STAFF REPORT - King William County

Transcription

KING WILLIAM COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
August 20, 2013
Regular Meeting – 7:00PM
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Consideration of Minutes of July 16, 2013 Meeting
4. General Public Comment Period
5. Public Hearing – Conditional Use Permit CUP 03-13, National
Communication Towers, LLC
Request to construct a communications tower
a) Presentation by applicant
b) Public hearing
c) Commission discussion
c) Motion to Recommend Approval or Denial to Board of Supervisors
6. Unfinished Business
7. New Business
8. Adjourn to September 17, 2013 regular meeting
August 20, 2013 PC Agenda
1
MINUTES
KING WILLIAM COUNTY
PLANNING COMMISSION
JULY 16, 2013
At a regular meeting of the Planning Commission, held on the 18th of
June 2013 at 7:00P.M. in the King William County Administration Building, the
meeting was called to order with the following members:
Present:
John Breeden, Vice-Chair
Alvin Carter
Carlyle Clements
David Ford
Tara Roane, Chair
Otto Williams
Staff Present:
Bret Schardein, Community Development Director
Betty Brooks, GIS Technician
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JUNE 18, 2013 MEETING:
Chair Roane asked for a motion for approval of the minutes of the June 18,
2013 meeting. David Ford made a motion, seconded by Carlyle Clements, to
approve the minutes as printed. The vote was unanimous on this motion.
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
Chair Roane opened the Public Comment Period.
There being no one to speak, Chair Roane closed the Public Comment
Period.
CONTINUED FROM APRIL 16, 2013 MEETING – ACQUINTON
CHURCH – CASE Z-01-13
Bret Schardein, Planning Director, briefly reviewed that since the April
meeting, he met with members of Rehoboth Baptist Church and adjacent/nearby
Minutes from 7/16/13 PC meeting
2
property owners to discuss their concerns with having a Historic Preservation
Overly District next to them.
He also heard from the Department of Historic
Resources and they stated that since this was a local zoning matter, they had no
official recommendation but noted that due to the archaeological significance of
the site they did feel that some protection might be warranted. As to questions
that came up at the last meeting about deed restrictions or State protection through
a Historic Preservation easement, a letter was received from the Historical Society
that they did not want to pursue those options along with a resolution from the
King William Historical Society that they would not seek any expansion of the
Historic District beyond their own property.
Chair Roane opened the Public Comment period.
Straughan Robinson, 1260 Acquinton Church Road, expressed concerns
with the wording “overlay and district”. He noted that the Mangohick Church
Historic District has had problems over the years.
He had also suggested deed
restrictions for the property but noted that Mr. Fischer’s letter said the County’s
HPARB would not be able to oversee the property and deed restrictions do not
provide flexibility if changes are necessary. He questioned though if the HPARB
was in place when the church was renovated would it be a metal roof or a slate
roof as the original building. He urged the Planning Commission to forward this
case to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of denial.
Johanna Townsend, 3298 Jack’s Creek Road, stated that by the County’s
own Zoning Ordinance, the boundaries of a Historic Preservation District shall be
drawn to include all lands closely related to and bearing upon the character of the
historic site thus providing a landscape unit affording transitional regulations to
control potentially adverse environmental influences. This is the widely accepted
understanding of the concept of a HP district and you can’t get away from the
inclusion of surrounding properties. The Historic Society has provided a letter of
intent and statement of resolution both having words that they will not now or in
the future pursue expansion at Acquinton which in terms of legal consideration
and enforcement is non-binding and essentially only means that until their Board
changes its mind or the Board changes it would be that way. New members could
have a different interpretation of the intent than their predecessors. She noted that
3
although the Historical Society may have members that may be on the Historic
Preservation Architectural Review Board (HPARB), they are not the same entity.
A non-binding promise of no future expansion was received from the Historical
Society, however, no such promise has been received by the HPARB, the
committee that actually has the legal capacity to direct revisions to extend a HP
District. She also noted that the County Staff representative at the time of a
December 7, 2010 HPARB meeting had stated by interpretation of the Ordinance
adjacent properties would have to be included and that creation of this district
without including adjacent properties may be setting a precedent. As to the
Acquinton Church Historic District, no method of legal documentation or
enforcement that the statements made by the Historic Society would not be
changed or overridden by some other entity at some point in the future has been
presented. In conclusion, she does not support sending this matter forward for
Board approval.
Patrick Kosek, speaking on behalf of Rehoboth Baptist Church, stated that
he also agreed with the previous speakers that there is no need to create a Historic
District on Tax Map Parcels 36-36 and 36-37. He noted that in a letter submitted
by the Historical Society it stated that they had offered, in writing, to sit down
with adjacent landowners but the landowners had not responded. Mr. Kosek
wanted to clarify that neither the Church nor Mr. Simpson has received any
correspondence in reference to that statement as of this meeting. When this issue
was brought up approximately three years ago by the Historical Society, County
Staff, at that time, responded that by interpretation of the Ordinance adjacent
properties would have to be included and might be setting a precedent by creating
a district without adjacent properties and felt that no further discussion would be
needed until the Historical Society no longer owned the property. He expressed
concerns about the hardships that could be placed on Mr. Simpson’s property and
any expansion he might want to do as well expansion at the Church.
In
conclusion, he urged on behalf of the Rehoboth Baptist Church family, that the
Planning Commission forward this request to the Board of Supervisors with a
recommendation of denial.
4
Carl Fischer, 1685 Sweet Hall Road, president of the King William
Historical Society and responsible for the information included on pages 24 and
25 of the packet, had the following comments. The question asked earlier about
the roof of the Church being different if it were in a Historic District and he noted
that it would be up to the HPARB to determine what would be appropriate. In
reference to meeting with adjacent property owners, he did want to remind the
previous speaker that following the last meeting on this case, he stood outside the
door to try to communicate with the members and was told they had just received
correspondence and were not able to respond that quickly. He expressed his
concerns about the continuing feeling that this property is going to be expanded
beyond its boundaries. The Historical Society has signed a document that they do
not want to extend beyond their property and their intent is to preserve the
property. Both the Historical Society and County have said that this request does
nothing to adversely impact adjacent property owners and will have no say on
what is done on adjacent property. In reference to comments by previous Staff
personnel, he felt that Staff misled property owners at that time. That request,
following that situation, was withdrawn. He felt that adjacent property owners
would also benefit from the creation of a Historic District for these parcels
because the HPARB would oversee any changes that might be made. As to the
Society’s willingness to separate the two parcels, he felt that the property across
the road, with its trees, gives historic landscape to the church.
Correspondence received from Mr. Sewell Simpson expressing his
concerns and asking that the Planning Commission forward this request to the
Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of denial will become part of the
minutes and is attached.
Chair Roane closed the Public Comment Period.
John Breeden asked if there were any plans for the store parcel and
possibly just having the Church parcel as the district and Mr. Fischer noted no
plans for the store parcel at this time but it has been registered with the State as an
Archaeological site and their desire is to preserve both parcels. Mr. Breeden
noted that he would like to see the Church preserved as a Historic District and
does not see any adverse impact for the neighbors.
5
Carlyle Clements noted his concerns with what might happen five to ten
years down the road and expressed his opposition to the overlay district. He
agreed that it is a historic site but is opposed to the creation of the district.
David Ford noted that this would afford some protection to surrounding
properties but does see this as a double-edged sword.
Otto Williams stated that deed restrictions on the property seem a better
way to go than the creation of a Historic District.
Alvin Carter noted that the people most affected, the next door neighbors,
are opposed to this and he would be in favor of denial of this request.
John Breeden noted that he read both State and local information and does
not see any adverse impact on adjacent properties and is still in favor of creation
of the District.
Following discussion, Carlyle Clements made a motion, seconded by
David Ford, that the Planning Commission recommend the Board of Supervisors
deny Case Z-01-13, a rezoning request in accordance with Sec. 86-342 of the
King William County Zoning Ordinance to include tax map parcels 36-36 and 3637 into the Historic Preservation Overlay District, as it is not consistent with the
goals or policies of the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance.
The vote was as follows:
John Breeden
Alvin Carter
Carlyle Clements
David Ford
Otto Williams
Tara Roane, Chair
Nay
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
PUBLIC HEARING
AMENDMENTS TO CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS CUP-89-77, CUP-92106 AND CUP-92-107
Bret Schardein, Planning Director, stated that RockTenn is requesting
amendments to the conditions on the above cases.
The revised conditions for CUP-89-77 were briefly reviewed and are as
follows:
1. The leachate pit, if constructed above ground, shall be fenced on the sides
and screened above, to prevent animals from reaching the leachate water.
6
2. A one hundred (100) foot buffer between the Hunt Club property shall be
created and maintained between the various phases and the adjoining Hunt
Club property. As depicted in Drawings Ches 4 and Ches 5 (attached),
which were submitted to the DEQ in 1990 for the Landfill Permit
application, the Hunt Club access road, monitoring wells, storm water
retention basins, and access to those, may be included in the buffer area.
3. Only waste generated by the Owner’s operation of the West Point
containerboard mill shall be placed in the landfill.
4. The undisturbed areas of the Mann Landfill site, as depicted on the
Existing and Proposed Site Plans, prepared by Black & Veatch, Inc., dated
August 10, 1989, shall remain undisturbed.
5. The Owner will provide the County Administrator or staff access, upon
request, to the quality-assured results of all analyses of groundwater from
monitoring wells at the Mann Landfill. The sampling frequency and
parameters analyzed shall be in accordance with current regulations and
the Groundwater Monitoring Program that are part of the Solid Waste
Permits, administered by the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality.
6. The Owner will maintain and enforce for the active life of the Mann
Landfill, a policy of triple rinsing and crushing all drums, barrels, cans or
other containers containing process chemicals which are five gallon size or
larger before they are disposed of in the landfill. The Owner will also
maintain and enforce for the active life of the Mann Landfill its policies
that petroleum-based containers will be emptied and crushed prior to
disposal and that thinners, inks, dyes and solvents containing hazardous or
polluting compounds will not be disposed of in the Mann Landfill.
Mr. Schardein noted that a question had been asked about one of the
previous conditions (which is now being removed) dealing with an independent
consulting firm would be hired by the Company to carry out objective sampling
and testing of the monitoring wells and any neighboring private wells for up to
two years for the project site and nearby area in order to acquire base data about
the water quality in the area. After review of the file, there is documentation in
the file that this was done and a copy also provided to landowners at that time.
The revised conditions for CUP-92-106 were briefly reviewed and are as follows:
1. The building and electronic equipment for controlling and monitoring the
well and their pumps will follow the plans the Owner submitted to the
Board of Supervisors of King William County that are presented on
Drawings 19392.03-DM-3093 and 19392.03-DY-2005-1.
2. The amount of water withdrawn from the wells may not exceed the
amount permitted by the current Groundwater Withdrawal Permit issued
to the Owner by the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
7
(DEQ). All applicable erosion and sediment control and stormwater
management measures will be utilized and followed in the construction of
the buildings and adjacent pipelines.
3. Monitoring reports submitted to the DEQ, as required by the current
groundwater withdrawal permit, will be made available to the County
Administrator and/or staff upon request.
4. The pumping system shall be approved by the DEQ and the Virginia
Department of Health as applicable.
The revised conditions for CUP-92-107 were briefly reviewed and are as follows:
1. The leachate pump station will follow the drawing submitted on Mann
Landfill, in Part B of the Mann Landfill permit application (Black and
Veatch 8-1-91) that pertains to the leachate pumping station.
2. All applicable erosion and sediment control and stormwater management
will be utilized and followed in the construction of the pump station and
the adjacent pipelines.
3. Quarterly reports showing the volume of leachate flowing through the
pump shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator. Any leakages of
leachate shall be immediately reported to the Zoning Administrator. The
owner shall monitor the flow rate of leachate through the pipeline, inspect
it annually and report any leakages to the Zoning Administrator.
Stormwater management of the site, as a condition, was briefly discussed
and noted that this is required by local and State ordinances and would not have to
be listed as a condition.
Chair Roane opened the Public Hearing.
Charles Piersa, one of the closest people adjacent to this property, stated
that he had asked Staff questions and would like those answers as part of the
minutes. He expressed concern with pulling 21 million gallons of water per day
right beside an industrial landfill.
He felt that their wells need to be monitored
and checked. Monitoring wells are being put where there are no homes and
nothing is near his or his neighbor’s property. He is concerned because things are
being done without permits and a lot of these proposed changes will not be for the
good. There needs to be better protection for nearby landowners. He asked if the
County had ever been notified of a pipeline break since there had been one. Who
monitors what goes in the landfill and is a list of what goes in there? Have there
been water quality tests and information provided to the County? He stressed the
need for the County to do a thorough review of this project.
8
John Farnor, 31067 King William Road, noted that he and his wife live
directly across from the landfill. He has concerns because he knows absolutely
nothing about what goes in the landfill and has only seen it by viewing Google
maps. He asked if any Commission members knew what goes in the landfill and
if you don’t, this should not be approved.
Does RockTenn feel that the cost of
sending these reports will hurt their bottom line? Does it cost the County to
receive and review these reports? He received a letter about this request last week
and this is the first he has heard about it and questioned whether someone is
trying to cover up something. He felt that RockTenn should reach out to the
neighbors and perhaps provide a tour to see what goes on at the site along with
County Staff. In conclusion, this request does not seem right to him.
Bonnie Hite, 31472 King William Road, also an adjacent property owner,
stated that this property was in her family prior to her owning it and they were
strongly opposed to the landfill even being approved.
The County made a
decision but has not followed up on any of the conditions of approval. She was
told that reports had been provided to the County but there was no one at the
County that could understand them. She felt that by taking away the ability of the
County to still have these monthly reports, it was taking away the property
owners’ ability to obtain any information because it would be harder to obtain this
type of information from the Department of Environmental Quality. She asked
that the Commission strongly consider not approving that the County no longer
receive these reports. She has concerns, along with adjacent landowners, about
who has been looking out for our interests. If tests were being done on our wells,
why were they only done for two years and she has concerns with even drinking
her well water.
In conclusion, she asked that the Commission carefully review
this request before making any decisions that would allow the landfill and the
company that owns it do as they please.
Carole Hamner, Environmental Manager at RockTenn in West Point,
stated that RockTenn currently owns the landfill and wanted to clarify that they
are not requesting any changes to the way the landfill is operated. Their request is
to amend some of the conditions of the outdated Conditional Use Permits. DEQ
is responsible for regulating the landfill and RockTenn has been in compliance
9
with all DEQ requirements. They send monitoring well analytical results to DEQ
semi-annually from the monitoring wells that are around the landfill. The landfill
has a liner so that waste that goes into it does not percolate into the ground. There
is a collection system for rain water which gets collected and sent to the waste
water treatment plant at the mill. Ms. Hamner was surprised to hear that there are
people who live next to the landfill and know nothing about it. She urged them to
call and ask questions and arrange a tour of the landfill and monitoring wells. In
answer to the question about the type of waste going to the landfill, the majority
of the waste is from the recycling. Cardboard is brought in and pulp is made out
of it and the cardboard has plastic, Styrofoam and metal which goes to the
landfill. Other waste includes ash from the two power boilers. A small amount
(no more than ten trucks/day) of waste water treatment plant residual is sent to the
landfill. She noted that the amount of water being pumped is 5 million gallons
per day and not the 21 million gallons mentioned earlier. They have a water
withdrawal permit issued by DEQ along with a landfill permit issued by DEQ.
DEQ inspects their records annually and on-site inspections are also done at the
landfill.
The landfill is very well monitored, not necessarily by the County because
it is not responsible for it but rather it is the responsibility of the State. RockTenn
is not trying to hide or cover up anything from the community ‘other than the
waste’ and is very proud of the job being done and welcomes visits and comments
and noted that Planning Commission members have toured the site.
Chair Roane closed the Public Hearing.
Discussion followed about the possibility of the plastic items being
recycled rather than going to the landfill and Ms. Hamner stated that this is being
worked on but waiting on some permits. The percentage of plastic going to the
landfill is about 60-70%. The average number of trucks over the last six months
is about three per day.
Ms. Hamner noted that the question was asked about a pipe leak and if
notification was ever received by the County. They did review their information
and there have been two leaks since the landfill has been there and both were
reported to DEQ.
10
Ms. Hamner will review with their lawyers the possibility of testing the
adjacent landowners’ water periodically.
Following discussion, David Ford made a motion, seconded by Carlyle
Clements, that the Planning Commission recommend the Board of Supervisors
approve the proposed amendments to the conditions of Conditional Use Permits
CUP-89-77, CUP-92-106 and CUP-92-107, as they would be consistent with the
goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Before voting on this motion, Commission members discussed whether
the reporting done to DEQ and any feedback should continue to be sent to the
County and felt this should be done. RockTenn also stated that all reports are a
matter of public record and could be obtained by the County or citizens at any
time..
David Ford amended the above motion, seconded by Carlyle Clements, to
include electronic communication to the County and residents of reports.
The vote was as follows:
John Breeden
Alvin Carter
Carlyle Clements
David Ford
Otto Williams
Tara Roane, Chair
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
Aye
Chair Roane suggested that anyone in the audience that had questions of
Ms. Hamner might want to talk with her following the meeting and to contact Mr.
Schardein at the office if you have further questions of Staff.
REVIEW – CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP-03-13
Stephen Gallagher, National Communication Towers (NCT), stated that
this Conditional Use Permit request is to construct a 195’ self-support tower for
wireless communication on Tax Map Parcel 22-10. He noted that Mr. Elliott
Herrington with NCT is also in attendance. National Communication Towers was
founded in 1997 and has constructed 38 operational towers in the State with an
average of three carriers per tower location. NCT does not build a tower without
a signed lease and their facilities are designed to facilitate the deployment of a
communications network not only for wireless phone service but also public
11
safety systems and high speed internet. This 195’ self-support tower with a 4’
lightning rod will not require any lighting by the FAA. The access road for the
site is off of Commins Road and the tower compound will not be visible from any
travel corridors. A brief power point presentation was made giving details of the
site, lease area, construction of the structure, etc. A balloon flight was done at the
site and could not be seen from any location other than one area on Newman
Drive. At this time, Verizon Wireless has signed a letter of intent to be the lead
tenant on the tower and the tower has capability for six carriers which NCT will
market with other carriers. One location on the tower will be made available, at
no cost, to King William County for emergency services.
Brief discussion followed on the selection of this site and Mr. Gallagher
noted that locations have to be outside a certain radius from any historic site and
this site meets the State Preservation Office requirements.
Following discussion, David Ford made a motion, seconded by John
Breeden, that the Planning Commission set the proposed Conditional Use Permit,
CUP-03-13, for public hearing at the Commission’s regular meeting on August
20, 2013. The vote was unanimous on this motion.
UNFINISHED/NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Schardein noted that he met with Commissioner Breeden and
discussed having Commission members that were willing to review the Comp
Plan and redline anything that does not need to be included in future revisions.
The subcommittee will also be meeting to work on the Vision Statement. He
noted that Staff will be interviewing for the E&S position this week and hopes to
have someone on board by August. This will help clear his schedule to work on
the Comp Plan and hopes to have info for review by the September Planning
Commission meeting.
GENERAL COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Otto Williams thanked everyone for coming and if anyone has questions
from tonight’s meeting or on any other items, please feel to call him.
Alvin Carter thanked everyone for coming.
12
Carlyle Clements thanked everyone for coming and encouraged people to
contact Mr. Schardein’s office if you have questions prior to the meetings.
John Breeden thanked everyone for coming and thanked both Mr. Roberts
and Mr. Gallagher for the opportunity to view their respective operations. He also
thanked Staff for the work that you continue to provide to the Planning
Commission.
David Ford thanked everyone for coming and felt that good progress was
made at tonight’s meeting.
Chair Roane thanked everyone for coming out and for their
input/comments which helps the Commission in making knowledgeable decisions
for the County.
ADJOURNMENT
Being no further business, John Breeden made a motion, seconded by Otto
Williams, to adjourn the meeting. Chair Roane adjourned the regular meeting at
8:30 P.M.
Tara Roane
Chair
LaVerne J. Otto
Secretary
13
King William County Planning Commission
P.O. Box 215
King William, VA
RE:
Historic Preservation Overlay District
Parcels 36-36 and 36-37
Members,
I have serious concerns and strongly object to the proposed new County Historic District
on Parcels 36-36 and 36-37 at Acquinton Church and the effects that it will have on my property
being considered tonight, July 16, 2013.
1. It is a blatant attempt to infringe on my Constitutional Rights to Private Property.
2. Will subject my property to have restrictions placed upon it by unelected members of the
Historical Society, many of which do not live in King William County and additionally
neither I or the county will have any say in who the future board members of the
Historical Society Board will be.
3. Is full of misrepresentations:
A. The false statement that the Historical Society has offered in writing to sit down with
adjacent property owners,
B. The district will have no impact on adjoining property owners,
C. Has the potential of indirect benefits to current property owners,
D. Will prohibit salvage yards, automobile service stations, etc. which are currently
prohibited by AC zoning.
E. That the goal of the Historical Society is to preserve their historic integrity when in
fact the property has not been restored to its original state
Further, the Historical Society states that they would not attempt or support expansion of
the district beyond currently owned property of the society when the current Board has
absolutely no control over the actions of future boards.
These concerns plus numerous other issues that have not yet been addressed dictate that this
proposal be rejected entirely by this Planning Commission.
Sincer
E. Sewell Simpson, III
14
Piersa questions and replies from RockTenn
1) Is there any limit to the height the existing or future landfill phases will be built to? Does not
appear to be any local height restrictions within the CUP permits, any DEQ or other regulations,
or plans for how tall you expect the remaining phases to be? I think this may have been asked
during our site tour but I cannot recall. The final elevation of the active landfill (Mann 3) is
indicated in the drawings approved by DEQ, which is approximately 190 ft. above sea level.
2) Have there been any changes to the ground water withdrawal permit to increase the
withdrawal? No. He stated he has observed the ground and water levels dropping over the
years. Regarding ground subsidence: Several years ago subsidence in the area was raised and
the owner of the marsh near the landfill (Pamunkey Game Club) had Dr. Carl Hershner and Kirk
Havens of the Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) come to review the situation. Dr.
Hershner presented to mill personnel and Game Club representatives (Ed DeJarnette and Patrick
McSweeney), that the character of the marsh is subject to change with very slight water level
changes. Dr. Hershner showed trends of sea level rise based on levels recorded at Sewell’s Point
in Norfolk by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) far greater than any
subsidence . The study concluded that there is no evidence to support that the groundwater
wells at the landfill are contributing to the subsidence of the marsh; rather , the changes in the
marsh are related to sea levels. Regarding ground water level subsidence: The mill did an
impact study on the Pamunkey Game Club well in 1992 and found that the landfill wells were not
interfering with the Hunt Club well.
3) If the County no longer receives the monthly reports automatically, who will be reviewing
them? I believe DEQ but want to verify that. DEQ receives the landfill groundwater monitoring
reports quarterly. If the County would like to see those reports, we can present them at any
time on request. We will continue to send the quarterly leachate production rate reports to the
County.
4) Who inspects the water pipeline to ensure there are no leaks along the way to the mill and
water is being lost that way? JSG, who is under contract with the mill to operate the landfill,
does annual inspections of the pipeline. The pipeline is underground with access via
manholes. JSG walks the entire line, checking for erosion or other issues that could affect
it. They also look into each manhole to inspect the valves and pipes.
5) How long will the landfill be monitored for water quality after its closure? For 10 years after
closure, plus the amount of time it takes to be granted by DEQ permanent closure and the end
of post closure care.
6) He stated there was an old pit near his property line, maybe 25 or 30 years ago, one day a long
time ago he noticed it had been filled over and closed. What was buried in there and was it
properly closed off? We are not exactly sure what he is talking about, but it may be the landfill
(Mann 1) that was closed in the 1970’s. That landfill was covered with clay, and closed in
accordance with the regulations at that time. The waste was calcium carbonate (lime)
generated in our recovery process at the mill.
15
7) Are there any monitoring wells along the landfill’s south east and eastern sides? Yes. MW1,
MW8, MW9 are at the SE corner of the landfill. The plan shows MW-1 at the southeast base of
Phase I but other than Staff Gauges does not show any equipment planned in that area. MW1,
MW8, MW9 are at the SE corner of the landfill. He said that is where much of the run off drains
and should be monitored in that location as well. We monitor storm water runoff in accordance
with the landfill Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. There are four settling basins at that
portion of the landfill to protect the area from erosion and sediment runoff. We monitor the
groundwater wells by performing analytical testing quarterly.
16
MEMORANDUM
Review of Conditional Use Permit
CUP 03-13
Planning Commission
August 20, 2013
Processing schedule:
If the Planning Commission makes a recommendation
at their August 20, 2013 meeting, the Board of
Supervisors may conduct their public hearing and act
on the request as early as Monday September 23,
2013.
Application Information:
Applicant:
Owner:
Requested action:
Tax map parcel:
Address:
Voting District
Zoning:
Comp Plan recommendation:
Size:
Existing uses on the site:
Existing structures on site:
National Communication Towers, LLC.
Charles S. Watkins, IV
Conditional use permit to construct a
communications tower.
22-10
no address, located on Commins Road, Aylett VA
3, Aylett
A-C, Agricultural-Conservation
High Density Residential
196 acres
None
Forest, dirt roads
Attachments:
A) Application
B) Recommended conditions
Summary of Request:
Prior to 2013, towers were a use by Special Exception acted on by the Board of Zoning
Appeals. With the removal of the special exception process from the ordinance in 2012,
towers became a use by Conditional Use Permit, subject to review and recommendation by
the Planning Commission and approval by the Board of Supervisors. The applicant is
proposing to construct a 199’ tall telecommunications tower on the above referenced
property. Attached is a set of seven (7) conditions staff would recommend be attached if
the request were to be recommended for approval.
CUP 03-13 Staff Report
17
Public notice:
Legal ads were run in the Tide Water Review on August 7th and 14th 2013 for the Planning
Commission’s public hearing. Notices to adjacent property owners were mailed on August
5th 2013. Additionally the legal ads and Planning Commission materials were posted to the
County’s website and on display in the County Administration building.
Public input:
As of August 8th staff has received no input.
Draft Motions:
To recommend approval:
Mrs. Chair, I move that the Planning Commission recommend the Board of Supervisors
approve Conditional Use Permit CUP 03-13, as it would be consistent with the goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
To recommend denial:
Mrs. Chair, I move that the Planning Commission recommend the Board of Supervisors
deny Conditional Use Permit CUP 03-13, as it would not be consistent with the goals and
policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Bret Schardein
Director of Community Development
CUP 03-13 Staff Report
18
National Communication Towers, L.L.C.
Aylett Tower – Commins Road TM 22-10
Table of Contents
SECTION
DESCRIPTION
1
CUP Application / Application Overview for the Aylett tower
2
Property Tax Card / County Tax and Zoning Maps
3
NCT Lease Aerial
4
Lot Line Overlay
5
List of Adjacent Property Owners
6
Statement of Justification and Impact
7
Service Maps With and Without Gaps
8
General Guidelines Statement
9
NIER Letter (Maximum Permissible Exposure and Interference Letter)
10
Statement of Collocatable Structures
11
Statement of Willingness to Allow Collocation / Collocation Affidavit
12
Tower Design Letter / Tower Engineer’s Design Document
13
Proposed Construction Schedule
14
Additional Information Statement
15
Survey / Site Plan / Fence Detail
16
Verizon Wireless Letter of Intent and Propagation Studies
17
Balloon Flight Visibility Study / Statement / Ad Copy
18
Statement of Visual Impact
CUP 03-13 Application
19
DATE:_________________
KING WILLIAM COUNTY, VIRGINIA
APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1.
Owner:
Name: Charles S. Watkins, IV
Address: 767 Old New Castle Road, Manquin, VA 23106
Phone Number: 804-673-8800
2.
Applicant:
Name: National Communication Towers, LLC
Address: 5413 Patterson Avenue, Suite 101, Richmond, VA 23226
Phone Number: 804-337-8247
3.
Property description:
(a)
Size (acres): 196
Road frontage: 3200'+
(b) Deed recorded in Deed Book
at Page
Plat recorded in Plat Book
at Page
22 Section
Tax Map: ____
(c)
, Parcel 10
Zoning District: A/C
4.
Hours of operation of the planned facility: Unmanned 24 hours a day
5.
Describe water supply plans: N/A
6.
Describe sewage disposal plans: N/A
7.
Attach a statement describing how specific conditions stated in Article X, Sec. 86-451, of
the Zoning Ordinance for the type of project planned will be met.
20
21
NCT
County of King William
Application Overview for Conditional Use Permit
Aylett Tower
1. The proposed communication facility will enhance the quality of life and the safety of the residents
and the general public within the projected service area of the communications facility by
providing wireless services along the Rt. 360 corridor. The facility will also provide the
infrastructure needed to support the equipment of County’s Sheriff’s Department and Emergency
Services should it be needed by these agencies.
2.
The proposed facility will not emit noise or other types of pollution into the environment. Since it
will be unmanned it will not require County Services such as water and sewer. Road use impact is
minable and once constructed the facility will generate from 6 to 8 light vehicular trips into the site
a month. Also, there has been no documented evidence of diminished property values due to
communication facilities or other types of utilities such as power substations, transmission lines,
telephone poles and water tanks.
3.
The proposed facility is located on a 196 acre parcel of land owned by Charles S. Watkins IV. The
proposed communications facility will be located within the AC Zoning District. No variance to the
Zoning Ordinances is being requested for this facility. The surrounding properties vary in size and
the facility should not have an adverse impact on them for future use. The compound of the
facility will be screened from the view of Commins Road and will not be visible from Rt. 360.
4.
The Compound area of the proposed facility will be screened from the view of adjacent parcels by
the existing trees growing on the parcel. The buildings and the equipment in the compound will
be of a neutral color and the Self Support Tower will have a non-glossy galvanized finish. The
proposed Self Support Tower will not be lit, also no signage or advertisement placed on the tower.
There is no verifiable evidence Communication Towers, Substations, Transmission Lines and
Towers, Telephone Poles and Water Tanks contributing to the devaluation of properties these
structures are located on or adjacent to.
22
NCT
5.
Power and Telco exist along Commins Road will be installed to the site along the proposed access
road. Utilities will tie into the existing lines and will be buried underground to the site. The site and
the access road will be designed by a Certified Engineer licensed to do business in the State of
Virginia and will comply with all Local, State and Federal regulations and building codes.
6.
The ingress/egress of the site will utilize an existing entrance into the parcel off of Commins Road.
The entrance will comply with the most current VDOT standards. Once the site is constructed an
estimated 6 to 8 trips a month by light duty vehicles is anticipated into the site.
7.
Adequate parking and turn-around space will be provided at the proposed facility. There will be no
odor, noise, glare or economic deprivation associated with the facility or imposed on adjoining
properties.
8.
The proposed facility will not generate any refuse; nor will any refuse or toxic substances be
introduced into the site.
9.
The compound, fence and support structures of the proposed facility will be buffered from the
view of existing roadways and by existing vegetation and tree growth on the parcel.
10.
No signs or advertising will be placed on the tower; however an 18” X 24” site identification sign
will be placed on the compound fence. The tower will not be lit and no security type lighting will
be installed at the site.
11.
All setback requirements will be met or exceeded and the tower will be designed to collapse
within the lot lines of the parcel. The proposed facility consists of a Leased Area of 125’ X 125’ with
a 30’ Ingress/Egress, Utility Easement.
23
NCT
12.
The King William County Zoning Ordinances permits towers and communication facilities in AC
districts by a Conditional Use Permit. Also, the lack of Cellular Communications in the area further
solidifies the need for the proposed facility and its compatibility with adjacent and other
properties within the zoning district.
13.
The site is located within the lot lines of a 196 acre parcel of land zoned AC. The facility will be
constructed on the east side of Commins road, approximately 2,800’ west of Rt. 360.
14.
National Communication Towers, LLC will comply with all applicable regulations of the zoning
district and any Conditions of Approval imposed by the Board of Supervisors of King William
County.
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
24
KING WILLIAM COUNTY
Last Updated November 2012
Map information is believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. Any errors or omissions should be reported to the Commissioner of Revenue's
office. In no event will King William County be liable for any damages or other pecuniary loss that may arise from the use of this data.
15
15-5A
21-9-3
21-9-4
219-5
219-6
15-5B
1136
!
(
15-6
608
!
(
600
!
(
56B
56
56A
57
58
52C
52B
51
608
!
(
52
52A
(21-95)
5
48
3
!
(
10F
35
10N
21-82
4
2
70
69D
69A
71
5
73
72
34J
4
75
34K
655
76
87A
75A
87
94
92
17A
90
1
20
Aylett
10
Farms
(6
9
8
32
360
!
(
16
1
1
2
43 32
CA
5 6 54 3 1
1
2
2
5
4 3 21 1 4
3
6 5 45 3 2 1
6 5 4 23
1 1
2
6
54 2
6 4 3 35 4
5
6
6 6 5
5 4 4
3
2 2 31
1
5
2
46
47
48
25
32 14 31 2
56 4 5
6
33
50
31
20
19
1
5 342 2 1
6 64
53
15
647
!
(
53
54
L
20
O
S1
42 1
6 53 2 1
4
6 53
20
W
1150
!
(
2
20G
12
(
(
!
(
!
(
360
21-69
23A
1
50
26
45
29A
INSERT
22C
32
34
44
20
19
31
!
(
40
18
B2
E1
D1
17
16
21
22
39
38
14
13
1206
!
(
C1
12
11
B1
30G
30E
A2
1
5
10
30C
4G
10
104F
103
9
8
30D
30B
1
2
3
4
30F
10
A6
A3
104A
104D
7
!
(
30H
WATER
2
6
647
INSERT
22B
5
8
(
9
8
(
106A
A5
106C
(22-106A)
106
(1
109
26
600
!
(
109A
Rosespout
109B
G2
1
3
Fairfield
10
(
110
Acres
4
H
110A
110B
2
111A
111B
8
29-67C
29-67A
29-68
V
RI
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
´
ACQUINTON DISTRICT
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57
58 59 60 61 62 63 64
65 66 67 68 69 70
SECTION 22
ER
7
29-67E
NI
3
6
29-67B
114
115
PO
2
5
115A
TA
1
29
29-53
116A
T
MA
29-1
111
108
116
4
6
7
23
G1
Walnut
4
B3
25
37
Estates
(7
15
W
107
30
29
31B
A4
36
41
C3
22
3
113
Black
611
F1
24
35
43
42
C2
11
12
18
17
33
46
D3
D2
47
25
E2
19
A1
16
104B
31A
(22-1-D1)
9
13
48
360
F2
F3
8
3
2
14
15
30A
!
(
27
56
10
49
30
55
A
1150
23
Mill
20
POND
104C
(22-7-21)
6 4523
1
!
(
AYLETT
Aylett
21
102
101
3
(
(
!
(
100A
3
1
!
(
(22-100)
(9 4
2
31C
42 41
44 43
40 PS
45
CA
36 37
360
39
35
3
3 46
38
4
49
1
20J
OS 3 4 56
32
31
52 51
1 2
23 22
30
29 24
28
6
20I
3 5 24 6
21
27 26
1
4 6 5 35 46
3
2
2
1
20D
16 17 18
6 1 5 6
3 4
11 CA6 321 45 5 162
13
20C
4
3
4
12
14
2 35 1 2
19 (22-20A)
7
1
11
6
20B
2
8
5
134
9 10
1151
2 5 6
4 3
1 34
20A
19A
2 1
5
6
20H
21 21A
1150
CA
20
OS
51A 52
B
3
20
OS
1
2
100B
5
AP
17H
600
!
(
2
TT
17G
23
89B
MA
17F
17J
100
R
!
(
33
1
99
91
17D
17E
1217
89A
VE
!
(
98
93
RI
21
17C
1217
INSERT
22A
97
95
ONI
!
(
83
(22-76)
17B
1216
82
78B1
96
14
17B
81
85
86
34F
!
(
80
78A
78B
88
INSERT
21A-2
79
78C
78
!
(
34D
78D
78E
78F
73
A
34
23
B
RIVER
INSERT
22D
74
7
34H
3
2
1
6
(3 6
0
12
1
69C
4
(22-34) 34C
34E
12B
3
3
36
34B
10D
10
10H J
600
2
(2
69
69B
!
(
40D
1
37
34A
10C
10
5
(
(
40A
39A 39B
67
68
TAP
5
34G
11
7
65
40C
38
360
360
35A
10B
8A
39C
!
(
!
(
40F
39
10K
10A
606
8B
6
10L
10M
8
8C
40E
63
64
MATTAPONI
66
MAT
21-97D
10E
10G
62
E
7
21-97A
4
360
!
(
41
49
Aylett
6
46
360
!
(
10
4
21-98
1
45
46
47 A
59
60
59A
55
53
21-95
40B
21-9-10
21-9-9
21-9-8
21-9-7
15-5
600
300
0
600
1,200
Feet
1,800
LEGEND
County Boundary
Railroads
Routes
Roads / Alleys
Lots
Sections / Blocks
Streams
Water Bodies
25
26
27
NCT
Statement of Justification and Impact
Conditional Use Permit Application
National Communication Towers, LLC
Aylett Communications Tower,
King William, Virginia
National Communication Towers L.C. (“National”) as lessee, hereby applies for a Conditional Use Permit to
allow a telecommunications facility and accessory structures on leased land. The leased land is located on
property known by Tax Map Parcel 22-10. The Lease area is located approximately 900’ east of Commins
Road, approximately 2,800 feet west of Rt. 360. According to the tax records of King William County it is
owned by Charles S. Watkins IV, 767 Old Newcastle Road, Manquin, VA 23106.
National is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow a self support Tower, measuring approximately
195’ in height with a 4’ lightning rod, to be located on a leased area, measuring 125’ x 125’. The facility
will be designed to allow multiple collocations on the tower and within a secure fenced compound area.
The exact number and types of future users is difficult to predict, however the tower will be designed to
accommodate a mix of carrier types. The design mix will include: 6 or more users of panel antennas
(typically 15 panels, 12” wide x 96” high, per user). Likewise, the compound area is designed to
accommodate a mix of shelter types and sizes as denoted on the drawings submitted with this
application.
The 196 acre parcel is zoned AC, according to the King William County zoning ordinance,
telecommunication facilities are permitted on AC zoned properties, with Conditional Use Permits. Proper
setback distances have been observed and are denoted on the enclosed plans.
National develops telecommunication facilities for collocations by cellular, PCS, paging and other wireless
services which rely upon a network of elevated platforms in areas where the carriers have gaps in signal
coverage, or “holes.” Such a hole exists along the Route 360 corridor. Supported by propagation studies,
National believes communications facility located on the subject parcel will enable carriers to fill this gap,
while minimizing the effect on surrounding property owners. The 145’ Radiation Center on the tower and
space in the compound will be reserved for King William County’s Emergency antennas rent free.
28
NCT
The FCC has authorized several carriers to provide wireless services in this part of King William County.
Those carriers include: Sprint, AT&T, Nextel, Verizon Wireless U.S. Cellular and Ntelos.
The facility will be in continuous operation but will produce no interference with other types of
communications including: radio, television, cable TV, garage door openers or other consumer electronic
equipment. No offices will be constructed on the site, so neither sewer nor water facilities will be
required. The facility will produce no refuse, noise, vibration, dust, glare, odors or fumes. Neither
National nor any of the tower users will introduce hazardous or toxic substances to the site. After
completion of construction, the only traffic associated with the site will be short visits by technicians on a
monthly basis to test or replace equipment components. In most instances towers below 200’are not
required by the FAA to be lit.
The facility will provide a vital public safety service to this part of the County in two important ways. First,
the County may incorporate the tower into its communication network utilized by law enforcement and
fire and rescue personnel. Second, this new facility will enable wireless services to be extended to this
part of the County, enabling the public at large to utilize those services for important medical or life-safety
calls.
The proposed use conforms to the provisions of all applicable ordinances, regulations, adopted standards
and conditions. National is not seeking any wavier or variance for the proposed use at this time. National
respectfully requests the approval of this Conditional Use Permit application.
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
29
30
31
NCT
FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS
The tower will be designed to meet or exceed all current standard and regulations set forth by all Local,
State and Federal agencies including the FAA and FCC. The emissions will not exceed the allowable
standards set by the FCC.
BUILDING CODES
The current standard is Revision “F”, the tower will be designed under revision “G” which is a more
stringent structural design. The tower will also be designed and maintained in compliance with all Local,
State, and Federal regulations and building codes. The tower is designed for a 90 mph basic wind in
accordance with the TIA/EIA-222-G standard and is also designed for a 30 mph basic wind with 0.75 in.
ice. Deflections are based upon a 60 mph wind. The tower is designed for Exposure C to the TIA-222-G
standard. The tower structure is designed according to Structure Class II, Topographic Category 1 and a
crest height of 0' per the TIA-222-G Standard. All construction practices will be in compliance with the
current OSHA Handbook. The tower will be designed to collapse within the lot lines of the parcel.
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
32
33
34
STATEMENT OF COLLOCATABLE STRUCTURES
National Communication Towers, LLC has verified there are no other suitable structures within a 2
mile radius capable of meeting the service coverage objectives. The closest tower is 2.5 miles to the
south and will not bridge the coverage gap of 5.4 miles to the ATC Tower to the northeast.
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
35
STATEMENT OF WILLINGNESS TO ALLOW COLLOCATION
National Communication Towers, LLC is a developer of communication facilities and is licensed to
do business in the state of Virginia. An extensive amount of research is dedicated to each location
to determine if there is a need for a communications facility in a given area. Once a need is
established and a site is identified, NCT will start the design process for the facility. The facility will
be designed for the maximum potential of collocations including both phone and data
transmissions and will accommodate a minimum of six collocations. NCT will actively market and
solicit collocations within the facility to all users that are licensed to broadcast cellular phone
transmissions and both licensed and unlicensed data transmissions. Should an additional tower be
needed the site will be designed to accommodate the construction of an additional structure.
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
36
COLLOCATION AFFIDAVIT
This Affidavit is to confirm the Ground Lease to be executed by and between National
Communication Towers, LLC and Charles S. Watkins IV does not in any way prohibit or impede the
collocation of users on the tower provided their equipment is within the design parameters of the
tower.
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
37
May 17, 2013
Aylett
King William Co., VA
37-46-33.84N -77-7-16.5W
National Communication Towers (NCT) is requesting a quote for a self support lattice tower with
the following specifications:
Height: 195’ Self Support Tower plus 4’ lightning rod
Loading:
Rad Ctr
195
185
175
165
155
145
Panel Antenna
96”x12”x12”
96”x12”x12”
72”x12”x8”
72”x12”x8”
72”x12”x8”
72”x12”x8”
Qty
18
18
15
15
12
12
Coax
1-5/8”
1-5/8”
1-5/8”
1-5/8”
1-5/8”
1-5/8”
Qty
18
18
15
15
12
12
Mounts
Sabre Ultra Boom
Sabre Ultra Boom
Sabre Ultra Boom
Sabre Ultra Boom
Sabre Ultra Boom
Sabre Ultra Boom
Safety Climb
Step Bolts
Designed to collapse within 125’ X 125’ lease area
Revision G for structural analysis, King William County, VA
Certified foundation design, tower drawings and engineer’s letter to be provided
Delivery to: Commins Road, Aylett, VA 23009
Should you have any questions please call feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Stephen Gallagher
Vice President of Construction
National Communications Towers, LLC
38
39
PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Pending Approval by the B.O.S.
Months 1-3: Complete tenant lease
Months 4-10: Complete Due Diligence items
Months 11-14: Site Plan Approval and Building Permit
Months 15- 16: Grade site, dig foundation, install ground ring, pour mud matt, lay out tower
centroid, place rebar, tie foundation steel, set anchor bolts, Install grounding, verify steel and
anchor bolts, pour foundation, backfill foundation, finish grade site, complete grounding, install
compound stone and set H-frame
Month 17: Stack tower, install security fence
Month 18: Tenant to start collocation
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
40
NCT
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION STATEMENT
In order to ensure compliance with all King William County Zoning Regulations, National Communication
Towers, LLC will provide any other information or documentation requested by County Officials with
regards to this Conditional Use Request.
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
May 30th, 2013 Mr. Elliott M. Harrigan National Communication Towers, LLC 5318 Patterson Ave, Suite C Richmond, VA 23226 RE: Letter of Intent Aylett Tower Site King William County, VA Mr Harrigan – As previously discussed Verizon Wireless (“Verizon”) is expanding its wireless telecommunications network in Virginia. Verizon engineers have reviewed and approved your proposed tower site at Aylett, King William County, Virginia. As you know we are in final negotiations on the lease. Once completed, we hope to attach to the proposed tower to be located: Coordinates: N37 46’ 33.84” / W77 07’ 16.5” Best, Sean M. Bamman Real Estate Consultant – Verizon Wireless Please be advised that this is not contractually binding on the parties. This letter is only an expression of the basic terms and conditions to be incorporated in a formal written agreement. The parties shall not be contractually bound unless and until they execute a formal lease, which must be in the form and content satisfactory to each party in its sole discretion. Neither party may rely on this letter as creating any legal obligation of any kind. CUP 03-13 Application
52
Aerial Map of Photo LocaƟons
53
BALLOON
BEHIND
TREE
CANOPY
Location: 223 Newman Drive. Looking North ~0.23 Miles (1,200 Feet)
PHOTO 1: BALLOON FLIGHT
NCT
54
BALLOON FLIGHT CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
Ayle Balloon Flight
June 20, 2013
The balloon was launched at 7:47AM
Mostly clear, few clouds, 65F, wind 0‐3mph
County representa ves Bret Schardein, Herb White, John Breeden and Tara
Roan arrived onside at 8:53AM.
Bret Schardein, Herb White, John Breeden and Tara Roan examined the
travel corridors around the site with NCT representa ve Stephen Gallagher.
The balloon was not visible at any loca on except one loca on on Newman
road where it was barely visible behind the tree canopy and one spot at the
entrance to the site behind the tree canopy.
Chip Watkins arrived onsite at 10:30AM
Carlyle Clements arrived onsite at 10:57AM .
Signed:
______________________________
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construc on
The balloon was taken down at 12PM, 75F clear, few clouds, winds 0‐8MPH.
Date:
PUBLIC NOTICE
BALLOON FLIGHT FOR
PROPOSED
TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER
KING WILLIAM COUNTY, VA
NationalCommunicationTowers,LLC
ofRichmond,VAwillbeconductinga
balloon lightforaproposed195’tall
wirelesscommunicationstowertobe
locatedonparcel22‐10adjoiningRt.
606,ComminsRoad,KingWilliam
County,VA.Theballoon lightwill
takeplaceonMonday,June17,2013
from8:00a.m.to12:00p.m.approxi‐
mately1,000feeteastoftheentrance
offofComminsRoad.Theentranceto
theparcelislocatedapproximately
1.15milestothenorthoftheinter‐
sectionofRt.606andRt.611.Inter‐
estedpartiesmaystopbyandask
questionsattheirconvenience.
Shouldinclementweatheroccur,the
alternativedatefor lyingtheballoon
willbeTuesday,June18,2013from
8:00a.m.to12:00p.m.However,
shouldinclementweatheroccuron
thisalternativedate,thesecondalter‐
nativedatefor lyingtheballoonwill
beThursday,June20,2013from8:00
a.m.to12:00p.m.
55
NCT
STATEMENT OF VISUAL IMPACT
The proposed telecommunications facility will be located approximately 2,900 feet northwest of Rt. 360,
approximately 980 feet southeast of Commins Road, and approximately 1,150’ northeast of Newman
Drive. The portion of the parcel abutting Commins Road is bounded by a tree buffer and the tower site
lies approximately 980’ to the southeast making the visibility of the fenced compound unobservable from
the road. Rt. 360 is 2,900’ to the southeast and the existing tree cover will make the compound
unobservable from that corridor, also the tower will not be seen from that corridor. The fenced
compound and proposed equipment buildings will not be visible from the roadways or existing homes
located on the adjoining parcels. It is our opinion screening plants will serve no purpose in screening the
facility as it will not be visible from exiting roadways and homes due to topography and the existing tree
cover of the adjoining parcels.
Signed copy on file
Signed:
______________________________
STEPHEN GALLAGHER
VP, Construction
Date:
______________________________
56
Conditions for CUP 03-13
1) All ground equipment including but not limited to fencing, pads, buildings or electrical equipment
shall be fully screened from view from adjacent properties, either by existing trees or vegetation, or by
new plantings.
2) The tower shall be limited to a maximum total height of 199 feet including any lightning rods,
antennas or accessory equipment.
3) If the tower is abandoned or unused for communication purposes for a period exceeding two years,
the tower and any accessory structures shall be removed at the County’s request from the property
within 90 days at the cost of the owner.
4) NCT LLC shall provide on a reserved basis and at no cost or expense to the County or its political
subdivisions (collectively, the “County”) space on the tower to the County of not less than 10 feet in
radial direction and at a height of at least 80 feet above ground level for the installation by the County,
at the County’s sole cost and expense, for communications equipment and antennas. NCT shall also
make space available for ground equipment supporting such County tower use. NCT shall be able to
install its own or third-party antennas and/or equipment located on the same height and/or platform
pass through County space, perform construction and/or take other action as may be necessary or
incidental to NCT’s ownership or operation of the tower. Such County use shall be consistent with
Federal Communications Commission licenses for wireless telecommunications service and be operated
in a lawful and proper manner, in accordance with good engineering practices and be compliant with all
applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, relating to such operation and use.
5) This conditional use permit shall allow for construction work commenced on or before (insert date 36
months from the effective date of the conditional use permit), and any such activities which expand the
height or the footprint of the tower commenced thereafter shall require a new or amended conditional
use permit.
6) This permit shall not become effective until a removal bond in the amount of $25,000 has been
approved by the County Attorney, executed, and filed with the Zoning Administrator.
7) The radius width shall be limited to three (3) feet for any dish placed on the tower. Antennae placed
on the tower shall not extend beyond four (4) feet above the one hundred ninety-five (195) foot tower
height.
CUP 03-13 conditions
57

STAFF REPORT - King William County

Transcription

Similar documents

30 St Mary Axe - Foster + Partners

updates - Favelle Favco

WELCOME TO CAESARS PALACE

Map 8c Area from which Beckford`s Tower is Visible (Landmark 2)

Your Director`s Benefits

Brochure - Monkey Tower

SMART FUN in MIRABILANDIA ( )

The Board of Directors of Qatar Fuel (WOQOD) is pleased to invite

Save the tower!

Slim, flexible and safe