The URL can be used to link to this page

10SN0168 July 28, 2010 BS ADDENDUM lOSN0168 (Amended) Richmond 20 MHz LLC Clover Hill Magisterial District East line of South Old Hundred Road REQUEST: Conditional Use to permit a communications tower in an Agricultural (A) District. PROPOSED LAND USE: A 198-foot communications tower, employing a monopole design with internally mounted antennas, and associated improvements are planned. Since the tower would not meet the restrictions for towers in an Agricultural (A) District a conditional use permit is required. On July 23, 2010, due to the site being relocated, the applicant submitted a revision to Proffered Condition 5 which reduces the maximum height of the proposed tower from 198 feet to 196 feet. Staff continues to recommend denial of this request for the reasons outlined in the "Request Analysis." (NOTE: SHOULD THE BOARD WISH TO CONSIDER THIS AMENDED PROFFERED CONDITION, THEY MUST UNANIMOUSLY AGREE TO SUSPEND THEIR PROCEDURES AS SUCH AMENDMENT WAS SUBMITTED AFTER THE CASE APPEARED IN THE NEWSPAPER.) PROFFERED CONDITION The tower shall not exceed a height of 196 feet. (P) (NOTE: The tower shall be a 190 foot tall monopole structure with a 6 foot tall lightning rod.) Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service 10SN0168 JUL28-BOS-ADD ,• •'~'~'•_~i~ .'ry f ~fi ...r ~ ~ ~ f . ~ ry~~. ~. STAFF' S REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION lOSN0168 (Amended) Richmond 20 MHz LLC July 28, 2010 BS Clover Hill Magisterial District East line of South Old Hundred Road RE VEST: Conditional Use to permit a communications tower in an Agricultural (A) District. PROPOSED LAND USE: A 198-foot communications tower, employing a monopole design with internally mounted antennas, and associated improvements are planned. Since the tower would not meet the restrictions for towers in an Agricultural (A) District a conditional use permit is required. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON PAGES 2 AND 3. AYES: MESSRS. BROWN, HASSEN AND WALLER. NAY: MR. BASS. ABSENT: MR. GULLEY. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend denial for the following reasons: A. The proposal does not conform to the Public Facilities Plan which suggests that communications tower locations should generally be located to minimize the impact on existing or future areas of development and that locations adjacent to planned or existing residential development are to be minimized. Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service B. The proposal does not conform to the Tower Siting Policy which suggests that towers should generally be located away from existing or planned areas of residential development. (NOTES: A. CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. B. UNDER THE FEDERAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT, LOCALITIES CANNOT REGULATE CELL TOWERS ON THE BASIS OF POSSIBLE HEALTH OR ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS.) PROFFERED CONDITIONS The Owners and Developer in this request for a conditional use ("CU"), pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the Code of Virginia (1950 as amended) and the Zoning Ordinance of Chesterfield County, for themselves and their respective successors or assigns, proffer that the development of the property known as part of Chesterfield County Tax Identification Numbers 732-681-4585, 732-681-3768, 733-681-0761, and 731-681-8265 (the "Property") under consideration will be developed according to the following conditions if, and only if, the CU to construct a telecommunications tower on the Property is granted. In the event the request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the Developer, the proffers and conditions shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. (CPC) 1. There shall be no signs permitted to identify this use. (P) (CPC) 2. The base of the tower shall be enclosed by a minimum six (6) foot high fence, designed to preclude trespassing. The fence shall be placed so as to provide sufficient room between the fence and the property line to maintain a tree preservation area of at least 100' in each direction, such buffer to be comprised of existing trees at the site and to provide screening of the base of the tower and accessory ground equipment from adjacent properties. A detailed plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. So long as such area is required, no trees within the area shall be removed unless such trees are dead, diseased, or dying. (P) (CPC) 3. The color, design and lighting system for the tower shall be as follows: a. The tower shall be gray or another neutral color, acceptable to the Planning Department. b. The tower shall not be lighted. c. The tower shall be a monopole structure with internally mounted 2 10SN0168 JUL28-BOS-RPT antennas. (P) (CPC) 4. Any building or mechanical equipment shall comply with Sections 19-595 and 19-570 (b) and (c) of the Zoning Ordinance relative to architectural treatment of building exteriors and screening of mechanical equipment. (P) (NOTE: Section 19-570 (b) and (c) would require the screening of mechanical equipment located on the building or ground from adjacent properties and public rights-of way. Screening would not be required for the tower or tower-mounted equipment.) (CPC) 5. The tower shall not exceed a height of 198 feet. (P) (CPC) 6. At such time that the tower ceases to be used for communications purposes for a period exceeding twelve (12) consecutive months, the owner/developer shall dismantle and remove the tower and all associated equipment from the property. (P) GENERAL INFORMATION T nratinn~ East line of South Old Hundred Road, south of Rose Glen Drive. Tax IDs 731-681-Part of 8265; 732-681-Parts of 4585 and 3768; and 733-681-Part of 0761. Existing Zoning: A Size: 2.3 acres Existing Land Use: Residential or vacant Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: North, South, East and West - A and R-7; Single-family residential or vacant 3 10SN0168 JUL28-BOS-RPT T ITTT ,TTTF,~ Public Water System: This request will not impact the public water system. Public Wastewater S,, sue: This request will not impact the public wastewater system. However, atwenty-seven (27) inch wastewater trunk line extends along Nuttree Creek within afifty-five (55) foot easement. This line must not be disturbed during construction. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND COUNTY TRANSPORTATION This request will have no impact on these facilities. ENVIRONMENTAL The subject property is bordered to the north by Nuttree Creek which is a perennial stream subject to a 100-foot conservation buffer, inside of which only water dependant uses are allowed. In conjunction with plan submittal, a copy of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation approval must be submitted so the conservation area (RPA limits) can be adjusted such that all disturbance is outside of the Resource Protection Area (RPA). If more than 2500 square feet of land is disturbed to construct the cell tower and associated roads, a land disturbance permit will be required from the Department of Environmental Engineering. It should be noted, prior to plan submittal, a perennial flow and connective wetlands connectivity application must be submitted to Water Quality for review and approval. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (VDOT~ A cell tower requires a special private entrance. The property owner shall identify the desired location of the private entrance with the assistance of the Richmond District Administrator's designee. If the minimum sight distance standards specified in Appendix G of the VDOT Road Design Manual (see 24 VAC 30-73-170 A) cannot be met, the entrance should be placed at the location with the best possible sight distance as determined by the Richmond District Administrator's designee. The District Administrator's designee may require the property owner to grade slopes, clear brush, remove trees, or conduct other similar efforts, or any combination of these, necessary to provide the safest possible means of ingress or egress that can be reasonably ac ieve . COUNTY COMMUNICATIONS The Zoning Ordinance requires that any structure over eighty (80) feet in height be reviewed by the County's Public Safety Review Team for potential detrimental impacts the structure could 4 10SN0168 JUL28-BOS-RPT have on the County's Radio Communications System microwave paths. This determination must be made prior to construction of the communications tower. COUNTY AIRPORT A preliminary review of this proposal indicates that, given the approximate location and elevation of the proposed installation, there will be no adverse affect on the County Airport. T ,ANn T 1~F, Comprehensive Plan: The request property lies within the boundaries of the Upper Swift Creek Plan Amendment which suggests the property is appropriate for residential use of 2.2 units per acre or less and conservation/recreationuse. The Public Facilities Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, suggests that communications tower locations should generally be located to minimize the impact on existing or future areas of development. Also, the Tower Sitin.~X suggests that towers in the vicinity of existing or planned areas of development should be architecturally incorporated in the design of an existing structure, or possess design features that mask the utilitarian nature of the tower. Area Development Trends: The subject property is located in an area characterized by single-family residential uses on acreage parcels and single-family residential subdivision development, including Rose Glen, Nuttree and Echo Ridge. In addition, subdivisions within the Brandermill community are located to the west, across Old Hundred Road. Single-family residential development is expected to continue in this area, as suggested by the Plan. Development Standards: The applicant is proposing a 198-foot monopole communications tower with internally mounted antennas and associated accessory equipment, and has offered standards similar to those for towers located in areas where staff would typically be supportive (Proffered Conditions 1 through 5). These include standards for fencing and landscaping; tower color, design and lighting; maximum height; architectural treatment and screening; and a provision for removal. CONCLUSIONS The proposal does not conform to the Public Facilities Plan which suggests that communications tower locations should generally be located to minimize the impact on existing or future areas of development and that locations adjacent to planned or existing residential development are to be minimized. In addition, the proposal does not conform to the Tower Siting Policy which suggests 5 10SN0168 JUL28-BOS-RPT that towers should generally be located away from existing or planned areas of residential development. Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended. CASE HISTORY Applicant (3/29/10 and 3/31/10): The applicant submitted additional proffered conditions. Planning Commission Meeting (4/20/10): The applicant did not accept staff s recommendation, but did accept the Planning Commission's recommendation. There was opposition present expressing concerns relative to visibility; other alternatives; proximity to residential development; locating the tower in a business area or on a Virginia Power structure; visual impact; depreciation of property values; and the safety of children. There was support present, stating: they grew up adjacent to towers; they own a business and rely on cell services; there were other users of the tower, not just this applicant; preference for a tower instead of residential use with 300-500 homes; and that towers have to be located somewhere. Mr. Waller questioned the dangers of the microwaves from a cell phone versus those emitted by antennas on a cell tower. He noted the applicant has made some progress towards addressing staff s concerns. He also indicated area property owners have a reasonable expectation for wireless coverage. In response to a question from Mr. Hassen, Mr. Keene stated that locating the tower closer to Route 288 would mean the removal of more trees; there were wetlands and less land to work with; and that the Colonial Pipeline runs through the property. Mr. Bass asked if health issues were discussed at the community meeting. He also stated that with 139 signatures on a petition, he felt he would have to vote with the people. On motion of Mr. Waller, seconded by Dr. Brown, the Commission recommended approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2 and 3. AYES: Messrs. Brown, Hassen and Waller. NAY: Mr. Bass. ABSENT: Mr. Gulley. 6 10SN0168 JUL28-BOS-RPT Board of Supervisors Meeting (5/26/10): At the request of the applicant, the Board deferred this case to July 28, 2010. Staff (5/27/10): The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information should be submitted no later than June 1, 2010 for consideration at the Board's July 28, 2010 public hearing. The applicant was also advised that a $1,000.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Board's public hearing. Staff (6/17/10): The deferral fee was paid. Applicant (6/29/10): A revised plan was submitted, showing the proposed tower as being relocated in an effort to address concerns of area property owners. The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, July 28, 2010 beginning at 6:30 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 7 10SN0168 JUL28-BOS-RPT J U N U N ~ g ~- ~ T2$ - .•~ ~ R ~ -~ r~ - ~ \ I ,1. ~~ ^ ` ~ ~ --~~~ ' ~ r r~-~ l Q ~ / ~ NEE r ~ . t ~ f~ ~ a t ~~~~i Q 1 1'. .r ~ ~ ~ J ~ / ~ I ~ ~ Nl 3lAl 3~ l z~ ti s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~y ~ !~ / / w ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ I ~ z 1 ~ / ~ r .~ ~ ~ 2~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ 1 ' G~ d ~ ~ ~ / Y U , ~ V , ~ 8/~ 0 / Q G~ Q o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~P ~ 1 ~ i ~ Q ~ o ~ d Sy N ~Z ~ ~ ,~ ~~~ ~~~, ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ Ha~OS W ~ ~ z cn W m, o m, o ~ 0 a ~7 0 ~ U fly' e ~~ ~ ~ O ~ ~n X O 0 Q o t ~ O ~ U ~ ^ O O ., r ~~ ~i ~ ~ r U TOTAL HaGFIT 198'-O"f AGL ItiI1Al"~AI~rA 71 1 IAi IT-Iiil/\ I'IAh FOR ~R PROPOSED fi-i uTluTr RACK 3'~3' HOFFfrIAN PROPOSED 7' HIGH cHAi~uN~ FENCE Y~~ ~3J STRAND5 OF BARBED SIRE TO[[yyP OF TTQWEyR ~ 1 ~7~'-0"f AGL N1Qt GF PROP054D N1F106 AN1E?lIAS 1 - f A~6L RAD CENTER OF FUTURE ANTENNA 180'-O't AGL RAD CENTER OF FUTURE ANTENNA ~ 170'-0"t AGL RAD CENTER OF FUTURE ANTENNA 160'-0"f AGL COAl~ STEEL SKID FINISH GRAQE 0'-0"t AGL - - ` , ,