The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSP199800003 Action Letter jf COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45% (804) 296-5823 September 29, 1998 Dick Gibson C/o Tremblay & Smith, LLP 105-109 East High Street Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: SP-98-03 360 Communications (Dudley Mountain) Tax Map 89, Parcel 18 Dear Mr. Gibson: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on September 16, 1998, adopted the attached resolution denying the SP-98-03. lfyou have any questions or comments regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~a~ Director of Planning & C VWC/jcf e elopment Cc: Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey Comprehensive Plan (Record, 5) and would be subject to the Mountain Section of the Natural Environment Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan adopted August 5, 1998. The Open Space Plan states that "Mountains are a major open space system recommended for protection in the Rural and Growth Areas." (Record, 5) 360 Communications did not submit information which compared the impacts caused by siting the tower in the Mountain Resource Area to those caused by siting the tower outside of the mountain resource area. (Record, 5) Siting a tower such as the one proposed in this case in the Mountain Resource Area will permanently alter the quality of the mountain resource and, therefore, approval of SP 98-03 would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. (Record, 6) The Mountain Section states in part: "Mountains may be said to define much of the character of Albemarle County. . . Mountains are a source of concern when inappropriate development creates unwanted impacts to environmental and aesthetic resources and public safety." (Record, 67) In discussing scenic resources and their economic impact, the plan states: A number of highly visible structures constructed recently have occasioned public concern about the continued scenic quality of the mountain landscape. Public expression of concern suggests that the scenic quality of the mountains is important to County residents. An issue that is of importance to visual impact is the horizon. In a county with as much varied topography as Albemarle, the natural horizon becomes very prominent. Any serious modification of the natural ridge lines in the County will modify the visual character of an entire area. (Record,71) Because the proposed tower would be located at an elevation of approximately 1550 feet above sea level (Record, 5) at or near the ridgeline of Dudley Mountain (Record, 6, 53, 82), and would extend 40 to 50 feet above the tree canopy, it will modify the visual character of the area. (Record, 6, 53, 82) The proposed project will also require the disturbance of 600 linear feet on critical slopes to improve the access road to the tower site (Record, 42); some of the slopes disturbed by the project are as steep as 40 percent. (Record, 65) The Mountain Section states in part: "Concerns regarding disturbance of steep land become pronounced in mountain areas due to generally shallow soils and length of grade on side slopes. Soil erosion, surface water runoff, and septic system contamination are amplified in these areas." (Record,68) The following design guidelines recommended in the Mountain Section are also relevant to this proposed project: (1) "Locating. . . structures to make them unobtrusive-in the landscape"; (2) "Do not build structures taller than the natural tree 2 canopy'(; (3) "Do not locate. . . structures where they will be 'skylighted' against the horizon"; and (4) "Do not alter the continuity of the ridgeline." (Record, 74) The proposed tower is contrary to each of the above guidelines. 2. The findings required for the approval of SP 98-03 cannot be made. a. The proposed tower will be a substantial detriment to adjacent property. The tower was proposed to be located only 40 feet from the nearest property line, even though it would have been 100 feet tall and extended 40 to 50 feet above the tree canopy. (Record, 6, 35, 82) The Planning Commission denied 360 Communications request for a setback waiver. (Record, 61) Although the lease area for the proposed tower and related facilities was moved (Record 1-2), the proximity of the tower to the nearest property line did not change. The closest property adjacent to the tower is Arrowhead Farm (Record, 26, 57) which is in a conservation easement. (Record, 6, 26, 35, 36, 57) The proposed project will also require the disturbance of 600 linear feet on critrcal slopes to improve the access road to the tower site (Record, 42); some of the slopes disturbed by the project are as steep as 40 percent. (Record, 55) The owner of Eagle Crest Christmas Tree Farm stated that any erosion on the property would come down on his property and on the Wood's property on the other side. (Record, 42) b. which is rural. The proposed tower will change the character of the district, The proposed tower would be located at an elevation of approximately 1550 feet above sea level (Record, 5) at or near the ridgeline of Dudley Mountain. (Record, 6, 53, 82) The tower would extend 40 to 50 feet above the tree canopy. (Record, 6, 53, 82) The Dudley Mountain area where the tower would be located is entirely wooded (Record, 6, 82, 93) in an area that is sparsely populated. (Record, 37) There are no tower facilities in the vicinity of the proposed tower site. (Record, 17) Dudley Mountain was described by citizens as a beautiful mountain (Record, 44A), which is the "most visually prominent peak in Albemarle County, save Carter's Mountain," and lithe gateway to the City from the south". (Record, 47) Since the adoption of the Open Space Plan in 1992, no towers have been approved within the Mountain Resource Area except within the existing tower farm on Carter's Mountain, and on Piney Mountain, which had two other towers. (Record, 7) The proposed tower would change the character of the district to the extent that it permits development in the Mountain Resource Area. (Record, 7) As provided by the 3 The final report of the wireless telecommunications task force concluded that cellular service and personal communications service ("PCS") are functionally equivalent. The Zoning Ordinance does not discriminate between the two wireless telecommunications services. See, for example, section 1 0.2.2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, which authorizes, among other uses in the Rural Areas (liRA") zoning district, "unmanned telephone exchange centers; micro-wave and radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances." This language, which appears in the regulations for other zoning districts also, has been construed to include the facilities for both cellular service and PCS. Neither the decision of the Planning Commission, the staff report, nor the evidence presented by citizens indicated an intent to favor another wireless service provider over 360 Communications. Rather, the staff report was based upon an analysis of the proposed project's consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and its compliance with the requirements of section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The concerns of citizens rested on traditional land use concerns, including visual blight, erosion, and the proposed tower's proximity to the ridgeline and to an adjoining property line. (Record, 25-28, 30, 32-34, 43-46, 57) b. Neither the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, nor any other regulation or policy of the County prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless telecommunications service in Albemarle County . The purpose of SP 98-03 was to authorize a tower with antenna in order to provide improved wireless telecommunications coverage for southern Albemarle County. (Record, 4, 35, 82) Neither the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, nor any other regulation or policy of the County establishes a ban or policy that has the effect of prohibiting wireless telecommunications service in Albemarle County. A wireless service provider is required to obtain a special use permit for the construction and use of wireless telecommunications facilities. Applications for special use permits are decided on a case-by-case basis, and in reviewing such applications, the Board considers the applicable provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and the factors relevant to the approval of a special use permit set forth in section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Since 1990, the Board has approved 18 applications for special use permits for wireless telecommunications facilities, and denied 4 (other than this application and the application for SP 97-27, the decision on which is pending). (Record, 76-77) There was no evidence presented at either of the public hearings that 5 I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of _ to _, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on September 16, 1998. Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Aye Nay Mr. Marshall Mr. Bowerman Mr. Perkins Ms. Humphris Mr. Martin Ms. Thomas f 7