Loading...
02SN0166-July24.pdfJuly 24, 2002 BS STAFF'S REQUEST ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 02SN0166 (~vmND~V) Token Tower, L.L.C. Bermuda Magisterial District Offthe eastern terminus of Station Road REQI (AMENDED) Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a 400 foot communications tower in an Agricultural (A) District. A 250 foot exception m the 150 foot height limitation for towers in Agricultural (A) Districts is requested. PROPOgF, D I,AND I JSE: A 400 foot communications tower with accessory equipment is planned. PI,ANNTNGCOMMISSION RECOMMENDATION RECOIVIMEND APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON PAGES 2 THROUGH 4. ,qTAFF R F,,CDMMF. N'D A TION Recommend denial for the following masons: The request is not in compliance with the ' - ' which suggests that communications towers should generally be located away from high visibility areas, such as major traffic corridors, rivers, parks, community recreational facilities and similar uses. The request is not iB compliance with the Onidalinaa for R~,,viaw of .qnh~tantlal Aeeard Determination and/hr Znning APProval for Commnnieatlem Tower 1 ,c~ea*lona which suggest that if a tower is to be located in the vicinity of parks, community recreation areas, high visibility areas and areas of existing or planned Providing a FIRST CHOICE Community Through Excellence in Public Service. residential development, it should be either architecturally incorporated in the design of an existing structure, possess design features that mask the utilitarian ' nature of the tower, or be located as remotely as possible on property that is densely wooded with mature trees. The Jefferson Davi~ Corrldar Plan provides that revitalization of the Corridor is an important key to its livability and vitality. The Plan suggests a key to implement this revitalization is enhancing the appearance of the Corridor. The Plan alsosuggests protection' of the "Gateway" which' conveys first anpressmns' ' to visitors from Chippenham Parkway and 1-95. The construction of an additional tower on the request property will have a negative visual impact on the Corridor and the "Gateway." (NOTE: CONDITIONS MAY BE IMPOSED OR THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY PROFFER CONDITIONS. THE CONDITIONS NOTED WITH "STAFF/CPC" WERE AGREED UPON BY BOTH STAFF AND THE COMMISSION. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "STAFF" ARE RECOMMENDED SOLELY BY STAFF. CONDITIONS WITH ONLY A "CPC" ARE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION.) The property owner (the "Owner") in this zoning case, 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 successors or assigns, proffer that the development of the Property known as Chesterfield County Tax Identification Number 792-685~5662 (the "Property") under consideration will be developed according to the following conditions if, and only if, the request for CUPD with height exceptions is granted. In the event the request is denied or approved with conditions not agreed to by the Owner, the proffers and conditions shall immediately be null and void and have no further force or effect. (cpc) With approval of this CUPD, one tower may be constructed on the Property, which tower shall not exceed a height of four hundred (400) feet above ground level. NOTE: AFTER APPROVAL OF THIS CUPD, THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO SEEK AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITIONAL USE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT CASE NUMBER 958N0239, FURTHER AMENDED BY CASE NUMBER 968N0185 (TI-~ "PINNACLE PROPERTY CUPD") FOR THE ADJACENT PARCEL OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS GPIN 792-685-9419 AND CURRENTLY OWNED BY PINNACLE TOWERS, INC. (THE "PINNACLE PROPERTY"). THE AMENDMENT, IF APPROVED, WILL REMOVE THE RIGHT TO MAINTAIN THE EXISTING FIVE HUNDRED FORTY (S40) FOOT TOWER ON THE PINNACLE PROPERTY AS OF A DATE CERTAIN (THE "EXPIRATION DATE"). CONCURRENT WITH SUCH 2 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS (cpc) (cpc) (c?c) (c?c) (cpc) (cPc) AMENDMENT REQUEST, THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO SEEK APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A FIVE HUNDRED FORTY (540) FOOT TOWER ON THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY UNDER CONSIDERATION IN TI-IIS CUPD. THAT FACT NOTWITHSTANDING, NOTHING HEREIN CONIA1NED SHALL BE DEEMED AS AN APPROVAL OF A FIVE HUNDRED FORTY (540) TALL TOWER ON THE PROPERTY. The floor elevation of any buildings located on the Property shall be a minimum of one-foot above the FEMA flood plain elevation. (EE) 3. There shall be no signs permitted to identify this use. (P) 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 property line to accommodate evergreen plantings having an initial height and spacing to minimize the view of the base of the tower and accessory ground mounted equipment or structures from the adjacent properties. A detailed plan depicting this requirement shall be submitted to the Planning Department for approval in conjunction with final site plan review. (P) The tower and equipment shall be designed and installed so as not to interfere with the Chesterfield County Public Safety Trunked System. At the time of site plan review, the Owner shall submit information as deemed necessary by the Chesterfield County Communications and Electronics staff to determine if an engineering study should be performed to analyze the possibility of radio frequency interference with the County system, based upon tower location and height, and upon the frequencies and effective radiated power generated by tower mounted equipment. Prior to release of a building permit the study, if required, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Chesterfield County Communications and Electronics staff. (CS) 6. The Owner shall be responsible for correcting any frequency problems that affect the Chesterfield County Public Safety Tranked System caused by this use. Such corrections shall be made immediately upon notification by the Chesterfield County Communications and Electronics staff. (CS) 7. The treatment, color and lighting system for the tower shall be as follows: The tower shall be gray or another neutral color, acceptable to the Planning Department. 3 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS (CPC) If required by the FAA, lighting during daylight hours shall be limited to strobe lights with upward reflection and lighting during night time hours shall be limited to soft blinking lights. (P) At such time the tower ceases to be used for communications purposes for a period exceeding twelve (12) consecutive months, the Owner shall dismantle and remove the tower and all associated equipment from the Property. (P) (cpc) 9. No additional fill material shall be placed outside the limits that are currently filled for any of the buildings, the towers, or the guy wires. (EE) Eastern terminus of Station Road. Tax ID 792-685-5662 (Sheet 12). Agricultural (A) with Conditional Use to permit nommetallic mineral and wood products manufacturing; and, with Conditional U~e Planned Development, as amended, to permit a 540 foot telecommunicatiorm tower. 12.5 acres Vacant (Closed construction/demolition/debris landfill) A~acent Zoning~and l,and 1 l~e: North - i-2; Industrial (Falling Creek Wastewater Treatment FaciF~ty) South - A; Public/serrd-public (Falling Creek Ironworks Park East -A with Conditional Use Planned Development and 1-2; A 540 foot telecommunications tower and industrial (Falling .Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant) West - I-2; Industrial 4 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS ............. ] ............ J ............. [ ............... ] : c The proposed use will not necessitate a manned facility; therefore, the use of thc public water and wastewater systems is not required. k'ThlVl~ ON!MI~'.N'T A I. and l~'n~i c,rl: The site is located between Failing Creek and Grindall Creek and completely within the 100 year floodplain. The site was filled many years ago but there should be no further filling (Proffered Condition 8). Any structures associated with tower should be elevated to one (1) foot above the minimum flood plain or flood proofed (Proffered Condition 2). When the site plan is submitted, Environmental Engineering will not ailow removal of existing trees to accommodate instailatlon of guy wires. Along the denuded areas, the Ordinance requires that the conservation area be re-established. This m-vegetation of the conservation area must be approved with the site plan. and Transportation: The proposed tower and associated equipment will have a minimal impact on fire/rescue services and the existing transportation network. County. C. ommunleatlon~: The Zoring 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 stmctare could have on the County's Radio Commuuicatio~s System microwave paths.Th_is determination must be made prior to erection of the proposed communications tower. A preliminary review of this tower proposal has indicated that the facility will not interfere with the County's communications system; however, if this request is approved, a condition should be imposed to insure that the tower is designed and constructed so as not to interfere with the County Communications System (Proffered Condition 5). In addition, once the tower is in operation, if interference occurs, the owner/developer should be required to correct any problems. (Proffered Condition 6) Cn]]nty Airport: A preliminary review of this tower proposal has indicated that, given the approximate location and elevation of the proposed installation, it appears the tower will not adversely affect the Chesterfield County Airport. 5 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS Pm-k'~ ~'nd Recreation: Parks and Recreation has concerns about the development of this tower within thc view shed of an important historic property, Falling Creek Ironworks and the associated Special Purpose Park. According to the 1994 Parks and Recreation Master Plan, "Special Purpose Parks should ideally be located where the park user is away from the adverse conditions normally associated with an urban environment (noise, pollution, uaffie)." Towers looming over Falling Creek Historical Park would limit any illusion of being away from the urban environment and would therefore undermine the quality of the experience for park users. T,AND I I~qF. Lies within the boundaries of the Jefferson Davi~q Corridor Plan: which designates the property for general industrial use. The Plaj3 strongly encourages the mvitalizatior~ of the properties within the Corridor to include improving the physical appearance of the corridor. The P_[aa also designates the intersection of Jefferson Davi~ Highway and Chippenham Parkway as a critical "Gateway" location. The "Gateway" plays an important role in conveying first impressions to visitors from Chippenham Parkway and Interstate 95. The P~hlle l:aeilifi~.~ Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, suggests that communications uses should be located in areas so as to minimize impacts on existing and future areas of development and minimize locations adjacent to planned or existing residential development. Area Development Trend~: The property to the north of the request property is zoned General Industrial and occupied by a public wastewater treatment facility. Property to the east is zoned A with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a 540 foot telecommurficatious tower. Property to the west is zoned I-2 and is occupied by industrial uses and the CSX Railroad. Property to the south is zoned A and is the site of the County's Falling Creek Ironworks Park developed along the banks of FallIng Creek. This portion of Falling Creek has Itistoric significance. Property to the southwest, along the south bank of Falling Creek, has historic landmark designation. (Falling Creek Ironworks, Case 8711P001) On May 22, 1985, the Board of Supervisors approved a Conclifional Use for seven (7) years to permit a landfill on the property (Case 84S190), Fill material was restricted to inert materials, to include rock, dirt, gravel, concrete, asphalt, brick and block, and precluded other types of construction and land clearing debris such as wood, brash, stumps, plastic 6 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS and metal. Further, conditions of the Conditional Use required a survey of the fill area, a plat note stating that the property may not be suitable for construction, and, that no facilities be constructed over the fill area unless soil engineering studies prove the suitability of such construction. In addition, it should be noted that the request property is part of property which was included in an application by Cogentrix of Richmond for Heavy Industrial (I-3) zoning with a Conditional Use to permit an electric power generation plant (Case 90SN0148), On May 23, 1990, the Board of Supervisors denied that request dueto concerns relative to the impact on area land uses. On May 27, 1992, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation by the Planning Commission, approved the rezoning from General Industrial (M-2) to Agricultural (A) with Conditional use to permit non-metallic and wood products manufacturing on the request property and property to the south. (Case 92SN0145) On April 26, 1995, the Board of Supervisors, upon a favorable recommendation by the Plarm/ng Commission, approved a Conditional' Use Planned Development (95SN0239)' to permit a 540 foot communications tower on a property which, at the time, included the request site. This property was subsequently subdivided which excluded the request property. Amendments to this Conditional Use Planned Development were approved by the Board of Supervisors on March 27, 1996, relative to rower lighting and power line easements (Case 96SN0185). These amendments allowed higher intensity lighting than that typically allowed on other tall structural in the Cotmty. The request.property lies within a Post Development Area. The development standards are intended to promote renovation and improvement of areas which have already experianced development. However, became the request property is zoned Agricultural (A), it is not required to meet the development standards for a Post DeveloPment Area. Therefore, should this case be approved, consideration should be given to imposing appropriate development standards. The proposal does not conform to the County's tower siting criteria. While the policy suggests that towers are appropriately located in industrial areas, the guidelines also suggest that towers should be located away from existing or. planned areas of residential development; high visibility areas such as major roads and the James River; and parks, recreational areas and similar facilities and that the view of the towers from these areas should be mimmized. The criteria suggests that wooded areas provide appropriate separation and screening from future residential neighborhoods, however, towers to which these typical criteria apply are proposed at a height less than 200 feet. In this case, the request site lacks sufficient vegetation or topographical features to provide .screening or mitigate views of the proposed 400 foot tower from these identified resources. A more remote location would be appropriate. 7 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS The applicant submitted proffered conditions which address the typical standards required for other towers in the County except that if lighting is required by the FAA, strobe lighting during daylight hours is requested as opposed to medium intensity strobe lights (Proffered Condition 7). As stated above, the existing tower siting criteria typically applies to towers proposed at a height less than 200 feet. These typical standards will not mitigate views of the proposed 400 foot tower. The communications tower located on property to the east of the request property was approved w/th a condition to require compliance with Emerging Growth Area standards relative to architectural treatment of buildings and screening of mechanical equipment. These requirements applied to the equipment building for the above referenced tower, not to the tower or tower-mounted equipment. As previously noted, if this request is to be approved consideration should be given to imposing a similar condition. Consistent with past actions on similar facilities, and to ensure that the tower does not become a maintenance problem or an eyesore, if approved, the tower should be removed at such time that it ceases to be'used for communications pmposas. (Proffered Condition 8) and Rcreenlng: The request property lies in a highly visible area near the intersection of Interstate 95 and Chippenham Parkway, is in close proximity to the James River, and is adjacent to a significant historic resource, Falling Creek Ironworks, and its related public park. The tower siting criteria suggests that towers should be located as'remotely as possible from these areas. C O'N'C..¥ l TRTONR The proposal fails to conform to the Jefferson Davis O, nrridnr Plan, the ~, and the "Guidelines for Zoning Approval of Communications Tower Locations." The Jeff'eman Davla ~'r~rrMe}r Plan suggests that measures should be taken to improve the appearance of the Corridor and protect the appearance of one of the "Gateways." Residential and commercial development exists and is proposed along Jefferson Davis Highway within the view shed of the proposed tower.. The site is approximately 1,500 feet from Jefferson Davis Highway, The.Elan recognizes the importance of enhancing the appearance of the Corridor to the area's livability and vitality. The 540 foot tower located on the property adjacent to the request property is highly visible from commemial and residential areas along Jefferson Davis Highway as well as from the intersection of Jefferson Davis Highway and Chippenham Parkway ("Gateway"). Dwellings in proximity to the site are shown on an attachment. It is important to note that residential structures are placed based on 1994 aerial photographs and may not, therefore, represent all residential structures. An additional tower will have a negative visual impact on the Corridor and one of the "Gateways." - 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS ...... ] ........... ~ r - .............. ] The Public F~ailltla~ Plan indicates that communications towers should be located away from certain identified County resources. The Plan provides that when towers are proposed in the vicinity of these resources, the tower should be architecturally incorporated in the design of an existing structure, such as a church or office building, or possess design features that mask the utilitarian nature of the tower. The masking of a 400 foot communications tower is virtually impossible. The PJau states that towers should generally be located away from existing or planned areas of residential development, other high visibility areas such as major traffic corridors, rivers, villages, schools, parks, community recreational facilities and similar development. The request property is located adjacent to, or in close proximity of, several of these identified resources and is highly visible from the intersection of Interstate 95 and Chippenham Parkway. It is in close proximity to the James River, and is adjacent to a significant historic resource, Falling Creek konworks, and its related public park, as well as near areas of existing residential development. The proposed tower will be located approximately 1,100 feet from both I~terstate 95 and Chippenham Parkway and their junction northeast of the request property. The tower would be highly visible from these roadways as well a~ from the interchange for Pocohontas Parkway under construction. Once complete, this interchange will represent a "Gateway" into the County where tb.e visual appearance should be protected. An additional tower located on the request property w/fl negatively impact this "Gateway." Given these considerations, denial of this request is recommended. CASE HISTORY Applicant (2/7/02): Revised and additional proffers were submitted. Planning Commission Meeting (2/19/02): ..... At ~e request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to May 21, 2002. Staff (2/20/02): '- The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should be submitted no later than March 18, 2002, for consideration at the Commission's May 21, 2002, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $150.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission's public hearing. 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS Applicant (3/1/02): The $150.00 deferral fee was paid. Stuff (4/25/02): To date, no new information has been submitted. Applicant (5/21/02): The applicant amended the request to seek approval of one (1) 400 foot communications tower in lieu of the two (2) communications towers. In addition, revised proffered conditions were submitted. Planning Commission Meeting (5/21/02): At the request of the applicant, the Commission deferred this case to June 18, 2002. Staff(5~22~02): The applicant was advised in writing that any significant new or revised information should be submitted no later than May 28, 2002, for consideration at the Commission's June 18, 2002, public hearing. Also, the applicant was advised that a $250.00 deferral fee must be paid prior to the Commission's public hearing. Staff (5/30/02): The applicant submitted revised proffered conditions, site sketch md elevations. Applicant (6/3/02): The applicant paid the $250.00 deferral fee. Planning Commission Meeting (6/18/02): The applicant accepted the Commission's recomme/~dation, but did not accept staff's recommendation. There was no opposition present. 10 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS ......... i r .............. ~ r Mr. Curmingham stated the Jefferson Davis Association and the Falling Creek Park Committee have no objections to the request. He stated the propose~l tower would not provide any more visual clutter in the area than the existing tower on the adjacent property, the extended eleclrical power structures and the Route 895 interchange. On motion of Mx. Cunningham, seconded by Mr. Stack, the Commission recommended approval and acceptance of the proffered conditions on pages 2 through 4. AYES: Unarfimous. Further, the Commission found this facility to be in Substantial Accord with the Comprehensive Plan. The Cr~cla ~f Virglnla~ as amended, grants the Board authority to "overrule the action of the Commission by a majority vote of the membership thereof." The Board of Supervisors, on Wednesday, July 24, 2002, beginn/ng at 7:00 p.m,, will take under consideration thls request. II 02SN0166-JULY24-BOS ~f ~f j, 02SN0166-3 ~ r'