Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201100067 Legacy Document 2011-11-29o� arm ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SDP2011 -067 Gallihugh/ Verizon Staff: Brent Nelson, Planner Wireless- Tier II PWSF Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Hearing: December 61 2011 N/A Owners: Robert A. Hogue Applicant: Stephen Waller- GDN Sites; Verizon Wireless C/O Maynard Sipe- LeClair Ryan Acreage: 2.78 Acres Rezone from: Not applicable (Lease Area: 1,200 square feet) Special Use Permit for: Not applicable TMP: Tax Map 74, Parcel 2C By -right use: RA, Rural Area Location: 3624 Dick Woods Road Magisterial District: Samuel Miller Proffers /Conditions: No Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A DA - RA - X Proposal: To extend an existing steel monopole to Comp. Plan Designation: Rural allow for the attachment of a second vertical array Area in Rural Area 3 with three new flush -mount antennas above the existing antennas. Proposed height of the monopole, with the existing 8.5 foot extension, will be 82.5 feet, approximately 2.5 feet below the top of the reference tree. Character of Property: Heavily wooded with an Use of Surrounding Properties: existing monopole and associated ground Single- family Residential equipment in a fenced lease area. Factors Favorable: The proposed extension is on Factors Unfavorable: none an existing facility and will not have any negative identified visual impact to adjacent properties and roadways. Recommendation: Section 5.1.40 Personal Wireless Facility- Tier II. Staff recommends approval at the height 2.5 feet below the reference tree. STAFF CONTACT: Brent Nelson, Planner PLANNING COMMISSION: December 6, 2011 AGENDA TITLE: SDP2011 -067: Gallihugh Property - Verizon Wireless Tier II Personal Wireless Service Facility PROPERTY OWNER: Gregory Ross Gallihugh APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless PROPOSAL: Request for approval of an extension of the existing steel monopole to support the attachment of a second vertical array with three flush -mount antennas above the existing antennas [Attachment A]. The existing monopole, approved under SP 2000 -28, is 74 feet tall, 11 feet below the top of the reference tree. The total height of the monopole, including the extension, will be 82.5 feet, approximately 2.5 feet below the top of the reference tree. This application is being made in accordance with Section 10.2.1 (22) of the Zoning Ordinance, allowing for Tier II wireless facilities by -right in the Rural Areas. The facility is located on a 2.78 acre parcel, described as Tax Map 74, Parcel 2C, zoned RA and located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District [Attachment B]. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Areas in Rural Area 3. CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The lease area, with the existing monopole and associated ground equipment, is heavily wooded and located in a rural setting of large lot, single family dwellings and farms. 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. 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 N 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 extension of the existing steel monopole supporting a second vertical array with three flush -mount antennas 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 extension will increase the total height of the structure from 74 feet to 82.5 feet, approximately 2.5 feet beneath the top of the reference tree. A balloon test was conducted on October 17, 2011. Staff observed a test balloon that was floated at the approximate height of the modified facility. Staff traveled nearby roads to determine the visual impact on other properties in the area. Staff noted that the existing facility, not including the balloon, was not visible from any of the locations traveled. The balloon was visible from Rosemont Drive, Dick Woods Road (St. Rte 637) near the entrance to Rosemont subdivision and from the adjoining parcel to the west. Each time the trees around the balloon provided a backdrop with the visual impact sufficiently mitigated. The additional pole height and antennas are not expected to have a negative impact on adjacent properties and the ground equipment is not expected to be visible. 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 proposed modifications to the existing facility. The proposed monopole extension and supporting ground equipment will be within the existing facility compound. No trees will need to be removed in order to install the new antennas and ground equipment. 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)(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). The height of the monopole extension with antennas will be 713.5 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The existing monopole has a height of 705 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is 716 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The monopole extension with antennas will be 2.5 feet lower than the height of the reference tree. The extension is proposed to stay within the requirements of this section. 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 parcel or a public or private street. The new antennas, all associated cables, and ground equipment shall be painted Sherwin Williams (6090) Java Brown to match the existing facility. 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 on the outside of the pole shall be placed to face the interior of the property, away from public view. 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. 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 denial of this application would have the effect of prohibiting or restricting the provision of personal wireless services. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed extension of the existing monopole with antennas, and associated ground equipment, based upon the findings in the staff report. ATTACHMENTS: A. Site Plan B. Vicinity Map C. Applicant Justification Letter D. Balloon test photos E. Open Space and Critical Resources Map 5