william and nelson martin, owners, at&t wireless, Applicant

WHEREAS, at&t Wireless has filed a request for special exception, pursuant to Articles 5 and 11 of the Fauquier County Zoning Ordinance, seeking to locate a telecommunications tower on the subject property; and

            WHEREAS, on June 26, 2003 , a public hearing was held by the Planning Commission; and

            WHEREAS, written and oral comments regarding the location of the proposed telecommunications tower were submitted to the Planning Commission; and

            WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended to the Board of Supervisors that SE03-CR-29 be denied for the reasons set forth herein and contained in the record; now, therefore, be it

            RESOLVED by the Fauquier County Board of Supervisors this 21st day of July 2003, That Special Exception SE03-CR-29, at&t wireless, Applicant, be, and is hereby, denied for the following reasons:

1.      The provisions of the Zoning Ordinance for a special exception are not met in this application, the Commission finding that the proposed facility will negatively impact the public health, safety and welfare of residents of Fauquier County and adjoining property owners.

2.      The proposed use will hinder and discourage the appropriate development and use of adjacent land and impair the value of adjacent land in violation of Sections 5-006, 11-101 and 11-102 of the Zoning Ordinance.

3.      The proposed use will be incompatible with existing or planned development in the general area and the Comprehensive Plan.

4.      The proposed use fails to comply with, and is not in conformity with, the applicable standards of Article 5 and Article 11 of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.

5.      The property that is the subject of this special exception request has available to it other existing reasonable permitted, special exception and special permit uses.

6.      Other existing and potential locations are suitable to serve the proposed use.

7.      The proposed use would negatively impact the scenic, historical and cultural resources of the surrounding property and the general area.

8.      That the proposed site, at the elevation proposed, is not necessary in order to afford cellular service in the affected area.

9.      That suitable alternatives to afford cellular coverage in the affected area exist or are feasible.