HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-10-13 ACTIONS
Board of Supervisors Meeting of October 13, 1999
October 14, 1999
AGENDA ITEM/ACTION
ASSIGNMENT
1. Call to order.
4. Others Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public.
· There were none.
5.1. Spdngwoed Drive "Watch for Children" Sign.
· ADOPTED the attached Resolution.
6. SP-97-51. Goodlow Mountain (Signs ~46&47).
· APPROVED subject to the conditions recommended by staff
and amended at the BOS meeting.
APPROVED site plan waiver subject to two conditions.
SP~99-53. Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital (Sign fr26).
APPROVED subject to the conditions recommended by the
Planning Commission.
8. SP-99-57. Averett College (Sign #49).
· APPROVED subject to the three conditions recommended by
the Planning Commission.
9. ZMA-99-8. White House Motel (Sign #89).
· APPROVED.
11. Appointments.
· There ware none.
12. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the Board.
· Mr. Cilimberg presented an overview of a meeting he attended
in Farmville on passenger rail service. A state-wide committee
is being formed and he asked if any Board member wished to
have their name submitted to serve on the committee. If no
Board member is willing to serve, he will serve.
· Mr. Perkins asked that a letter be sent to Phil Bradley informing
him that the County will accept responsibility for maintenance
of the memorial.
· Ms. Thomas asked about the lighting at North Fork Industrial
Park.
· Ms. Humphds mentioned a notice regarding SDP 99-128,
Shadwell Antiquaires Major Amendment (request to amend a
site plan allowing the change in use of a 2,112 square foot
building, approved as a repair shop, to a restaurant). She did
not think wa could put restaurants in the rural areas, and she
questioned the description for the site location.
12. Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
Meeting was called to Order at 7:00 p.m., by the
Chairman. All BOS members present except Mr.
Marshall.
Clerk: Forward to Juan Wade
Clerk: Sat conditions out in action letter to
Planning.
Clerk: Sat conditions out in action letter to
Planning.
Clerk: Set conditions out in action letter to
Planning.
Clerk: Include in action letter to Planning.
County Executive: Prepare letter for Chairman's
signature.
Zoning Administrator:. Look at lighting to see if past
concerns have been addressed.
Planning: Look into issue.
Attachment I - Springwood Drive "Watch for Children" Sign
Attachment 2 - Planning Commission conditions
Attachment 2
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development
Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC
October 14, 1999
Board Actions of October 13, 1999
At its meeting on October 13, 1999, the Board of Supervisors took the following actions:
Agenda Item No. 6. SP-97-51. Goodlow Mountain (Si.clns #46&47). PUBLIC HEARING on a
request to remove & reconstruct existing tower on Goodlow Mountain. Znd RA. Consists of 121 acs.
TM36, P16. Rivanna Dist.
APPROVED SP-97~51 subject to the following conditions:
Tower height shall not exceed seven (7) feet above the height of the tallest tree within twenty-five
(25) feet of the tower. The applicant shall provide a certified statement on the height of the tailest
tree. Antenna may extend three (3) feet above the height of the tower.
The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows:
a. The tower shall be of wood or construction similar to the design and dimensions (other
than height) as the existing tower;
b. Guy wires shall not be permitted;
c. The tower shall have no lighting; and
d. The tower shall be natural wood color.
The tower and the secured yard shall be located, and the mechanical building shall be located
and sized, as shown on Attached plan titled "Proposed Cellular Antenna Site" and initialed WE)F
November 7, 1997 and on untitled topographic map initialed WDF November 7, 1997.
Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows:
a. The antennas shall be limited to three (3) flush-mounted panel antennae not to exceed
six (6) feet in height and one (1) foot in width; and
b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited.
The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless
telecommunications providers, as follows:
a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas
on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions:
( 1 ) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan
requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make
a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such
other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and
(2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that
it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Vedfiable evidence of a
good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has
offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for
reciprocal dghts on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider
within Albemade County.
10.
11.
The use of this facility by additional telecommunication providers will require amendment of this
special use permit. The presence of this condition in no way implies approval of additional uses
for this fadlity or this property.
Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a
horizontal plane running though the lowest pert of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire.
For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or
lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps,
and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of
maintenance only.
Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or installation
of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from the Director of
Planning to remove existing trees on the site. The Director of Planning shall identify which trees
may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly
authorized by the Director of Planning, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two
hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility access.
The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the lease
area shall not be required.
The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its
use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued.
The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not later than
July I of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user
that is a wireless telecommunications service provider.
Access road improvements shall be limited to drainage improvements and minimal grading
necessary to improve travel surface and the application of gravel.
APPROVED waiver of the site plan subject to the following conditions:
Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit; and
Provision of one (1) parking space.
Agenda Item No. 7. SP-99-53, Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital {Si.qn # 26), PUBLIC
HEARING on a request to construct addition of approx 620 sq ft to existing veterinary hospital on .913
acs. Znd HC. TM61 K, Sec9, P1. Loc S sd of Rt 743 (Hydraulic Rd), ¼ ml W of Rt 29. Pjc Di-',,t. Jack
Jouett Dist.
APPROVED $P-99-53 subjed to the following conditions:
No outdoor runs are permitted and all existing outdoor runs should be enclosed before a
Certificate of Occupancy for any expansion of the existing building will be issued;
Development of the site shall be in accord with site plan amendment titled "Hydraulic Road
Animal Hospital" dated 7/20/99. The proposed addition identffied theron shall not exceed 650
square feet. The addition shall not encroach into the 40-foot side setback. Any further expansion
will require an amendment to the special use permit;
Construction materials including "Windows" of glass block shall be generally the same as, or
better than, the previous additions in their sound attenuation properties; and
The addition will not house any animals.
(Note: This is located in the Jack Jouett District, not Rio District.)
Agenda Item No. 8. SP-99-57. Averett College (Skin #49). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to
establish business school of approx 2,000 sq ft w/in Greenbriar Office Park (23.2.2.6) on 4.3 acs. Znd
CO. Contains 4.3 acs. Portion of TM61W, Sec, Psl ,2&3. Loc on E side of the Whitewood Rd/Greenbdar
Dr inter. Rio Dist,
APPROVED SP-99-57 subject to the following conditions:
1. The total business school square footage shall be limited to the internal 2,000 total square feet;
Hours of operation shall be limited to 6:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 3:30
p.m. on Saturdays. The school shall not operate on Sundays; and
3. The total school enrollment shall not exceed forty-f'Ne (45) students per day.
Agenda Item No. 9. ZMA-99-8 White House Motel (Si_un #89). PUBLIC HEARING on a
request to fezone 1.497 acs from R6 to HC to allow expansion of Free Bddge Auto Sales Ioc on adj
parcel (TM78, P57B). TM78E, P A, part thereof. Loc on N sd of Rt 250 E (Richmond Rd) approx 0.2 ml
from inter of Rt 20 N (Stony Point Rd). (Comp Plan designates this property as Regional Service in the
Urban Area Neighborhood 3 Development Area.) Rivanna Dist.
APPROVED ZMA-99-8.
/evvc
FAX (804) 972.4126
COUNTY OF ALBEMARI F-
Department of Building Code and Zoning Services
401 Mdntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
TF; FPHONE (804) 296-5832
'FrD (804) 972-4012
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning & Community Development
Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrator [~
October 7, 1999
S.P. 97-51 U.S. Cellular Corporation at Goodlow Mountain (TM 36-
Parcel 19)
This is in response to several questions that have arisen during the consideration of this
request for the construction of a tower. We have been asked to determine: the height of the
current tower and its status with respect to nonconforming provisions. In the .review of these
questions, I have visited the site, reviewed the files, read the minutes and considered
information submitted by the applicant. In summary, it is my opinion that the tower at its
present height is lawfully nonconforming. Please copy the appliCant's representative with this
memo, in the event that they are aggrieved by any of the decisions and wish to appeal.
Zoning and Engineering staff measured the height of the tower onsite. The tower is 60 feet
tall and the antenna is 22 feet in height, for a total height of 82 feet. This antenna consists of
metal conduit. This tower was damaged in 1996 and repaired. Based on the information
provided to us by the applicant and by Steve Blaine, their representative, repair work was
done to the tower in compliance with the Albemarle Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, this
tower as it presently exists remains a legal nonconformity. No further addition or extension
may be done to the tower, even to restore it to the pre-damage height, without approval of a
special permit.
A description of the tower and a chronology of events follow. It is taken directly and
indirectly from the applicant's submittal. (See the letter from Steve Blaine to me dated June
22, I999.)
I. Prior Structure
The prior tower was built prior to zoning regulations. We are not certain of the date of
construction but find reference to it in documents from the micl-1960s. It was a "guyed"
STAFF PERSON:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
*'!October 13, 1999
SP 97-51 US CELLULAR [GOODLOW MOUNTAIN]
BACKGROUND:
US Cellular submitted an application for a special use permit on September 22, 1997. The
Planning Commission reviewed the request on November 18, 1997. and recommended approval
by a vote of 4 to 3. The Board of Supervisors held a hearing on December 10, 1997, at which
time the Board referred the item back to staff to prepare conditions of approval consistent with
the Board's direction. It was intended that the conditions of approval for the application would
be placed on the January 7, 1998 consent agenda. Prior to action by the Board on the proposed
conditions, it was determined that the application had not been properly filed. The application
was not signed by the property owner and, therefore, was not properly before the County for
review.
The property owner' s authorization was later obtained and the application was placed on the
Planning Commission's February 2, 1999 agenda. The Planning Commission recommended
denial of the special use permit by a vote of 6 to 1. By a vote of 3 to 4, the Commission failed to
approve the applicant's request for a site plan waiver. On March 17, 1999, the Board of
Supervisors reviewed this request and deferred action to allow additional review, including a
propagation analysis.
Staff initiated negotiations for preparing the propagation analysis. It was determined that the
lowest cost to perform a minimal review would be approximately $8,800. The engineer
contacted to perform this work (affiliated with the vendor selected to be the County's wireless
consultant for the case-by-case review of wireless applications) stated in a July 8, 1999 letter:
I have some question about whether this process will adequately support a
resolution to the County's dialog with US Cellular. The siting issues for the
cellular provider are not exclusively those of coverage, and the ability to model a
radio site with the degree of precision that might be supportable in a court of law
is beyond the capabilities of most, if not all coverage analysis facilities.. Coverage
analysis is by nature a statistical process, and the presence or absence of a signal
at a particular location is always couched in terms of the probability of that
happening. The consequence of this is that the coverage analysis done by us
using, our software and our model will more than likely differ from that done by
US Cellular, which in turn would differ from that done by Sprint or Alltel or
others.
Based on this information and the cost of the review, staff did not pursue the propagation
analysis.
Since the March 17, 1999 Board of Supervisors meeting, the zoning administrator has sought and
analyzed information provided by US Cellular and Columbia Gas Transmission Company in
order to make an official determination regarding the nonconforming status of the remaining
portion of the existing tower at the site. The zoning administrator has determined that the
existing, nonconforming, tower is 60 feet tall, and has a pipe extending 22 feet above the tower.
This application was ready to return for your consideration in September, but was delayed until
now because US Cellular stated that it was going to conduct a drive test to measure the actual
signal strength at various locations while an antenna on a crane was placed at the site at various
heights. Staff has not received the results of that test from the applicant, despite repeated
requests.
This staff report supersedes the prior staff report prepared for this application for the following
reasons:
Staff s original analysis was based on the assumption that the proposed 120-foot tower
would replace an existing 123-foot tower on the site. Since then, the zoning
administrator determined that the 123-foot tower .was a nonconforming tower, that it was
damaged in late 1996, and then was repaired to only a height of 60 feet within the 2-year
period allowed by section 6.0 of the Zoning Ordinance to repair nonconforming
structures.
Since the original staff report was prepared, the Board has amended the Comprehensive
Plan by adopting a new chapter on "Natural Resources and Cultural Assets" on March 3,
1999. This chapter includes sections pertaining to Scenic Resources, Historic Resources,
and Mountains (the Mountain Section was originally adopted on August 5, 1998).
Since the original staff report was prepared, there have been significant advancements in
wireless technology such that alternative designs and equipment .allowing shorter towers,
different and less intrusive antenna arrays, and collocation on existing utility structures
(including high voltage lines) are feasible and commonly used.
On Friday, October 8, 1999, staff will deliver to the Clerk of the Board a binder containing
supplemental background information related to this application, including applicable statutes,
ordinances, comprehensive plan policies and guidelines, excerpts of the draft wireless design
manual~ short articles regarding wireless prepared by Kreines & Kreines (the County's consultant
on the wireless design manual), and information about US Cellular.
2
Applicant's Proposal:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 120 foot tower to provide improved cellular phone
coverage for northem Albemarle County and portions of Greene and Orange. US Cellular' s
service is currently available in the area. However, US Cellular states that significant areas of
weak signal or even no signal exist.
The location of the proposed facility is shown on Attachments A and B. The location of the
proposed facility (whiCh includes the proposed tower, antennae and supporting equipment) on
the property and the facility design proposed by the applicant is shown on Attachment C. The
facility is located on Goodlow Mountain on the Columbia Gas pipeline easement and replaces an
existing tower located on the site. Zoning and Engineering staff measured the height of the
tower onsite. The existing tower is 60 feet tall and the antenna is 22 feet higher, for a total height
of 82 feet..The original tower was damaged in 1996 and repaired only to the 60-foot height.
Petition:
Proposal to construct a wireless telecommunication tower and associated support facilities
[10.2.2(6)]. The proposed location is on Goodlow Mountain on the existing Columbia Gas
pipeline easement. This application will allow for the removal and reconstruction of the existing
tower located on the property. The property is described as Tax Map 36, Parcel 19 and consists
of 121 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. This site is within the Rivanna Magisterial District and is
not located within a designated growth area.
Character of the Area:
The location of the proposed facility is near the peak and on the ridgeline of Goodlow Mountain
on the Columbia Gas pipeline easement. Attachment D is a topographic map that shows the
location of the proposed tower, nearby house structures, the quarry and the railroad.
The area is in the SoUthwest Mountains Rural Historic District. The property to the south is
located within an Agricultur.a!/Forestal District.
The proposed facility is at an elevation of approximately 1,380 feet ASL, Above Sea Level. The
peak of the mountain is at an elevation of 1,504 feet ASL. The closest dwelling to the proposed
facility is approximately 2,300 feet (0.4 miles) distant and approximately 600 feet lower in
elevation. No houses are located within 2,000 feet (0.6 miles) of the proposed facility. No
existing towers are located in the area, other than the tower to be replaced. The tree canopy
surrounding the proposed site is 70 to 80 feet tall.
The nearest identified structures capable of supporting telecommunications are a water tank
3
located in the Town of Gordonsville approximately 4 miles to the east, and a series of utility
poles owned by Rappahannock along Routes 22 and 23 1. The nearest US Cellular facility is
located in Greene County approximately 8 miles west of this site.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 3 1.2.4.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval, with conditions, including a condition limiting the
tower to a height not to exceed 7 feet above the existing tree canopy (expressed in this report as
"a tower no taller than'the existing tree canopy").
Comprehensive Plan:
All applications for special use permits are reviewed for consistency with the Comprehensive
Plan. Staff notes that, in order to construct the proposed facility, no clearing for access or the
provision of electrical service will be required. Therefore, the impact of the tower itself is the
only factor reviewed by staff for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning
Ordinance.
The following provisions of the Comprehensive Plan are relevant to the proposed facility: (1) the
Land Use Plan; (2) the Open Space Plan; and (3) the Scenic Resources, Historic Resources, and
Mountain sections of the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets chapter.
Land Use Plan
The site is .located in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan. The Land Use
Plan contains limited review criteria for the siting of telecommunication towers, none of which
provide guidance for recommending approval or denial of the proposed facility.
Open Space Plan'
The Open Space Plan provides guidance for the protection of identified resources of the County.
The Open Space Plan's stated objectives include protecting "the County's natural, scenic and
historic resources in the Rural and Growth Areas," preserving and managing "the County's
natural resources in order to protect the environment and to conserve resources for future use,"
and preserving "the County' s scenic resources as being essential to the County's rural character,
economic vitality, and quality of life." The Open Space Concept Map, which is part of the Open
Space Plan, identifies the four major open space systems in the County - major stream valleys,
mountains, farmlands and forests, and civic/cultural features.
The resources identified in the plan and potentially affected by this application are: Mountain
Resource Area, Critical Slopes and the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District.
Critical slopes: Most of Goodlow Mountain is designated as critical slopes in the Open Space
Plan. The location of the proposed facility is on the ridgeline of Goodlow Mountain and no
disturbance of critical slopes will occur. The existing access to the facility crosses areas of
critical slopes. The only improvements proposed are drainage improvements and the placing of
gravel in the existing roadbed to aid in stabilization. It is the opinion of staffthat no adverse
impact on areas of critical slopes as identified in the Open Space Plan will occur.
Mountain resource ai'ea: The Open Space Plan provides that the Mountain Resource Area on
Goodlow Mountain starts at the 700-foot contour. The proposed facility is at an elevation of
approximately 1,380 feet ASL.
Aside from the Columbia Gas pipeline easement and the nonconforming existing tower (that
does not extend above the 70 to 80 foot high tree canopy), this area of Goodlow Mountain is
relatively pristine and undeveloped. It is staff opinion that the proposed tower, at a height of 120
feet and located on the ridgeline, would be inconsistent with the Open Space Plan's stated
objectives of protecting "the County's natural, scenic and historic resources in the Rural and
Growth Areas," preserving and managing "the County's natural resources in order to protect the
environment and to conserve resources for future use," and preserving "the County' s scenic
resources as being essential to the County's rural character, economic vitality, and quality of
life."
However, it is staff opinion that a tower no taller than the existing tree canopy and of equal or
lesser bulk than the existing tower would not be inconsistent with the Open Space Plan.
The construction of a facility in a location other than the Goodlow Mountain ridgeline will
require additional clearing for construction of the tower and access. However, construction could
occur outside of the Mountain Resource Area altogether. This altemative would likely require
the construction of multiple facilities to provide the same coverage desired by the applicant with
the single tower on the Goodlow Mountain ridgeline.
Historic district: The site is in the Southwest Mountains National Register Rural Historic
District. This designation occurred with the presence of the original tower on this site. A tower
no taller than the existing tree canopy and of equal or lesser bulk than the existing tower would
have limited impact to the historic district. It is staff opinion that a taller tower, particularly one
120 feet tall, would have a greater impact on the district and would be inconsistent with the
historic designation of the area. (See also the discussion of the Historic Resources Section,
below). Although the site was included within the historic district even though the original 123~
foot tower was standing, staff notes that, as a nonconforming use and structure, the tower would
eventually either have to become a conforming use or terminate.
5
Scenic Resources
The Scenic .Resources Section states as its goal: "Preserve the County's scenic resources as being
essential to the County's character, economic vitality and quality of life." The Section states that
the County's outstanding scenic resources include "the natural landscape such as mountains."
The section adds that these resources are held in high value by its citizens as well as its visitors
and, therefore, merit special attention and consideration because they "contribute to the
community' s desirability as a place to live, they enhance and protect property values, and
contribute to the overall quality of life." Many existing measures to guide the protection of
scenic resources are found in other parts of the Comprehensive Plan, including the Open Space
Plan (discussed above), the Historic Resources Section and the Mountain Section.
It is staff opinion that a tower no taller than the existing tree canopy and of equal or lesser bulk
than the existing tower would not be inconsistent with the Scenic Resources Section. Both Route
20 and Route 231 are designated as Virginia Byways and are designated as Entrance Corridors.
The Scenic Resources Section states that the designation of the roads as Virginia Byways is to
give formal recognition to deserving roads and to promote tourism and public appreciation of
natural and historic resources. An objective of the Scenic Resources Section is to "maintain the
visual integrity of all of Albemarle's roadways." The existing 60-foot tower has limited
visibility from these roadways. It is staff opinion that a tower that is taller than' the existing tree
canopy or of greater bulk may be inconsistent with the goal and objective of the Scenic
Resources Section.
Historic Resources
The Historic Resources Section states as its goal: "Protect the Count3f's historic and cultural
resources." One of the objectives of the Historic Resources Section is to continue "to identify
and recognize the value of buildings, structures, landscapes, sites and districts which have
historical, architectural, archaeological or cultural significance."
As noted above, the proposed site is within the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District. In
1992, the district was listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The survey of
contributing resources surveyed for the report include approximately 109 domestic complexes,
11 churches, 16 commercial buildings, and 2 railroad depots on 31,975 acres.
As stated in the discussion of the Open Space Plan, a tower no taller than the existing tree canopy
and of equal or lesser bulk than the existing tower would have a limited impact on the Southwest
Mountains Rural Historic District. It is staff opinion that a taller tower, particularly one 120 feet
tall, would be inconsistent with the Historic Resource Section's goal of protecting the historical
integrity of the district. As noted above, the original 123-foot tower was a nonconforming use
and structure and would eventually either have to become a conforming use or terminate.
6
Mountains
The Mountain Section applies to those areas within the Mountain Resource Area, such as the
proposed site.
The Mountain Section states as its goal: "Recognize the value of Albemarle's mountains,
including protecting water quality and drinking water reservoir capacity, soil conservation, forest
resources, plant and animal habitat, scenic values, tourism, and the economic impact of these
resources." The Mountain Section also states that: "[m]ountains 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." In discussing scenic resources and their economic impact, the Mountain Section states
in part:
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.
The guidelines in the Mountain Section include the following:
Locate structures to make them unobtrusive in the landscape.
Do not build structures taller than the natural tree canopy.
Do not locate structures where they will be 'skylighted' against the horizon.
Do not alter the continuity of the ridgeline.
Because the proposed 120-foot tower would be located on the ridgeline and would extend
40 to 50 feet above the tree c. anopy, it is staff opinion that the proposed tower is
inconsistent with these guidelines. Such a tower would also be obtrusive in the
landscape, even though there are no residences in close 'proximity, would be skylighted
against the horizon, and would alter the continuity of a ridgeline that, at present, has such
continuity in the area. However, it is also staff opinion that a tower no taller than the
existing tree canopy and of equal or lesser bulk than the existing tower would not be
inconsistent with the Mountain Section.
Staffs findings are that approval of a tower taller than the existing tree canopy and of equal or
greater bulk than the existing tower would be inconsistent with the several policies and
guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan discussed above. Approval of any facility at this location
7
may be deemed to be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. However, staff opinion is that
approval of a facility not taller than the existing tree canopy and of a construction similar to that
of the existing 60-foot tower, or a wood pole, would not result in increased impacts on the area.
STAFF COMMENT:
Staff will address the issues of this request in three sections:
Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(b)(i)(II) (part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996).
Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use
permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance
may be issued upon a findin~ by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of
substantial detriment to adjacent property,
The proposed facility complies with the setback requirements of the ordinance. The tower
location is on a gently sloping area on the crest of the ridge located at the treeline adjacent to the
Columbia Gas pipeline easement. These trees will provide excellent screening of the equipment
at the base of the tower. Based on a field visit, staff determined that the trees in the area of the
tower are approximately 70 to 80 feet tall.
The proposed facility is located approximately 2,300 feet from the nearest dwelling on adjacent
property. Staff opinion is that the clearing for the gas line has created the only visibility of the
facility and, based on a field visit, the tower will be visible from several dwellings located to the
east and west of Goodlow Mountain. Visibility from north or south of Goodlow Mountain is
extremely limited due to the existing tree cover and topography of the region. Lighting of the
tower is unlikely as the tower is under the height standard for lighting, but staff has included a
condition limiting lighting unless required by the FAA or other federal officials. The tower does
not penetrate the Airport Overlay District.
The visibility of the tower from residential property may be considered a detriment. The distance
to dwellings and the fact that this request is for the reconstruction of an existing tower mitigates
any new visual impacts caused by the tower if it is reconstructed to the tree top height
recommended by staff. Additional information may be provided by the public during the public
hearings on the issue of potential impacts. Staff is unable to determine if the impact of this
proposal will create a substantial detriment to adjacent property. The applicant has not submitted
evidence that the impact from this proposed facility will not be substantial.
that the character of the district will not. be changed thereby,
The Rural Areas zoning district is an agricultural district whose purposes include preserving
agricultural and forestal lands and activities and conserving natural, scenic and historic resources.
The district' s regulations recognize that rural residents "should expect to receive a lower level of
service delivery than will be provided to residential developments in designated growth areas."
The uses allowed by right and by special use permit in the zoning district generally are either
residential, related to ~igricultural and forestal activities, or services related to those activities.
Properly conditioned to address the impacts and to preserve the character of Rural Areas zoning
district, a wireless facility is allowed by special use permit in the district.
In determining the impact on the character of the district,. staff has taken into consideration the
character of the district as described in the Open Space Plan and in the Rural Areas zoning
district regulations. A topographic map is attached to this report which shows the location of
dwellings, the gas pipeline and other features.
The property immediately to the south is located in an Agricultural/Forestal District. Staff
opinion is that approval of this request would have no adverse impact on the use of the adjacent
property for either agriculture or forestry. Visibility of the tower from the Agriculmml/Forestal
District to the west is extremely limited. Therefore, it is the opinion of staff that the approval of
the proposed tower, as conditioned, will negatively impact neither the agricultural and forestal
activities within the Districts, nor the aesthetics of the Districts.
Towers have been permitted in the Rural Areas and have not, in the opinion of staff, resulted in a
change in the character of the Rural Areas to this point. However, each application is evaluated
on its own merits, and the existing conditions are taken into consideration. Because this request
is for the reconstruction of an existing tower, it is staff opinion that the proposed tower, as
conditioned, will not result in a significant change in the appearance or the character of the
district.
Since the Mountain Resource Area was established in 1992, no towers have been approved
within the Mountain Resource Area except on Carter's Mountain (within the existing tower /
farm), on Piney Mountain (where there was at least one preexisting tower), and on Afton
Mountain (where a tree top tower was approved, with conditions, because its height and location
were found to be consistent with both the Open Space Plan and the Mountain Section
guidelines).
Staff opinion is that this application, as conditioned, complies with this provision of Section
31.2.4.1 of the ordinance.
and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance,
9
Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5
and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1.5. All of these provisions address,
in one form or another, the provision of public services. The use of mobile telephones clearly
provides a public service as evidenced by the expanded and rapid increase in use. Based on the
provision of a public service, staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and
intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the ordinance, "To
facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community". The proposed
facility would increase the availability and convenience for users of wireless phone technology.,
The reconstruction of this site will allow Columbia Gas to restore its communication network.
The quality of this network was reduced when .the tower was damaged. The existing tower
serves as a link in its emergency communication network.
Staff opinion is that this application, as conditioned, is in harmony with the purpose and intent of
the ordinance.
with the uses permitted by fight in the district,
The proposed facility will not restrict the current uses, other by-fight uses available on this site or
by-right uses on any other property.
with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance,
Section 5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations governing tower facilities and appropriate
conditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
The provision of increased communication facilities may be considered consistent with the
public health and safety and general welfare by providing increased communication services in
the event of emergencies and increasing overall general communication services. As noted
previously this tower also serves as a link in the Columbia Gas emergency commtmication
network and therefore this request may be considered as consistent with the public safety. The
Telecommunications Act addresses issues of enviroumentai effects with the following language,
"No state or local government or insmunentality thereof may regulate the placement
construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the
enviroumental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with
the Commission's regulations conceming such emissions. In order to operate this facility, the
applicant is required to meet the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions. This
requirement will adequately protect the public health and safety.
47 U.S.C. ~ 332(c)(7)(b)(i)(II) (part of the Telecommtmications Act of 1996)
10
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.
Neither the Comprehensive Plan nor the Zoning Ordinance prohibits the provision of personal
wireless service. Staff opinion is that the County has no ban or policies that have the effect of
banning personal wireless services or facilities and that decisions regarding the approval of
facilities to provide service is done on a case-by-case basis. Staff offers as support for this
statement the following evidence. Since 1990, the Board of Supervisors has acted on 46 special
use permit applicatior/s requests and has approved 40 of these requests (the denial of the special
use permit for the tower on Dudley Mountain, currently in litigation, is counted as a "denial"
here). Some of these requests were for modification of existing facilities.
The Mountain Resource Area is identified in blue and purple on the Open Space Concept Map.
Staff estimates that the Mountain Resource Area comprises not more than 14.5% of the County' s
total land area, and a good portion of that area is within Shenandoah National Park and other
remote, unpopulated areas. (Approximately 22% of the Mountain Resource Area is within
Shenandoah National Park; if that acreage is excluded from the equation, only 11.4% of the
County's land area is within the Mountain Resource Area.) As noted above, when considering
requests for towers within the Mountain Resource Area, the Board has found some requests to be
consistent with the Open Space Plan and the Mountain Section guidelines and has approved
those requests.
The applicant has not demonstrated that there are no other locations within the proposed area of
service currently available for new tower construction. Alternative locations and designs for the
facility have been discussed. Alternatives include:
Use of a tower not more than 6 to 10 feet taller than the existing trees adjacent to the site.
Adjacent trees are estimated to be 70 to 80 feet. This alternative would be similar to the
many other tree top towers approved by the Board in the past 2 years.
2. Use of a tower no taller than the existing tower, 60 feet.
3. Use of a tower no taller than the existing tower and antenna, 82 feet.
4. Use of a 120-foot tower.
No use of Goodlow Mountain. This would require the location of multiple facilities to
provide comparable service. However, alternative locations may allow for siting with
minimal impact by making use of "treetop facilities" or existing power lines in the area.
Rappahannock Power has existing power lines along the Route 22/23 1 corridor, that
might provide alternative locations outside of the Mountain Resource Area.
11
The facility recommended by staff, with a condition limiting the height of the tower to not more
than 7 feet above the surrounding tree canopy with an antenna design that is flush with the pole,
has been successfully used by a PCS provider in Albemarle County. An engineer representing a
cellular service provider told the Planning Commission that such an infrastructure works better
for cellular than it does for PCS. Therefore, it is staff opinion that the facility recommended by
staff is a reasonable alternative. The applicant has not provided evidence that the alternatives
discussed are either logistically infeasible or cost prohibitive.
It should 'be noted that following the original submittal of SP 97-51 staff has worked with other
providers to develop the "treetop facility" approach. At the time of the original submittal of SP
97-51, this approach did not exist.
Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Planning Commission did not approve the site plan waiver request.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors that are favorable to this request, as conditioned:
1. 'The tower will provide increased wireless capacity and emergency communication that
may be considered consistent with the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5.
2. The tower will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties.
3. The tower is considered to be a collocation site as it will support both US Cellular and
Columbia Gas communication facilities.
This proposal is for the reconstruction of an existing tower.
Approval of this tower will not require the construction of an access road or clearing for
electrical service.
The request is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the
ordinance.
Staff has identified the following factors that are unfavorable to this request:
1. This site is within the Mountain Resource Area as identified in the Comprehensive Plan.
2: This site is within the Southwest Mountains Rural Historic District.
3. .Options for alternative sites have not been exhausted.
12
4. There is an existing reasonable use of the property.
Staff opinion is that this request, as conditioned, generally complies with the provisions of the
ordinance and is consistent with the applicable policies and guidelines of the Comprehensive
Plan. Although the proposed tower would be located within the Mountain Resource Area, as
conditioned and as a replacement of an existing tower, staff opinion is that this unfavorable
factor is mitigated. It is staff opinion that the limited amount of activity associated with this
tower, and the impact on the surrounding area from these limited activities, is a favorable factor.
Few, if any, other locations are available which would allow such a limited activity for the
installation of a communication facility. Therefore, staff is able to support this application, as
conditioned.
Should the Board choose to approve this request, staff has provided conditions of approval.
In the event that the Board chooses to deny this application staff requests consensus direction
from the Board regarding the basis for denial of the application and instruction to staff to return
to the Board with a written decision for the Board's consideration and action.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of this request and offers the following recommended conditions of
approval.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
The height of the tower shall not exceed 7 feet above the height of the tallest tree within
25 feet of the tower. The applicant shall provide a certified statement on the height of the
tallest tree. Antenna may extend 3 feet above the height of the tower.
The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows:
a. The tower shall be of wood or a lattice construction similar to the design and
dimensions (other than height) as the existing tower;
b. · Guy wires shall not be permitted;
c. The tower shall have no lighting; and,
d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color.
The tower and the secured yard shall be located, and the mechanical building shall be
located and sized, as shown on Attached plan titled "Proposed Cellular Antenna Site" and
initialed WDF November 7, 1997 and on untitled topographic map initialed WDF
November 7, 1997.
4. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows:
,
The antennas shall be limited to 3 flush-mounted panel antennae not to exceed 6
feet in height and 1 foot in width;
Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited.
The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other
wireless telecommunications providers, as follows:
a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommtmications providers to locate
antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions:
(1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site
'plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that
it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in
good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the
site; and,
(2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable
evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location.
Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to,
evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate
on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site
owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County.
The use of this facility by additional telecommunication providers will require
amendment of this special use permit. The presence of this condition in no way implies
approval of additional uses for this facility or this property.
Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded .such that all light emitted is projected
below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of
the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit
consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to
position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor
lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only.
Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or
installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from
the Director of Planning to remove existing trees on the site. The Director of Planning
shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except
for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of Planning, the permittee shall
not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment
building, or the vehicular or utility access.
The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the
lease area shall not be required.
The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the
date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued.
14
10.
11.
The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later
than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify
each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider.
Access road improvements shall be limited to drainage improvements and minimal
grading necessary to improve travel surface and the application of gravel.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Applicant's Application and Related Information
D - Topographical Map
E - Letters from the public
F, Superseded staff reports (without attachments,-because included in this staff report)
G - Miscellaneous correspondence regarding actions and recommendations
H - Minutes of the November 18, 1997 Planning Commission Meeting
I - Minutes of the December 10, 1997 Board Meeting
J - Minutes of the February 2, 1999 Planning Commission Meeting
K - Minutes of the March 17, 1999 Board Meeting
Attachment A- Location Map
pfohtt
IATTACHMENT Ai
e°o4,t
, SP 97-51 US Cellular [Goodlow Mountain]
o
/
/ ,,~
o
CROSSROADS
Attachment B- Tax Map
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
35:
i
\ ..*
SP 97-51
U.S. Cellular (Goodlow Mnt.)
· - ,- RIVANNA DISTRICT SECTION
Attachment C
Applicant's Application and Related
Information
SPECIAL USE PERMIT CIq'F, CKI,IST
9
PRIOR TO THE SUBMITTAL OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT REQUEST, A
PRELIM/NARY CONFERENCE SHOULD BE HELD WITH THE PLANNING STAI;'F.
The current application form must be completed by the applicant in its entirety (the reqhest
should be clear).
TWO COPTFS OF TH.F, FOT .T .OWING INFORMATION SHAI,I, BF, SIIBMITTF.'D..WITH
THE APPI ,ICATION AND IS TO '131=, PROVIDED BY THF, APPT ,ICANT:
Completed application signed by the current owner of the property or a separate
statement signed by the current owner authorizing the application.
Letter of profferS, if applicable.
Most recent approved and recorded plat. If none exists, then a copy of the deed
description for the property or properties involved in the request. If the proposed
rezoning involves only a portion of a parcel, it shall be adequately indenti,fied, to the
satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator.
Description of Request (on back of application or attach own sheets).
JZp;tification of Request (on back of application or attach own sheets).
propflare fee made payable to the County of Albemarle.
THF. ZONING DF:.PARTMI!.NT WII .l . PROVIDE THF. FOI .1 .OWING INFORMATION TO
THF, APPT ]CANT:
( ) One public notice sign for each roadway and/or road frontage.
Ff"'Instructions for posting signs.
),~Copy of review schedule.
Revised 4/30/96
Date
IAGENERAL\SI4AREXZONING\STACYXSPUSECHK.FRM
County of
Albemarle
Application for
SPECIAL USE
PERMIT
SP#:
Date Submitted ~ .'Eft.,
Feel'aid V"Tc'Zt3
Receipt Number
Intake Staff' '
Department of Zoning
401 Mclntire Road · Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 ~: 804 296-5875 phone ~ 804 972-4035 fax
dNEW SP (see Zoning Ordinance Section 35.0 for Appropriate Fee)
[] AMENDMENT OF A VALID SP: SP # ($85.00)
[] EXTENSION OF A VALID SP: SP# ($55.00)
IMP 36/19.
Tax Map/Parcel:
Location:
PROJECT NAME:
Existing Zoning:
PROPOSED USE: for
OWNER Name:
Address: WV 75375-1
Phone/Fax: Day Time Phone:
APPLICANT Name (if different from owner): Ch' vi 11 e Cel 1 ul ar Ptnr. -a Wash. D.C. ?tnr.
Address: 28t~ Route 101, Bedford, N.H. 03110
PhoncrFax: ( 603 ) 533- 2200 Day Time Phone: ( 603 ) b33-22/7
CONTACT Name (if different from above): Mark Keller c/o ~.IcKee/Carson
Address: 301 E. Hiqh Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone/Fax: 979- 757?/977-11 q4 Day Time Phone:
NE slde of GoodLow Mtn. along the existing gas line easement
U. S. CellularTower/Antennae - Goodlow Mtn.- Rivanna District
RA
Replacement towerlfor Columbia Gas and
CNS Hicrowave, Inc.
Box 12/3, Charleston,
(304) 357-3046
wireless communications
I hereby disclose that the owner or owners of the subject property also have an ownership interest in the
following tax map and parcel numbers, which abut or are immediately across the. street or road from the
subject property:
If ownerahip of the subject property is in the name of any type of legal entity or organization including, but
not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership, or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a
fictitious name, the applicant must sumit with this application a document acceptable to the County which
certifies that the person signing below has the authority to do so. If the applicant is a contract purchaser
of the subject property, the applicant must submit a document acceptable to the County containing the
owners written consent to the application. If the applicant is the agent of the owner, the applicant must
submit a document acceptable to the County that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency..
I hereby certify that tile information provided on this application and accompanying information is
accurate, true and correct to tile best of my knowledge and belief.
Date [
· --~ ~\ /
Applicant requests a va,,ance with regard to the setback ,nsofar as the existing >
outparcel is of limited size. The adjacent'areas are mountainous and not developed.
A setback of 25' is desired. Applicant also wishes to SpecialU~Pem~tApplication
2
request a waiver of the site plan requirement - see attached.
DESCRIPTION OFREQUEST:(PIease ~tach additionalinformationasneeded)
Applicant wishes to install a wireless communications facility consisting of a
tower, antennae, small mechanical building and fencing on the Nk. corner of Goodlow
Mountain, immediately adjacent to an existing clear-cut gas transmission.easement.
Columbia Gas owns and maintains the easement which traverses the mountain on its
north face in an east/west direction. CNS Microwave, Inc. maintains an existing
fee simple outparcel adjacent to the easement at the high point of the ~asement
where a 120' lattice tower exists. The existing tower pre-dates the County
ordinances and consequently does not have a permit. In leiu of attaching to the
older existing tower, the applicant desires to replace the old tower with a newer
tower of similar, but stronger designof the sme height which will accommodate co-
location of U.S. Cellular antennae. All improvemenst to be located on current ownership.
JU~TIFICATION:(Please attach additionalinformation ashceded)
Current service levels alone'both SR 231 and 20 ar~ inadequat~.Th~ location nf<th~qe
road corridors in low valleys on either side of the Southwest Mountains makeq them
difficult to serve. The DrODOSed location. very near the County lin~ will ~nahl~
the applicant to serve the northern limits of these two roadways from a single loration
which currently exists. The site is currently accessed, and will continu~ to h~
accessed by existinq Oravel roadways to the site. No additional ,clearing wil~ h~
required for'the installation. The existing tower will h~ r~mov~d ~nd th~ miCrOwave
units inStal. led on the new 120' tower.
TAX MAP/PARC EL:
1. O3btr, -oo - e o - o ~q oo
OFFICE USE ONLY
ZONED: rz:A MAG DIST:
REQUESTED UNDER ORDINANCE SECTION: eo , 2.-
EXISTING USE:
PROPOSED US E:
-HISTORY:
1"3 SPs:
l"2'I VAse
ZMAs and Proffers:
Letter of Authorization
I:xG ENERAL~SHARE~ONINGxSTACYxSPUSE. FRM
Last Revised 4/30/96
McKEE CARSON
CONSUlTING ENGINEERS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
LAND PLANNERS
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
22 September 1997
Bill Fritz; Planner; Albemarle County
Mark E. Keller; St. Assodate; McKee/Carson
U. S. Cellular Goodlow Mtn. Application; Site Plan Waiver
With this correspondence we would like to request the County's consideration of a site plan waiver
for this effort commensurate with our request for a Special Use Permit. The actual facility is small and
very simple involving the installation of a pre-fabricated tower and mechanical building, provision of
basic cabled utilities, erection of a perimeter fence and utilization of an existing gravel access road.
We feel our plans would receive adequate scrutiny, with the County's best interest served, by an
. abbreviated, administrative review by select staff members. We hope you, the Commission and .
Board agree, and we appredate your consideration of Our request.
9624.09
Affiliated with Reid Sport Concepts, Ltd.
301 East High Street · Charlottesville. Virginia 22902 · 804-979-7522 · Fax: 804-977-1194 · mc@mckeecarson,Com ° www. mckeecarson.com
1887
CNS MICROWAVE, INC,
Box 1273
Cllarleston, W,V. 25325--1273
p
September 8, 1997
Mr. Mark Canlee
United States Cellular Wireless Communications
288 Route 101
Bedford, Nsw Hampshire 03 110
Dear Mr. Cartlee:
The purpose of this letter is to advise you that CNS Microwave, Inc. CCNS") hereby:
grants United States Cellular Wireless CormnunicafionS permission for the limited purpose of
filing zoning permit applies. lions on its behalf in Greene County, Virginia for the Bickers site, and
A/bem~arle County, Virginia for the Goodlow Mountain site. Any questions regarding the
permission granted herein should be directed to Mr. Bruce Cttvender of'CNS, who can be reached.
at (394) 357-3046.
Sincerely,
Pl'tilip tL-AJ. dridge
President
time to time erect, operate, remove or replace on such tract radio tower
ForeFred to above, certain guy wires to secure the said towers and whatever
buildings and equipment are necessary or useful in'the opinion of Grantee in
.i
connection with the operation of such radio tower and proposed communication
Grantor also grants to Grantees its successors and assigns the
right or ingress and egress to the said tract along existing roads, or if
such roads are not suitable for such ingress and egress, Grantee shall have tte
right to make such changes and improvements to e xisting roads as in the
Judgment of Grantee are necessary to provide satisfactory access to the said
t~act.
This agreement shall remain in fQrce and effect until any of
the structures mentioned above be constructed upon the above described tract
and so long thereafter as they, or any of them, be maintained thereon.
Grantee agrees to use due diligence in the construction and
t'operation of its communication equipment end pay to Grantor for any physical
damage to the remainder of Grantor's p~operty resulting from such construction
and operation with the exception of damages resulting from acts of God and other
cause over which Grantee has no control. Also, Grantee shall not be liable
for any damage on the said iOO foot square tract described above.
This agreement shall be binding upon successors and assigns of
both Grantors and Grantees.
Witness the following signatures and seals this 23rd day of
March, 1964.
Witness: Malcolm G. Cameron (SEAL)
W. A. McCarty, Jr. Willie J. Cameron (SEAL)
W. A. McCaDty, Jr.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGIHIA
COUNTY OF LANCASTER, TO-WIT:
)
I, William A. Metartys Jr.s a Notary Public in and for the County
of Lancaster aforesaid do hereby certify that Malcolm G. Cameron and Willie J.
Cameron, his wife, whose names are signed thereto to the foregoing writing
bearing date on the 23rd day of March, 196~, have this day acknowledged
the same before me in the County and State aforesaid.
Given under my hand this 23rd day of March, 196~.
My commission expires January 25, 1967.
~>~llliam A. McCarty, Jr., Notary Public
VIRGINIA, )
IN THE CLERK'S O~'FICE OF ALBEMARLE CI|~CUITCOURT, MARC}! 26, 196it.
'[his deed was presented to me in Said office and with certificate annexed
admitted to record at 9:10 A. M.
Teste:
,Clerk.
STATS OF VINGINIA,
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, TO-WIT:
: Is Myrle Maddax, a Notary Public in and for the County of
libemetic, State of Virginia, hereby certify that James E. Clark, Jr. and
Gladys F. Clark, whose names are signed to the foregoing writing, bearing
date on the 20th day of Marchs 196hs have acknowledged"the same before me in
my County aforesaid.
My commission expires the 3 day of April, 1966.
Given under my hand this 20 day of March, 196|n.
Nyrle Maddex, Notary Public
VIRGINIA,'
IN TRE CLERK'S OFFICE OF ALREMARLE CIRCUIT COURT, MARCU 25s 196q.
This deed was presented to me in said office and with certificate annexed
admitted to record at 1|:20 P, M.
Teste:
RADIO TOWER PERMIT ]4. G. Cameron &c
FOR AND IN CONSIDEHATION OF THE SUM OF FOUR |I[JNDI~ED DOI,I.ARS To: Permit
cash in hand paid, receipt or which is hereby acknowledged, MalcolmCommonwealth
Natural Gas
($~00.00),
G. Cameron and Willie J. Cameron, his wife (hereinarter called Grantor) herebyi:
~'St. Tax .60
grant to Commonwealth Natural Gas Corporation (herelaafter called Grantee) the~Co. Tax .20
right to install, operate, maintain, replace and remove a radio towers certai~ Fee ~.00
guy wares and other structures commonly used with communication equipment upo~ Pd. $ ~.80
a tract of land IOO foot square situated In [livanna Magisterial Districts 4~.b.,,~..~
Dei.g a part of a pare~ or la.d acguired b~ .alcolm G. Cameron
under the Will of Barton U. Cameron, deceaseds dated August as 1958, and
recorded on February nO, 1963 in Will Book ~2, pa~e 108, in the Office of
the Clark of the Circuit Court of Albemarle CountysVirElntas together with
the right of ingress and egress tos from and through same.
The said 100 foot square tract of land shall be located on
the southerly side of Grantee's pipeline right of way near the point where th~
said right of way crosses the top of the mountain of the above described.
property. While the said IO0 foot Square t~a~t has not been surveyeds its
location has been agreed upon and It is hereby agreed that when the radio tows
is erecteds the location shall be the 100 foot square tract centered on the
said radio tower.
It Is hereby agreed that all trees and other obstructions shall
be cut and removed from said tract and Grantee shall have the right to keep
the area clear of all trees~ brush or other obstructions as long as said
structures are located on said tract. Grantee shall have the right to erect
(...EGEM~
"GOODL OE~ FIELD'
PLAT SHC~ING BOUNDARY SURVEY OF
TAX MAP 36 PARCEL 19
LOCATED NEAR BARBOURSVLLE
RIVANNA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
DECEMBER 7, 1989
O 150 300 600 900
09~~'08-00
I,,,
/
/
/
.50
R'IVANNA DISTRICT
/
x.
SECTION .56
37
660 000 FEET
(SOUTH)
q225
- [ 738.~
38o07'30,,
~39000m E. R~:$TON. VIdGINIA~--,~86
[SOUTH) ~ !5'
ROAD CLASSIFICATION
Heavy-duty. Light-duty
-..
Medium-duty Unimproved did ......... ~'~'~?'~.'z,,..,
~ U. S. Route O State Route
OUAORANGLE LOCATION
Revisions shown in purple and woodland compiled in
cooperation with Commonwealth of Virginia agencies from
aerial photographs taken 1984 and other sources. This
information not field checked. Map edited 1986
BARBOURSVILLE, VA.
38078-B3-TF-024
1964
PHOTOREVISED 1986
DMA 5360 Ill NE-SERIES V854
-
P/N 106770
-er,~.l,e-
H~
P/N 100246
.-,
H - 5.0
P/N t 19703
SECTION
Post-It" brand fax transmittal memo 7671
'To From
Co. Co.
Ey -
,.,
10'
12'
C-C:
- E ISEE PAGE 2)
(SEE PkGg 3)
' O [SEE PAGE 3)
- F {SEE PAGE
G (SEE PAGE 4)
- Z {SEE PAGE
- H (SEE PAGE 4)
PRELIMINARY
DESIGN
DO NOT BUILD
US" CELLULAR
COHHUNITY OIe ZVY. VA
U- 12.O X t90' S~'I.F-SUPPORTING TOWER
API~AOVE0/ENe. ~~
APPAOYEO/FO~ ~ 1545 P;d~o
_ my~u~ IN
on~Uv ,LS 219-f36-4221 _
FPOR' E, et92'.~}FT ' g7/~g/g7 ta:00 }
SAMPLE PHOTO
2960.006 / 2960.016 1090 12 dBd Panel
c)C)
270
GENERAL CI'IARAC'I'EI'?,ISTICS
I:rcqslcm'y I~;mgc ,',;(16 - 9{,}() MI [z "'
l,:aicd Power 500 W'
EI..ECTR ICA L CH A R A CTEI~, 1$1'I CS
Beamwidth: H-ffianc
E-plato:
I02° _+ 2" Cat -3 dB)
14° _ 1° (at -3 d13)
Maximum / Minimum Gain
12 dBd / 11.4 dgd
I?.lcc~rical Downtilt
0° (available -I ° to .-15°).
SicIt: l,obcs < -15 dB
Front-to-Back Ratio ,. < - 19 dg
MECHANICAL CI-.IARACTERI.STrCS
.Hcighljx Width x Deplh 5 1" x 9.3" X 7.5"
·. (1290x 235x ].90nml)
Weight 19 lbs (8.6 kg)
Wind Survival Rating
125 mph (200 kin/h)
Wind Load (al 1()0 ml~h)
· 137 N (fronlaI Ft.}
348 N (lalcral
Flat Plait Equivalent Area
'.i.26 ft: (0.30 m: )
'l>pe N. or 7/16 I~IN
Alumintun / Pol)'cs!cr
...;,'. 'lm~ lhc U.:.,. 'i c:;m;ida. di;il
·: . ...,~_ ......
,lodel 296,0.'006./2960.01.6 102°, 12 dBd Panel
· (a member of the DAPA Series 2900'rt'~ family of pands)
::/[" ':' .'.;)".-h'c;":"i~'6);i'i""'r; .........L'i' .....' ........"(,,", ,..' .....
UNT R WARE INFORMAT[ON AND DRA INGS .
~i , ........:" "':' "" .............."" .............................................................................
Fix 903 (I .25" -'3.5" OD lfipc), or
Fix 905 (1.66"-4.5" OD pipc~;" .-.
Model 307~780 (l'cfer to page I18)
REAR UIE~
~m 3~
,.q,(233mm) h""
TOP U I E~
"i
'-F'l
CNS Microwave Inc.
November 2, 1997
Mr. Wffiiam Fritz
County of Albemarle
Dept. pf Planning and Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, ~inia 229024596
Dear Mr. Fritz:
I am writing this letter in regards to the telecommunications tower Columbia Gas operates at
Goodlow Mr..( SP 97-51) near Gordonsville, VA. This tower was hit in by a tractor October
1996. The tower fell and was damaged. The lower portion of the tower was re-erected to pi'oviite
radio coverage for Columbia field personnel until the tower could be replaced.
Columbia was approached by US Cellular who offered to replace the tower for us, in exchange for
them being able to mount antennas at this site. Colttmbia would hope that the planning board
would approve US Cellular to build a new tower, so that Columbia can avoid rebuilding their
tower. Allowing US Cellular to rebuild the tower has several advantages over Columbia Gas
rebuilding the tower including:
· The tower would be rebuilt more quickly, improving service and safety for Columbia Gas
customers. The radio system Columbia operates off of this tower in an integral part of its
emergency communication system.
· The cost of the tower would be home by US Cellular, and therefore not get passed along to
Columbia Gas' s customers.
· An aging, lightweight tower would be replaced wi~ a commercial grade tower, increasing
safety and reliability in the future.
· Other wireless companies would be allowed to locate on the new tower, eliminating the need
for additional towers in the future.
Columbia would sincerely appreciate any action this board could take to allow the tower to be buik
before we have to rely on the current tower through another winter heating season. If the board
has any questions, I can be reached at (304) 357-3 154. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Engineer
CNS Microwave, Inc. - 1700 MacCorkle Avenue S.E., P.O. Box 1273, Charleston, WV 25325 - 1273
MEMORANDUM
De=amber, 19g7
Andy Cipriani
Fiefir.
JERRY PELKEY
Subj:
Gorclonsvitle Raffle Tower at Goodlee Mountain
We need to restore 'the radio antennas at Goodlee mountain to the proper height as
designstool on the license of 120 feet or 37 meters.The radio site on Gooffloe mountain,
which we refer to as Gordonsville Radio is pert of a radio rapeater system that include
radio repeaters ~t Gordonsville, Emporia, Richmond and Suffolk, Va. Any ~ these
repeaters can be selected remotely to provide communication to their respe=tive areas.
This radio system provides emergency and routine communications between ,area ~nd
district cd~i~.s and personnel in the field. It also provides communi~.stion from vehir, Je to
vehir, Je and vehicle to offica. ;,.,
When the tower at Goodlos was lost we made an emergen=y rapair and only put up
enough :tower to get the antenna above the trees. The lack of the proper height
provided f~ir coverage but resulted in some dead spots. We waited to replace this
tower becauee it was scheduled to be raplaced as part of phase 4 of the microwave
replacement project. This would have entailed installing a.120 foot microwave tower at ·
Goodlee Mountain that would have been heavier but neither higher nor lighted.
Columbia gas re-engineered in 1995196 and plans were dropped for mi=rowave through
Goodlee mountain.
The fact still remains that in order to comeunit, ate effeeavely with mobiles in the
Gardensvilla area it is imperative that the Goodlee site I~ restored to 120 feel
Transmitter power (in Watts output), receiver sensitivity, an¢l antenna heights am the
main factors that determine how well a radio system works. Mathematical calculations
will show that antenna height has far more effect than any =thor factor in determining
coverage area for a radio system. We limped along with the antennas whom they are
now, but we need to get them back to the license height to better provide for the safe
and efficient operation of the pipeline in the Gardensvilla - Boswells Tavern area and
provide effective radio =ommunicetions to other areas.
Uperintendent
Attachment D- Topographical Map
Attachment E- Letters from the Public
tATTACHMENT E } ~'
MANGHAM MANOR MOHAIRS
901 Hammocks Gap Road
Charlottesville, Vir~nia 22911
Phone: (804) 973 2222
Facsimile: (804) 973 7108
E-mail: MangManor~ol.com
October 23, 1997
William Fritz
Senior Planner for Albemarle County
401 McIntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
Dear Mr. Fritz:
We are writing to express our disagreement with the 2 proposed Centel Towers on our-scenic
Keswick road. We understand the need for towers in high metro population areas but lets try & ·leave the
countryside unblemished - or as undisturbed as possible. Lets work with the facilities in the neighboring
cities of Charlottesville & Culpeper & reduce .sprawl & construction. The East side of the Southeast
Mountain Range around Edgeworth Farm already looks like its wired & bunkered for the next war.
Image not just the monstrosity power sub-station to gaze upon & the govemment hillside installation
but two monolithic phone towers. Lets consider keeping this in check, huh? W~'~e phone carrying
citizens & work well within the "dead air" zones.
Thank you for your consideration,
Joel Mangham ~
Michele Mangham
ATTACHMENT E ~
Ms. Mary Joy Scala
Department of Planning
401 McIntire Road.
Charlottesville, Virginia
22902-4596
Ernest W. Duncan
Glenda L. Duncan
7090 Gordonsville Rd
Gordonsville, VA 22942
October 27, 1997
Dear Ms. Scala:
We want to state our opposition to, and protest of, the proposed
cellular towers on. Strawberry Hill Farm and Goodloe Mountain.
These unsightly and monstrous towers will distract from the.
beautiful pastoral views of.the Southwest Mountains.
The Route 231 - 22 corridor between Gordonsville and Shadwell has
many beautiful and historic estates and farms that should be
protected and.preserved at all costs.
We would appreciate your support in denying this request..
Si~e~e ly ,~____~
ATTACHHENT E t
Ms. Mary Joy-Scala
Department of Planning
401McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia
22902-4596
Frank L. Robinson Jr.
7090 Gordonsville Rd
Gordonsville, VA 22942
October 27, 1997
Dear Ms. Scala:
I want to state my protest of the proposed cellular towers' on
Strawberry Hill Farm and Goodloe Mountain inAlbemarle County.
The proposed location, of which Route 231 is a scenic byway, is in
the Blue Run Agricultural and Forestal District and adjacent to
historic Edgeworth Farm. The Routes 231 - 22 corridor, between
Gordonsville and Shadwell, has many historic estates and farms that
should be preserved and protected from such encroachments.
These towers, if absolutely necessary, should be located elsewhere
so as to not detract from the beautiful views of these historical
estates and the Southwest Mountains.
I would appreciate your support in the denial of this request.
Sincerely, ~ ~
I"" s ," I
HF-Ub[V -U
NOV/0 t997
Planning Dept,
6621 Sam Mundy Road
Barboursville, Va. 22923
November 7, 1997
Mr. WilliamD. Fritz, Senior Planner
Department of Planning and Community Development
Albemarle County
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Va. 22902
Dear Mr. Fritz,
We are writing to voice our strong opposition to the construction of a
cellular tower on Goodlow Mountain adjacent to our property - SP 97-51
U.S. Cellular (Goodlow Mountain).
The Southwest Mountains in northern Albemarle County are virtually
unspoiled by twentieth century technology and the accompanying visual
blight. Routes 20 and 231 that straddle these mountains are noted
scenic routes and help make our area the desirable destination it is.
The proposed tower at 120 feet will most certainly be visible from our
property, the existing tower is not, and will be an eyesore from both
routes 20 and 231. The resulting marginal improvement in area cellular
phone service does not, in our opinion, warrant a large reduction in the
inherent asthetics of our area.
Other less objectionable sites are available like the radio towers in
Ruckersville. We ask you to reconsider approval of this project.
Sincerely,
a/ul~ w. P/~~/~ a r c/e~
Cynthia C. Pearce
Charlotte Humphris
Chair, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
401 McLntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA
Dear Mrs. Humphris,
Relative to the Goodlow-Peters Mountain Tower proposal:
(1) The present owner of the property where the tower is proposed has been
misinformed and deceived by Columbia Gas and U.S. Cellular. He is not in favor of this
new tower proposal that would doom his property with one stroke of the pen. I strongly
suggest that you discuss this issue with him prior to any decision..
(2) Doesn't the zoning administrator's ruling apply. only if construction of a new
tower had begun within 12 months of the accident? I am not aware of any new tower
construction on the mountain.
(3) Emergency service for Columbia Gas Pipeline communication and fire-rescue,
etc. is being met with the present service. Example: recent total severance of the Columbia
Gas Pipeline in Greene County.
(4) Cellular phone service west of Goolow-Peters Mountain presently exists about
as good as anywhere else. Why not have U.S. Cellular co-locate to get the same coverage?
(5) Most other communities are co-locating communication antennae on water
towers and power substation structures - just observe on a drive from here to D.C... There
would be little or no public opposition~nd no additional negative environmental impact.
Why not do this on the east side of Peters Mountain?
(6) A Peters Mountain tower does impact the only land use that exist there: forestry.
No trees could be harvested that would endanger these towers and no timber would be
allowed to grow in a surrounding area. Foresters say the Southwest Mountains grow
timber better and faster than anywhere in this nation. I originally formed the Blue Run
Agricultural and Forest District which now runs continuously between the two scenic by-
ways Rt. 20 and Rt. 231, thus bisecting Peters Mountain. Selectively harvesting over 2
million board feel of timber enabled us to purchase this land in order to give lasting
mountain protection.
(7) No mention was made in the review report to the commission or the Board of
Supervisors concerning the fact that almost the entire western slope of Peters Mountain is
in a permanent scenic easement ,that pre-dates U.S. Cellular's application. This easement
can not be ignored because it is forever - it is not going away. This. is the'largest scenic
easement in Albemarle County of over 1200 acres, fronting on Rts. 20, 777, and 641. It is the
most restrictive easement in Albemarle County as well, with permanent restrictions
allowing no structures whatsoever above 1300 feet elevation, including no dwellings or
agricultural buildings and no clear cutting. A tower, and all its accessories, is completely
inconsistent with a permanent scenic easement. Reference: Gay Carver and lohn 5heppard
with Albemarle County.
(8) There is specific reference to no towers being allowed in the deeds of nearly 3000
acres on and immediately around Peters Mountain. Reference: our easement, Mansfield,
and Piedmont Manor.
(9) This request is not for "reconstruction of an existing tower", but rather for new
construction of a new tower, a much wider tower that would be much more visible and
already has plans for multiple coexistences. Nightmares of Carter's Mountain and Piney
Mountain don't l~elong here.
(10) Visibility is the issue. I wonder how anxious U.S. Cellular and Columbia Gas
would be to build a tower rather than co-locate if you were to have them sign a binding
agreement to remove the tower immediately were lights required by the FAA? By
relinguishing any possibility of ever subdividing or develol~ing Peters Mountain forever,
we sacrificed financial gain to assure the scenic beauty of the mountain. In the' few decades
that we all have left, I hope that any one of you can drive along Rts. 64, 33, 29, 250, 20, 231,
and 15 - to name a few - and look up at Peters Mountain where the gas line crosses, and say
"that mountain is beautiful. I helped preserve that beauty. I made a difference".
CC:
Sincerely,
Harold E. Young, Jr., M.D.
Members of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Philip S. Marshall
"Polhavn"
1300 Skyline Drive
Fairbanks, AK 99712-
Mr. Wayne Cilimberg
Director of Planning & Community Development
County of Albemarle
Dept. of Building Code & Zoning Services
401 McIntire Rd., Rm. 223
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
7 February 1998
Dear Mr. Cilimberg,
As landowner of TM-36, parcel 19, for which US Cellular and
Commonwealth Gas have applied for special use permit 97-51 to
erect a radio/microwave tower on Commonwealth's right of way, I
wish to inform you of my objection to this proposal for the
following reasons:
1) As steward of this land, I wish to pass it on in as "good" a
condition as I received it. The proposed development has adverse
impacts on visual aesthetics, lighting, traffic, and ..-is in
noncompliance with the County's zoning ordinance and the Board of
'Supervisors' proposed resolution for the special permit.
2) This'land ~..is--surrounded. by~the-Southwest...Mountains. National
Register Rural Historic District. It is zoned
rural/agricultural, with a property tax proviso to keep it
undisturbed. Such proposed development violates the spirit of
these agreements by Significantly changing the character of the
district.
3) I have declined to sell or lease to Commonwealth any
additional property because significant adverse visual aesthetic
impact will result from the proposed enlarged development as the
stipulated clear-cutting will result in a gap on the skyline
visible from both east and west sides.
4) As a consequence, the proposed construction cannot meet
condition 2b of the Board's proposed resolution dated 9 January
1998 for the special permit, i.e. in case of failure it will
remain on ROW land.
5) If 3 or more collocators are permitted to place up to six per
user, 2 x 5' microwave panels, on this tower, it will unlikely
meet the resolution's condition 2c of being a "lattice-type"; it
will have become a "solid" tower.
6) Though the concept of collocation is commendable, it can be
argued that the permittee's and its assigns' new activities go
beyond the scope and intent of the original ROW agreement with
the landowner and thus are not permissible.
A more immediate hindrance is that this proposed special
permit is for a continuation of a legal, nonconforming special
use due to damage. Therefore, by Section 6.6.1 of the Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance, "no such structure shall be enlarged or
expanded as a part of such repair and/or reconstruction."
However, section 2a of the Board's proposed resolution to permit
the tower to be constructed to 199'(and section 4a to allow
another 20' of whip antennae) violates this ordinance.
Commonwealth has also indicated (but not on its application) that
it wishes to construct a 12 x 20' building on the ROW.
7) In lieu of these irregularities, it seems ill-advised that
the County has waived the tower site plan requirement and I wish
to petition that such a document be generated.
8) With the possibilty of a heightened tower comes a much
stronger likelihood of FAA's requirement for a light. This
change would conflict with section 2d of the resolution. This
light pollution would be a significant adverse impact in three
counties.
9) My property, those of the adjacent landowners, and the
wildlife habitat along the ROW access will suffer adverse
environmental impact (trash, noise,'road erosion) due to the 300%
or more increase in traffic as US Cellular and each of the other
coltocators inspect their equipment 8-12 times per year..
All of these concerns constitute ~'ubstantial detriment to
t.~e.]'adjacent "property. Nor has the applicant"'demonbtr~ted"there
are n0"other suitable locations.= Therefore, I petition you and
the Board to reject the proposed special use permit and maintain
the status quo. Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully,
Philip S. Marshall
cc W.D. Fritz
A.G. McCulley
M. Keller (McKee/Carson)
Charles Martin
Chairman, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
200 Pineridge Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22911
R.E: Goodlow-Peters Mountain Tower Proposal
March 9, 1999
Dear Mr. Martin,
We are all aware of the significance of this Goodlow-Peters Mountain region-its historic designation,
its permanent scenic easement protection, and the large agricultural and forest district in the area. Addi-
tional objective points. that support no tower include:
(I) Facts listed in my ietter to the Board prior to the January 7, I998 meeting and in Philip S.
Marshall's (the property owner) letter of February 7, 1998 to the Director of Albemarle County's Planning
and 'Community Development.
(2) Columbia. Gas did not construct their tower to 120 feet within the 24 month time frame required
after the October, 1996 accident, which is contrary to the applicant's testimony and documented Xlbemarle
staff comments. They have managed very well for 29 months now with a 60 foot tower with a small whip
extension. Our law of non-conformity makes a 120 foot tower irrelavant.
(3) This should be considered a new tower application in an extremely protected area. The present
Small 16 inch triangular tower serving Columbia Gas's purposes can not be seen because it does not extend
above the tree line. As far as visibility is concerned, for nearly 3 years a tower has not existed on Goodlow
Mountain. Alarge permanent scenic easement exists now and has for over 36 months in the Goodlow-Peters
Mountain area, thus predating the current tower proposal and the .damage date.
(4) U.S. Cellular has taken a very deceptive and aggressive approach for quite some time now in an
effort to locate in this protected area. Their application 1 year ago was without landowner notification or'
approval although previous public hearings suggested otherwise (see Philip S. Marshall's letter of February 7,
1998). Their current application has Philip Marshall's signature only because he was deceptively informed
by U.S. Cellular that a new tower was going up regardless of his position, therefore it would be in his best
interest. to go along with their application - rather presumptuous. U.S. Cellular has already voted for you.
(5) There is'no access road in place as previously stated but rather a rutted 4 wheel drive only log-
ging road as would exist with any forest land that has undergone timber management.
(6) No additional clearing needed seems questionable.. The present area is not visible because it only
measures 80 feet x 80 feet, well under 1/4 acre in size.
(7) U.S. Cellular couldn't obtain a tower site from any area landowners (we have been approac-hed on
several occasions), so they are attempting to sneak in the back door on a site to which they have no claim.
This is Columbia Gas's old permit and that has expired without necessary rebuilding.
The existence of our various protective districts is not subjective as was recently suggested, but rather
very much a fact of law. We have learned from our past mistakes that "ugly telephone poles" could easily be
replaced with underground cable. After correcting so many environmental disasters of the past century, it
seems incomprehensible that our intelligent, informed society would repeat those same mistakes. Thank
you for your concern.
Sincerely,
Harold E. Young; Jr. M.D.
cc: Members of the Albemaxle County Board of Supervisors; Zoning. Administrator
Piedn~<H~l Environn~ental Cotincil
SP-97-51 - Goodlow Mountain Tower
Statement delivered to the Board of Supervisors, March 17, 1999
After talking to County Planner Bill I~ritz today, ! learned that the tower in question has
probably not been .rebuilt to its original height within the two years allowed by the Zoning
Ordinance. Mr. Fritz said that the tower as it exists today consists of a lattice structure
measuring about 60 feet in height with a pipe about 40 feet tall attached to the top of the
lattice. I also learned that the reconstruction was not verified until last Friday, four months
and a half after the two-year deadline necessary for the tower to keep its legal status as a
non-conforming structure.
When the Planning Commission first reviewed this application in 1997, five nearby
property owners expressed concern about the project, its impact on the Southwest
Mountains Rural Historic District and their property values. It is clear from the minutes that
at least two Planning Commissioners may have voted for approval because they thought
the tower could be restored legally to its reputed height of 120 feet.
When you reviewed and all but approved this request in December, 1997, you had before
you a determination from the Zoning Administrator stating that the tower was a legal
nonconforming use which could be rebuilt to its pre-accident height. Judging from the
draft minutes for that night, at least one of you viewed this as an existing tower upon which
U.S. Cellular would locate a panel.
That may no longer be .the case, if the applicants have lost their legal 'right to rebuild a
120-foot tower. Now the County should be free to consider this request as if a tower of this
height did not exist on top of Goodlow Mountain, one of the highest peaks in the
Southwest Mountains.
To the best of my knowledge, you have not approved a new tower in the mountain overlay
district identified in your Open Space Plan, unless that tower was clustered near other
towers already in existence. To the best of my knowledge, the only tower you have
approved in a rural historic district was a much shorter structure near the substation at
Cash's Corner. And you' have refused to approve towers near !and under permanent
conservation easement.
It would be completely cBnsistent with the actions you have taken in the 'past to deny this
request. Residents of the Southwest Mountains are doing their part to keep this place
open and unspoiled. They've placed thousands of acres under conservation easement
and given up most of their development potential for all time. Please support their
commitment, deay this request and encourage the applicant to consider shorter, less
visible alternatives to this structure.
I'd like to leave you with one question: when was the 40-foot piece of pipe added to the '
structure?
P.O. Box 460 · W/arreIHot~. Virginia · 20188 · 540-347-2334 · I-'ax 540-34.<)-9(X)3
I I I I ROse 14ill Drive ° S{~ilc-~ Orle · Cl'/arh:>ne~vill(~, vir~i~ia · 22903 · 8()4-~77~2~)3:~ · I:;~x ~()4.-~)77-~s:~)c~
Attachment F - Superseded Staff Reports
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ, AICP
NOVEMBER 18, 1997
DECEMBER 10, 1997
SP 97-51 US CFJJ .UI.AR [GOODI.OW MOUNTAIN]
Applicant's Proposal:
The applicant is proposing to construct a 120 foot guyed lattice tower to provide improved
cellular phone coverage for northern Albemarle County and portions of Greene and Orange.
Currently US Cellular's service is available in the area. However, significant areas of weak signal'
or even no signal exist. The specific location and design of the proposed tower is shown on
Attachment C. This tower is located on Goodlow Mountain on the Columbia Gas Pipeline and
replaces an existing tower located on the site.
Petition:
Proposal to construct a wireless telecommunication tower and associated support facilities
[10.2.2(6)]. The proposed location is on Goodlow Mountain on the existing Columbia Gas
pipeline easement. This application will allow for the removal and reconstruction of the existing
tower located on the property: The property is described as Tax Map 36, Parcel 19 and consists
of 121 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas: This site is within the Rivanna Magisterial District and is
not lo~ated within a designated growth area.
Character of~he Area:
The location for the tower is near the peak of Goodlow Mountain on the Columbia Gas Pipeline.
The property to the south is located within an Agricultural/Forestal District. Attachment D is a
topographic map that shows the location of the proposed tower, nearby house structures, the
quarry and the railroad. The proposed tower is at an elevation of approximately 1,380 feet ASL,
Above Sea Level. The peak. of the mountain is at an elevation of 1,504 feet ASL. The closest
dwelling to the proposed tower,' is approximately 2,300 feet (0.4 miles) distant and
approximately 600 feet' lower in elevation. No houses are located within 2,000 feet (0.6 miles)
of the proposed tower. No existing towers are located in the area, other than the tower to be
replaced. [The tower to be replaced is currently 80 feet tall. However, prior to October 1996 this
tower was 123 feet. The tower was hit and damaged by a tractor and only the undamaged portion
was replaced.] The nearest identified structure capable of supporting telecommunlcations is a
water tank located in the Town of Gordonsville approximately 4 miles to the east. The nearest
US Cellular Facility is located in Greene County approximately 8 miles west of this site.
RECOMMF, NDATION:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Seelion 31 ~2.4.1 of the
Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval.
P!annitlg and Zoning, History:
A special use permit allowing the installation of an additional gas pipeline was approved by the
Board in 1991. [SP 90-111]
Contprehensive Plan:
Staff notes that in order to reconslruct the proposed tower no clearing for access and the
provision of electrical service will be required. Therefore, the impact of the tower itself is the
only factor which has been reviewed by staff for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and
the Zoning Ordinance.
Staff can identify no provision in the Comprehensive Plan which prohibits or has the effect of
prohibiting the provision of personal wireless communications. This site is located in the Rural
Areas of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan, the Mountain Resource Area as identified in
the Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan, and the Southwest Mountains National Register
Rural HiStoric District as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan. Currently, the
Land Use Plan contains limited review criteria for the siting oftelecommunieation towers. The
Open Space Plan does provide some guidinee for the protection of identified resources of the
County. The resources identified in the plan and potentially affected by this application are:
Mountain Resource Area, Critical Slopes and Southwest Mountains National Register Rural
Historic District. Critical Slopes are addressed by the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. The
methods for protection and potential allowable impacts in the Mountain Resource Areas are
currently being reviewed in detail by the Mountain Protection Committee. Although detailed'
standards for potential allowable impacts are not completed, staff has determined that protection
of an identified resource, the mountain areas, is still appropriate. Information as to the impact of
locating outside of the Mountain Resource Area on another parcel is not available.
Most of Goodlow Mountain is designated as critical slopes in the Open Space Plan. However,
the location of the proposed tower is on the erest of a ridge of Goodlow Mountain no disturbance
of critical slopes will occur for the reconstruction of the tower. The existing access to the tower
crosses areas of critical slopes. The only improvements proposed are drainage improvements and
'the placing of gravel in the existing roadbed to aid in stabilization. It is the opinion of staflY ttmt
no adverse impact on areas of critical slopes as identified in the Open Space Plan will occur.
The mountain resource area as identified in the Open Space Plan starts at the 700 foot contour.
The proposed tower is at an elevation of approximately 1,380 feet ASL. The Open Space Plan
states that, "Mountains are a major open space system recommended for protection in the Rural
and Growth Areas" (page 27). In addition the plan states "Resources associated with mountains
include critical slopes, scenic views, wildlife habitat, extensive forests~ unique soils for orchards,
natural areas (including geologic features, and habitat for rare and endangered plants and
animals), and headwaters," (page 5) The Open Space Concept Map "is intended to serve two
functions:to guide open space decision-making in the County as a whole, and to provide a
starting point for the ongoing identification and protection of Rural Area open space resources"
(page 2), TIffs application is to permit the reconstruction of an existing tower, The tower on the
site is currently approximately 80 feet high, The original height of the tower was 123, However,
the tower was damaged during maintenance of the right of way which resulted in the partial
collapse of the tower, [The damaged was caused while bushogging the Columbia Gas right of
way, During the bushogging a guy wire for the tower was hit and a portion of the tower was
pulled over,] Typically staff considers that the location of a tower in the Mountain Resource Area
as permanently altering the visible appearance of the resource and, without additional guidance
as to acceptable impacts in the Mountain Resource Area, staff opinion is that locating towers in
the Mountain Resource Area is inconsistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan~ Open
Space Plan. However, in this case the request allows for the reconstruction of a tower which was
on this property for a number of years and which had limited visibility from surrounding areas.
Therefore, staff does not find that approval of this request'would have an adverse impact on the
Mountain Resource Area,
STAFF COMMENT:
Staff wili address the issues of this request in three sections:
1. Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning'Ordinance.
2. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(i)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
3. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of. Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4. I of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use
permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance
may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not b~ of
substantial detriment to adjacent property.
The proposed tower complies with the setback requirements of the ordinance. The tower
location is on a gen~y sloping area on the crest of the ridge located at the treeline adjacent to the
Columbia Gas Pipeline. These trees will provide excellent screening of the equipment at the
base of the tower. Based on a field visit, staff opinion is that the trees in the area of the tower are
approximately 70 to 80 feet tall.
The proposed tower is located approximately 2,300 feet from the nearest dwelling on adjacent
property. Staff opinion is that the clearing for the gas line has created the only visibility of the
tower and, based on. a field visit, this tower will be visible from dwellings located to the east and'
west of Goodlow Mountain. Visibility from north or south of Goodlow Mountain is extremely
limited due to the existing tree cover and topography of the region. Lighting of the tower is
unlikely as the tower is under the height standard for lighting, but staff has included a cohdition
limiting lighting unless required by the FAA or other federal officials. This tower does not
penetrate the Airport Overlay District..The visibility of the tower from residential property may
be 'considered a detriment, However, staff is not able to determine if the detriment is substantial.
In fact the distance to dwellings and the fact that this request is for the reconstruction of a tower
that has existed mitigates the visual impacts caused by the tower. Additional information may be
provided by the public during the public hearings on the issue of potential.impacts. Staff is
unable to determine if the impact of this proposal will create a substantial detriment to adjacent
property. The applicant has not submitted evidence that the impact from this development will
not be.substantial.
that the character of the district will not be chan_~ed thereby.
In determining the impact on the character of the district staff has taken into consideration the
character of the district as described in the Comprehensive Plan Open Space Plan; A topographic
map is attached to this report which shows the location of dwellings, the gas pipeline and other
features.
The property immediately to the south is located in an Agriculmml/Forestal District. Staff
opinion is that approval of this request would have no adverse impact on the use of the adjacent
property for either agriculture or forestry. Visibility of the tower from this Agriculural/Forestal
District and land in an Agricultural/Forestal District to the west is extremely limited and it is the
opinion of staffthat no negative impact on the aesthetics of the District will be caused by the
approval of this request.
As this request is for the reconstruction of an existing tower this result will not result in a
significant change in the appearance of the Rural Area or Mountain Resource Area. Towers have
been permitted in the Rural Areas and have not in the opinion of staff resulted in a change in the
character of the Rural Areas to this point. Since'the adoption of the Open Space Plan no towers
have been approved within the Mountain Resource Area except within the existing tower farm on
Carter's Mountain and the recent approval for CFW on Piney Mountain.
Staff opinion is that this request does comply with this provision of Section 3 1.2.4..1 of the
Ordinance.
and that such use will be i~ harmony with the purpose and intent ofthis.ordinance.
Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5
and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1.5 (Attachment F). All of these
provisions address, in one form or another, the provision of public services. The use of mobile
telephones clearly provides a public service as evidenced by the expanded and rapid increase in
use. Based on the provision of a public service, staff o sinion is that this request is in harmony
4
with the purpose and intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of
the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, atractive andharmonious community".
The provision of this facility does increase the availability and convenience for users of wireless
phone technology. The reconstruction of this site will allow Columbia Gas to restore its
communication network. [The quality of this network was reduced when the tower was
damaged.] This tower serves as a link in its emergency communication network.
Staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance.
with the uses permitted by. right in the district.
The proposed tower will not restrict the current uses, other by-right uses available on this site-or
by-fight uses on any other property.
with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance,
Section 5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations governing tower facilities and appropriate
conditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance.
and with the public health. safety and general welfare.
The provision of increased communication facilities may be considered consistent with the
public health and safety and general welfare by providing increased communication services in
the event of emergencies and increasing overall general communication services. As noted
previously this tower also serves as a link in the Columbia Gas emergency communication
network and therefore this request may be considered as consistent with the publics safety. The
Teleeommunications Act addresses issues of environmental effects with the following Ianguage,
"No state or local government Or insmentality thereof may regulate the placement
construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the
environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent'that such facilities comply with
the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions". In order to operate this facility the
applicant is required to meet-the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions. This
requirement will adequately protect the public health and safety.
Section 704(a)(7)Co)(i)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
The regulation of the placement. construction and modification of personal wireless facilities bv
any state or local government or insmentality thereof shall not prohibit or have the effect of
prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services.
Neither ihe Comprehensive Plan northe Zoning Ordinance prohibits the provision of personal
wireless service. Staff opinion is that the County has no ban or policies that have the effect of
banning personal wireless services or facilities and that decisions regarding the approval of
facilities to provide service is done on a case-by-case basis. Staff offers as support for this
5
statement the following evidence. Since 1990 the Board of Supervisors has acted on 16 requests
and has approved 11 of these requests. Staff does not believe that the special use permit process
nor the denial of this application has the effect of prohibiting the provision or personal wireless
services. The applicant has not demonstrated that there are no other locations within the proposed
area of service currently available for new tower construction. For this reason, staff does not
believe that denial of this application would have the effect of prohibiting the provision of
services.
The applicant has worked with staff in an effort to identify any suitable location for collocation
which would eliminate the need for construction of a tower. Alternate sites for the construction
of a new tower have not been discussed. No potential collocation sites were identified which
would alleviate the need for reconstruction of the tower on the site under review.
Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zonin[,' Ordinance.
The text of Section 32.2.2 is attached. The Commission my waive the drawing of a Site plan ff
requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the
public interest. The site review committee has reviewed the request for a site plan waiver. Based
on this review staff is unable to identify any purpose which would be served by requiring the
submission of a site plan. Staff recommends approval of a full site plan waiver subject to one
condition:
1. Provision of one parking space.
SUMlVlARY:
Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request:
I. The tower will provide increased wireless capacity and emergency communication which
may be considered consistent with the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5;
2. The wwer will not restrict permitted' uses on adjacent properties.
3. The wwer is considered to be a collocation site as it will support both US Cellular and
Columbia Gas Communication facilities.
This proposal is for the reconstruction of an existing tower.
Approval of this tower will not require the 'construction of an access road or clearing for
electrical service.
The request is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the
ordinance.
Staff has identified the following factor which is unfavorable to this request:
This site is within the Mountain Resource Area as identified in the Comprehensive Plan,
Open Space Plan.
2. Options for alternative sites have not been exhausted.
3. There is an existing reasonable use of the property.
Staff opinion is that this request generally complies with the provisions of the ordinance and the
· Comprehensive Plan. Staff has noted that this tower is located within the Mountain Resource
Area identified in the Open Space Plan. However, as this is a replacement of an existing tower
staff opinion is that this unfavorable factor is mitigated. The limited mount of activity
associated with this tower and impact on the surrounding area is, in the opinion of staff a factor
which tends to favor tiffs application. Few ff any other locations are available which would allow
such a limited activity for the installation of a communication facility. Therefore, staff is able to
support this application.
Should the Board choose to approve this request, staff has provided conditions of approval.
In the event that the Board chooses to deny this application staff often the following comment:
In order to comply with the provisions of the Telecommunication Act, staff requests consensus
direction from the Board regarding the basis for denial of the application and instruction to staff
to remm to the Board with a written decision for the Board' s consideration and action.
RECO1VEMF:NDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of this request and offers the following recommended conditions of
approval.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Tower height shall not exceed I20 feet.
2. Compliance with Section 5. I. 12 of the Zoning Ordinance.
There shall be no lighting of the tower unless required by a federal agency. All tower
lighting shall be shielded so as to minimiTe visibility from the ground.
Staff approval of additional antennae installation. No administrative approval shall
constitute or imply support for or approval of, the location of additional towers, antennae,
etc., even if they may be part of the same network or system as any antennae
administratively approved under this section.
7
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
The tower must be designed and adequate separation provided to property lines such that
in the event of structural failure, the tower and components will remain within the lease
The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within 90 days of the
discontinuance of the use of the. tower for wireless telecommunication purposes.
Tower shall 'be located as shown on Attacheel plan rifled "Proposed Cellular Antenna Site
"and initialed WDF November 7, 1997 and on nntifled topographic map initialed WDF
November 7, 1'997.
Existing trees within 200 feet of the tower shall not be removed without amendment of
this' special use permit except as may be authorized by staff to permit construction of the
tower and installation of access for vehicles and utiliries.
Except as specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration of the Federal
Communications Commission, lransmission structures shall use colon such as gray,. blue
or green, which reduce their visual impacts.
The permittee shall allow other wireless te!ecommunicarions providers to'locate on the
tower and site and shall provide the County, upon request, verifiable evidence of having
made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort
includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other
providers to locate on the permittee' s tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a-
tower ind site owned or controlled by such other provider within Albemarle County. The
permittee also agrees to execute a letter of intent prior to final site plan approval stating
that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith
with any other wireless telecommtmicarions provider requesting to locate on the tower or
site.
A report shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator once a year, no later than July 1.
This report shall state the current user status of the tower. Specifically, the report shall
state if the tower is being used for wireless telecommunicarion service.
The tower shall be of lattice type construction.
Access road improvements shall be limited to drainage improvements and minimal
grading necessary to improve travel surface and the application of gravel. ·
The Planning Commissiononiy must take the following action in order to authorize a site
plan waiver.
8
A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of
Section 32.2.2.subject to the following conditions:
1. Provision of one parking space.
ATTACHM~,NTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Applicants Information
D - Topographical Map
E - Letters fxom the public
F - Purpose and Intent of the Zoning Ordinance
A:\SP9751.RPT
9
COUNTY OF ALBEMARL'E
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITI F:
SP 97-51 US Cellular [Goodlow Mountain]
'SURJ;CT/PROPOSA~ ~R;nUI=ST:
Proposal to construct a telecommunications tower on
Goodlow Mountain.
STAFF CONTACTIS):
Messrs. TuckerlCilimberg/Davis
AGENDA DATE:
January 7, 1998
ACTION:
ITFM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
CONS;NTAGFNDA:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
ATTACHMF:NTS: Resolution; Blaine Letter Dated
December 17, 1997; Prior Conditions
RFVIFWFD BY:~
BACKGROUND:
This special use permit request was reviewed by the Board on December 10, 1997. The item was referred back to staff to
revise the proposed conditions of approval consistent with .the Board's directions for .approval on the Consent Agenda.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has revised the proposed conditions of approval .to address the concerns raised by the Board of Supervisors, update,,
the standard conditions and modified the format of the conditions to place related conditions together.
At the Board's direction, the conditions now limit the type of antennae permitted on the tower and require the tower to
accommodate st least three users. These conditions are found in Condition ft.4 and Condition #5. Condition #4 specifies what
antennae are allowed and prohibited. Condition #5 spec~ss the requirements that the tower must meet to support additional
antennae.
At the request of the applicant, Condition #1 has been modified to allow a 12 foot whip antenna above the 120 foot tower.
Previously the request was for an 8 foot whip antenna. Because the whip antenna at a three inch diameter is virtually
invisible, staff does not object to this change.
The lighting restriction for the support building, found in Condition #6, has been further deftnod. This language is proposed
as a new standard condition for all permits.
For the Board's general information, staff has photographed a number of existing telecommunication towers in Albemade '
County and will provide those photographs to the Board for its review at the January 7, 1998 meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of SP 97-51 subject to the revised conditions. Attached is a Resolution f~r a. pproval.
97.258
,J
Planning 'DepL
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, United States Cellular Corporation C'U.S. Cellular'~) filed an
application for a special use permit C'SP 97-51") which would authorize it to erect a wireless
telecommunications facility in Albemarte County on a portion of that parcel identified as Tax
Nap 36, Parcel 19 (the "property'O, which is located in the Goodlow Mountain area in the
northeastern part of Albemarle County; and
WHEREAS, the property is within the rural areas zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on SP 97-51 on November 18, 1997, and the Board of Supervisors conducted a duly
noticed public hearing on 5P 97-51 on December 10,1997.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, has determined that the criteria for the issuance of a special use
permit. set forth in section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance have been satisfied, and hereby
approves U.S. Ce!lular's application for SP 97-51, subject to the following conditions:
The height of the tower shall not exceed one hundred twenty (120) feet. Whip
antennae and lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in
diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the
tower.
2. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows:
The tower shall be design .ed to allow an increase in height up to· one hundred
ninety-nine (199) feet if necessary to meet the collocation certification in
condition #5.
The tower shall be designed and located so that, in the event.of structural
failure, the tower and all of its components will remain on the portion of the
property leased by U:S. Cetlu'lar (the "site").
The tower shall be of self-supporting lattice-type construction. Guy wires
shall not be permitted.
d. The tower shall have no lighting.
The tower shall be gray, blue or green in order to reduce its visual impacts
unless the Architectural Review Board, the Federal Aviation Administration, or
the Federal Communications Commission requires otherwise.
I:~DEPT~ATTORNEY~ESOLUTI~CELLGOOO.RES
The tower location and the equipment building shall be substantially in accord with
that shown on the attached plan entitled "Proposed Cellular Antenna Site" and
initialed "WDF November 7, 1997."
Ante'nnae may be attached to the tower only as follows:
Omnidirectional or whip antennae shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height
or seven (7) inches in diameter, and shall be of a color which matches the
tower. ]:n no case shall any antenna exceed the height of any antenna
authorized in condition # 1, and the diameter of such antenna shall not
exceed three (3) inches at any point above'the top of the tower.
b.
Directionai or panel antennae shall not exceed five (5) feet in height or two
(2) feet in width, and shall be of a color which matches the tower.
Satellite, microwave dish, and any other antennae not authorized in
paragraphs. (a) or (b) of this condition are prohibited.
Antennae authorized in paragraphs (a) or (b) of this condition 'may be
installed in addition to those installed by the permittee when the tower is first
constructed without amending this special use permit, provided that all
necessary building permits are obtained from the building official and the
antennae otherwise comply with these conditions.
The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other
wireless telecommunications providers, as follows:
At the time the permittee submits a preliminary site plan or a request for a
site plan waiver for the site, it shall submit to the department of planning and
community development a certified engineer's report which certifies that the
proposed tower is compatible, or would be compatible if its height was
increased, for collocation of at ligast three (3) providers of a similar wireless
service, including the permittee.
The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunications providers to
locate antennae on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these
conditions.
Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the
site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a'letter of intent
stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and
will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to
locate on the tower or the site,
I:U:}EP'I!AI'I'ORNEY'uD, ESOLUTt',CELLGOOD .RES
2
.(2)
The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable
evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location.
Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to,
evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to
locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a
tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within
Albemarle County.
All lighting shall be shielded to minimize its off-site visibility. Each outdoor luminaire
shall be fully shielded so that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane
running though the lowest part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a
"luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps, together with
the parts designed to distribute the light..
Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building,
or installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain
authorization from County staff to remove existing trees on the site. The County
staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation.
Except for the tree removal expressly authorized' by County staff, the permittee shall
not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment
building, or the vehicular or utility access:
8. The permittee shall comply with section 5.i.12 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days
of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued.
10.
The permittee shall. submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, not
later than 3uly 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the.tower and
each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider.
11.
Access road improvements shall be limited to drainage improvements, minimal
grading necessary to impi'oVe the travel surface and the application of gravel.
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 .. on 3anuary 7, i998.
I:\DEP'T"tAIIORNEY~RESOLUTIXCELLGOOD. RES
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
SP 97-51 US Cellular (Goodlow Mountain)
SUBJECTfPROPOSAL/REOUEST:.
Proposal to consWuct a personal wireless service
facility on Goodlow Mountain.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Mr. Fritz
REVIEWED BY:
AGENDA DATE: February 2, 1999 -Planning
Commission
March 17, 1999 - Board of Supervisors
ACTION: Yes INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA: No
ACTION: Yes
INFORMATION: No
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
BACKGROUND:
This application was originally reviewed by the Planning Commission on November 18, 1997. At that time the
Planning Commission recommended approval by a vote of 4 to 3. The Board of Supervisors held a hearing for this
item on December l0, 1997. At that time the Board referred the item back to staff to revise the proposed conditions
of approval consistent with the Board's directions for approval on the January 7, 1998 consent agenda. Following
the Board' s hearing on December 10, 1997 it was determined that the property owner had not consented to filing
the application for special'use permit. Therefore, the special use permit was not properly before the County and no
further action was taken. The applicant has, since that tLme, obtained the owner's consent and this item is now.
properly before the County.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has attached the prior staff report, Planning Commission minutes, draft Board of Supervisors minutes and all
letters received from the public. Staff is unable to identify any changes in circumstance since the original review
of this application which would tend tO warrant a change in staff's recommendation. However, staff does
recommend a modification of the conditions which were prepared for the Board's consideration tO reflect current
technology and standard conditions for personal wireless service facilities. The modifications axe noted in bold and
the original language is included, but is overstruck.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of SP 97-51 US Cellular (Goodlow Mountain) subject to the following conditions:
'2.
The height of the tower shall not exceed one hundred. twenty (120) feet. Whip antennae and lighting
suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12)
feet above the top of the tower.
The tower shall. be designed, constructed and maintained as follows:
a. The tower shall be designed to allow an incroo~ in height up to one hundred ninety nine (199) foot if
necessary to meet the collocation certification in condition ~5.
b,. a. The tower shall be designed and located so that, in the event of structural failure, the tower and all of
its components will remain on the portion of the property leased by U.S. Cellular (the "site").
s,. b. The tower shall be of self-supporting lattice-~/pe construction. Guy wires shall not be permitted.
d,. c. The tower shall have no lighting.
~ d. The tower shall be gray, blue or green in order to reduce its visual impacts unless the Architectur
Review Board, the Foiloral Aviation Administration, or the Federal Communication Comrnissi,
requires otherwise.
The tower location and the equipment building shall be substantially in accord with that shown on the attached
plan entified "Proposed Cellular Antenna Site" and initialed "WDF November 7, 1997."
Antenna may be attached to the tower only as follows:
a. Onmidirectional or whip antenna shall not exceed twenty (20) feet in height or seven (7') inches in
diameter, and shall be of a color which matches the tower. In no case shall any antenna exceed the
height of any antenna authorized in condition #1, and the diameter of such antenna.shall not exceed
three (3) inches at any point above the tower.
b. Directional or panel antenna ihall not exceed five (5) feet in height or two (2) feet in width, and shall
be of a color which matches the tower.
c. Satellite, microwave dish, and any other antenna not authorized in paragraphs (a) or (b) of this condition
are prohibited.
d. Antennae authorized in paragraphs (a) or (b) of this condition may be installed in addition to those
installed by the permitted when the tower is first constructed without amending this special use permit,-
provided that all necessary building permits are obtained from the building official and the antennae
otherwise comply with these conditions.
The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for collocation of other wireless telecommunications
providers, as folloWs:
a. At the time the permittoo submilz a preliminary r. ito plan or a request for a site plan xvaivor for the site,
it shall submit to the department of planning and community dox,olopmont a certified onginoor's rope/
which oerti~eo that the proposed terror i~ compatible, or would be compatible if i~ height w,
inoroa~od, for collocation of at loar~ throe (3) proriders or a similar wireless sorvioo, including the
permittoo. .The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunications proriders to locate
antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions:
(1) Prior issuance of a building permit, the permittee shah execute a letter of intent stating~at
it wffi made a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with
such other provider requesting to locate on the tower of the site.
b. The permittee shall allow other wirolo~ tolooommunioation providors to leoate antennae on the tower
and equipment on the site, subjeer to th~so conditions.
(1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the
perrnittoo sl'nll oxoouto a lettar of intent stating that it x~ill make a good faith effort to allow suoh
location and xvill negotiate in good faith ~4th such other prorider request to loonto on the toxvor
or the site.
(2) 'The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made
a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes,
but is to limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on
the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by
another provider within Albemarle County.
Alllighting shall be shielded to minimize its off-site visibility. Each outdoor tuminaire shall be fully shielded
so that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running through the lowest part of the shield ~
shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of-this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit
consisting of a lamp or lamps, together with the pans designed to distribute the light, to position and protect
the lamps and to connect the lamps to the power supply. All lighting shah 'be shielded from public roads.
Outdoor lighting shall only be on during periods of maintenance.
7. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or installation of access
for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staff to remove existing trees on
the site. The County stuff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation.
'Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the .permittee shall not remove existing trees
within two hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility access.
8. The permittee shah comply with section 5. 1 . 12 of the Zoning Ordinance.
9. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within' ninety (90) days of the date its use for
wireless telecornmunications or uses related to the adjacent gas pipeline purposo5 is discontinued.
:10. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning eclrnlnistl~_tor once pe~year, not later than July 1 of that year.
The report shall identify each user of the tower and each user that is a wireless telecommunications service
prorider.
1 I. Access road improvement shall be Limited to drainage improvements, minimal grading necessary to improve
the travel surface and the application of gravel.
Should the Planning Commission support a waiver of the requirements of a site plan the Planning Commission
only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver.
A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. subject
to the following conditions:
Approval of an erosion and sediment conWol plan prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Provision of one parking space.
Attachment G- Miscellaneous
Correspondence Regarding Actions and
Recommendations
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclnlire Road
Charlotlesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
November 26, 1997
Mark Keller
McKee/Carson
301 East High St
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE:
SP-97-51 U S Cellular (Goodlow Mountain)
Tax Map 36, Parcel 19
Dear Mr: Keller:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on November '18, 1997, by a vote of
4-3, recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to the following conditions:
Tower height shall not exceed 120 feet.
Compliance with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance.
There shall be no lighting of the lower unless required by a federal agency· All
lighting shall be shielded so as to minimize visibility from the ground.
Staff approval of additional antennae installation. No administrative approval
shall constitute or imply support for or approval of, the location of additional
towers, antennae, etc., even if they may be part of the same network or system
as any antennae administratively approved under this secttort.
The tower must be designed and adequate separation provided to property lines
such that in the event of structural failure, the tower and components will remain
within the lease area.
The tower shall be disassembled and. removed from the site within g0 days of
the discontinuance of the use of the tower for wireless telecommunication
purposes.
Tower shall be located as shown on Attached plan titled "Proposed Cellular Antenna
Site "'and initialed WDF November 7, 1997 and on untitled topographic map initialed
WDF November 7, '1997.
Existing trees within 200 feet of the tower shall not be removed without amendment of
this special use permit except as may be authorized by staff to permit construction of
the tower and installation of access for vehicles and utilities.
Except as specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration of the Federal
Communications Commission, transmission structures shall use colors such as gray,
blue or green, which reduce their visual impacts.
10.
The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunications providers to locate on the
tower and site and shall provide the County, upon request, verifiable evidence of having
made a good faith effod to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith
effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow
other proriders to locate on the permittee's tower and site in exchange for reciprocal
rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by such other provider within A!bemarle
County. The permittee also agrees to execute a letter of intent prior to final site plan
approval stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will
negotiate in good faith with any other wireless telecommunications provider requesting
to locate on the tower or site.
11.
A report shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator once a year, no later than July
1 .. This report shall state the current user status of the tower. Specifically, the report
shall state if the tower is being used for wireless telecommunication service.
12. The tower shall be of lattice type construction.
13.
Access road improvements shall be limited to drainage improvements and minimal
grading necessary to improve travel surface and the application of gravel.
Please be aware that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and
receive public comment at their meeting on December 10, 1997. Any new or additional
information must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior
lo your scheduled hearing
fyou have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
·
V. ~/~ayn:ll~~imberg
· .. 9f Planni ity
Development
CC:
Ella Carey
AmetiaMcCulley
Jack Kelsey
CNS Microwave, Inc
Charlottesville Cellular Partnership
MCGLHREWOODS
BATTLE&BOOTHE,.,.
Court Square Building
Post Office Box 1288
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-1288
Telephone/TDD (804) 977-2500 · Fax (804) 980-2222
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
(k~,'Q,RNEY'S OFFIC~
Steven W. Blaine
Writer's Direct Dial
8041977-2588
December 17, 1997
Larry W. Davis, Esq.
Office of the County Attomey
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
United States Cellular Corporation: Peter's Mountain Site: SP-97-51
Dear Larry:
At the Board of Supervisors meeting the other night, the Board discussed various changes
to the conditions of approval recommended by staff. For your consideration, below are some
suggested changes based on notes that I took at the meeting:
1. Revise condition #1 to read: "Tower height shall not exceed 120 feet, plus the
existing, 12 foot "whip-style" antenna." (After the meeting, it was determined that the existing,
CNS antenna was 12' instead of 8'.)
2. Revise condition #3 to read: "There shall be no lighting of the tower. Any lighting
of accessory structures shall be shielded so as to minimize visibility."
3. Add to condition '#4 the following: ,'This permit contemplates re,installation of a
12-foot, whip-Style antenna as well as installing "panel-style" antennae for cellular service. Any
other style of antennae proposed for additional installation shall require amendment of this Special
Use Permit."
4. Revise condition #12 to read: "The tower shall be of a self-supporting, lattice-type
construction, and the structure shall be designed to support at least three additional, wireless
service providers' antennae."
Please call me if you have any questions regarding the foregoing.
SWB:ctg
cc: Mr. Mark. Gartley
Mr. Mark Keller
Very truly yours,
· Steve; ~W. Blaine
ALEXANDRIA · BALTIMORE · BRUSSELS · CHARLOTTESVILLE · JACKSONVILLE · NORFOLK · RICHMOND · TYSONS CORNER · WASHINGTON, D'C · ZC~RICH
COUNTY Of ALBEHARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
March 24, 1999
Steve Blaine
P O Box 1288
Charlottesville, VA 22902
SP-97-51 U S Cellular (Goodlow Mountain)
Tax Map 36, Parcel 19
Dear Mr. Blaine:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on March 17, 1999, deferred
for 60 days the above-noted proposal to remove and reconstruct an existing tower on
Goodlow Mountain in accord with Section 10.2.2(6) of the Zoning Ordinance. The
Board has requested gaff to review the application again in light of the site visit last week
and provide the board with some additional information. Depending upon staffs review,
the request may or may not go back to the Planning Commission.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above-noted action, please
do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Director of Planning & ~nity
vwc/jcr
Development
Cc:
Amelia McCulley
Jack Kelsey
Tex Weaver
Steve Allshouse
Steven W. Blaine
swbLain~mwbb. cont
Court Square Building
310 Fourth Street, N.E., Suite 300
Post Office Box 1288 :'
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-1288
Telephone/TDD (804) 977-2500 · Fax (804) 980-2222
March 26, 1999
Direct Dial: (804)977-2588
Direct Fax: (804)980-2251
Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg
Director of Planning and
Community Development
County of Albemarle
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
· uUNYy OF ALBEMARL'
APR I 1999
SP-9 7-51 U.~ Cellular [Goodlow Mountain)
Dear Wayne:
I am in receipt of your letter dated March 24, 1999 regarding the captioned matter. I
understand that the Board's action was to defer for 60 days, consideration of the Special Use
Permit application:' I did not understand what purpose the delay would serve since the Staffs
recommendation to approve the Special Use Permit had not been affected' by the site visit which
occurred prior to the Board's meeting.
I am also perplexed by the suggestion that, depending on the Staffs review, the request ~
may go back to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission recommended denial of
the Special Use Permit. There is no purpose in the Staff recommending that the Planning
Commission review this matter further, other than to prolong the denial of effective and
affordable service to wireless customers of United States Cellular in the Goodlow Mountain area,
and to further prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting service to those customers as
contemplated in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47USC §332.
I respectfully request on behalf of the applicant, an expedient review and consideration of
this matter.
Very truly y,, ,' i'. ~
SWB:hH
cc:- Mr. Mark Gartley
Mr. DaveKlumb
RECEIVED
Planning Dept.
www, mwbb.com
r~..x.V~A. B~mlO~ · BRUSS~. Cmea~rr~ ·Cate, w~- C~ncA~o. JAcxso,~tt~ · Moscow · No~otx · t~cm4o~n · l"vsoNs COa~ma- W.~m~7o,~ .~c, (O~Cou~s~t)
Dept.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 2%-5823
September 23, 1999
Anne Mark
2123 Ivy Road, Suite 204
Charlottesville, VA 22903
SP-99-53 Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital
Tax Map 61K, Parcel 1
Dear Ms. Mark:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on September 21, 1999,
unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors.
Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions:
Retention of condition #1 of SP-96-28 as follows:
1. No outdoor runs are permitted and all existing outdoor runs should be enclosed before a
Certificate of Occupancy for any expansion of the existing building will be issued.
Substitution of condition 2 of SP 96-28 for the following conditions:
w
Development of the site shall be in accord with site plan titled "Animal Road Hospital"
dated 7/20/99. The proposed addition shall not exceed 620 square feet. Further
expansion to the structure shall require a special use permit.
Construction materials including "Windows" of glass block shall be generally the same or
better as the previous additions in their sound attenuation properties.
4. The addition will not house any animals.
The Commission also unanimously approved modification of setbacks contained in Section
5.1.11 (b) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Page 2
September 23, 1999
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and
receive public comment at their meeting on October 13, 1999. Any new or additional
information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Eric L. Morrisette, AICP
Senior Planner
ELM/jcf
Cc:
Ella Carey
Jack Kelsey
DL Raymond Doss
Amelia McCulley
Steve Allshouse
D:\
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
Eric L. Morrisette
September 21, 1999
October 13, 1999
SDP 99-53 HYDRAULIC ROAD ANIMAL HOSPITAL
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting to construct an expansion of approximately 620 square feet to the
existing veterinary hospital (Attachment A). Attachment B is a reduced copy of the site plan
with the proposed expansion.
PETITION:
Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital petitions the Board of Supervisors to amend condition 2 of SP
96-28 Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital to allow an expansion of an additional 620 square feet to
the existing veterinary hospital [Section 24.2.2.4 of the Zoning Ordinance]. Property, described
as Tax Map 61K, Section 9, Parcel 1, consists of .913 acre and is zoned HC, Highway
Commercial (Attachment C). This property is recommended for Urban Density in Urban
Neighborhood 1 of the Comprehensive Plan.
CHARACTER OF AREA:
The property is located on the western side of Hydraulic Road [State Route 743], approximately
¼ mile northwest ofU. S. Route 29 North. The site is adjacent to the residential development of
Berkshire Apartments, zoned Planned Residential Development [PRD], to the north and west.
The site is also adjacent to the residential development of Inglewood Square Condominiums,
zoned PRD, to the south. A laundromat/cleaners, zoned Highway Commercial [HC], is adjacent
to the southeast. The undeveloped Sperry Marine property, zoned Commercial [C-1 }, is located
across Hydraulic Road.
This site is occupied by an animal hospital that was originally constructed in 1953, before the
adoption of the 1980 Zoning Ordinance. Since then, the hospital enclosed the outdoor dog
kennels and added a reception area in 1997. The property entrance is directly off of Hydraulic
Road, approximately ¼ northwest ofU. S. Route 29.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
This area is recommended for Urban Density in Neighborhood 2. The Comprehensive Plan does
not specifically speak to non-residential uses in designated residential districts. The
Comprehensive Plan does suggest that adequate buffering, screening, and physical separation of
non-residential uses be accomplished to alleviate relational problems. This site, as well as the
use, has existed in the community for over 45 years. Dense plantings were installed to increase
screening measures in 1997. Modifications were also made to the building to reduce the noise
impact to adjacent properties by enclosing the outdoor dog kennels and installing screening trees
and shrubs along the residential boundaries of the site [SDP 96-63]. The modifications
drastically reduced noise through the installation of dense construction materials like concrete,
insulation, and glass block [SDP 96-63]. No windows were installed. The applicant proposes to
use the same type of construction materials for the 620 square foot addition and staff has
included such in the recommended conditions of approval (Condition 2).
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
VA 99-20 Dr. Raymond Doss [Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital - August 3, 1999 - The Board
of Zoning Appeals unanimously approved two separate variances as follows:
Relief from Section 21.7.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to reduce the required parking, from
6 to 3 parking spaces with the following condition:
a. All six parking spaces must be constructed unless for 90 days after the Certificate
of Occupancy is issued for the addition, the Zoning Services Department receives
no complaints noting that clients of the veterinary office are parking on the street
or in adjacent parking lots. If no complaints are received, the total parking
requirement for this veterinary office and hospital shall be 19 spaces: 16 spaces
required by VA 96-10 and 3 spaces by VA 99-20.
Relief from Section 4.12.6.6.2 of the Zoning Ordinance and to amend VA 97-04 to allow
for the proposed expansion within the varied north side setback of 40 feet subject to the
following conditions:
a. Limitation of the addition to 620 square feet only. Staff has included this
condition as a recommended condition of approval for this special use permit
(Condition 1).
b. Construction materials including "Windows" of glass block shall be generally the
same or better as the previous additions in their sound attenuation properties
(Condition 2).
SP-96-28 Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital - September 11, 1996 - The Board of Supervisors
[BOS] approved a special use permit to allow for an expansion to the animal hospital and to
enclose the outdoor dog kennels. The Conditions of Approval are attached as Attachment D.
Since the hospital was established in 1953, before the adoption of the 1980 Zoning Ordinance,
the special use permit was also necessary to make the existing use conforming. Also, the
Planning Commission passed a motion to grant a modification of Section 5.1.11 to allow for a
reduction in setbacks. The Board of Zoning Appeals also granted variance for a reduction in
setbacks [VA 97-04], as well as a reduction in required parking [VA-96-10].
The BOS approval was subject to two conditions.
1. No outdoor runs are permitted and all existing outdoor runs should be enclosed before a
Certificate of Occupancy for any expansion of the existing building will be issued.
2. Development of the site should be in general accord with the 8/8/96 site plan titled
2
"Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital".
SDP-96-063 Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital Major Amendment- February 14, 1997 - The
Planning Dspartment signed the site plan to allow for the enclosure of the outdoor dog kennels
and to allow for an expansion to the front of the building
SDP-97-117 Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital Minor Amendment - April 30, 1998 - The
Planning Department signed the site plan to allow for modifications to the parking area and to
save an existing tree.
REASON FOR PLANNING'COMMISSION REVIEW:
The applicant is requesting Board of Supervisor' s approval to amend condition 2 of SP 96-28
Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital to allow an expansion of an additional 620 square feet to the
existing veterinary hospital [Section 24.2.2.4 of the Zoning Ordinance]. Attachment D is a copy
of the conditions of Approval for SP 96-28.
STAFF COMMENT:
Recommendation:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Sections 24.2.2.4 and
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval subject to conditions.
Staff Analysis:
Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use
permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance
may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of
substantial detriment to adjacent property,
Staff notes that the existing veterinary hospital has existed within the community for over 45
years. Since its original construction, the applicant has decreased the impact on adjacent
properties with the improvements made to the site in 1997 [SDP 96-63]. Additional plantings
were installed along the residential boundaries to the south and west, thus increasing the
vegetative screening. Modifications were also made to the building to reduce the noise impact to
adjacent properties by enclosing the outdoor dog kennels. The modifications drastically reduced
noise through the installation of dense construction materials like concrete, insulation, and glass
block. No windows were in stalled. These improvements have allowed the hospital to exist in
harmony with the residential community for the past two years.
The 620 square foot addition will house a x-ray/examination room and provide for storage. The
addition will not provide housing for the animals. The applicant proposes to use the same type
3
of construction materials for the 620 square foot addition as was used for the 1997 improvements
and staff has included such in the recommended conditions of approval (Condition 2). With this
condition, and the relatively small increase in building size, staff does not view the additional
620 feet of building as a detriment to the adjacent properties.
that the character of the district will not be changed thereby,
As previously noted, the use has existed for over 45 years and, as a result of the 1997 site
improvements, has existed in harmony with the district for 2 years. The proposed addition is not
viewed as an intensification of use and therefore will not change the 'character of the district.
and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance,
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance of Section 1.4, Section 1.5, and Section 1.6 of the
Zoning Ordinance and finds no conflict. '
with the uses permitted by fight in the district,
Approval of this request will not negatively affect permitted uses on adjacent property.
However, further expansion to the building does reduce the likelihood that this site will become a
residential site as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan. Staff notes that due to the parcel's
configuration and relationship to Hydraulic Road, residential use of the property is limited.
with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance,
Section 5.1.11 contains additional regulations regarding this type of use [Attachment F]. Section
5.1.1 l(b) states "For soundproofed confinements, no such structure shall be located closer that
two hundred (200) feet to any agriculture or residential property". The proposed addition, as
well as the additions made in 1997, will be soundproofed and air-conditioned (Condition 2). The
current distance to the nearest property line from the existing building is approximately 50 feet.
The proposed addition encroaches an additional ten feet, whereas the new addition will be
approximately 40 feet from the nearest residential property line.
The Department of Building Codes and Zoning Services has determined that, although the Board
of Zoning Appeals granted a variance for side setback requirements, the Planning Commission
must grant a modification of section 5.1.11 (b) to allow for a further reduction of the setback
provisions (Attachment E). Since the Commission granted a modification of Section 5.1.11 (b)
with its approval of SP 96-28, staff is able to support a slight increase in setback reduction with
this request. The Planning Commission's action for the special use permit request must include
an action for the reduction of setbacks as outlined in Section 5.1.11 of the Zoning Ordinance.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
No adverse impact on public health,. safety, and/or general welfare can be identified with this
expansion request.
SnmmarV:
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this request:
,
,
6.
7.
8.
The addition will not adversely impact adjacent residential properties;
The addition will be of similar or better soundproofing design as was those used in the
1997 building improvements;
The use has existed for over 45 years;
The current use has existed in harmony with the surrounding residential district for over
two years;
The addition will not house any animals;
Consistent with Sections 5.1.11 of the Zoning Ordinance;
Consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; and,
Consistent with Section 32.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Staff has not identified any unfavorable factors to the request, although any expansion approval
does reduce the likelihood that this site will become residential as called for in the
Comprehensive Plan.
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends approval for the expansion of the animal hospital use to allow for an
additional 620 square feet of building.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
Staff recommends retention of condition 1 of SP 96-28 as follows:
No outdoor runs are permitted and all existing outdoor rims should be enclosed before a
Certificate of Occupancy for any expansion of the existing building will be issued.
Staff recommends substitution of condition 2 of SP 96-28 for the following conditions:
This permit is issued for an additional 620 square feet only and must in accord with
7/20/99 minor site plan amendment titled "Hydraulic Road animal Hospital". Any
further expansion will require an amendment to the Special Use Permit;
,
Construction materials including "Windows" of glass block shall be generally the same
or better as the previous additions in their sound attenuation properties.
Note: In order to allow for approval of the site plan, staff 'recommends approval of a
modification of the setbacks contained in Section 5.1.11 (b). (Only the Planning
Commission needs to act this modification of setbacks.)
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Applicant's Special Use Permit Request and Justification
B - Site Plan Amendment Reduction
C - Tax Map
D - SP 96-28 Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital Conditions of Approval
E - Zoning Administrator's Memo Dated August 16, 1999
F - Section 5.1.11 of the Zoning Ordinance
Application for Special Use Permit
ATTACHMENT A
HyQraulic Koad
Veterinary Hospital
*Existing Use Proposed Use
Comm cia )
*Zoning District HC ( H i ghway gZroning '~rffinance Section number requested
(*stuff will ~sist you wire these items)
Number of acres to be covered by Special Use Perrnit (it, potnon It rest be dealer- on pist) 0.9 13
Is this an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit? ',~ Yese, No
Are you submitting a site development plan with this application? X~ Yes~ No
Anmmal Hospmta/
Veterinary Hospital
24.2.2.4
Anne Mark
Conmet Person (Whom should we ~Ywnte concerning mis project?):
Ste 204 CiW Ch'vil!e
Addmss 2123 ivv Rd., .
Daytime Phone (BOa) 996-6107 , Fax# 296-6109
Smte VA ~p22903
E-m~l AnneGMark@aol.
Owner of land (As listed in the CounW's records): Dr. RAymond C. Doss
Address 2407 Hydraulic Road CiryCh' vil!e
Daytime Phone 804 ) 971 - 9800 Fax # 971 - 8873 E-mail
Sate VA Zip 22903
:AppliCarlt(Whoistheconmctpenonmpmsendng?Whoisrequ~ringthespecialuseg)- Dr. RAymond C. Doss
~ '-
laddress 2407 Hydraulic Rd
[ ' CityCh'vi!!e Statev_3Lk._Zip 22901
'DaytimePhone( 804 ) 97] -9800 FaX# 971-8873 E-mail
Tax map and parcel
61K-06-B4, Parcel "X" PhvsicalAddressrif..zsigned)
240 / Hydraulic ,~oad ' '
Location of property (la~clma:lcs. inrers~cUons, or other)
1/4_+ mile west of intersection of 29N and Hydraulic Road
Does the owner of this property own (or have any ownership interest in) any abutting property?
those tax map and varcet numbers NO
If yes, please list
OFFICE USE ONLY
, Date Paid , Check #/C2'/O Receipt
!{istory: ::.fi.~-Spe, cial Use Perrm=:5 e''~.''~' 'C'F5 Q ZMAs and Proffers:
',~,Vanances: ,,r X ,-qsw;, . . C-.
~' ~-R'4 -O %q~ VA ~'~d -]iD " ~ ~tter of Aumonza~on
, '~Yes ~ No
Cancm~ent review of Site Deveioomen~ Ply?
~1 Mcgee Road -:- Ch~!ottesvii!e. VA 22902 -:-' ~bice: 296-5832 -> F~: 972~126'
Section 31.2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, '.'The board of supervisom
hereby reserves unto itself the fight to issue all zpecial use permits permitted hereunder. Special-use
permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors
that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district
will not be changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intern: of rk
ordinance, with the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional reguiation.q nr.~vide. fi
5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare. ATTACHMENT A
The items which follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please cornmicro
this form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of your request.
_...If you need assistance filling out these items. staff is aviilable.
WhatistheComprehensi'vePlandesignationforthisproperty? Urban Density
Howwilltheproposedspecialuseaffectadjacentproperty? It will not chance as the
property has been an animal hospital since ~954 and has previously
been granted a special use permit,
the
How will the proposed special use affect the character of the district surrounding the property?
It will nQff change other than it may reduce the noise cn the
side of the addition,
How is the use in harmony with the pum. ose ~nd intent of the Zoning Ordinance? The arch i t ecture o f
1997 addition and the DroDosed addition is in keeping with the
adjacent proDerties, These additions have assisted in reducing ncise,
How is the use in harmony with Qe uses permitted by nght in the dis~ct? The animal hospital serves
a need for the area and its natura~ !an{scape enhances the area,
What addition~ regulations provided in Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance apply to this Use?
property is too small for this to be applicable
Howwill~isusepromcmtheFubliche~th. sa~,andgener~ wetfareofthecommuni~?
The animal hospital provides medical service to
therefore 'assists in the ~enera! welfare of the
5.1.11 requires
requested as the
animals and
community,
involved in the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use:
See attached.
ATTACttMENTS REQUIRED- provide two(2) copies of each:
ATTACHMENT A
Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning. If there is
no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and
the Deed Bookand page number or Plat Book and page number.
Note: If you are requesting a special use permit only for a portion of the property, it
needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing.
Ownership i~ormation - If ownership of the property is in the name of-any type of legal
entity or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership
or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to
the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority
to do so.
If the applicant is a contract purchaser; a document acceptable to the County must be
submitted containing the owner' s written consent to the application.
If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be
submi~ed that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency.
OPTIONAL Ai"FACHNIENTS:
Drawings or conceptual plans, if any.
Additional Information, if any.
Signature
Dr. RAym~Dnd
Printed Name
t hereby certify that I own the subject property,, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in
f'ding this application. I also certify that the information provided is true and accurate to tlne best of my
· t ~ !. ~
C. Doss
Date
804-971-9800
Daytime ohcne number of Signatory
Application for Special Use Permit
July 21, .1999
Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital
ATTACHMENT A
Attachment: Describe your request m detail and include all pertinent iraformation such as the numbers of
persons revolved in the use, operating hours and any unique features of the use:
The Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital is a vete,-inary clinic with one primary.' doctor, Dr. Raymond C. Doss,
one assistant doctor, and at any one time a maximum of three staff. The clinic is operated Monday through
Friday from 7'~0 A~M to 7:00PM, on Saturdays from 9:00AM to I:00PM, and on Sundays from ~.:00PNl
to ~i :00PM. The Animal Hospital has been in this location since it ~vas built in 1962. In 1997 an addition
was added that enclosed 'all of the ernstrag outdoor runs thus substantially reducing the noise to the
surrounding residences. The proposed addition of 620 gross square feet will be of the same dense building
materials, concrete block with insulation and glass block (no opemble windows) thus reducing noise even
more. Due to the oblique angle of the orig;aml structure to the side propert3' lines it was necessary in 1997
when the addition was added, and again now to apply for a variance to VA-~)7-o'~ and a waiver to 5. I. t 1,
both concerning the side yard setback requirements. Both requests were granted in 1997, but must be again
approved for the currently proposed addition: A variance to VA-97-t~4 has been applied for and will be
reviewed August 3, !999.
i'ax Map 6tK-9-2
I
Lot Z
Benjamin B. White etal
T/A 13erkshire Associates
J D.B. 415-545 DB.4O::5-::534(plal)
N I ~ o 2_6' Od'W 137.0Z'
rod found ~
Alcova
ATTACHMENT A
"%~ax Map elK-5-1B /; pa~ ~r~n~g
· / _ - .....
Realty 8 Manag~ent CG ,' _--"' Tax
O.b. 1540 -439 ~ , ;~3~ Lot I
0.8. 748-5~9(pmt} ~ ~ Raymond C. Doss
~ I ~my Hawkins Dos
; I I D.~.754-415
San;tory Sewer Easement~~ ~ ~1~, n
_:- ,- .
Tax Map 61K-5-iA
James L. ManJey , Trustee
Maxine F. Steele, Trustee
O. 8. ~t4,0-~_61
Q.B. 447-32_9(p[m)
paved parl~ng area
PLAT SHOWING A BUILDING LOCATION
rod found
,Note;
Th~s surveyor in r, aay 1977 mode a
survey of th;s parcel (T-M,61t¢-9-~) and
found ~ lot ]o ~ 4' ~rrOwer than
the original ~ot En D.B.
had ShO~n. The cor~iOn of that
~iff~enC~ ~s s~n
/
/
rod found
TGx Map 6IK-06-84
Parcel "X"
Benjamin B, White etal
T/A Berkshire Associates
D.B. 4-11-197
O. B. 575-B9(plal)
ON TAX MAP SIK PARCEL 9-1 AT 2~.,07 HYDRAULIC
ROAD (ST. RT. 743)IN ALBEMARLE COUNTY ,VIRGINIA
Dale; 5/Z2/'97 Scole: t"= 50'
Revied: 6/1 j/98
THOMAS D. BLUE.
Civil Engineer 8, Land Surveyor
~00 Chestnut Ridge Road
Chcriottesvilie, Virgini= 229 ~ i
uob No. 98 -06
Jog NO. e7-5
.)
2. All paving and d~ainaVe relate~ m&tezl&la and. coustruc~:lan .
m~thods sb~l con/ore to curren~ ~ectllct~L~s ~ s~nd~s
o~ V.D.O.~. unless o~e~ise
.3. ~tosion and sll~on control meuureS shil~ be
a~cordance ,tth the appr~ erosion ~n~rol plan ~a ~all
~ installed p=ior ~o ~y clearing, ~ad~V or o~er
~ns~.
~eze ~euon~l~"bb~b~e tei~lr' i'i~pes o[
Ire ~ be
S. All ~ainage lnle~s sh~l have
l~ed d ~ch ~y be
Paved~ rip-rap or s~iliza~on ~t ~b~ Cc~ D~zec~r
re~l~ when In ~ opinion o2 ~he
cf =nginser~g, or his desires, l~ Is ds~ necess~
o~er to s~ll~ze a ~d~e
8. Unless o~be~ise ~o~e~.alt concabs pipe. shgll
concre~ pips - ~lasx.'ilI.
9. xll excavation too undergz~ pipe ins~lation with OS~ S~anda~ eor the Cons~ion IM~t~
~ate 1926). '
..
In addition ~o ~he ~ove no~es, ~he ~oll~g s~a~een~ ~s~.be
lncl~d cn ~l sits plana v~ch =e~=e V.D.O.T.
statement' ms~ be si~d ~ ~e dev~l~ o~ ~he prop~ p~ior
tenet/lye si~e pl~
we ~he ~dersi~ned doveloft(s) ~dezs~
this pl~ b~ ~he C~n~ o~ X~ematla does not necessarll~
indicate Virginit Dspattm~ o~ Transportation
- floes ho~ in ~ war re,an me De ~
~ "- D~OP~ D~
Ez~r . ~.F.C/~Lq.~. .
II.M~S br DEVELOPHER'r!e IIyDRAULIC RqAO MIIHAb iIOSPItAL
OWNERX DR. ~ytIOIID C.
~N PRePAReD BYI AHllg GIRSOR H~nK
aOllHSOll, CRAVEH S ~IBSOH
TAX ~P i PARCEL NO. I TAX ~F
CO~I~RCIA , - ~l ~ K
ZOIIINGI IIIGITHAYl
~GISTERZA~ DISTRI~X RACK JoUSt. DISTRI~
9ENCIt ~axt ~P OF WATER ethER (not~ on dr&wig)
SOURCE OF TOPOC~IYl ~Olll~ONt ~VEN & gl~oH
B~RCE OF SURVg~S THOH~5 D.
ClVI~ ENGIIIEBR 2 ~ D S~Vg~OR
t,,ilkl(2R AI,.II:'PIUl4Et.]T. el'rE
H'frDI~ALILIC F, OAIP AI,,IIM AL I-IO:~PI
JOHHSON, CRAVEH & GIBSON. ARCHITECTS
;::;';-:' l'i:;;.)vl. ,. : m'... . I
"°'" .............. ::t':.:~:;,t.".%,:~"|:'~.~'.".~.':;|Zt' ...... 7 / o,.,:- /
ATTACHMENT B.
-.v'
ALBEMARLE
? · 5
SOLONON
COUNTy
eOkO '~
4
SP-99-53 Hvdraulic Road Animal [-Iosnital (Si,on ,~ 21
/
ZTHE MEADOWS-SECTION 1 -D.B. 337 P~s.5158,516 (K]t\
THE MEADOWS -SECTION 2 D.B. 339 Pg, 584 (K)
THE ME..~DOWS-SECTION 3_ D.B. 343 pg. 146(K.)
~RTHERLy D.B. ~5 ~. 3~ (N)
OAK TERRACE DE. ~63 P~, 99~P}
BARTERBROOK--SECTION I D. B373 Pg. 99(S)
GUEEN CHARLOTTE D.E~
LOTS 1,2,3 D.C. ~S-~4 (V)
GEORGETOWN LANE D.8 809 pg. 351
1111164
JACK JOUE TT,
DISTRICT SECTION 6f-K
ATTACHMENT D
September 18, 1996
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
Anne Gibson Mark
2123 Ivy Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
SP'96-28 Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital
Tax Map 61K, Block 9, Parcel 1
Dear Ms. Mark:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on Septemer 11, 1996, approved the
above-noted request to expand the existing animal hospital located on 0.9 acres zoned Highway
Commercial. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions:
No outdoor runs shall be permitted. All existing outdoor runs shall be enclosed prior to
the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any expansion of the existing building.
Development of the site shall be in general accord with a site plan titled "Hydraulic Road
Animal Hospital" initialed WDF 8/8/96.
In the event that the use, structure or activity for which this special use permit is issued shall not
be commenced within eighteen (18) months after the issuance of such permit, the same shall be
deemed abandoned and the authority granted thereunder shall thereupon terminate. For purposes
of this section, the term "commenced" shall be construed to include the commencement of
construction of any structure necessary to the use of such permit within two (2) years from the
date of the issuance thereof which is thereafter completed within one (1) year.
Before beginning this use, you must obtain a zoning clearance from the Zoning Department.
Before the Zoning Department will issue a clearance, you must comply with the conditions in
this letter. For further information, please call Jan Sprinkle at 296-5875.
Page 2
September 18, 1996
ATTACHMENT D
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above-noted action, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
V. ijVayn~erg
Director of Plannin'~unity Development
VWC/jcf
cc: Amelia McCulley Jo Higgins
Dr. Raymond C. Doss
FAX (804) 972-4126
COUNTY OF AI RF, aMARI~
Department of BuiMing Code and Zoning Services
401 Mclntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
TELEPHONE (804) 296-5832
TTD (804) 972-4012
TO: Eric Morrisette, Senior Planner
FROM: Jan Sprinkle, Chief of Zoning Administration~
DATE: 08/16/99
RE: SP 99-53
ATTACHMENT E
On August 3, 1999, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved two variances related to this property.
One allows the currently proposed addidon to be 40 feet from the northern property line while the
other reduces the parking requirement to only 19 spaces (if no complaints are received in this
department within 90 days of the CO for this addition.)
Although the BZA approved a variance for setback, the Planning Commission must still grant a
modification of the distances required under Section 5.1.11 for the expansion desired by this SP
amendment to be permitted.
Zoning has no issues with this SP. With the variance and spedal use permits approved in 1997, Dr.
Doss made his additions including enclosing the dog runs. That change greatly improved a
previously nonconforming situation and completely stopped the complaints from the neighboring
apartments. Since the proposed addidon is intended to be office/lab type use, we do not think k
should create any new complaints.
.4LBE.~,!ARLE COt~[TY CODE
ATTACHMENT F
consider: growth potential for the area: relationship to centers of population and to high-value
propert>.;concentrations: and access to and adequacy of public roads in the area tbr such use.
The commission may request recommendation from the Albemarle Count'5.' fire official and
other appropriate agencies in its review:
Such subordinate uses and fund-raising activities as bingo. raffles and auctions shall be
conducted in an enclosed building only. Noise generated flora such activity shall not exceed
tbrty 140} decibels at the nearest agricultural or residential propert3.' line. No such activit.x
shall be conducted between 11:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.
5.1.10 JUNK YARDS
All storage and operational areas shall be enclosed by a solid. light-tight. sighfly fence not less
than eight (8) feet in height or alternative screening ancL'or fencing satisfactor).' to the
commission:
b. StOrage yards and access to public roads shall be maintained in a dust-flee surface.
5.1.11 COMMERCIAL KENNEL, VETERINARY. ANIMAL HOSPITAL
Except where animals are confined in soundproofed. air-conditioned buildings. no structure or
area occupied by animals shall be closer than five hundred (500) feet to any agricultural or
residential lot line. For non-soundpr6ofed animal confinements. an external solid fence not
less than six (6) feet in height shall be located within fifty. (50) feet of the animal confinement
and shall be composed of concrete block. brick. or other material approved by the zoning
administrator: (Amended 11-15-89)
For soundproofed confinements. no such structure shall be located closer than two hundred
(200) feet to any agricultural or residential lot line. For soundproofed confinements. noise
measured at the nearest agricultural or residential propert>.' line shall not exceed forty (40)
decibels: (Amended 11-15-89)
In all cases. animals shall be confined in an enclosed building from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Noise measured at the nearest agricultural or residential propen'y line shall not exceed
(40) decibels: (Amended 11 - 15-89)
do
In areas where such uses may be in proximity. to other uses involving intensive activity such
as shopping centers or other urban density locations. special attention is required to protect the
public health and welfare. To these ends the commission and board may require among other
things: (Amended 11-15-89)
-Separate building entrance and exit to avoid animal conflicts:
(Added 11-15-89)
-Area for outside exercise to be exclusive from access by the public bv fencing or other
means. (Added 11-15-89)
5.1.12 PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURES/USES
a. The proposed use at the location s'elected wi'll not endanger the health and safe .ty of workers
and/or residents in the community and will not impair or prove detrimental to neighboring
properties or the development of same:
18-5-6
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Planning & Community Development
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Board of Supervisors
Eric L. MorriseRe, AICP
September 23, 1999
SP 99-53 Hydraulic Road Animal Hospital
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the above referenced Special Use Pennit
Request at their September 21, 1999 meeting. Their action included a recommended condition
that the addition shall not exceed 620 square feet. Since the Planning Commission meeting, the
applicant has met with the builder to verify the square footage of the addition. The verification
revealed that the addition would actually be 638 square feet. The additional 18 square feet has to
do with the construction materials and not with the exterior size of the building. The additional
18 square feet will not impose any further on the granted setbacks. Since no external change to
the addition size is proposed, Planning finds no conflict with the additional increase.
To allow for flexibility in the square footage of the addition, Planning recommends modifying
the condition to allow for up to 650 total square feet, as long as no further encroachment on the
approved 40-foot buffer occurs. Condition 2 should be modified as follows:
Development of the site shall be in accord with the site plan amendment titled "Hydraulic Road
animal Hospital" dated 7/20/99. The proposed additional identified thereon shall not exceed 550
square feet. The addition shall not encroach into the 40-foot side setback. Any further expansion
will require an amendment to the Special Use Permit;
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
....... '. '15:;"~ · ,'. '..'. X .....i. '\,'.. ,/. ,', ·.. ,, ...' ................... ', .', .', ,', .., ..... ', . . '. '..'..'.'.' './.' ............ ,:. ...........
..','1"']'~...,~'.. '. '.., ~'....L./.,.:",..,,.'.'. ,'.'....'.Y ...5.-...'.:-]........'.........'."..'..:...' ..........'.'-...-.:~ .'..' .. '....
....... ,. ',b. :. ....· · ".',' .. '; '.' ...... '. ,., ""' .., .."' '., .'~ ..........' . ..................,X. ...... · .' ..........\ .......
.;.' '%"'~y~.,' ...... .'" ..... .' ' ' "~' '. ...... : .. ' '. '. ' ,'..'.' ': ......... .' .'.' ',;_'..2.~ ' '. .... ""'" ....... :" '.. ~L,',' .... ' '"
.2Z ~';"2.""~'" ":'] :'; Z';.'" '.~':"2~ '.::E".' Z".;'Z."'.'.: 2:. 2 ~'... 2 Z;. ]; ;.Z, 2; 2, ', 2.2' '.22;',;; L 2Z: . Z ~2
~ ....................... ' ........ '..~...<'....'...'.' ......' ........... ' ....X. "~'.':,:. '.. '}".
............................ / ..................... ', ~, '.,7~', ,',. ,. ;...
: .................................. , ........................... ', .;y, . .'...', ,
................. ~ .......... , ..... , ..... ',', , , ........ ,
~ ............. '... ', ',.,~ ...........~' ~ .................. ' ..... ',' .....
s:;.~ :...: .:~ .'...';. ~,;~:'~';~.: .;~,:;~ZZ~;~L,~,~;E::~ ~'~'~ :.,:~'.~:.'~.:] ~],..~.~,...
" ' '~ ............ .'.'.'" .... ~ ........ .' ' ' ~ · .,.,~ .... ~,o,.~,.~b 'Mm.'" ..... ..... .'
.. ~,,.OltXd'~O;l.lh ,' ............... , . , . ,' ..',', . , .[ ...... ' . . ~ ........... ', . , , , .
<', ~ .~. ' ' t ·
. ~ ~, .X . . 2
, ,.,, ..... ....
· ,'.· ~ ................... / . .................. ,~
;,....; -. ........... · .............. ,~ ·
......... ~ ........ . .... }~...4. ' .....................
. . ' .... ~, , . .., , ~ .......
......... 2. . . ................................. I ...........................
' ' ,'~ ' t ', .....
~7 ......... , ..... .' e . .,. ' "
~,... ...... ; ..........................
,,.,....,. ..... . / . .
" ......".". ......-,,'k: .'7~: Z Z~Z 2Z,'...2 ;;Z ' '
....... ,.. ., ........ i. ,,,,
.; '; ~ .'.,'.'.:Z:2]~;~22 ;'~,Z2~.. 2: ".,.,.,.,. ......' ..... y" ..........................
· T" '. , · .
i '. ............. · '
.. . · .) . . ; r/ .................................
"' ".' '.":r ........' '. ........~ ............................... ,/ ......... ' ...... .' '."'. ..........
""""" ::2i2':%.2,.':.2~ ':.::.i: ........:'7"2i '. "' .:.: ,<" '2.2. Z.
"7'. ............. ~ .................... '..// ............ .. ....' ....' ..... ........
..: :....:2 :-2::.72;.'..:.::.' .
.'..}2.L2]'7.2;;':i2.2:2i.~.~]2"'2 :': ....'.. :2.'i':':.'.'2'2.':...:" 2 "'...] i".:i.": ": .......".". ....
'; 5 5':: ",:':'::.;'"":)i.":::.::.:..:.:....':.:'::". :::,":, ': ......:::: '.:::::::':: .'' ':":" ·
:.' '~f,'r~.'." "'.2r ..................................../" ...............' ..........""" ....' ....
. . , , ....... ~ , . . . ./'/ ·
"'.'.' F ~':~ /7'
2.., ".l: ......
'..' .....'-";i:.~ Z .....
z~i,:C' .... ..................................................
~2'2::::': :~! :: , '. .........'
,. tl . . .
~,........,....~ ....:,:':'..: ::':'::."::. :::::::..,J::::''::::::.::: ............,. .............. ....
'" "' '~ ' . ................. ~' ' ............ ." ....t ' ' '.' '" ........... .' '. .........
' "" 1'i: ........x ....Z .... // .................. . ...... ....."'. ....... . ......
.... . ....:.:.:':.....r...':..:: .: :':: ..... :.:: :':.:./ :.' :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .:.:' . .
:': ": ::' Z.: :.:.~,.:::.:'.. :... 2::. ': ' . ...............z""' ". ....· ......" ......'." "' ""'.'" .......'.'. ......
' " .....'.7 '2 :'.: 2" ':'i: .....: ........ '7' · ......": ........." "'2'. ......'. ...... ....". ......". ....
...... · , .' . .'..~":"':~': .....,h.,,~,,~a'~r,' .'.. ::'::: .' :2':: ....: :: ..... :::.::". '. :::: :.::2.:.: :.: :.:.:. :::::': :.:.::: :.::.' .' ....
,' '.,,-, .... '.,.",..:~I. , ' " Z. , ." / ~ ' 'J" .... '"""" "'. "'.".""""",""'.'"""L' .... ' "
........'....: .......:.:X.:.; . .... '.... · ..;/,..':...:' ...:...':'::.:.: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .......2 . ...
~.'' ~ ~"k:.:~..i.! .i,5 ~"::~"5"~'-:'.': '.L....>-.-..:' ~'q":": :'. :5 ·: :':'.~'S!i~:'i.:.~.'~ i':.Si~5~ ::~ [.~ ~.~.~'~.:i..~.~' :2...: .. ' ... Z..:· ·
t.::::.:.': :. :. :.:: :.:: ::':.: "7'.. ~".. :. :. :.. .: :'. :: :"'.: .:':.: :.:: :i.::: ::': ::..:::.:.::: :: :.::: 2.:.:.::.: . ".:: ::::: :.:"..'
~ ...2:. · :: · .:.. ~;... ..72 .-- ............... ... ...... ............ .............,. ........
~ "% :' z"' ':'::
: : ~:':':': ~:':'Tz ,~..;". ......:'i':: ': ' :' :':'5'5~::~'~5:~::~::5 "~':::'~
L......,. ,.'.:...: .:L,..~z.:..:_: 2.'.- '. .....'. ,.. ....2 . '.L' ...' ....:: ..... ::..,. :, ::'... ::. ...."., ._..... :'
0 1
Miles
Proposed Goodlow Mt.
USCellular ALLTEL Cellularone
-85 green yellow lite blue
- 102 blue magenta grey
2
0 1 2
R~Iiles
Existing Coverage
USCellular ALLTEL Cellularone
-85 green yellow lite blue
-102 blue magenta grey
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept, of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
September 23, 1999
Lance Van de Castle
Greenbriar Office Park, LLC
P O Box 5487
Charlottesville, VA 22905
RE: SP-99-57 Averette College, Tax Map 61W, Parcel 2
Dear Mr. Van de Castle:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on September 2 I, 1999, unanimously
recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors.
Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions:
The total business school square footage shall be limited to the intemal 2,000 total square feet;
Hours of operation shall be limited to 6:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00-3:30 p.m. on
Saturdays. The school shall not operate on Sundays; and,
The total school enrollment shall not exceed 45 students per day.
The Commission also unanimously approved the request for cooperative parking based on condition #2 as
noted above.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive
public comment at their meeting on October 13, 1999. Any new or additional information regarding your
application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your
scheduledhearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
C4r'~i~c Morrisette, AICP
Senior Planner
ELIvl/jcf
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Ella Carey AmeliaMcCulley Jack Kelsey
Steve Allshouse Averette College
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
Eric L. Morrisette, AICP
S~tember 21, 1999
October 13, 1999
SDP 99-057 Averett CoHere
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant is seeking to establish a business school (Averett College) within the existing
Greenbrier Office Park (Attachment A). The school seeks to utilize 2,000 square feet of the
Office Park's total 43,200 square feet.
PETITION:
Avereli College petitions the Board of Supervisors to issue a special use permit to allow for a
business school in a Commercial Office zoned district [Section 23.2.2.9 of the Zoning
Ordinance]. Property, described as Tax Map 61W, Section 1, Parcels 1, 2, 3, and 4, consists of
4.379 acres and is zoned CO, Commercial Office (Attachment C). This property is
recommended for Neighborhood Density in Urban Neighborhood 1 of the Comprehensive Plan.
CHARACTER OF AREA:
The property is located at the northem side of the intersection of Greenbrier Drive and
Whitewood Road, within the recently constructed Greenbrier Office Park. The business 'school
will be located on the second story of the only two-story of~ce building within the Office Park
(Attachment B). The site is adjacent to the residential developments of Minor Hill and Wynridge
to the north, both zoned R-1. The site is also adjacent to the Albert Court Duplexes to the west,
zoned R-15. Whitewood townhouses, zoned R-15, are located across Greenbrier Drive. Other
office buildings, also zoned Commercial Office, are located to the east.
This site is occupied by four office buildings that have been constructed within the past year.
The proposed business school will be located in the only two story building on site. The
property entrance is located at the new three-way-stop intersection of Greenbriar Drive and
Whitewood Road.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
This area is recornn~,ended for Neighborhood Density in Neighborhood 1. The Comprehensive
Plan does not specifically speak to non-residential uses in designated residential districts. The
Comprehensive Plan does suggest that adequate buffering, screening, and physical separation of
non-residential uses be accomplished to alleviate relational problems. The issues of buffering,
screening, and physical separation of uses were addressed during the rezoning [ZMA 96-22] and
the site planning [SDP 97-068]. The location of the screening fence, as well. as the double
staggered row of screening trees were agreed to by the developer and the adjacent property
owners at the time of site plan approval.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
ZMA 96-22: RHH Development Corp. - April 16, 1997, the Board of Supervisors approved a
request to rezone 1.691 acres, from R-4, Residential to Commercial Office and 2.774 acres from
C-l, Commercial to Commercial Office. The rezoning request was initiated in order for Robert
M. Hauser, of RHH Development, to build the Greenbrier Office Park. Approval was subject to
seven proffer conditions (Attachment D).
SDP-97-068: Greenbrier Office Park Preliminary Site Plan - July 28, 1997, administrative
approval was granted by the Planning Department to allow for four office buildings totaling
approximately 43,200 square feet. The adjacent property owners withdrew their request for
Planning Commission review with agreements made between the residents and the developer.
SDP-98-O11: Greenbrier Drive Office Park Final Site Plan - January 22, 1998, Planning Staff
signed the final site plan for the development as described in SDP 97-068.
SDP~98-062: Greenbrier Drive Office Park Minor Amendment - June 11, 1998, Planning Staff
signed an amendment for changes to the full frontage improvements and to show the location of
the screening fence.
SUB-98-138: Greenbrier Office Park L.L.C. Administrative Plat - September 21, 1998, Planning
Staff signed a plat to create three new lots from the prior parcel.
REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
The applicant is requesting Board of Supervisor' s approval to allow for a business school
(Averett College) within the existing Greenbrier Drive Office'Park (Section 23.2.2.9 of the
Zoning Ordinance).
STAFF COMMENT:
Recommendation:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Sections 23.2.2.9, 4.12.4
and 31.2.4:1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval subject to conditions.
Staff Analysis:
Section 23.2.2.9 of the Zoning Ordinance:
The Commercial Office Zoning District allows for uses that are allowed in the R-15 Residential
Zoning District by special use permit [Section 23.2.2.9 of the Zoning Ordinance]. Private
2
schools are listed as a use allowed by special use permit in the R-15 zone [Section 18.2.2.5 of the
Zoning Ordinance]. The proposed business school is considered a private school and therefore a
special use permit is required. Approval of this special use permit satisfies the provisions of
section 23.2.2.9.
Section 4. 12.4 of the Zoning Ordinance.'
The approved site plan for the Greenbrier Office Park used office use as the generator for the
required parking. This school requires more parking than required for the approved office use.
The 2,000 square feet of office use requires only 8 parking spaces, while a private school for a
maximum of 45 students requires 15 spaces. Therefore, a deficit of 7 spaces is created.
The Zoning Department has reviewed this application and has pointed out that the applicant must
receive a waiver from the Planning Commission to allow for Cooperative Parking (Attachment
E). "Section 4.12.4 of the Zoning Ordinance allows for the Planning Commission to reduce the
amount of space required in a combined parking area by reason of different hours of normal
activity than those of other uses participating in the combination." The applicant has indicated
that the school's operation hours of 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays, and on Saturdays, would not
conflict with the Office Park's operation hours of 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekdays. The Zoning
Department has determined that this combination qualifies for the reduction (Attachment E).
The Planning Department concurs and recommends that the Planning Commission include
approval of the cooperative parking in their action for the special use permit.
Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4. 1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use
permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance
may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of
substantial detriment to adjacent property.
Staff notes that no adjacent property owners have raised any concerns to the Planning
Department as of the date of this report. The proposed school is located within an existing office
park. The business school will operate from 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. on weeknights and 9 a.m. to 3
p.m. on Saturdays. Staff has added a condition limiting the time of the school's operation to no
later than 10:30 p.m. (Condition 2). No new buildings or light fixtures are proposed with this
use. All but three of the existing lights are on timers that shut the lights off at 1:00 a.m. Staff
views the size of the proposed 2,000 square foot business to be minimal when compared to the
overall 43,200 square feet of the entire office park [4.6% of the total building area]. Staff has
added a condition limiting the size of the school to a maximum of 2,000 square feet, as well as a
condition limiting the number of enrolled students (Conditions 1 and 3). Although residential
development is adjacent to three sides of the development, appropriate screening measures have
been installed at the time of site plan approval. With the conditions recommended by staff, as
well as the existing on-site conditions, staff does not view the additional business school use as a
detriment to the adjacent properties
that the character of the district will not be changed thereby.
The proposed business school will be located within a district of professional office buildings
and residencies. Due to the limited size of the proposed use, Planning Staff views the business
school to be a similar use to that of a professional office. Since the use will be internal to the
office park, and appropriate screening measures were installed at the time of site plan approval,
staff has concluded that the character of the surrounding district will not be altered.
and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance.
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance of Section 1.4, Section 1.5, and Section 1.6 of the
Zoning Ordinance and finds no conflict.
with the uses permitted by right in the district.
The proposed business school will not interfere with other by-fight uses in the district. Since the
school's hours of operation will be after normal business hours, the parking for the school will
not interfere with the parking for the other office uses within the Office Park. [As previously
mentioned; the Planning Commission's action on this special permit can include the action to
approve the cooperative parking.]
with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance,
Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance provides no additional regulations.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
No adverse public health, safety, or general welfare issues have been identified with this
proposal.
Summary:
Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request:
5.
6.
7.
The use will not have any adverse impact on adjacent property;
The school's limited 2,000 square feet is small enough to retain the office character of the
Office Park;..
The school's hours of operation can support the Planning Commissions approval of
cooperative parking;
Adequate screening measure were installed at the time of site plan approval;
Consistent with Sections 23.2.2.9 of the Zoning Ordinance;
Consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan; and,
Consistent with: Section 32.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
4
Staff has not identified any factors which are unfavorable to this request:
Recommended Action:
· Staff recommends approval for the proposed private school. Staff also recommends approval of
cooperative parking to meet the requirements for this use.
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. The total business school square footage shall be limited to the internal 2,000 total square
feet;
2. Hours of operation shall be limited to 6:00 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. on weekdays and9:00-3:30
p.m. on Saturdays. The school shall not operate on Sundays; and,
3. The total school enrollment shall not exceed 45 students per day.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Applicant' s Special Use Permit Request and Justification
B - Site Plan Reduction
C - Tax Map
D - Proffers from ZMA 96-22
E - Zoning Administrator's Memo Dated September 02, 1999
F - Section 4.12.4 of the Zoning Ordinance (Cooperative Parking)
County of Albemarle -:o
OFFICE USE ONLY Fq
Sign# qq Mag. Dist.
Application for Special Use Permit
Department of Building Code and Zo~ing~erv
.0 G izJ o 0 / o
ATTACHMENT A
Project Name (how ~houid ~ rae~ to ~h~ application?) G r e e n b r i e r 0 f f i c e P a r k
*Existing Use Professional Office ProposedUse Private School for Adult Educatio
*Zoning District /'~ *Zoning Ordinance Section number requested a~3, ~. o~ ~/q3 /
(*staff will assist you with these items)
NumberofacrestobecoveredbySpecialUsePermit(irnF,ruonstmustbeddin=tedonpia0 .046 (2,000 s.f. bldg. are
Is this an amendment to an existing SpeCial Use Permit?
"'----Ar~you submitting a site development plan with this application?
o Yes~ No
n Yes'~ No
Contact Person (Whom should we call/write conceming ~is project?): L a n c e V a n d e C a s t i e
Address P. o. Bnx 5487 City Charlottesville State VA Zip 2291
DaytimePhone( 804 ) 979-7334 ,Fax# (804) 979-7443 E-mail lvandecastleSr
OW~er0fland(Aslistedin~eCounty'smcorS): Greenbrier Office Park, L.L.C.
Address P.O. Box 5487
City Charlottesvill$tate VA
DaytimePhone( 804 ) 979-7334 Fax# (804) 979-7443 E-mail n/a
AppliCant(Whoisthecontactpersonrepresenting?Whoisrequestingthespecialuse?): Avereli Colleqe
Address 146 Woodland Drive City Danville State VA Zip245____t
DaytimePhone( 804 ) 791-5842
Fax# (804) 791-5870 E-mail kcarter$averett.edt
~A~4~e~/~ ~ Tax map and parcel
TNdlhZ Pa-c~l~ 45,46,47 PhysicalAddress(ifassigned) :?2
CLOCatiOnOfprOperty(landmarks, intersections, orothcr) gn upstairs' suite at Buildino #2 in the
Greenbrier Office Park located at the intersection of Greenbrier Drive and
Wh~fpwnnd ~n~d ~n fh~ ~n M~O~Sfer~l D~frjr. f '
Does the owner 6f this. property own (or have any owne~hip interest in) any abutting property? If yes, piece !
~osemxmapandp~celnumbers Yes, T~CIW F~Zb~i 01-50 ~ O~[¢~{'.O0--O~!~
Date Paid
OFFICE USE ONLY
Fee amount $ "'l g'6,0~
History: ~ Special Use Permits:
CI Variances:
Concurrent review of Site Development Plan7
°% X/niP,',. ")OF-._.~Q?'~ ,% 'Pq,.. 0"70 4 ~ o~
ATTACHMENT A
Section 31.2.4.1 of the Albemarle County'Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of supervisors
hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use.
permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors
that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district
will not be changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
ordinance, with the uses permitted by fight in the district, with additional regulations provided in section
5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
The items which follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete
this form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of your request.
If you need assistance filling out these items, staff is available.
WhatistheComprehensivePlandesignationforthisproperty?/_-ot~,t~,'~/Se.t~,,,?_.e ,'^ ~e,~;~(]~or],,,-.-d e~
Howwilltheproposedspecialuseaffectadjacentproperty? The noise should be minimal except for the
noise generated by automobiles when students and instructors leave at 10:00 p.m.
There will notbe any additional exterior building lighting coming on due to the
proposed night time activity. The apDroved site Dole liqhts are on a timer and will
on from-d k until I a.m. T ere a e thr ex erior dowO li'ht atT~ach ~ ces~ed
How will~eproposedspecialuseaffectthech~ac~rofthedist~ctsu~ounding ~eproperty.
Above question continued...approved before this ypar'~ major rPv~¢inn nf fhp p×fPriC
lighting requirements by the county, but a plan showing the photometrics of the site
is available.
~er to current question. It will not negatively impact the character of the district surrounc
Howistheuseinharmonywith~epu~oseandintentof~eZoningOrdinance? the ProPertY.
The use fits in as a tra'nsition between residential and more intensive commercial
districts because of its low impact on the surrounding residential community.
Howistheuseinh~mony wi~theusespermittedbyrightin ~edist~ct? The use is intsn. ded to be a public
classroom setting open to all in'a non-discriminatory way. It will be open to all
those who are qualified and willing to commit themselves to the educational program
Even though Averell College is considered in zoning parlance to be a "private schoo.
because it is not supported by funQs t'rom ~e State ot v~rg~n~a, we ree~ ~t meets t~
None.
How willthisusepromotcthepublicheai~,sa~,andgeneralwelfareof~ecommunitY?ThSs use will Drovide
an outlet for the growing number of working adult professionals who want to learn
and succeed in an academic environment and achieve their own personal goals. These
students, through their hard work and determination, will better themselves, their
families, their workplace and ultimately, the community as a whole.
ATTACHMENT
Describe your request in detail and include all pertinent information such as the numbers of persons
involved in the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use: s e e A t t a c h-e d s ~ e e t.
ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - provide two(2) copies of each:
l] 1. Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning. If there is
no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and
the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number.
Note: If you are requesting a special use permit only for a portion of the property, it
needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing.
Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal
entity or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership
or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to
the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority
to do so.
If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be
submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application.
If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be
submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency.
OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS:
Drawings or conceptual plans, if any.
Additional Information, if any.
I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in
filing this application. I also certify that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge.
Signature
Lance Van de Castle
Printed Name
( 804 ) 979-7334
Daytime phone number of Signatory
ATTACHMENT A
Answer to first question on page 3.
AvereR College has been setting up satellite classrooms like this around the
Commonwealth of Virginia since 1988 and has over 20 satellite sites across the
state at the present time. They will have classes year round except major holidays
on Monday through Fdday night from 6 p.m. to 10 p.m. They hope to add a class on
Saturday from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. The number of students will vary according to class
offedngs and enrollment. The average age of the students is between 35 and 40
years of age. Every student has to have had at least two years of work experience
to be able to join the program. Undergraduate and masters degrees are being
offered. At present, the current weekday class sizes varies from 9 to 18 students. A
minimum of 13 students is required to start a new class, but some will drop out over
the course of the intensive program. The planned weekday enrollment is 35
students, 20 in one classroom with an instructor and 15 with an instructor in another
classroom. The maximum expected weekday enrollment is anticipated to be 45
students, with the addition of 10 students and an instructor being added to the 35
student scenario. The 2,000 square foot space (see attached plan) has three
classrooms and two bathrooms. If and when a Saturday class gets started, it would
involve between 15 and 30 students with two instructors: At present, there is no
staff planned during the day. At optimum operational levels, the staff could be as
many as five advisors and/or recruiters.
We know that additional off-street parking will be required by Albemarle County
zoning section 4.12.6.6.2, as related to schools in which pupils ddve to school.
Other tenants in the Greenbaler Office Park (COP) have already pledged their
support for twenty-two additional parking spaces shown on the approved site plan
for COP, which is a 43,200 square foot office park on 4.3 acres. Averett College
would represent 2,000 square feet or on 4.6% of the total approved building area.
ATTACHMENT B
.,/
ATTACHMENT C
I
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
- _ .___~,: ._.. .... __._.,,,, R IO DISTRICT SECTION
Date:
1.691
2.774
ATTACHMENT D
Original Proffer__
Amended Proffer
(Amendment #
PROFFER FORM
ZMA # 96-22 Tax Map Parcel(s) # TM 6:1W2-45,46,47
R4
Acres to be rezoned from
co
to co
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the AIbemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or
its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shah
be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the
requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for
the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning
requested.
( 1 ) The Owner will install and maintain an opaque privacy fence along the property line
between the property and the adjoining residential district, at the points indicated on the drawing
attached hereto as Exhibit 1. The fence will be six (6) feet tall and will be constructed of treated
lumber.
(2) All of the buildings constructed on the property will have one level visible from
Greenbrier Drive, and not more than two levels visible from adjacent residential properties, with a
maximum roof pitch of 6/12. No more than 43,200 total square feet of space, consistent with CO
(commercial office) zoning, will be constructed on the property. The primary exterior finish
materials shall be split-face block, or brick, and stucco.
(3) A minimum separation of fifty (50) feet will be maintained between any dumpster
located on the property and the adjoining residential district.
[See Continuation sheet, attached.]
Signatures of All Owners
Printed Names of All Owners
Date
Signature of Attorney-in-Fact
(Attach Proper Power of Attorney)
OR
Printed Name of Attorney-in-Fact
PROFFORMWPD
"' -= ' ATTACtth!ENT D
Proffer Form (continued)
ZMA #96-22
TM 61W2-45,46,47
(4) All exterior light fixtures will be fully shielded. A fully shielded fixture means an
outdoor light fixture shielded in such manner that all light emitted by the fixture, either directly from
the lamp or indirectly from the fixture, is projected below the horizontal.
(5) No single building shall have a floor area (footprint) greater than 12,000 square feet.
(6) The Owner recognizes that certain residential property owners and the County of
Albemarle desire to see certain improvements made to existing drainage facilities downstream from
the subject property. To provide assistance in this undertaking, the Owner will contribute the sum
of $9,334.00 to the County for application toward such improvements. Payment by the Owner shall
be made when the Owner is advised in writing by the County that it is ready to commence with the
construction of such improvements.
(7) The Owner will construct on the property a storm water detention facility satisfying
design criteria to maintain the current rate of storm water nm-off from the property into the adjoining
Wynridge subdivision during a "two-year storm" and to reduce the rate of rim-off during a "ten-year
storm," provided however, that the Owner shall have received approval from Albemarle County to
construct such detention pond by grading to the joint property line between the property and the
Wynridge subdivision, or within five (5) feet of such property line.
Signatures of All Owners Printed Names of All Owner
FAX (804) 9724126
COUNTY OF AI _R~
Department of Building Code and Zoning Services
401 Mclntim Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596
TF-[ .FPHONE (~a4) 296-5832
ATTAC~HMENT E
TED (804) 972-4012
MEMORANDtYM
TO: Eric Morrisotto, Senior Planner
FROM: Jan Sprinkle, Chief of Zoning Administration
DATE: 09/02/99
RE: SP 99-57, Averett College
As pointed out by the applicant, this school for adults requires more parking than is provided for on
the Greenbrier Office Park site plan which used office as the parking generator. The 2000 gross
square feet of office area only requires 8 parking spaces. The private school for a maximum of 45
students requires 15 spaces. This leaves a defttit of 7 spaces. Under Section 4.12.4, Cooperative
Parking, the Planning Commission may reduce the amount of space required in a combined parking
area by reason of different hours of normal activity than those of other uses partialparing in the
combination. Since most of the offices in the Greenbrier Office Park will operate between the
hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., and the college operates from 6 p.rrL to 10 p.m. and Saturdays, this
combination of uses qualifies for the reduction. Please have the Commission note this if they
approve the SP.
This use does not violate any proffers of ZMA 96-22.
ALBE:'ffARLE C(~U:'VTY CODE
ATTACHMENT F
4.12.3.2 Off-street parking spaces shall be provided on the same lot with the use to which it is apptmenant
except as herein after provided. (Amended 6-14-89)
12.3.3 Where practical difficulties prevent location as required in section 4.12.3.2 or where the public
sat~' or the public convenience would be better served by the location thereof other than on the
same lot. the commission may authorize such alternative location of required parking space as will
adequately serve the public interest. provided that such space shall be located on land in the same
ownership as that of the land on which is located the use to which such space is appurtenant or. m
the case of cooperative provision of parking space. in the ownership of at least one of the
participan~ in the combination. In the rural areas district. the board of supervisors may issue a
special use permit to allow off-site parking for a historic structure or site pursuant to sections
5.1.38 and 10.2.2.46. (Amended 12-10-97)
4.12.3.4 Whether off-street parking is provided on the same lot or not. the following shall apply:
(Amended 6-14-89)
a. For residential uses. where parking is provided in bays. no parking space shall be located
further than one hundred (I00) feet from the entrance of the dwelling such space serves.
b. For nonresidential uses. no parking space shall be located further than five hundred'(500) feet
from the entrance of the use such space serves.
Distances in (a) and (b) above may be increased in such cases where the commission shall
determine that the public interest or convenience would be equally or better served by such
increased distance: that the allowance of a greater distance would not be a departure from
sound engineering and design practice: and that the allowance of a greater distance would not
otherwise be contrary to the purpose and intent of this ordinance: provided that in no case
shall the maximum distance from the entrance of a dwelling unit and irs appurtenant parking
space exceed two hundred (200) feet.
4.12.4 COOPERATIVE PARKING
Parking space required under the provisions of this ordinance may be provided cooperatively for
two or more uses in a development or for two or more individual uses. subject to arrangements
that will assure the permanent availability of such space as such arrangements are approved by the
commission.
The amount of such combined space shall be equal to the sum of the amounts required tbr the
separate uses: provided, that the commission may reduce the amount of space required for a
church or for a meeting place of a civic. fraternal or similar organization or other uses under the
provisions era combined parking area by reason of different hours of normal activity. than those of
other uses participating in the combination.
4.12.5 AVAILABILITY
4.12.5.1 No required off-street parking or loading area shall be used for the sale. repair. dismantling or
servicing of any vehicle. equipment. materials or supplies. or obstructed in any other thshion
unless specifically approved by the commission. This provision shall not be applicable to single-
family dwelling units.
18-4-17
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
August 31, 1999
Kamrah Roell
C W Hurt, Incorporated
195 Riverbend Drive
Charlottesville,VA 22911
ZMA-99-08 White House Motel
Tax Map 78, Parcel 57B
Dear Mr. Roell:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on August 24, 1999, unanimously
recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and
receive public comment at their meeting on October 13, 1999. Any new or additional
information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Senior Planner
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
MJS/jcf
Cc:
Ella Carey
Jack Kelsey
Amelia McCulley
Steve Allshouse
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
ZMA 99-008 WHITE HOUSE MOTEL
MARY JOY SCALA
AUGUST 24, 1999
OCTOBER 13, 1999
Anolicant's nronosa!: The applicant, Charles Hurt, proposes to rezone a strip of land of
approximately 50 feet by 1,318 feet, containing approximately 1.5 acres, from R-6
Residential to HC, Highway Commercial to match the adjacent zoning. The strip of
property, currently owned by Fontana Land Trust, will then be added to the adjacent
properties currently owned by White House Motel and Free Bridge Auto Sales.
Petition: Request t0 rezone 1.497 acres from R6, Residential to HC, Highway
Commercial to allow expansion of the Free Bridge Auto Sales located on the adjacent
parcel, Tax Map 78, Parcel 57B. (See Attachment A - Tax Map). The property, described
as Tax Map 78E Parcel A, part thereof, is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District on
the north side of Richmond Road [Route 250 East] approximately 0.2 mile from the
intersection of Stony Point Road (Route 20 North). The Comprehensive Plan designates
this property as Regional Service in the Urban Area Neighborhood 3 (Pantops)
Development Area.
Character of the Area: The area surrounding this Pantops Neighborhood parcel is
developed in existing highway commercial uses.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this application for conformance with the
provisions of Title 15.2, Chapter 22, Article 7 of the Code of Virginia, and Sections 1.4,
1.5, and 1.6 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, and the Albemarle County
Comprehensive Plan, and recommends approval.
Plannin~ and Zonin~ History:
ZMA 94-06 Upper Pantops Land Trust: The strip of land was part of a larger parcel
rezoned from R-1 Residential to R-6 Residential on January 18, 1995.
SUB 97-036 Fontana Preliminary Plat: The strip of land was shown as residue acreage
on the Fontana preliminary plat, approved December 19, 1997. It was not proposed to
provide access to the Fontana development because it was too steep.
All the abutting parcels are zoned HC, Highway Commercial, except the Fontana
property which is zoned R-6.
Comnrehensive Plan: This area is designated for Regional Service on the Urban Area
Neighborhood Three (Pantops) Land Use Plan. The HC, Highway Commercial zoning
district is consistent with this designation.
The Open Space Plan indicates that Richmond Road (Route 250 East) is a designated
Entrance Corridor.
Staff Comment: The applicant has requested a rezoning simply to add area to parcels
already zoned HC, Highway Commercial. Part of the strip will be added to Tax Map 78-
Parcel 57B, which contains Free Bridge Auto Sales. The need for the rezoning was noted
when Free Bridge Auto Sales submitted a request for a special use permit and site plan to
expand the building and outdoor display area. The remainder of the strip will be added to
Tax Map 78, Parcel 10, which currently contains the Whim House Motel and (formerly)
Hilltop Restaurant. (See Attachment B - Plat of Parcel Z).
Virginia Department of Transportation has commented that the strip of land is not an
approved access point along Route 250, and should not be considered another entrance
for commercial use. (See Attachment C - VDoT Letter dated July 21, 1999).
SUMMARY: Section 33.9 of the Zoning Ordinance states that a proposed Zoning Map
Amendment shall be reviewed in regards to Sections 1.4 Purpose and Intent, 1.5
Relation to Environment, and 1.6 Relation to Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds that this
rezoning is consistent with the intent of these sections. Specifically, it encourages
economic development activities that provide desireable employment and enlarge the tax
base. It was noted above that the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of the request to rezone
1.497 acres from R6, Residential to HC, Highway Commercial.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Tax Map
B - Plat showing Parcel Z
C - Virginia Department of Transportation Letter dated July 21, 1999
2
:.':.:<..' ALBEMARLE
COUNTY
ATTACHMENT A
.\
II
~-~ ZMA-99-8 White House Motel',
__rSlCYl~N
p-,,/
22A
,/.
i
RI. 250 ,
SECTION 78
Pa, RCXL ,dl* · PGRrI~ Or PMC~L 5~
~! Iq~ ICRES mil IOTM.
S75
l.fl. lB
PAR 571]
\
_1,11 W'II*II'II Iii,lis' I
PAR g
PARCEL Z
ZONED R-A
PARCEL 5. J
! t9,310 AC~S,
TAX MAP 78
PARCEL ~ 0
ZONED
PARCEL
1.H.78
PAR j ! 61
/ SC,tLE:
?
PAP£EL
11 /
/ ,
/ x
// T.M. 78 ~
// PAR 12
EXCHANGE OF LAND
BET#EEN PARCELS 10 ~ 57C
AS SHOHN ON TAX MAP 78
B. AUBREY HUFFMAN l ASSOCIATES. LTD.
CIVIL ENGINEERI~ -
CHA~OTTESvILLE, VIRGINIA ........
Mr. David Benish
August Public Hearing Submittals
Page 3
July 21, 1999
ATTACHMENT C
ZMA-99-08 White House Motel, Route 250E
· This strip of land has historically been for potential access to the Fontana subdivision. The
approved Fontana subdivision plan does not provide for any access along this strip of land.
· It appears that this rezoning is intended to allow transfer of this strip to another parcel. This
strip of land is not an approved access point along Route 250, and should not be considered
as another entrance for commercial use.
If you have any questions, please advise before releasing to the applicant.
i.p~.B~al~
Transportation Planner
RPB
Cc:
Karen Kilby
H.W. Mills
J.H. Kesterson
INTER
Oicee~'~leClewttot~eBoerd
401
OFFICE
MEMO
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Members, Board of Supervisors
Laurie Hall, Senior Deputy Clerk
Reading List for October 13, 1999
October 7, 1999
March 10 (A), 1997
March 17 (A), 1999
April 21, 1999
August 4, 1999
August 11, 1999
Ms. Thomas
Mr. Martin
Ms. Thomas
Ms. Humphris
Mr. Perkins '
/Ibh
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Members of the Board of Supervisors
Laurie Hall, Senior Deputy Clerk ~?
October 7, 1999
Vacancies on Boards and Commissions
I have attached the updated list of vacancies on boards and commissions through
December 31, 1999.
cc: Bob Tucker Larry Davis
Ch'ville Regional Chamber of Commerce
BOARD OR COMMISSION
"EQUALIZA 770N BOARD
HOUSING COMMITTEE
ALBEMARLE C()U/%: I'V
PIAI~TNG (;OMML~,~I!ON
RIVAN~ SOI. ID WASI~'
A UTHORII"F CIFIZENS
ADVL~Y)R¥ COMM!ITEE
(AppliCatio~ due 11/17/99)
BOA~ OF S~'~L SERVICES
PUIII. IC DEf'!,.'NDi,.'R OFFICE
C!I'!ZE~%' ADVISORY
COM,~I'IT'EE
(Applications due 11/17/99)
MEMBER
Tracy (~orea
Albert O. Humbertson, Jr.
James E. Clark, Jr.
Michael Gaffhey
Jenny Greenwood
Peter G. Hallock
Ronald N. Whitenet
C. Jared Lowenstein
William J. Nitchmann
Hilda R. Lee-Washington
William W. Finley
Karen L. Powell
Donna Marshall
Martha Harris
I Elizabeth Isley
NEW TERM
TERM EXPIRES EXPIRES
12/31/99 12/31/00
12/31/99 12/31/00
12/31/99 12/31/00
WISH TO BE
RE-
APPOINTED?
Yes
Yes
Yes
MAGISTERIAL
APPOINTMENT?
12/31/99 12/31/03 Yes
12/3 1/99 12/31/03 No
12/31/99 12/3 1/03 Yes
12/3 1/99 12/31/03 ?
12/31/99 12/31/03 Yes
.
i
12/31/99 12Bl/01
12/31/99 12/31/03
12/3 1/99 12/3 1/03
12/31/99 12/31/03
·
i
Rivanna
White Hall
Seottsville
Yes At-large
No Seottsville
Yes Rivanna
Yes White Hall
I
Rivanna
12/31/99
12/31/99 12/3 1/03
12/31/99 12/31/03
'1'1'/63/01
i2> 1/olI Notetiib e
........! .........
2/3 1 l03 Yes
Yes
lXIO
N/A
Scottsville
White Hall