Board of Supervisors Meeting Date:

Raymond E. Graham, Cedar Run District Supervisor


January 10, 2008


Staff Lead:


Kimberley Johnson, Zoning Administrator


Community Development



A Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment to Section 11-102 to Allow a Legally Existing Non-Conforming Cell Tower to be Relocated on the Same Lot


Topic Description:

This proposed text amendment would allow an existing cell tower, which does not meet the County’s current requirements for cell towers, to be relocated and rebuilt on the same parcel using the special exception process.  As proposed, the language would require the rebuilt and relocated tower to be made more conforming with current requirements.


Requested Action of the Board of Supervisors:

Conduct a public hearing and consider adoption of the attached Ordinance.


Financial Impact Analysis:

No financial impact analysis has been conducted.


Summary Staff Report:

This proposed text amendment is being initiated to address a specific situation at Vint Hill, where an existing 410 foot high cell tower is proposed to be relocated within the project.  The tower exists as a legal non-conforming use.  Because the tower is located within a key development area, there is interest in relocating it within the property.   Under existing Zoning Ordinance regulations, it could not be moved and rebuilt, but it can remain forever as-is.

The proposed text amendment would allow the tower to be relocated and rebuilt with approval of a special exception, provided that the rebuilt tower is more conforming with current regulations than the existing tower.  There are multiple ways that such a facility could be made more conforming, to include: any decrease in height, more buffer area, more setback from other uses, a design with stealth elements.  Under the proposed language, the Board of Supervisors could approve the relocation provided the applicant proposed at least one of these improvements with the relocated tower. 

The Board of Supervisors initiated consideration of this text amendment on October 11, 2007.  The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the issue on November 29, 2007 and recommended unanimous approval.

The Board also asked that staff look at including a setback requirement from towers for new buildings.  Staff has determined that the appropriate location for such a requirement would be with other setback requirements in Article 2 rather than with the Telecommunications requirements in Article 11.  As no text amendment was advertised for Article 2 when the amendment went to the Planning Commission, staff separated that issue into a different text amendment to go forward to the Planning Commission at their next meeting.


Identify any other Departments, Organizations or Individuals that would be affected by this request:

Department of Economic Development

Back to Agenda...