HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201200025 Legacy Document 2012-06-08 (12)pF .ALg�
�Si dr
Lrkf;ll�tp,
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SDP201200025 - Tier II Personal
Staff: Joanne Tu Purtsezova, Planner
Wireless Service Facility: Verizon Wireless, Vest
Property /Hardware River
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Hearing:
June 19, 2012
July 11, 2012
Owner: Linda M. Vest
Applicant: Verizon Wireless
Acreage: 2.16
Rezone from: Not applicable
(Lease Area: 10,000 square feet)
Special Use Permit: YES: SP- 2003 -072, which is no
longer valid due to latest federal, state, and county
legislation and policies
TMP: Tax Map 109, Parcel 43C
By -right use: RA, Rural Areas
Location: 795 feet east of U.S. 29 at 5469 Murrays
Lane
Magisterial District: Samuel Miller
Proffers /Conditions: YES, but no longer valid
Requested # of Dwelling Units /Lots: N/A
DA - RA - X
Proposal: Request to replace an existing wood
Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in Rural Area 3
monopole with a new steel monopole in order to
support the attachment of six new antennas in
two vertical arrays. The new proposed height of
the replacement steel monopole will be 92 -feet,
6- inches, an 18 -foot, 2 -inch increase from the
74 -foot, 4 -inch existing wood monopole, and will
be approximately 7 feet above the reference
tree. Associated with this request is a critical
slopes waiver.
Character of Property: The proposed site is located
Use of Surrounding Properties: Rural area single
on a parcel with an entrance off of Murrays Lane
family residential uses.
(State Route 718) about 795 feet east of U.S. 29. The
lease area is heavily wooded and there are existing
rural /residential structures nearby.
Factors Favorable: Proposal meets the requirements
Factors Unfavorable: The approval of a critical slopes
of Section 5.1.40
waiver request is required.
Recommendation:
Section 5.1.40 Personal Wireless Facility - Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility
with antennas and associated ground equipment at the proposed height of seven (7) feet above the reference tree.
STAFF CONTACT:
Joanne Tu Purtsezova
PLANNING COMMISSION: June 19, 2012
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: July 11, 2012
AGENDA TITLE: SDP201200025 - Tier II Personal Wireless Service Facility:
Verizon Wireless, Vest Property /Hardware River
PROPERTY OWNER: L. M. Vest
APPLICANT: Verizon Wireless
PROPOSAL-
Request to replace an existing wood monopole with a new steel monopole in order to support
the attachment of six new antennas in two vertical arrays. The new proposed height of the
replacement steel monopole will be 92 -feet, 6- inches, an 18 -foot, 2 -inch increase from the 74-
foot, 4 -inch existing wood monopole, and will be approximately 7 feet above the reference tree.
Associated with this request is a critical slopes waiver. 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 3.
CHARACTER OF THE AREA:
The proposed personal wireless service facility is located about 795 feet east of U.S. 29, within
a heavily wooded lease area well below the ridgeline of Cook Mountain, with an entrance off of
Murrays Lane (State Route 718). Existing rural /residential structures are nearby. The parcel is
located in the Entrance Corridors overlay district. A portion of the property is located in the
Mountain Overlay District, but the site /lease area itself is not. The nearest off -site residence is
located about 88 feet south of the tower site on TMP 109 Parcel 43B. 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 109, Parcel 43C and will require a fall zone easement
from the adjacent property [Tax Map 109, Parcel 43C1]. The applicant has submitted a fall zone
easement prohibiting development on the abutting lot [Tax Map 109, Parcel 43C1] within the
monopole's fall zone area [Attachment G].
STAFF COMMENT:
Section 3.1 provides the following definitions that are relevant to this proposal:
Tier 11 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
2
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 11 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
F] .
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 existing wooden monopole is approximately 74 feet 4 inches above ground level (AGL) or
798.51 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The proposed replacement facility includes a steel
monopole that would have a height of approximately 92 feet 6 inches above ground level (AGL)
or 892 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is about 74 feet
above ground level (AGL) or approximately 885 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and is
located 11 feet away from the proposed monopole.
A balloon test was conducted on May 9, 2012 [Attachment F]. During the site visit, the balloon
was launched at a slightly higher elevation than the proposed monopole location, because the
branches on a dying tree made it difficult to launch the balloon at the exact location. The balloon
was raised to the same elevation as the proposed pole, seven (7) feet above the reference tree.
The balloon was slightly visible for a short period from the northbound lane of U.S. 29, directly in
front of the site. The balloon was not visible from southbound lane of U.S. 29, approximately
2/3 -mile south of the site. The balloon was minimally visible at various locations immediately in
front of the lease area along Murrays Lane (only with the digital camera zoomed in as closely as
possible, and not visible from a distance). The balloon was minimally visible above the trees. In
particular, the monopole is not visible from the adjacent property on Tax Map 109 Parcel 37A,
which has a conservation easement. 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 Murrays Lane
or U.S. 29 due to its limited visibility. The ground equipment will not be visible from Murrays
Lane or U.S. 29. The "Sherwin Williams Java Brown" 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 Murrays Lane or U.S. 29. 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."
The only 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 will be removed
and replaced by the proposed steel monopole. It is a wooden monopole just over 20 feet away
from the location of the replacement steel monopole.
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
M
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 892 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is
approximately 885 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, fagade 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 to replace the
current wooden monopole. The proposed paint color for the tower and equipment cabinet is
Sherwin Williams (Java Brown) 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 all vertical cables, wires, and similar attachments will run
vertically within the monopole's structure.
Section 704(a)(7)(b)(1)(11) 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.
5
CRITICAL SLOPES MODIFICATION
The proposed steel monopole and associated ground equipment will require the disturbance of
critical slopes. Critical slopes waivers would have previously been approved administratively;
however, due to a recent State Supreme Court decision, the waiver must now be approved by
the Board of Supervisors. The Board of Supervisors now has the sole authority to waive this
restriction. The applicant has submitted a request and justification for the waiver [Attachment D],
and staff has analyzed this request to address the provisions of the Ordinance. The request for
a modification has been reviewed for both the Engineering and Planning aspects of the critical
slopes regulations. Section 4.2.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance restricts earth - disturbing activity on
critical slopes, while Section 4.2.5(a) previously allowed the Planning Commission to waive this
restriction.
The critical slopes in the area of this request are natural and belong to a larger system of critical
slopes that have been identified as needing to be protected in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff
has reviewed this waiver request with consideration for the concerns that are set forth in Section
4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, entitled "Critical Slopes." These concerns have been addressed
directly through the analysis provided herein, which is presented in two parts, based on the
Section of the Ordinance to which each pertain.
Section 4.2.5(a)
Review of the request by Engineering staff:
The critical slope waiver request has been reviewed. The engineering analysis of the request
follows:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
This is a wooded mountain side above residences. The applicant is proposing a new site for a
new tower to replace an old wooden tower.
Areas
Acres
Total site
10,000 sf lease area on a 2.16 acre parcel
(existing lease area is 382sf)
Critical slopes
638sf
Remainder of lease area
Critical slopes disturbed
638sf
100% of critical slopes in lease area
Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without
reasonable alternative locations:
To date, cell towers and equipment sites have not been considered utilities which are exempt
from critical slopes waivers.
Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18 -4.2:
"movement of soil and rock"
Proper retaining wall construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will prevent
any movement of soil.
"excessive stormwater runoff'
Stormwater runoff has not been addressed, but the site is fairly small.
0
"siltation"
This site is small enough that it will probably not require an erosion control plan and inspection
'loss of aesthetic resource"
Planning should speak to this concern. [See planning comments below.]
"septic effluent"
This use has no sewage.
Based on the review above, there are no engineering concerns which prohibit the disturbance of
the critical slopes as shown. However, it is recommended that the equipment pad be moved
down the slope out of the critical area. If there is sufficient explanation to the Board as to why
this cannot be done, engineering does not have any concerns with impacts for this small site.
The applicant has provided the following response to Engineering concerns:
County Engineer's Critical Slopes Waiver Review / alternate location for the new ground
equipment: The proposed locations of newly proposed LTE equipment and generator (which
must have doors to be accessed from both sides) were selected in order to maintain adequate
spacing between the doors that must be opened to access the interiors whenever maintenance
is required. An attempt to place all of the new equipment in front of the existing equipment
would require a substantial amount of fill, a retaining wall, and handrails between the existing
equipment pad and lower access drive in order to create adequate space for Verizon Wireless'
technical operations staff to be able to access all of the equipment safely. Therefore, it was
decided to place the equipment in the area to the north, as proposed, where access to all
equipment can be achieved safely and in an area that will be more level.
Review of the request by Planning staff:
Summary of review of modification of Section 4.2:
Section 4.2.5 establishes the review process and criteria for granting a waiver of Section 4.2.3.
The preceding comments by staff address the provisions of Section 4.2.5(a). Staff has included
the provisions of Section 4.2.5(a)(3) here, along with staff comment on the various provisions.
The commission (now the Board of Supervisors) may modify or waive any requirement of
section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that:
"A. Strict application of the requirements of section 4.2 would not forward the purposes of this
chapter or otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare;"
Granting the modification request could better serve the purpose of this chapter or the public
health, safety or welfare by allowing the site to provide Covesville area residents with more
reliable 4G service. More reliable service may be considered to serve public welfare, in an area
where cell service is more limited.
'B. Alternatives proposed by the developer or subdivider would satisfy the intent and
purposes of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree;"
No alternatives have been proposed by the applicant.
"C. Due to the property's unusual size, topography, shape, location or other unusual
conditions, excluding the proprietary interest of the developer or subdivider, prohibiting the
disturbance of critical slopes would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of
7
the property or would result in significant degradation of the property or adjacent properties;
or"
The proposed steel monopole will replace an existing monopole that is in nearly the same
location, only about 20 feet away. If the critical slopes waiver is not approved, the wooden
monopole cannot be upgraded to provide more reliable 4G service to Covesville residents, thus
restricting the ability to upgrade the existing tower already in use on this property.
"D. Granting the modification or waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import than
would be served by strict application of the regulations sought to be modified or waived. "
A finding that granting the waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import than would be
served by strict application of the regulations may be made. Although the critical slopes
requested to be disturbed belong to a larger system of critical slopes, the total disturbance is
minimal. Loss of aesthetic resource is also expected to be minimal. The proposed tower is well -
sited and otherwise meets the County's Wireless Policy.
FAVORABLE AND UNFAVORABLE FACTORS:
Staff has identified the following favorable and unfavorable factors:
Favorable factors:
1. The amount of total disturbance is limited.
2. Proper retaining wall construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will
prevent any movement of soil.
3. Siltation and septic effluent concerns are minimal.
4. Approval of the critical slopes waiver would better serve public welfare than strict
application of the regulations.
5. Strict application of regulations would otherwise restrict a well -sited tower.
6. Minimal loss of aesthetic resource is expected.
Unfavorable factors:
1. The disturbance of critical slopes is to a larger system of critical slopes. [Attachment E]
2. An adjoining property owner has submitted a letter of opposition. [Attachment H]
CRITICAL SLOPES MODIFICATION RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the critical slopes modification request.
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION
Staff recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility with antennas and
associated ground equipment 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 with
antennas and associated ground equipment at the proposed height of seven (7) feet above the
reference tree.
Motion:
1. Recommend approval /denial of the critical slopes waiver request.
If the critical slopes waiver request is approved:
2. Recommend approval /denial of 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 recommend approval of the
personal wireless service facility:
I move to recommend approval of SDP - 2012 -025 Verizon Wireless Tier II
Personal Wireless Facility with antennas and associated ground equipment
on the Vest Property for the following reason(s) at the proposed height of
seven (7) feet above the reference tree.
B. Should the Planning Commission choose to recommend denial the personal
wireless service facility:
I move to recommend denial of SDP - 2012 -025 Verizon Wireless Tier II
Personal Wireless Facility with antennas and associated ground equipment
on the Vest Property 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. Critical Slopes Waiver Request
E. Critical Slopes and Conservation Easement Map
F. Balloon Photos at Proposed Location
G. Fall Zone Easement Document
H. Citizen Letter of Opposition.
9