HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201200006 Legacy Document 2012-04-18 (4)c7q ALi
1Y
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SP201200006 Yancey Mills - Verizon
Staff: Sarah Baldwin, Senior Planner
Wireless Tier III PWSF
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
April 24, 2012
TBD
Owners: Patterson, Roger W. or Patricia W.
Applicant: Verizon Wireless -c /o Lori
Schweller
Acreage: 13.38 acres
Rezone from: Not applicable
Special Use Permit for: 10.2.2(48) Special Use
Permit, which allows for Tier III personal wireless
facilities in the RA Zoning District.
TMP: Tax Map 71 Parcel 37J
By -right use: RA, Rural Areas
Location: 207 Patterson Mill Lane
Magisterial District: Samuel Miller
Proffers /Conditions: Yes
Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A
DA - RA - X
Proposal: Request for installation of a three new
Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in Rural
flush- mounted antennas. This is an amendment of
Area 3.
SP 2000 -27 that includes a condition (4a) limiting
the structure to what is shown on the approved
plans (one (1) antenna array).
Character of Property: This property is zoned Rural
Use of Surrounding Properties: Rural Areas -
Areas and is located in the Entrance Corridor. The site is
vacant residential land.
located in a wooded area at the edge of a field.
Factors Favorable:
Factors Unfavorable: None identified.
1. The proposal is on an existing facility and the
additional antenna will not increase or cause any
new impacts to adjacent properties or important
resources.
2. The proposal meets most of the requirements of
Section 5.1.40 except for the current SP conditions
which limit the number of antenna arrays to what is
shown on the approved plan.
Zoning Ordinance Waivers and Recommendations:
1. Included are modifications for Sections 5.1.40(a)(4)(e)(f)(g). Based on findings presented in the staff
report, staff recommends approval of SP201200006, and all modification requests, with a condition.
STAFF CONTACT: Sarah Baldwin, Senior Planner
PLANNING COMMISSION: April 24, 2012
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: TBD
AGENDA TITLE: SP201200006: Yancey Mills - Verizon Tier III
PROPERTY OWNER: Patterson, Roger W. or Patricia W.
APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless -c /o Lori Schweller
PROPOSAL:
This is a collocation proposal for the installation of three new flush - mounted antennas on
an existing Personal Wireless Service Facility ( "PWSF ") and supporting ground
equipment. The new panel antennas will be installed directly below Verizon's existing
antenna. This is an amendment of SP 2000 -27 that includes a condition (4a) limiting the
structure to what is shown on the approved plans (one (1) antenna array). The existing
guyed tower is approximately 90.75 feet above ground level ( "AGL "). The new antenna
panel will be located at 82 feet AGL. The proposed ground equipment will be installed
within the existing lease area and will require a minor expansion of the fenced compound.
No changes in height or other modifications are proposed at this time.
The BOS approved Special Permit SP2000 -27 on 9/13/00 authorizing the construction of this
facility. The current regulations for Wireless Facilities were adopted on 10/13/04. Because this
facility was approved prior to the current regulations it is still subject to the conditions of SP
2000 -27 and is not considered a Tiered Facility because the concept of tiered approvals did not
exist. Any change to the site must be consistent with the conditions of the Special Permit or the
conditions must be modified by using the Special Permit process or the site must be approved as
a Tier II. At this time, the Applicant has elected to amend the Special Permit.
The 13.38 acre property, described as Tax Map 71, Parcel 37J, is located in the Samuel Miller
District and is zoned Rural Areas ( "RA ").
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan designates the property as Rural Area in Rural Area 3.
CHARACTER OF THE AREA:
This property is zoned Rural Areas, as well as all the surrounding properties. The site is located in a
wooded area at the edge of a field.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
A special use permit (SP2000 -27) was approved for the site in 2000, which predated the Personal
Wireless Facilities Ordinance.
DISCUSSION:
An amendment to the Special Use Permit is required for this proposal only to accommodate an
increase in the number of antennas above that which is shown on the plan. In addition, many of
the conditions contained in the current SP could be eliminated since they are now required
regulations as contained in the PWSF Ordinance.
PA
ANALYSIS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST:
Section 31.6.1 of the Zoning Ordinance below requires that special use permits be reviewed as
follows:
Will the use be of substantial detriment to adjacent property?
It is not anticipated that the proposed addition of an antenna array will be of any detriment to
the adjacent properties, aside from limited construction activity to accommodate the array and
associated ground equipment. The new antenna array will not substantially change the visual
impact of the existing tower.
Will the character of the zoning district change with this use?
As mentioned above, no substantial changes will occur with the addition of an antenna array
aside from limited construction activity associated with the change.
Will the use be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance?
Staff has reviewed this request as it relates to the "purpose and intent" that is set forth in
Sections 1.4. of the Zoning Ordinance, and as it relates to the intent specified in the Rural
Areas chapter of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 10.1). This request is consistent with both
sections.
Will the use be in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district?
No significant adverse impacts are anticipated, since this request only involves an addition of
an antenna array.
Will the public health, safety and general welfare of the community be protected if the
use is approved?
The public health, safety, and general welfare of the community is protected through the
special use permit process, which assures that uses approved by special use permit are
appropriate in the location requested. The proposed increase in antenna arrays will provide
more reliable access to the wireless communication market, to include schools and residences.
This can be seen as contributing to the public health, safety and welfare. Otherwise, no
change to the public health, safety and general welfare is expected with approval of the
additional antenna array.
Compliance with Section 5.1.40 of the Zoning Ordinance
The county's specific design criteria for Tier III facilities as set forth in section 5.1.40(e) are
addressed as follows [Ordinance sections are in bold italics]:
Section 5.1.40(e) Tier III facilities. Each Tier III facility may be established upon approval of
a special use permit issued pursuant to section 31.6.1 of this chapter, initiated upon an
application satisfying the requirements of subsection 5.1.40(a) and section 31.6.2, and it shall
be installed and operated in compliance with all applicable provisions of this chapter and the
following:
1. The facility shall comply with subsection 5.1.40(b) subsection 5.1.40(c)(2) through (9) and
subsection 5.1.40(d)(2),(3),(6) and (7), unless modified by the board of supervisors during
special use permit review.
2 The facility shall comply with all conditions of approval of the special use permit.
Requirements of subsection 5.1.40(a) application for approval and section 31.6.1 special use
permits have been met with the exception of the modifications detailed below. Since this tower is
an existing facility, no balloon test was needed. Compliance with Section 5.1.40(e) of the
Zoning Ordinance: The County's specific design criteria for Tier III facilities set forth in Section
5.1.40(e)(1) and 5.1.40(e)(2) are addressed as follows:
Subsection 5.1.40(b) (1 -5): Exemption from regulations otherwise applicable: Except as
otherwise exempted in this paragraph, each facility shall be subject to all applicable
regulations in this chapter.
The proposed wireless facility meets the required Rural Areas setbacks in addition to all other
area and bulk regulations and minimum yard requirements. Attached site drawings, antennae and
equipment specifications have been provided to demonstrate that personal wireless service
facilities (PWSF) regulations and any relevant site plan requirements set forth in Section 32 of
the zoning ordinance have been addressed.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(2) -: The facility shall be designed, constructed and maintained as
follows: (i) guy wires shall not be permitted, (ii) outdoor lighting for the facility shall be
permitted only during maintenance periods; regardless of the lumens emitted, each outdoor
luminaire shall be fully shielded as required by section 4.17 of this chapter; (iii) any
equipment cabinet not located within the existing structure shall be screened from all lot lines
either by terrain, existing structures, existing vegetation, or by added vegetation approved by
the county's landscape planner, (iv) a whip antenna less than six (6) inches in diameter may
exceed the height of the existing structure, (v) a grounding rod, whose height shall not exceed
two (2) feet and whose width shall not exceed one (1) inch in diameter at the base and tapering
to a point, may be installed at the top of facility or the structure, and (vi) within one month
after the completion of the installation of the facility, the applicant shall provide a statement to
the agent certifying that the height of all components of the facility complies with this
regulation.
The proposed changes to the monopole do not require the installation of guy wires, nor will it be
fitted with any whip antennas. The proposed antenna array will be flush - mounted panel antennas.
All other requirements of this subsection have been met.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(3): Equipment shall be attached to the exterior of a structure only as
follows: (i) the total number of arrays of antennas attached to the existing structure shall not
exceed three (3), and each antenna proposed to be attached under the pending application
shall not exceed the size shown on the application, which size shall not exceed one thousand
one hundred fifty two (1152) square inches; (ii) no antenna shall project from the structure
beyond the minimum required by the mounting equipment, and in no case shall any point on
the face of an antenna project more than twelve (12) inches from the existing structure; and
(iii) each antenna and associated equipment shall be a color that matches the existing
structure. For purposes of this section, all types of antennas and dishes regardless of their use
shall be counted toward the limit of three arrays.
The proposed additional antenna array configuration is a flush - mounted panel which will bring
the total number of antenna arrays to two( 2) and requires modification of the SP conditions.
The previous special use permits (SP2000 -27) and associated plans limited the antenna array to
one (1). The existing and proposed changes to the tower meet all other relevant design,
mounting and size criteria of this subsection.
2
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(4): Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a
tree conservation plan prepared by a certified arborist. The plan shall be submitted to the
agent for review and approval to assure that all applicable requirements have been satisfied.
The plan shall specify tree protection methods and procedures, and identify all existing trees to
be removed on the parcel for the installation, operation and maintenance of the facility.
Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the agent, the applicant shall not remove
existing trees within the lease area or within one hundred (100) feet in all directions
surrounding the lease area of any part of the facility. In addition, the agent may identify
additional trees or lands up to two hundred (200) feet from the lease area to be included in the
plan.
The installation of the proposed antenna array for this personal wireless service facility will not
require the removal of any trees. The applicant will submit a letter from a certified arborist
stating that no trees will be disturbed and the plans include a note to that affect.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(5) The installation, operation and maintenance of the facility shall be
conducted in accordance with the tree conservation plan. Dead and dying trees identified by
the arborist's report may be removed if so noted on the tree conservation plan. If tree removal
is later requested that was not approved by the agent when the tree conservation plan was
approved, the applicant shall submit an amended plan. The agent may approve the amended
plan if the proposed tree removal will not adversely affect the visibility of the facility from any
location off of the parcel. The agent may impose reasonable conditions to assure that the
purposes of this paragraph are achieved.
As stated above, this is an existing tower where no changes are proposed that will require the
removal of any trees. A letter from a certified arborist and notes on the plan also confirm that no
trees will be removed.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(6): The facility shall be disassembled and removed from the site within
ninety (90) days of the date its use for personal wireless service purposes is discontinued. If the
agent determines at any time that surety is required to guarantee that the facility will be
removed as required, the agent may require that the parcel owner or the owner of the facility
submit a certified check, a bond with surety, or a letter of credit, in an amount sufficient for,
and conditioned upon, the removal of the facility. The type and form of the surety guarantee
shall be to the satisfaction of the agent and the county attorney. In determining whether surety
should be required, the agent shall consider the following: (i) the annual report states that the
tower or pole is no longer being used for personal wireless service facilities; (ii) the annual
report was not filed; (iii) there is a change in technology that makes it likely that tower or pole
will be unnecessary in the near future; (iv) the permittee fails to comply with applicable
regulations or conditions, (v) the permittee fails to timely remove another tower or pole within
the county; and (vi) whenever otherwise deemed necessary by the agent.
Should use of the antennae site in this location become discontinued at anytime in the future,
Verizon Wireless and/or its assignee(s) will be required to remove the facility within 90 days.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(7): The owner of the facility shall submit a report to the agent by no
earlier than May or and no later than July I of each year. The report shall identify each user
of the existing structure, and include a drawing, photograph or other illustration identifying
which equipment is owned and/or operated by each personal wireless service provider.
Multiple users on a single tower or other mounting structure may submit a single report,
5
provided that the report includes a statement signed by a representative from each user
acquiescing in the report.
It is recommended that Verizon Wireless submit an annual report updating the user status and
equipment inventory of the facility at or prior to building permit issuance and then annually to
satisfy the requirements under the Ordinance.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(8): No slopes associated with the installation of the facility and accessory
uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other
stabilization measures acceptable to the county engineer are employed.
Again, since this is an existing facility and proposed changes are only for the addition of an
antenna array and associated changes, no slopes are affected.
Subsection 5.1.40(c)(9): Any equipment cabinet not located within an existing building shall
be fenced only with the approval of the agent upon finding that the fence: (i) would protect the
facility from trespass in areas of high volumes of vehicular or pedestrian traffic or, in the
rural areas, to protect the facility from livestock or wildlife, (ii) would not be detrimental to the
character of the area; and (iii) would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general
welfare.
The existing facility contains a fenced in area that will be slightly enlarged to accommodate new
ground equipment and is therefore not be detrimental to the character of the area, nor the public
health, safety or general welfare.
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, or adjacent
to a conservation easement or open space easement, the facility shall be sited so that it is not
visible from any resources specifically identified for protection in the deed of easement.
The existing facility has been in place for over 10 years and has some visibility from some
points, but the proposed changes are not expected to increase the negative impact on the
Entrance Corridor. The new antennas will be mounted below the existing array to avoid an
increase in visual impact.
Section 5.1.40(d)(3): The facility shall not adversely impact resources identified in the
county's open space plan.
The existing facility has been in place for over 10 years. This proposal does not substantially
change the visual impact of the tower and does not adversely impact any resources in the open
space plan.
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
Co
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).
No changes to the height of this facility are proposed. This proposal does not substantially
change the visual impact of the tower and does not adversely impact any resources in the open
space plan.
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, favade 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 has submitted a paint chip entitled "Sherwin Williams Java -SW 6090" and states
that the proposed antenna array and supporting equipment will be painted to match the existing
color of the tower.
Section 5.1.40(e)2: The facility shall comply with all conditions of approval of the special use
permit.
The facility complies with all conditions of approval of the special use permit (Section 31.6.3).
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.
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 special use permitting process nor
the denial of this application would have the effect of prohibiting or restricting the provision of
7
personal wireless services.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the additional antenna for this personal
wireless service facility, and modifications based upon the analysis provided herein.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified factors which are favorable and unfavorable to this proposal:
Factors favorable to this request include:
1. The addition of the antenna array will provide advanced technology service and support a
larger project to provide fourth generation (4G) services therefore contributing to the
general health, safety, and welfare of the public.
2. The proposal is on an existing facility and the additional antenna array will not increase
or cause any new impacts to adjacent properties or important resources.
Factors unfavorable to this request include:
None identified.
In order to comply with Section 5.1.40(d) of the Zoning Ordinance if recommended for denial,
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.
Zoning Ordinance Modifications:
The proposed modifications are for certain required information to be provided on supporting
plan documents. The application request is for an additional antenna array on the existing tower
are part of a larger project to improve Verizon Wireless' existing network of facilities by adding
fourth generation ( "4G ") services to the existing cellular services. Staff is able to support all of
the recommended modifications described in the staff report because this is an existing facility.
The recommended modifications are for requirements of the ordinance that are generally meant
to aid in the determination of whether a new tower is appropriate in the proposed area of the
County or whether a height increase is appropriate, these specific requirements are not applicable
for an existing towers seeking the addition of antennas. Listed below are the recommended
modifications:
1. Section 5.1.40(a)(4)(e)- topography.
2. Section 5.1.40(a)(4)(f)- height, caliper and tree species.
3. Section 5.1.40(a)(4)(g)- setbacks, parking and landscaping.
If the Planning Commission recommends approval of this application, Staff recommends the
following condition:
Conditions of approval:
Development and use shall be in general accord with what is described in the applicant's
request and site plans, entitled "Yancey Mills LTE 4G Upgrade ", with a final zoning
8
drawing submittal date of 4/3/12 (hereafter "Conceptual Plan "), as determined by the
Director of Planning and Zoning Administrator. To be in accord with the Conceptual
Plan, development and use shall reflect the following major elements within the
development essential to the design of the development, as shown on the Conceptual
Plan:
a. Height
Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be
made to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Vicinity Map
B. Site Plan
C. Applicant Photo Simulations
I
Motion One: The Planning Commission's role in this case (SP201200006) is to make a
recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to approve or deny modifications for Sections
5.1.40(a)(4)(e), (f), and (g) of the Zoning Ordinance.
A. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of modifications of
Sections 5.1.40(a)(4)(e),(f) and(g):
I move to recommend approval granting the modifications for reasons outlined in
the staff report.
B. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend denial of the modifications for
this Tier III personal wireless service facility:
I move to deny the modifications outlined in the staff report. (Planning Commission
needs to give a reason for denial)
Motion Two: The Planning Commission's role in this case (SP201200006) is to make a
recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.
A. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of this Tier III
personal wireless service facility
I move to recommend approval of SP 201200006 Yancey Mill - Verizon Wireless
Tier III PWSF with the conditions outlined in the staff report.
B. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend denial of this Tier III personal
wireless service facility:
I move to recommend denial of SP 201200006 Yancey Mills - Verizon Wireless Tier
III PWSF (Planning Commission needs to give a reason for denial).
10