AGENDA DATE: 9/4/2024
TITLE:
Title
ZTA202300002 Personal Wireless Service Facilities
BODY
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Proposal to amend regulations for Personal Wireless Service Facilities
ITEM TYPE: Regular Action Item
STAFF CONTACT(S): Richardson, Wall, Herrick, Filardo, Fritz
PRESENTER (S): Bill Fritz
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
REVIEWED BY: Jeffrey B. Richardson
BACKGROUND: On July 17, 2024, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing and directed staff to make certain changes to the proposed Personal Wireless Service Facilities ordinance.
STRATEGIC PLAN: Infrastructure & Placemaking - Invest in infrastructure and amenities that create connection, opportunity, and well-being.
DISCUSSION: The Board directed staff to make changes to the proposed ordinance, including:
1) Removing Scenic Highways and Byways as avoidance areas.
2) Removing Historic Areas as avoidance areas. The Board directed staff to include provisions allowing for consideration of impacts to significant historic resources.
3) Adding Biodiversity and Forestal areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan as avoidance areas.
4) Clarifying that addition of antennas to existing structures is permitted with a building permit.
5) Allowing administrative approval of the most appropriate color for a tower and equipment based on the location of each facility.
6) Removing the review of impacts to conservation easements on properties adjacent to towers.
7) Allowing the agent to determine when a tree survey is required.
Staff made the changes requested by the Board for items 1 and 4-7 above. Staff also has prepared alternatives to address Historic Areas and Biodiversity and Forestal Areas (items 2 and 3 above).
Removing Historic Areas as avoidance areas.
The Board directed staff to include provisions allowing for consideration of impacts to significant historic resources. Staff has identified at least two alternatives to address this issue. The ordinance may be amended to define the avoidance area as:
1) “any area within 1,500 feet of a parcel containing a National Historic Landmark.” There are four National Historic Landmarks in Albemarle County. The four landmarks are Shack Mountain, The Rotunda, University of Virginia - Historic District, and Monticello, per the National Register of Historic Places.
2) “any area within 1,500 feet of a parcel listed on the National Register of Historic Places except for those parcels listed as being within only a historic district”. There are approximately 65 sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
Staff recommends the second option: that the ordinance be amended to protect those parcels on the National Register of Historic Places. Staff has quickly reviewed wireless facilities approved in the County and has found that there are approximately four facilities built within 1,500 feet of historic places. Based on this analysis, establishing an avoidance area based on properties on the National Register of Historic Places would not result in an avoidance area that discourages deployment. Staff also notes that individual historic places are scattered somewhat evenly throughout the County whereas the historic districts are concentrated.
Adding Biodiversity and Forestal areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan as avoidance areas.
The biodiversity areas shown in the Biodiversity Action Plan are of such a general nature that they do not allow for the establishment of an avoidance area that is parcel specific. If the Comprehensive Plan or Biodiversity Action Plan were amended to map these areas with more specificity, those resources could be added as an avoidance area in the future. Forest areas are mapped in the Biodiversity Action Plan and can be used for defining avoidance areas. However, that map was based on 2009 landcover. Development activity or timbering may have altered the boundaries of forest areas. This standard may discourage construction of new towers or result in processing special use permit applications that are not necessary.
Staff considered using the criteria in the Biodiversity Action Plan to delineate large forest blocks as a way to determine current forestal areas for protection. In part, the Biodiversity Action Plan identifies large forest blocks as being 100 acres or more of interior forest, which in turn was defined as areas 300 feet or more in distance from any non-forest land cover (i.e. open land, impervious cover, etc.). Approximately 34% of the County is designated as large forest blocks.
A case-by-case determination of large forest blocks is not appropriate as it may encourage timbering operations that would reduce the amount of forest below any threshold established by the County. The large forest blocks are scored in the Biodiversity Plan. The scoring was based on the size of the forest block, connectivity with other forested areas, compactness of the forest block and number of important sites within the block. Blocks scoring 4.1 or higher are largely in ridge areas.
Staff offers four alternatives to address the Board’s desire to include forestal areas as avoidance areas:
1) Use the existing map contained in the Biodiversity Action Plan to designate large forest blocks as an avoidance area (See Map 1 in Attachment A).
2) Use the existing map contained in the Biodiversity Action Plan to designate large forest blocks as avoidance areas based on the score (See Map 2 in Attachment A).
3) Amend the definition of avoidance area to include all areas within the Mountain Protection Areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan (See Figure 9 in Attachment A). The current regulations prevent location on the ridges of the Mountain Protection Areas.
4) Update the Biodiversity Action Plan or Comprehensive Plan to identify areas for protection based on up-to-date information. The zoning ordinance could then be amended to reflect the resources identified in any updated plan.
Staff recommends the third option: that the ordinance be amended to establish the Mountain Protection Areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan as avoidance areas. The ridge line of these areas is already included as an avoidance area. Including the entirety of the Mountain Protection Areas would include most of those forest blocks shown as having the highest conservation value. Staff has quickly reviewed the location of wireless facilities that are in the Mountain Protection Areas. There appear to be approximately six wireless facilities that were approved solely as wireless facilities in the Mountain Protection Areas. Other wireless facilities were approved as part of previously existing tower farms.
BUDGET IMPACT: No budget impacts are anticipated.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the ordinance included as Attachment B. Alternatively, if the Board prefers one of the different alternatives outlined above, staff recommends that the Board adopt the ordinance included as Attachment B, as amended by the Board’s chosen alternative(s) in Attachment C for historic and/or forest resources.
PROPOSED MOTION:
To follow staff’s recommendation:
I move that the Board adopt the ordinance attached to the staff report as Attachment B.
To use alternate standard(s) for historic and/or forest resources:
I move that the Board adopt the ordinance attached to the staff report as Attachment B, as amended by [specify alternative(s)] on Attachment C.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Maps of forest areas and mountain protection areas
Attachment B - Proposed Ordinance for adoption
Attachment C - Ordinance containing alternatives