Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201400013 Correspondence 2014-05-09 WILLIAMS MULLEN Direct Dial:434.951.5701 plloyd @williamsmullen.com May 9,2014, as last revised February 3, 2015 VIA HAND DELIVERY Ms. Sarah Baldwin County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,Virginia 22902 RE: S"R*Y0 40013—Tier II PWSF Royal Orchard Land Corp./AT&T Wireless Telecommunications Facility AT&T Site CV 479 Critical Slopes Waiver Request Dear Sarah: New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC ("AT&T") is submitting this request to allow disturbance of critical slopes for the installation of a proposed AT&T wireless telecommunications facility located on tax map parcel 05300-00-00-0020 (the "Property"), property owned by Royal Orchard Land Corp. (the "Property Owner"). This letter amends and restates in all respects our prior letters to you dated May 9, 2014, September 2, 2014, and October 24,2014. I. Overview The proposed facility (the "Facility") consists of a telecommunications monopole structure, an 11'5"x 12' equipment shelter and related improvements on a raised metal platform supported by a caisson foundation, situated at the western end of the Property on a wooded hillside within an approximately 2,000 square foot piece of land (the "Lease Area"). The Property consists almost entirely of critical slopes. The total critical slope area that would be disturbed by construction of the Facility in and around the Lease Area is 1,911 square feet. Design features of the proposed Facility are depicted and described on drawings by BC Architects Engineers PLC (the "Zoning Drawings"), copies of which are attached to this letter as Exhibit A. The Zoning Drawings attached hereto supersede any versions previously transmitted. The Facility is intended to improve wireless phone and data coverage to an underserved area in the vicinity of the Property. 321 East Main Street,Suite 400 Charlottesville,VA 22902 T 434.951.5700 F 434.817.0977 williamsmullen.com DC NC VA I A Professional Corporation WILLIAMS MULLEN Ms. Sarah Baldwin May 9,2014, as last revised February 3, 2015 Page 2 II. Exemption of Access Road Pursuant to Section 4.2.6(c) To provide access to the Lease Area, the Applicant proposes to improve and widen an existing gravel road from Royal Orchard Drive over adjacent properties owned by the Property Owner and identified as tax map parcels 05300-00-00-001B0 and 05300-00-00-00100 (the "Adjacent Properties"), and the Property, and to modify the alignment of the existing gravel road on the Property (the "Access Road"). Plans submitted to the County initially contemplated the disturbance of approximately 12,000 square feet of critical slope area resulting from the construction of the Access Road. In consultation with the County Engineer, AT&T has revised its plans to reduce the critical slope area impacted by the Access Road to 7,742 square feet. The Access Road is exempt from the requirements of the County's critical slope ordinance pursuant to Section 4.2.6(c) of the Zoning Ordinance as an "accessway... necessary to allow the use of the parcel"where "no reasonable alternative location or alignment exists." III. Request for Waiver Pursuant to Section 4.2.5(c) Section 4.2.5(a)(3) of the Zoning Ordinance allows the Board of Supervisors to waive restrictions against disturbing critical slopes upon a finding that the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, the orderly development of the area, or to adjacent properties, and would not be contrary to sound engineering practices. AT&T hereby requests a waiver of the restrictions applicable to the proposed Facility, as described above and in the Zoning Drawings. The requested waiver will not be detrimental to the orderly development of the area, as the small increase of disturbed critical slopes on the Property would not cause any interference with existing development. Nor would granting the requested waiver be detrimental to adjacent properties, or contrary to sound engineering practices. Furthermore, for the reasons set forth below, the Facility would satisfy the Public Health, Safety and Welfare Factors of Section 4.2.5(a)(1). Therefore, the Board can confirm that granting the waiver will not be detrimental to those factors. As the Access Road is exempt from the County's critical slope ordinance, the analysis in this Section III relates solely to the Facility. Consideration of"Public Health, Safety and Welfare Factors" under Section 4.2.5(a)(1): The five Public Health, Safety and Welfare Factors of Section 4.2.5(a)(1) of the Zoning Ordinance are addressed as follows: WILLIAMS M U LLE N Ms. Sarah Baldwin May 9,2014, as last revised February 3, 2015 Page 3 Rapid and/or large scale movement of soil and rock Improvement of the Lease Area would increase the disturbed critical slope area on the Property by only 1,911 square feet. During construction, the Facility site will be geologically stabilized with erosion control measures as outlined on the Zoning Drawings. These include the installation of silt fences and a construction entrance, if required, and seeding of any disturbed areas that are not actively in use. Ground cover and vegetation will permanently stabilize disturbed critical slope areas. Because of the limited size of the affected critical slope area and implementation of mitigation measures, the risk of rapid or large scale movement of soil and rock will be effectively minimized. Excessive stormwater run-off The proposed Facility is designed to minimally increase the soil permeability of the Property and effectively mitigate stormwater runoff. Stormwater runoff resulting from construction of the facility will travel downhill to the south and will dissipate through the permeable soils of the existing wooded area. In addition, stormwater will be captured and treated in a bioretention facility as shown in the Zoning Drawings. Siltation of natural and man-made bodies of water There are no natural or man-made bodies of water on the Property, although two streams and a pond are situated at the eastern end of the Adjacent Property identified as Tax Map Parcel No. 05300-00-00-00100. Although these water features are subject to a County Water Protection Ordinance buffer, the buffer area is several thousand feet east of the Lease Area, and any runoff from the Lease Area would flow downhill to the south. Moreover, as discussed above, the Facility site will be subject to mitigation measures during construction, and permanently stabilized with installation of ground cover and vegetation. Any runoff from the site would dissipate through the permeable soils of the wooded area south of the wireless facility, or be captured and treated in the proposed bioretention facility. Therefore,the Facility is unlikely to result in the siltation of natural and man-made bodies of water. Loss of aesthetic resource The aesthetic resources of the Property and surroundings consist chiefly in the characteristics of the existing woods,vegetation, and slopes. There will be no significant loss to these resources. Critical slope areas comprise the great majority of the Property, and the Facility will result in a minimal increase in disturbed critical slopes. The only WILLIAMS MULLEN Ms. Sarah Baldwin May 9, 2014, as last revised February 3, 2015 Page 4 trees that will be removed are those necessary to accommodate construction of the facility, as shown on the Zoning Drawings. The remaining trees and topography will serve to screen the facility from the roadway. Accordingly, disturbance of this small area will not result in a loss of aesthetic resources. Greater travel distance of septic effluent The proposed Facility will be unmanned, with no septic or plumbing systems. The concerns of this section are not applicable to this request. Therefore, the five Public Health, Safety, and Welfare Factors of Section 4.2.5(a)(1) are satisfied. Additional Required Findings In addition to the foregoing, Section 4.2.5(a)(3)requires the Board to make at least one of the following findings (in part): 1. A strict application of these provisions would not forward the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance or otherwise serve the public health,safety or welfare. The Zoning Ordinance implements the objectives of the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan, including the preservation of natural, scenic and historic resources in Rural Areas such as the Property. The Comprehensive Plan also includes the Personal Wireless Services Facilities Policy, adopted in 2000, which "encourages the construction of[wireless services] facilities that have limited visual impact on the community." As noted, construction of the proposed wireless facility would result in a minimal net increase in disturbed critical slope area on the Property. Moreover, the improvements will be screened from the roadway by existing tree cover and other vegetation. For the foregoing reasons, strict application of Section 4.2 would not forward the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance or otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare. 2. Alternatives proposed by the Applicant would satisfy the intent and purpose of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree. As discussed above, the Applicant is proposing engineering measures that will avoid or mitigate the adverse impacts that are often associated with the disturbance of critical slopes. Given the limited size of the proposed area of disturbance, the use of these engineering measures will satisfy the intent and purpose of Section 4.2 at least to an equivalent degree. WILLIAMS MULLEN Ms. Sarah Baldwin May 9, 2014, as last revised February 3, 2015 Page 5 3. Due to its unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interest of the developer, the requirements of Section 4.2 would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or would result in significant degradation of the site or adjacent properties. The proposed Facility site will be located on the western side of the Property on a hillside, to provide wireless phone and data service to underserved areas in the vicinity. Siting of the facility in this wooded area will mitigate the visual impacts of the proposed facility on surrounding roads and properties. It would be impracticable to relocate the proposed facility on the Property without causing a greater adverse impact to aesthetics or critical slopes. In addition,the Property consists of approximately 8.85 acres of land, while the proposed Facility would result in a net increase of disturbed critical slopes of only 1,911 square feet, or about 0.04 acres. Therefore, the relatively small scale of the proposed Facility would have little impact on the Property,taken as a whole. As the location of the Facility has been chosen to limit critical slope disturbance and mitigate its visibility, strict implementation of the requirements of Section 4.2 would unreasonably restrict the installation of a telecommunications facility on the Property. 4. Granting such modification or waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import than would be served by strict application of Section 4.2. Reliable wireless phone and data phone coverage for business, education, and government is a vital public utility. Moreover, wireless telecommunications facilities are essential for emergency communications. Finally, as discussed above, the critical slope area affected by this Facility is particularly small, especially when viewed in the context of the topography of the Property as a whole. Consequently, approval of the waiver will further the goals of the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the Wireless Telecommunications Facilities Plan. IV. Conclusion Many of the concerns associated with the disturbance of critical slopes and the criteria for evaluating a critical slopes waiver are considered and addressed generally through the existing Personal Wireless Service Facilities Ordinance requirements, such as the requirements for tree conservation plans, finished grades, and sound construction techniques. For that reason, and the reasons stated herein, we contend that this application satisfies the requirements for a waiver under Section 4.2.5(a)(3) of the Zoning Ordinance. WILLIAMS MULLEN Ms. Sarah Baldwin May 9, 2014, as last revised February 3, 2015 Page 6 Please contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information. Regards, r: � i1 T. Preston Lloyd, Jr. cc: Ms. Cheryl Taylor, Velocitel Valerie W. Long, Esquire, Williams Mullen (via e-mail) 25479112_4