources Map F. Approximate Site Location Map