Loading...
11SN0115CASE MANAGER: Robert Clay ,• •'~'~'•_~i~ .h{fr ~f~ ..~~. .~{~ +,~..~,f ..~ f.r I~ STAFF' S REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 11SN0115 HTS Towers, LLC Clover Hill Magisterial District 11100 Smoketree Drive ~~ n[IIIIC~~~ nrCT1 T November 17, 2010 B S RE VEST: Conditional use to permit a communications tower in a Residential (R-15) District. PROPOSED LAND USE: A 135-foot communications tower, designed as a bell tower (Proffered Condition 3), and associated improvements are planned. Since the tower would not meet the restrictions for towers in residential districts, conditional use approval is required. 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 designing facilities so as to minimize the impact on adjacent properties. B. The proposal conforms to the Tower Sitin.~ Policy, which suggests that towers in the vicinity of existing or planned areas of development should possess design features that mask the utilitarian nature of the tower. Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service (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 (STAFF/CPC) 1. There shall be no signs permitted to identify this use. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 2. Access into the tower structure shall be secured, to preclude trespassing. Evergreen trees, a minimum of six (6) feet in height at installation, shall be planted around the base of the tower, except where access is required. A detailed plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 3. The color, design and lighting system for the tower shall be as follows: a. The tower color and architecture shall be compatible with that of the church use on Tax ID 743-701-7543, as acceptable to the Planning Department. b. The tower shall not be lighted. c. The tower shall be designed as a bell tower, with internally mounted antennae. (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 135 feet. (P) (STAFF/CPC) 6. At such time that any communications antenna or equipment ceases to be used for communications purposes for a period 2 11SN0115-NOV17-BOS-RPT exceeding twelve (12) consecutive months, it shall be dismantled and removed. The bell tower structure may remain on the property provided the structure is maintained in a manner so that it does not become an eyesore or fall in to disrepair. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the owner/developer of the communications tower use shall provide surety to the County in the amount, as approved by the Planning Department, required to dismantle and remove the antennas and/or bell tower and associated equipment. An estimate from a communications tower contractor, as acceptable to the Planning Department, shall serve as the basis for the surety amount. (P) GENERAL INFORMATION Location: The request property is located on the north line of Smoketree Drive, west of Courthouse Road and better known as 11100 Smoketree Drive. Tax ID 742-701-Part of 8338. Existing Zoning: R-15 Size: 1.5 acres Existing Land Use: Recreational Adjacent Zoning and Land Use: North - R-15; Vacant South - R-9; Single-family residential East - R-15; Public/semi-public (Church) West - R-15; Single-family residential and recreational 1 ITTT ,TTTF,~ While the proposed tower will not require use of the public utilities, the applicant is cautioned that the tower must not be placed so as to conflict with the existing public utility lines, or their easements, on this site. 3 11SN0115-NOV17-BOS-RPT ENVIRONMENTAL If the construction of any access road and the site itself disturbs more than 2500 square feet, a land disturbance permit must be obtained from the Department of Environmental Engineering. PUBLIC FACILITIES; AND COUNTY TRANSPORTATION This request will have no impact on these facilities. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (VDOT~ This request will have no impact on these facilities. 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. Fire Service: The Courthouse Fire Station, Company Number 20, currently provides fire protection and emergency medical service. This request will have a minimal impact on Fire and EMS. T,ANn TIFF, Comprehensive Plan: The request property lies within the boundaries of the Northern Courthouse Road Community Plan, which suggests the property is appropriate for residential use of 2.5 dwellings/acre or less. The Public Facilities Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, suggests that communications towers should generally be designed to minimize the impact on adjacent properties. Also, the Tower Siting Policy 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. 4 11SN0115-NOV17-BOS-RPT Area Development Trends: Properties to the north and south have been zoned Residential (R-15 and R-9) and are occupied by single-family residences in the Elm Crest and Smoketree subdivisions or remain vacant. Properties to the east and west are zoned R-15 and are occupied by a church use and by the community recreation facility for the Smoketree subdivision. Development Standards: The request property lies within an Emerging Growth District area. Development standards for this area are applicable only to properties zoned office, commercial or industrial. The applicant has agreed to the architectural standards of the Emerging Growth District. (Proffered Condition 4) The height of the tower would not exceed 135 feet (Proffered Condition 5). Access to the tower site would be via an existing driveway to Smoketree Drive. The applicant has proffered access into the tower structure would be secured 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 and/or maintained at such time that it ceases to be used for communications purposes. (Proffered Condition 6) CONCLUSIONS The proposal conforms to the Public Facilities Plan, which suggests designing facilities so as to minimize the impact on adjacent properties. The proposal also conforms to the Tower Siting Po y, which suggests that towers in the vicinity of existing or planned areas of development should possess design features that mask the utilitarian nature of the tower. Given these considerations, approval of this request is recommended. CASE HISTORY Planning Commission Meeting (10/ 19/ 10) The applicant accepted the recommendation. There was opposition present expressing concerns relative to visibility of the tower; impact on area home values; does not belong in a residential area; is not architecturally pleasing; other more appropriate sites available; and tower height. There was also discussion regarding the lack of sufficient notification and a perceived conflict of interest. 5 11SN0115-NOV17-BOS-RPT There was support present regarding architecture and functionality; location; tower being close to a church; improved service; and the need for structures like this in residential areas. The Commission clarified that there was no conflict of interest and that notification was properly handled. They noted that there was support for the tower in this location; that alternative county sites were opposed in the past; the attributes of the tower; and land use issues with other sites. On motion of Mr. Waller, seconded by Mr. Hassen, the Commission recommended approval subj ect to the 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. 6 11SN0115-NOV17-BOS-RPT J 'ER ~ ~ Q = o ? Z ~ m ~~~ ~ i~i i :iii U 1 Q Q ~ ~ ~ • ^ . ~ ~~ ~ . ' I ~ ~ ~ ~ O • j 1 ~ ~ 1 1 ~~ \ ~ ~ ' U N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, Q \ I ~ Z ~ 1~ ~ ~ Q ~ i ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j Q \~ \ ~ ~'' Nfl ~ W ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ f rev W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `, ~ ~ `~ ~ E ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ` i I ' ~ ~ ~ ~_~- ~ o- ~~ ~~ 2 i , ~~ _ ~ ~ % ~ f" _ 0 Q \ ~~ ~~ Z 2 ~ W ~. ! w j ~- z ~ J N ~ +~ ~ w ~ ~ O O LL O ~ ~ , 0 1 ~ J 1 I~EMP ~'~ d NO~SI 0 ~, ~ONDURA P W ti ~ Z ~ a r y o ~? ~ o= Z ~ ~ V ~~` ~~ O N O ^ ~ ~ •~ ~ ^ i ~e.~ ~1SNOIIS - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i L m ~ O ~ Q ! ~, 1 ~~:~ `rte _ `~ ~4 ~,~ ''~ ~' ~; ~ e o ~~ t- I I ~ ~' t Cn - : _ ... V) ~ ~ _ ' - _ ~~ .`= ~~~ - #. i i 1 t ~' ~ ~.~.. ~-- ~ ~ ', `~ 1 ` ~ \ 1111 1 ~ ~ is . ~ 4-;err,-<i-, ;7~ 1 ~ W 1 ~ ~ ~ ~- r . - ~5 ~ ~ ~: _ f- 1= ~ i -:" . 1 ems- j ~ m ~ ,,` _ j _ , f, ~\ f _~' ~~1, :i I /ice' ~ 1 Qi.~r ~ ~ _ %~ ~ I- i ~; __'~ _-'~ --~ ~ --fir ~ t ~~, 1 ~ - ' III II ~ t, ~ " ~ ~~ •-- r- ~ ~ _ 1 _ `~ 1} ~ % I I _ - -~ r I 1 I ~ II ~ L_ ~ ` L - ry~_. 'I ~ _ 1 ~" ~. '^~ 1 .~.~ ~ r- _ ' 1 Q ~ _- ,~ i ~~` //1 ~ _- 1- O 1 --- Z Q !'~ ~ N N ti ~= Z U o a ~~ ~`` ~ . Cellular Phone Towers :: Print Preview P - Page 1 of 4 Qs~~, I~i ~~ ,~'~yl~ C~~ Tr ' I S N U I' S pRINi» CLOSE THE OFFICIAL SPONSOR OF BIRTHDAYS.' • learn About Cancer • What Causes Cancer? • Other Carcinogens • Al Home Cellular Phone Towers Cellular (cell) phones first became widely available in the United States in the 1990s, but their use has increased dramatically since then. The widespread use of cell phones has led to the placement of cell phone towers in many communities. These towers, also called base stations, consist of electronic equipment and antennas that receive and transmit radiofrequency (RF) signals. How do cellular phone towers work? Cell phone base stations may be free standing towers or mounted on existing structures, such as trees, water tanks, or tall buildings. The antennas need to be located high enough so they can adequately cover the area. Base stations usually range in height from 50-200 feet. Cell phones communicate with nearby cell towers mainly through radiofrequency (RF) waves, a form of energy in the electromagnetic spectrum between FM radio waves and microwaves. Like FM radio waves, microwaves, visible light, and heat, they are forms of non-ionizing radiation. This means they cannot cause cancer by directly damaging DNA. RF waves are different from stronger types of radiation such as x-rays, gamma rays, and ultraviolet (UV) light, which can break the chemical bonds in DNA. At very high levels, RF waves can heat up body tissues. (This is the basis for how microwave ovens work.) But the levels of energy used by cell phones and towers are much lower. When a person makes a cell phone call, a signal is sent from the phone's antenna to the nearest base station antenna. The base station responds to this signal by assigning it an available radiofrequency channel. RF waves transfer the voice information to the base station. The voice signals are then sent to a switching center, which transfers the call to its destination. Voice signals are then relayed back and forth during the call. How are people exposed to the energy from cellular phone towers? As people use cell phones to make calls, signals are transmitted back and forth to the base station. The RF waves produced at the base station are given off into the environment, where people can be exposed to them. The energy from a cellular phone tower antenna, like that of other telecommunication antennas, is directed toward the horizon (parallel to the ground), with some downward scatter. Base station antennas use higher power levels than other types of land- mobile antennas, but much lower levels than those from radio and television broadcast stations. The amount of energy decreases rapidly with increasing distance from the antenna. As a result, the level of exposure to radio waves at ground level is very low compared to the level close to the antenna. Public exposure to radio waves from cell phone tower antennas is slight for several reasons. The power levels are relatively low, the antennas are mounted at high above ground level, and the signals are transmitted intermittently, rather than constantly. At ground level near typical cellular base stations, the amount of RF energy is thousands of times less than the limits for safe exposure set by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) and other regulatory authorities. It is very unlikely that a person could be exposed to RF levels in excess of these limits just by being near a cell phone tower. When cellular antennas are mounted on rooftops, it is possible that a person on the roof could be exposed to RF levels greater than those typically encountered on the ground. But even then, exposure levels approaching or exceeding the FCC safety guidelines are only likely to be found very close to and directly in front of the antennas. If this is the case, access to these areas should be limited. http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcinogens/AtHome/cellular-phone-towers 11/17/2010 Cellular Phone Towers :: Print Preview Page 2 of 4 The level of RF energy inside buildings where a base station is mounted is typically much lower than the level outside depending on the construction materials of the building. Wood or cement block reduces the exposure level of RF radiation by a factor of about 10. The energy level behind an antenna is hundreds to thousands of times lower than in front. Therefore, if an antenna is mounted on the side of a building, the exposure level in the room directly behind the wall is typically well below the recommended exposure limits. Do cellular phone towers cause cancer? Some people have expressed concern that living, working, or going to school near a cell phone tower might increase the risk of cancer or other health problems. At this time, there is very little evidence to support this idea. In theory, there are some important points that would argue against cellular phone towers being able to cause cancer. First, the energy level of radiofrequency (RF) waves is relatively low, especially when compared with the types of radiation that are known to increase cancer risk, such as gamma rays, x-rays, and ultraviolet (UV) light. The energy of RF waves given off by cell phone towers is not enough to break chemical bonds in DNA molecules, which is how these stronger forms of radiation may lead to cancer. A second issue has to do with wavelength. RF waves have long wavelengths, which can only be concentrated to about an inch or two in size. This makes it unlikely that the energy from RF waves could be concentrated enough to affect individual cells in the body. Third, even if RF waves were somehow able to affect cells in the body at higher doses, the level of RF waves present at ground level is very low -- well below the recommended limits. Levels of energy from RF waves near cell phone towers are not significantly different than the background levels of RF radiation in urban areas from other sources, such as radio and television broadcast stations. For these reasons, most scientists agree that cell phone antennas or towers are unlikely to cause cancer. Studies in people Very few human studies have focused specifically on cellular phone towers and cancer risk. In the largest study published to date, British researchers compared a group of more than 1,000 families of young children with cancer against a similar group of families of children without cancer. They found no link between a mother's exposure to the towers during pregnancy (based on the distance from the home to the nearest tower and on the amount of energy given off by nearby towers) and the risk of early childhood cancer. The amount of exposure from living near a cell phone tower is typically many times lower than the exposure from using a cell phone. About 30 studies have looked at possible links between cell phone use and tumors in people. Most studies to date have not found a link between cell phone use and the development of tumors, although these studies have had some important limitations. This is an area of active research. For more information, see the document, Cellular Phones. Studies done in the lab Laboratory studies have looked at whether the types of RF waves used in cell phone communication can cause DNA damage. Most of these studies have supported the idea that the RF waves given off by cell phones and towers don't have enough energy to damage DNA directly. Some scientists have reported that the RF waves may produce other effects in human cells (in lab dishes) that might possibly help tumors grow. However, these studies have not been verified. Several studies in rats and mice have looked at whether RF energy might promote the development of tumors caused by other known carcinogens (cancer-causing agents). These studies did not find evidence of tumor promotion. Research in this area continues. What expert agencies say The 3 expert agencies that usually classify cancer-causing exposures (carcinogens) -- the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Toxicology Program (NTP), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) -- have not classified cell phone towers as to their cancer-causing potential. According to the World Health Organization: Considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects. In commenting on cell phone towers near homes or schools, the Federal Communications Commission states: http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcinogens/AtHome/cellular-phone-towers 11 /17/~n 1 n Cellular Phone Towers :: Print Preview Page 3 of 4 Radiofrequency emissions from antennas used for cellular and PCS [personal communications service] transmissions result in exposure levels on the ground that are typically thousands of times below safety limits. These safety limits were adopted by the FCC based on the recommendations of expert organizations and endorsed by agencies of the Federal Government responsible for health and safety. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that such towers could constitute a potential health hazard to nearby residents or students. Do cellular phone towers cause any other health problems? While high levels of RF waves can cause a warming of body tissues, the energy levels on the ground near a cell phone tower are far below the levels needed to cause this effect. Thus far, there is no evidence in published scientific reports that cell phone towers cause any other health problems. Can I limit my exposure? Cell phone towers are not known to cause any health effects. But if you are concerned about possible exposure from a cell phone tower near your home or office, you can ask a government agency or private firm to measure the RF field strength near the tower to ensure that it is within the acceptable range. What should I do if I've been exposed to cellular phone towers? There is no test to measure whether you have been exposed to RF radiation from cellular phone towers. But as noted above, most researchers and regulatory authorities do not believe that cell phone towers pose health risks under ordinary conditions. If you have additional health concerns, please consult your doctor. Additional resources More information from your American Cancer Society The following related information may also be helpful to you. These materials may be viewed on our Web site or ordered from our toll-free number, at 1-800-227-2345. Cellular Phones Known and Probable Human Carcinogens Radiation Exposure and Cancer National organizations and Web sites* In addition to the American Cancer Society, other sources of information and support include: Environmental Protection Agency Home page: www.epa.gov Understanding radiation: www.epa.gov/radiation/understanding-radiation-overview.html Federal Communications Commission RF Safety Program, Office of Engineering and Technology Web site: www.fcc.gov/oeUrfsafety Food and Drug Administration Home page: www.fda.gov Radiation-emitting products: Cell phones: www.fda.gov/Radiation- EmittingProducts/RadiationEmittingProductsandProcedures/HomeBusinessandEntertainment/CeIlPhones/default.htm National Cancer Institute Toll-free number: 1-800-422-6237 (1-800-4-CANCER) http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcinogens/AtHome/cellular-phone-towers ~ ~ ~1 ~/~nl n Cellular Phone Towers :: Print Preview Home page: www.cancer.gov Cellular telephone use and cancer risk: www.cancer.gov/cancertopicslfactsheeURisk/cellphones National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Home page: www.niehs.nih.gov Electric and magnetic fields: www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/emf/index.cfm World Health Organization Electromagnetic fields and public health: base stations and wireless technologies Web site: www.who.inUmediacentrelfactsheets/fs304/en/index.html `Inclusion on this list does not imply endorsement by the American Cancer Society Page 4 of 4 No matter who you are, we can help. Contact us anytime, day or night, for information and support. Call us at 1-800-227-2345 or visit www.cancer.org. References ANSI-C95.1, 1982, American National Standards Institute. American national standard safety levels with respect to human exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fieIds, 300 kHz to 100 Ghz. New York: IEEE. Elliott P, Toledano MB, Bennett J, et al. Mobile phone base stations and early childhood cancers: case-control study. BMJ. 2010;340:c3077. [Epub ahead of print] Federal Communications Commission, Office of Engineering and Technology. Radio Frequency Safety. 2009. Accessed at www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/rf-fags.html on February 22, 2010. IEEE-C95.1, 1991, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Safety levels with respect to human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields, 3 kHz to 300 Ghz. Piscataway, NJ: IEEE. IEEE: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. Human exposure to RF emissions from cellular radio base station antennas; Washington, DC: 1992. ICNIRP: International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Health Issues related to the use of hand-held radiotelephones and base transmitters. Health Physics. 1996;70:587-593. IRPA, 1988, International Radiation Protection Association. Guidelines on limits of exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields. IEEE United States Activities, COMAR, Washington, DC. NCRP, 1986, National Council on Radiation Protection. Biological effects and exposure criteria for radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Report 86, (Bethesda, MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements) pp. 1-382. Rothman KJ, Chung-Kwang C, Morgan R, et al. Assessment of cellular telephone and other radio frequency exposure for epidemiologic research. Epidemiology. 1996;7:291-298. Valberg PA. Radio frequency radiation (RFR): the nature of exposure and carcinogenic potential. Cancer Causes Control. 1997;8:323-332. Wolf R, Wolf D. Increased incidence of cancer near acell-phone transmitter station. Int J Cancer Prevention 2004;1:123-128. World Health Organization (WHO). ElectromagneticfieIds and public health: base stations and wireless technologies. 2006. Accessed at www.who.inUmediacentre/factsheets/fs304/en/index.html on February 23, 2010. Last Medical Review: 06/25/2010 Last Revised: 06/25/2010 http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcino;;ens/AtHome/cellular-nhnnP-tnwerc ~ t ii ~i~n ~ n