The URL can be used to link to this page

11SN0100CASE MANAGER: Robert Clay ,• •'~'~'•_~i~ .h{fr ~f~ ~' .' ~' ..~ f.r I~ STAFF' S REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 11 SNO 100 Richmond 20 MHz LLC Bermuda Magisterial District South line of East Hundred Road 4C nC~~ Q~ n~C November 17, 2010 B S RE VEST: Amend zoning (Case 95SN0214) plus conditional use to permit a communications tower in Agricultural (A) and General Business (C-5) Districts. PROPOSED LAND USE: A 158-foot communications tower, employing a monopole design with internally mounted antennas, and associated equipment are planned. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON PAGES 2 AND 3. AYES: MESSRS. BROWN, HASSEN, BASS AND WALLER. ABSENT: MR. GULLEY. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval for the following reasons: A. The proposal conforms to the Public Facilities Plan which suggests that communications tower locations should generally be located away from residential uses. B. The Plan also suggests areas where there are physical features such as topographical changes and streams which provide a boundary to future development maybe appropriate. C. The proposal conforms to the Tower Sitin.~ Policy which suggests that towers should possess design features which mask the utilitarian nature of the tower or be Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service located as remotely as possible from existing or planned areas of development on property that is densely wooded with mature trees. (NOTES: A. CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER CONDITIONS. CONDITIONS NOTED "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE 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 Owner 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 816-651-0395, 816-652-041 1, and 816-651-5749 (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 shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. (STAFF/CPC) 1. There shall be no signs permitted to identify this use. (P) (STAFF/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 lines to maintain a tree preservation area of at least 100 feet toward the eastern and southern property lines, 40 feet toward the northern property line, and 30 feet toward the western property line. Notwithstanding the forgoing, should the proposed road extension be completed (generally as shown on Sheet A-0 of the Plan dated July 1, 2010 and submitted with the CU application), the southern portion of that tree preservation area may be reduced to accommodate the construction of that future road, including any drainage infrastructure related to such road. Such buffer shall be comprised of existing trees at the site to provide screening of the base of the tower and of the 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 except as otherwise provided ereln. (P) 2 11SN0100-NOV17-BOS-RPT (STAFF/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 antennas. (P) (STAFF/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 ortower-mounted equipment.) (STAFF/CPC) 5. The tower shall not exceed a height of 158 feet. (P) (STAFF/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 ,nrati nn The request site fronts the south line of East Hundred Road, east of Rivers Bend Boulevard. Tax IDs 816-651-Parts of 0395 and 5749; 816-652-Part of 0411. Existing Zoning: AandC-5 Size: l .l acres Existing Land Use: Commercial or vacant 3 11SN0100-NOV17-BOS-RPT Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: North - C-3; Commercial South - A; Vacant East - C-5 and A; Commercial or vacant West - C-3; Commercial UTILITIES; PUBLIC FACILITIES; AND TRANSPORTATION This request will have no impact on these facilities. ENVIRONMENTAL The subject property drains to the south to Johnson Creek. There are no existing or anticipated on- oroff site drainage or erosion problems. If the combination of access to the site and the site involves disturbance of 2500 square feet or more, a land disturbance permit must be obtained from the Department of Environmental Engineering. 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 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 TIFF, Comprehensive Plan: The subject property is located within the boundaries of the Consolidated Eastern Area Plan which suggests the property is appropriate for neighborhood mixed use. 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 and that sites with existing mature vegetation or topographical features which provide screening are preferred. Also, the Tower Siting Po y suggests that towers in the vicinity of existing or planned areas of development should be located on property that is densely wooded with mature trees and that measures should be taken to insure the preservation of mature trees around the tower. 4 11SN0100-NOV17-BOS-RPT Area Development Trends: Adjacent properties are zoned Community Business and General Business (C-3 and C-5) and Agricultural (A) and are occupied by commercial uses or are vacant. The closest residence is located approximately 600 feet south of the proposed tower site, in the Chesterfield Downs subdivision. It is anticipated commercial uses will continue in this area along the East Hundred Road corridor, as suggested by the Consolidated Eastern Area. Plan. Zoning History: On February 25,1976 the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved commercial zoning on a portion of the request property. (Case 76SN0002) On July 26, 1995 the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation from the Planning Commission, approved commercial zoning on a portion of the request property as well as adjacent property to the east (Case 95 SN0214). With the approval of Case 95SN0214 uses permitted in the C-3 and I-1 districts were allowed, plus some limited C-5 uses. Development Standards: Currently, the property lies within an Emerging Growth Area and within the Route 10 Corridor East Highway Corridor District Area. The Zoning Ordinance specifically addresses access, landscaping, setbacks, parking, signs, buffers, utilities and screening for developments within these areas. The purpose of these standards is to promote high quality, well-designed projects. The applicant has offered language requiring compliance with Emerging Growth Area requirements relative to the architectural treatment of the proposed equipment building and screening of mechanical equipment. (Proffered Condition 4) The proposed communications tower would be a monopole with internally mounted antennas (i.e., "slick stick" design), intended to minimize its appearance (Proffered Condition 3). The height of the tower would not exceed 158-feet (Proffered Condition 5). Access to the tower site would be via a proposed driveway to East Hundred Road. Should this request be approved, the applicant has proffered the base of the tower would be secured with a fence to discourage trespassing. (Proffered Condition 2) To ensure that the tower does not become a maintenance problem or an eyesore, the applicant has offered the tower would be removed at such time that it ceases to be used for communications purposes. (Proffered Condition 6) 5 11SN0100-NOV17-BOS-RPT CONCLUSIONS The proposal conforms to the Public Facilities Plan which suggests that communications tower locations should generally be located away from residential uses. The Plan also suggests that areas where there are physical features such as topographical changes and streams which provide a boundary to future development maybe appropriate. In addition, the proposal conforms to the Tower Siting Policy which suggests that towers should possess design features which mask the utilitarian nature of the tower or be located as remotely as possible from existing or planned areas of development on property that is densely wooded with mature trees. Given these considerations, approval of this request is recommended. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (9/21/10): The applicant accepted the recommendation. There was opposition present expressing concerns relative to tower visibility; existing coverage being sufficient; and impact on future area development. Mr. Hassen stated that there are other sites in the area that had been looked at and this was the best site; there is commercial development adjacent to the site; and that other carriers were going to be on the tower. Mr. Hassen also stated that since there was opposition to the case, he would prefer a meeting with the applicant and those involved to discuss the matter further and would like to defer the case for thirty (30) days. On their own motion, the Commission deferred this case to their October 19, 2010 public Baring. Staff (9/22/10): The applicant was advised in writing that any significant, new or revised information should be submitted no later than September 27, 2010 for consideration at the Commission's October 19, 2010 public hearing. Staff (9/27/10): To date, no new information has been received. 6 11SN0100-NOV17-BOS-RPT Planning Commission Meeting (10/ 19/ 10) The applicant accepted the recommendation. There was no opposition present. Mr. Hassen stated that a meeting was held with the applicant, and those who were in opposition, to discuss the differences in the coverage maps. Although, there were homeowners who still opposed the site due to visibility of the tower, he felt satisfied with the case as presented. On motion of Mr. Hassen, seconded by Mr. Bass, the Commission recommended approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2 and 3. AYES: Messrs. Brown, Hassen, Bass and Waller. ABSENT: Mr. Gulley. The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, November 17, 2010, beginning at 6:30 p.m., will take under consideration this request. 7 11SN0100-NOV17-BOS-RPT / r j 1 M j l ~ U 1 1 ~•• _ - ~ 1 '~-~ .- 1Sb ! ~• ~ ~ ~- , ~ ~^-- a l ~•- -~ 1 .~- ~ a ~ j .~ z j ~ ~ M I - ~'~ • U 1 U ~ -- - j -~ -, - • -~ ~ ~ j ~ 1 f - j j j M f j l j ~ l 1 U c~ ! ! ~- j ~ -~l N ~ I ~ i~ ~~ ~ ~ M "~ i 1 U j ~ Q 1 , ~ Q ~ ~-. ~ i / / ~I~ S f 1 ~ ~~NNIM j j ~ ~ ~ l :::~ ~ Q' :::~ U :::::r: 1 .... ~ ::::~ ~ ~ 1 ::::~ ~ V j ...;: zl 1 0 ~3~ ~ Q j j ~ o~ N01~ j n~ 2 1 ~ W N ~ J ~ ' W ~ r ~ ~ _ a ~ j ~ ~ j ~~ ~ ~ W ~ , I m l ~ W o j l I .~~ ~~~ o j ~ ~ M ~~S''~ba j ~~ lU W l 1 ' z `_~~~~9 aN38 5~~~ j j ~ ~, j ~~ I a~ ~ ~ o ~i ~- ~ ~ N ° j . r • ~ ~. _ j ~ ,~ ~ 1 ' 1 ~~~ ~ Z ~ ~? I '~ ~ Z U 1 U ~ ~/ ~ o 1 " 1, N 1 1~ p ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~~ O Z ~ I (~ ~ \ ~ W ~ - - ~~ ~~NI U ~ O _ N / ~^ - - ~~ ' ~ ~ ~