ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: SDP2010-94 Hillsdale Farm/Cosner Property (AT&T CV427 Tier II) - Final Planning Commission Public Hearing: March 1, 2011 Owners: Kimco, LC Acreage: 7.64 (Lease Area: 1,600 square feet) TMP: Tax Map 102, Parcel 11B Location: West side of Scottsville Road [SR 20S], approximately 0.25 mile from its intersection with Thorn Rose Lane. Staff: Summer Frederick, Senior Planner; Margaret Maliszewski, Principal Planner ARB Board of Supervisors Hearing: N/A Applicant: SAI Communication for AT&T Joe O Conner Rezone from: Not applicable Special Use Permit for: Not applicable By-right use: RA, Rural Areas and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay Magisterial District: Samuel Miller Proffers/Conditions: No Requested # of Dwelling Units/Lots: N/A DA - RA - X Proposal: Proposal to install a Tier II personal wireless service facility. The proposed facility will consist of a 136- foot tall monopole and associated equipment. The monopole will be (10) ten feet above the reference tree. Character of Property: The proposed site is located on a parcel with an entrance off Thorn Rose Lane. The lease area is wooded and undeveloped. Comp. Plan Designation: Rural Area in Rural Area 4 Use of Surrounding Properties: Single-family residential homes, and wooded, undeveloped parcels. Factors Favorable: Proposal meets the requirements of Section 5.1.40.a and will be installed and operated in compliance with section 5.1.40.d Criteria (1) through (8) Factors Unfavorable: None Recommendation: Based on findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility at the proposed height of ten (10) feet above the reference tree. 1
STAFF CONTACT: Summer Frederick, Margaret Maliszewski PLANNING COMMISSION: March 1, 2011 AGENDA TITLE: PROPERTY OWNER: APPLICANT: SDP2010-94 Hillsdale Farm/Cosner Property (AT&T CV427 Tier II) - Final Kimco, LC SAI Communication for AT&T Joe O Conner PROPOSAL: Request for approval of a treetop personal wireless service facility with a steel monopole that would be approximately 136 feet tall (10 feet above the height of the reference tree), within a 40 x 40 foot lease area. This application is being made in accordance with section 10.2.1(22) of the Zoning Ordinance, which allows for Tier II wireless facilities by right in the Rural Area Zoning District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area in Rural Area 4. CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The proposed site is located on a parcel adjoining the west side of Scottsville Road [SR 20S], approximately 0.25 south of the intersection with Thorn Rose Lane. The lease area is heavily wooded. This section of the Route 20 entrance corridor includes a mix of single family homes and heavily wooded acreage (Attachment B). PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY No planning and zoning history was found for this parcel. STAFF COMMENT: Section 3.1 provides the following definitions that are relevant to this proposal: Tier II personal wireless service facility: A personal wireless service facility that is a treetop facility not located within an avoidance area. Treetop facility: A personal wireless service facility consisting of a self-supporting monopole having a single shaft of wood, metal or concrete no more than ten (10) feet taller than the crown of the tallest tree within twenty-five (25) feet of the monopole, measured above sea level (ASL), and includes associated antennas, mounting structures, an equipment cabinet and other essential personal wireless service equipment. Avoidance area: An area having significant resources where the siting of personal wireless service facilities could result in adverse impacts as follows: (i) any ridge area where a personal wireless service facility would be skylighted; (ii) a parcel within an agricultural and forestal district; (iii) a parcel within a historic district; (iv) any location in which the proposed personal wireless service facility and three (3) or more existing or approved personal wireless service facilities would be within an area comprised of a circle centered anywhere on the ground having a radius of two hundred (200) feet; or (v) any location within two hundred (200) feet of any state 2
scenic highway or by-way. Section 5.1.40(d), Tier II facilities states: (Emphasis Added) Each Tier II facility may be established upon commission approval of an application satisfying the requirements of subsection 5.1.40(a) and demonstrating that the facility will be installed and operated in compliance with all applicable provisions of this chapter, criteria (1) through (8) below, and satisfying all conditions of the architectural review board. The commission shall act on each application within the time periods established in section 32.4.2.6. The commission shall approve each application, without conditions, once it determines that all of these requirements have been satisfied. If the commission denies an application, it shall identify which requirements were not satisfied and inform the applicant what needs to be done to satisfy each requirement. The applicant has submitted an application that satisfies the requirements set forth in Section 5.1.40(a) and has performed a balloon test at the location of the proposed facility. The Architectural Review Board has reviewed this request for compliance with the County s design guidelines for the entrance corridor and has recommended approval. The Planning Commission shall approve each application, without conditions once it determines that all of the above requirements have been met. A balloon test was performed at the location of the proposed facility on January 19 th, 2011. The Architectural Review Board has reviewed this request for compliance with the County s design guidelines for the entrance corridor [State Route 20S] and recommended approval. Section 5.1.40(d)(1): The facility shall comply with subsection 5.1.40(b) and subsection 5.1.40(c)(2) through (9). Staff has determined that the proposed facility s location complies with all of the exemptions of Section 5.1.40(b) and the proposed equipment meets all relevant design, mounting and size criteria that are set forth in Section 5.1.40(c)(2) and (3). The remainder of subsection (c) provides requirements that are subject to enforcement if the facility is approved. Section 5.1.40(d)(2): The site shall provide adequate opportunities for screening and the facility shall be sited to minimize its visibility from adjacent parcels and streets, regardless of their distance from the facility. If the facility would be visible from a state scenic river or a national park or national forest, regardless of whether the site is adjacent thereto, the facility also shall be sited to minimize its visibility from such river, park or forest. If the facility would be located on lands subject to a conservation easement or an open space easement, the facility shall be sited to so that it is not visible from any resources specifically identified for protection in the deed of easement. The proposed facility includes a monopole that would have a height of approximately 136 feet above ground level or 723 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is 126 feet above ground level or 714.47 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) and is located within 25 of feet of the proposed monopole. A balloon test was conducted on January 19, 2011. The balloon was visible for a distance of approximately 0.25 mile along the State Route 20S Entrance Corridor at the proposed elevation of 136 feet, or 10 above the top of the reference tree (Attachment C), however Staff noted that the balloon would not be visible once the surrounding trees were fully leafed out. 3
Section 5.1.40(d)(3): The facility shall not adversely impact resources identified in the county s open space plan. The County s wireless service facilities policy encourages facilities with limited visibility, facilities with adequate wooded backdrop, and facilities that do not adversely impact Avoidance Areas. This personal wireless facility is not located in an Avoidance Area. The proposed monopole is expected to be visible for a relatively short period of time at a particular point when traveling west on the Scottsville Road [State Route 20S] entrance corridor. The posted speed limit for State Route 20S is 55 miles per hour adjacent to the proposed monopole location. Staff s analysis of this request addresses the concern for the possible loss of aesthetic or historic resources. The proposed lease area is not delineated as a significant resource on the Open Space Concept Map. Staff believes there is no significant loss of resources related to the installation of the proposed monopole. Section 5.1.40(d)(4): The facility shall not be located so that it and three (3) or more existing or approved personal wireless service facilities would be within an area comprised of a circle centered anywhere on the ground having a radius of two hundred (200) feet. There is no existing personal wireless service facility located within an area comprised of a circle centered anywhere on the ground having a radius of two hundred (200) feet. Section 5.1.40(d)(5): The maximum base diameter of the monopole shall be thirty (30) inches and the maximum diameter at the top of the monopole shall be eighteen (18) inches. Notes on the site plan for this facility propose a monopole diameter not to exceed 30 inches at the base or 18 inches at the top. These dimensions comply with the maximum width requirements for treetop monopoles serving Tier II facilities. Section 5.1.40(d)(6): The top of the monopole, measured in elevation above mean sea level, shall not exceed the height approved by the commission. The approved height shall not be more than seven (7) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty-five (25) feet of the monopole, and shall include any base, foundation or grading that raises the pole above the pre-existing natural ground elevation; provided that the height approved by the commission may be up to ten (10) feet taller than the tallest tree if the owner of the facility demonstrates to the satisfaction of the commission that there is not a material difference in the visibility of the monopole at the proposed height, rather than at a height seven (7) feet taller than the tallest tree; and there is not a material difference in adverse impacts to resources identified in the county s open space plan caused by the monopole at the proposed height, rather than at a height seven (7) feet taller than the tallest tree. The applicant may appeal the commissioner s denial of a modification to the board of supervisors as provided in subsection 5.1.40(d)(12). As mentioned previously in this report, the proposed monopole would have a height of approximately 723 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The height of the reference tree is approximately 714.47 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The proposed monopole will be ten (10) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty-five (25) feet. A balloon test was conducted in an effort to minimize the visibility of the monopole from adjacent parcels and streets as indicated above. The wireless policy states that personal wireless facilities that are well sited will almost 4
always be less visible, but siting does not guarantee invisibility. Based on the results of the balloon test, staff recommends approval of the proposed personal wireless facility at 10 feet above the reference tree. Section 5.1.40(d)(7): Each wood monopole shall be a dark brown natural wood color; each metal or concrete monopole shall be painted a brown wood color to blend into the surrounding trees. The antennas, supporting brackets, and all other equipment attached to the monopole shall be a color that closely matches that of the monopole. The ground equipment, the ground equipment cabinet, and the concrete pad shall also be a color that closely matches that of the monopole, provided that the ground equipment and the concrete pad need not be of such a color if they are enclosed within or behind an approved structure, façade or fencing that: (i) is a color that closely matches that of the monopole; (ii) is consistent with the character of the area; and (iii) makes the ground equipment and concrete pad invisible at any time of year from any other parcel or a public or private street. The applicant is proposing the installation of a facility with a steel monopole. The proposed color for the tower and equipment cabinets is Sherwin Williams brown paint (Java Brown) to match existing surroundings. Section 5.1.40(d)(8): Each wood monopole shall be constructed so that all cables, wiring and similar attachments that run vertically from the ground equipment to the antennas are placed on the pole to face the interior of the property and away from public view, as determined by the agent. Metal monopoles shall be constructed so that vertical cables, wiring and similar attachments are contained within the monopole s structure. A note on the site plan indicates that vertical cables, wiring and similar attachments will be located inside the monopole. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of The Telecommunications Act of 1996: The regulation of the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless facilities by any state or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. The Telecommunications Act addresses concerns for environmental effects with the following language, No state or local government or instrumentality 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 Commissions regulations concerning such emissions. In order to operate the proposed facility, the applicant is required to meet the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions. These requirements will adequately protect the public health and safety. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this personal wireless service facility. Based on findings presented in the staff report, staff recommends approval at the proposed height of ten (10) feet above the reference tree. 5
ATTACHMENTS: A. Site Plan B. Vicinity Maps C. Map indicating visibility along Scottsville Road (SR 20S) 6