Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201100068 Legacy Document 2011-11-29o� arm ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SDP2011 -068 Barrell/ Verizon Staff: Brent Nelson, Planner Wireless- Tier II PWSF Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Hearing: December 61 2011 N/A Owners: Herbert Crafts Barrell Estate, c/o Frances Applicant: Stephen Waller- GDN Barrell Sites; Verizon Wireless C/O Maynard Sipe- LeClair Ryan Acreage: 34.23 Acres Rezone from: Not applicable (Lease Area: 1,200 square feet) Special Use Permit for: Not applicable TMP: Tax Map 72, Parcel 43B By -right use: RA, Rural Area, Location: 1010 Mechum View Drive Entrance Corridor Magisterial District: White Hall 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 8.5 foot extension, will be 95 feet, approximately 10 feet above 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 and another PWSF located in close proximity to the east. 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, roadways or Entrance Corridors. Recommendation: Section 5.1.40 Personal Wireless Facility- Tier II. Staff recommends approval at the height 10 feet above the reference tree. STAFF CONTACT: Brent Nelson, Planner PLANNING COMMISSION: December 6, 2011 AGENDA TITLE: SDP2011 -068: Barrell Property - Verizon Wireless Tier II Personal Wireless Service Facility PROPERTY OWNER: Herbert Crafts Barrell Estate, c/o Frances Barrell 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 total height of the monopole, including the extension, will be 95 feet, approximately 10 feet above 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 34.23 acre parcel, described as Tax Map 72, Parcel 43B, zoned RA and located in the White Hall Magisterial District [Attachment B]. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Areas in Rural Area 3. CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The facility under review is located on a parcel adjoining the north side of the I -64 Entrance Corridor immediately west of Mechums' River. The parcel has a rural character containing wooded and cleared areas with the facility under review on a hillside just inside the wooded area. An existing T Mobile PWSF is located on the same parcel approximately 75' east of the facility under review. The properties surrounding the subject parcel, characterized by large farms and single family residential lots, are designated Rural Area in the Comprehensive Plan and included in the Rural Area Zoning District. 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 N 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 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 86.66 feet to 95 feet, approximately 10 feet above 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. Both the existing facility and the balloon were only visible, but not sky -lit, from one adjacent property to the north. Architectural Review Board staff reviewed this request and attended the balloon test. Interstate 64 was traveled east and west to determine the extent of visibility. Both the existing tower and the balloon were visible from the westbound and eastbound lanes of I -64 in the vicinity of the bridge over Mechums' River. When they were visible, they did not have a wooded backdrop, so they were sky -lit, but they were seen through the trees that stand along the I -64 right -of -way. The additional pole height and antennas are not expected to have a negative impact on the adjacent properties or the 1 -64 Entrance Corridor due to the low level of visibility. These findings were presented to the Architectural Review Board at their November 21, 2011 meeting. The Board granted a Certificate of Appropriateness for the ground equipment and base station as proposed. They forwarded a recommendation to the Planning Commission indicating that the ARB finds the proposed location of the facility sufficiently minimizes its visibility from the Entrance Corridor. 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 only one other 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. That facility is located approximately 75 feet east of the facility under consideration. 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 ofsupervisors as provided in subsection 5.1.40(d) (12). The height of the monopole extension with antennas will be 728 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The existing monopole has a height of 720 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is 718 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The monopole extension with antennas will be 10 feet higher 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, 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 new antennas, all associated cables, and ground equipment will be painted Sherwin Williams (6090) Java Brown to match the existing facility. Proposed ground equipment shall be located inside of the existing approved, opaque fencing and not visible. 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 5 C. Applicant Justification Letter D. Balloon Test Photos E. Open Space and Critical Resources Map F. Existing Tower Photo