|
Location, Zoning and
Current Land Use:
The property is located on
Elmores Lane, a private road which connects to Dumfries Road
(Route 605), north of Warrenton. The parcel is zoned Rural
Agriculture (RA); surrounding properties are also zoned RA.
Special Exception Analysis:
Category 20: Section
11-102.2 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines the following
standards for this Special Exception:
2. Personal
Wireless Facilities
These facilities are allowed
in all zoning district categories by-right, subject to
meeting certain performance criteria related to location,
siting, and design. This application does not meet the
siting standard because the facility is not proposed to be
located on an existing building, telecommunication
structure, or within a silo. The application does not meet
the design standard in that the facility is proposed to be
higher than eighty (80) feet in height. Because these
performance criteria are not met, this application requires
approval of a Special Exception.
11-102.3.a.
Zoning Application Category
New
personal wireless facilities which cannot achieve the
standards in Section 11-102.2 shall require special
exception approval. An application for a Special Exception
must meet one of the four criteria listed in Zoning
Ordinance Section 11-102.3.a. The application meets the
following criteria:
·
Special
Circumstances: A telecommunication tower facility up to 120
feet in height is permissible upon technical demonstration
that environmental and topographical constraints, as well as
available technology used, cannot provide acceptable service
at a lower height. Such a facility needs to be designed to
accommodate collocation; or with the exception of emergency
communication tower facilities, a personal wireless or
telecommunication facility proposed in excess of 120 feet in
height is an application of last resort. The
applicant/carrier must technically justify that: (a) all
existing structures, site and height alternatives have been
exhausted; and (b) the facility proposed is at the minimum
height, based on the best available technology, to adjust to
the identified environmental and topographical constraints,
for the established service carrier, and without the site at
the requested height, service cannot be provided.
The proposed tower is 11
feet above the average tree top height; however, the
applicant contends that this is the minimum height needed to
provide the level of service necessary to correct lacking
coverage areas, and has provided maps which indicate the
level of signal coverage at 97 feet of height and 107 feet
of height. The attached RF Justification indicates that 107’
(measured from the centerline of the antenna: actual height
of the monopole is 110’) is the minimum height suitable for
a tower at this location.
11-102.3.b General
Performance Criteria:
All personal wireless or
telecommunication facilities, whether permitted by right or
permissible with the approval of a special exception or
special permit application, shall be subject to the
standards set forth in this section. Although the applicant
has complied with a portion of this section, the following
standards have not been completely addressed:
·
New
telecommunication facilities greater than 80 feet in height
shall be designed to
accommodate
co-location, complete with the engineering report attesting
to that capacity,
unless the
Applicant is able to certify:
(a)
Doing so would
create an unnecessary visual impact on the surrounding area;
or
(b)
No additional
need is anticipated for any other potential user in the
vicinity; or
(c)
There is some
valid economic, technological or physical justification as
to why collocation is not possible.
The applicant
shall identify the conditions under which future collocation
by other
service
providers is permitted.
The applicant has agreed
to a condition which states that at the time of issuance of
a
Zoning/Building permit, a
qualified engineer shall certify that the tower shall be
constructed to
accommodate additional
carriers, and that no permit shall be issued without such
certification.
·
The height of
new towers shall be limited based on technological need,
type of
facility location,
and/or required permit approval.
Based on a statement
provided by the applicant, the height of this proposed tower
is the
minimum needed to achieve
maximum signal coverage.
11-102.3.c.
Additional Submission Requirements:
In
addition to Section 5-011.II, the following additional
information is required to be submitted by applicants for
towers or monopoles which require special exception or
special permit
approval:
·
Photo imagery
or other visual simulation of the proposed telecommunication
tower or monopole must be shown with the existing
conditions of the site. This simulation shall be provided
from a minimum of three (3) perspectives. The applicant
shall address how the facility can be designed to mitigate
the visual impact on area residents, facilities, and roads.
·
More
specifically, a sight line presentation must be presented.
A sight line shall be drawn from the three closest
residential units included in the vicinity plan to the
highest visible point on the personal wireless facility. If
there are no residential units in the mandatory setback
distance, reference 11-102.2.a (3), the public rights-of-way
will be used.
·
Photographs:
(1) 4 x 6 inch photograph from three perspectives
demonstrating existing conditions, one sight line from each
residential unit; (2) photosimulation from the same three
perspectives with the proposed personal wireless facility
included. If there are no residential units in the project
area, then views shall be from the public rights-of-way.
Photos and sight line drawings have been provided by the
applicant. See Attachment 3.
Staff and Review Agency
Comments:
Staff and Review Agency
Comments are included in Attachment 5.
Planning Commission Action:
On May 28, 2009, the
Planning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend approval of this
Special Exception with the conditions included in the
Resolution.
Ayes: Mr. Alm, Mr. Stone,
Mr. Meadows, Ms. Garreau
Nay: Ms. McCarty
|