Albemarle Logo
File #: 18-414    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Report Status: Passed
File created: 7/13/2018 In control: Board of Supervisors
On agenda: 8/1/2018 Final action: 8/1/2018
Title: Appeal of SDP201800027 - Verizon - Frys Spring Tier II (5th Street Station)
Attachments: 1. Att. A - Dissapproval Letter, 2. Att. B - Applicant's Appeal Letter, 3. Att. C - Relevant County Code Section, 4. Att. D - Site Plan, 5. Att. E - Resolution
AGENDA DATE: 8/1/2018

TITLE: Appeal of SDP201800027 - Verizon - Frys Spring Tier II (5th Street Station)

BODY
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Appeal of agent's disapproval of a Tier II Personal Wireless Service Facility.

ITEM TYPE: Regular Action Item

STAFF CONTACT(S): Richardson, Walker, Kamptner, Graham, Fritz, Knuppel

PRESENTER (S): Andrew Knuppel

LEGAL REVIEW: Yes

REVIEWED BY: Jeffrey B. Richardson

BACKGROUND: Staff disapproved the application for a Tier II Personal Wireless Service Facility on Tax Map Parcel 076M1-00-00-00027 (SDP201800027-Verizon-Frys Spring Tier II) on June 21, 2018 (Attachment A), providing notice to the applicant in writing and identifying which requirements were not satisfied. The applicant has appealed this action (Attachment D), challenging the staff's finding that County Code ? 18-5.1.40(b)(6) could not be satisfied under the current proposal.

STRATEGIC PLAN: Thriving Development Areas: Attract quality employment, commercial, and high density residential uses into development areas by providing services and infrastructure that encourage redevelopment and private investment while protecting the quality of neighborhoods.

DISCUSSION: County Code ? 18-5.1.40(b)(6) states in part: "The site shall provide adequate opportunities for screening and the facility shall be sited to minimize its visibility from adjacent parcels and streets, regardless of their distance from the facility. The facility also shall be sited to minimize its visibility from any entrance corridor overlay district... regardless of whether the site is adjacent to the district...".

Administrative practice is to maintain a narrow interpretation of the County Code unless further guidance from the Board is provided. While staff found from the balloon test that the facility would be sited to minimize visibility from adjacent parcels and streets, staff was unable to make the finding that the site provides adequate opportunities for screening. No trees t...

Click here for full text