Planning

NELSON COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION

Present: Chair Philippa Proulx, Commissioners Michael Harman, Linda Russell, Michael Tapager, Emily Hunt, and Supervisor Connie Brennan

Staff Present:  Fred Boger and Wanda Staton

Call to Order:  Chair Proulx called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M. in the Board of Supervisors meeting room, County Courthouse, Lovingston.

Approval of Minutes – April 5, 2011 Work Session Commissoner Tapager made a motion to approve the April 5, 2011 work session minutes.

Motion made by Michael tapager,

Second received by  abstatined Emily and phil

All in favor 3-0

Class I communication tower deferred by applicant

Class iii communication tower

Fred Boger staff report Original application for 150 feet

Description of where the tower will be located w

Applicant said not effect the drainfeild

Have reduced the tower from 150 to 125 possilbe of 4 array antennas on it. Request for fall area of the tower requires 125% of height want to reduce to 64 feet from rear and 95 feet from side property line

One concern is that private air strip. FAA has given their okay that the tower will not affect the take off

Applicant did a very detailed report although a lot of changes.

Two types of fences and not sure which one will be there.

Still a class iii tower

Land area to be disturbed is less than 10000 square feet.

Concerns from adjoining property owners.  If we feel it is appropriate and does not affect the apo

Rescue squad lease agreement from Linda Russell

Connie asked does the applicant get to decide what type of fence.

Fred said the ordinance requires a type of security fence sometimes we waive the landscape around the tower. The landscaping on one side, where you have the neighbors. Also FAA has to give the determination of the height to put on a light. NO lighting issue.

One change going to have a building now and not in the wide open.

Linda said was the rescue sqad use the landing for helidcoper emergeny landing

Dave Larsen white pine land company sister companies

Background. Chose site because looking to iporve they submit pan a network with a search are according to topogray what is going to give them the best location and service. Had to adjust

Rs feel into one of those search areas. Look at public property first. Spoke to fire chief and some others there really wanted to have the income for the resuce squad. Asking for the setbacks within the property lines . able to make it work they way if they get approval. Initaiily submitted at 90 feet need at least 120 feet miniumum. Collocation on those tower for AT&t was 120 feet. Wanted to go a little bit higher get quality receipting as. Rescue squad will want to put some carriers on there later. Not sure what height they will need. Left the application if they wanted to. 150 would allow 3 collocation below.

Balloon test phots simulation are at the tallest height at 150 and not at 120. To clarify on the faa still waiting on them submitted april 29^th and they have not made a determination yet, typically under 200 feet and not require lights or any type of marking.  FAA is a little more expensive what we typically

Should have a determination back from the FAA at anytime. They did get a request from at&t that they want to use a shelter instead had to get detailed drawings in the last minute.

The fence CST wood be happy to do a wood fence 8 feet high.

LR

Shelter 12 x 28. How high 1 story about 9 feet hight cb asked

The drawings you submitted. Need something stating what you are going to do. LR

David said those drawings are typical and goes by what the ordinance requires. This will be a 8 foot wooden fence.

Normally we don’t approve a tower unless we have exactly what you are going to do. LR asked are they going to be painted. David Larsen said he didn’t know.

They will paint them brown. ON page C-1 it doesn’t give

DL are very generic for what they are asking.

She needs to see a picture. 3 antennas

Need to modify each drawing need to know if the antennas are going to be tilted. What collocators invision that at& t requireds.

You need 3 arrays for emergency services.

She wants to see what you are asking for. 120 feet with one array of antennas.

The towers are being designed for At&T. David Larsen

Connie Brennan stated other people could collocate under the one that’s there.

Don’t know who will be collocating under that. Not approving any one but at&t at this time.

Towers can be extended but is costly but if someone comes back they can add with approval from owner. Can it be extended the current way it is

Open public hearing

Mr. Steve Eubank, Attorney in Amherst representing Dennis and  Millie Goss

Mr. Eubank stated that the Goss’s are the adjoining property owners that are to the left of the Gladstone Rescue Squad. They have lived there for 15 years, since 1996. The tower site is 95 feet from their northwest property line. He stated that the Rescue Squad is asking for relief from the Commission. He said it was an extraordinary request because with one vote or two votes this will go to the Board of Supervisors. With just that vote the Goss’s property will be devalued if the tower is approved. He gave Mr. Boger a preliminary report from a licensed appraiser William Milton in Lynchburg and was not sure if the Planning Commission had received copies. The appraiser went to the property looked at the plans of the application and the neighborhood and concludes that putting the tower in this location will reduce the market value of the Goss’s property significantly. This is extraordinary relief if the tower is not granted because of the so many exceptions needed for the tower but also because of the impact it’s going to have on the Goss’s property. He stated that in the Zoning Ordinance, in order to grant the exceptions, certain conditions have to be met. These are the standards for granting exceptions to the standards that were adopted for by right use in the Zoning Ordinance. One of those is that the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would produce undue hardship. He stated that the two parties,  the cell tower builder and the Rescue Squad that wants to rent them the property to put the tower on, that there is no undue hardship to either of those parties if these exceptions are not granted.  He stated that reading through the application it looked like the applicants are saying that one hardship would be is that the Rescue Squad won’t make the money because of being unable to rent this space to cell tower people.   Denying this application is not going to take away from money they are already making it just prevents them from making money off of granting exceptions and devaluing their neighbor’s property.  It doesn’t render the Rescue Squad site useless. The property was not purchased in good faith with the intent to build cell towers. The property will continue to be used what it’s always been used for and that’s the Rescue Squad.  Also in order for the Planning Commission to approve the application, authorizing the variance with exceptions will not be a substantial detriment to adjacent property owner. He stated that after looking at the application, the way the applicant tries to address this is that they have designed this tower to collapse on its self so they do not need all of the setbacks in order to provide for a fall. The substantial detriment to the Goss’s is not the risk of the tower falling on their property. Their property will be devalued if the tower is allowed. Another exception standard requirement is that the character of the district will not be changed by granting the variance. The appraiser, Mr. Milton, that submitted the preliminary report went through the neighborhood and took into account what the neighborhood was like in determining what the impact of this tower would have on the Goss’s property and said it would substantially reduce it.   Typically towers of this height are required to be back in the woods to hide them. There is discussion about using a wood fence or landscape to soften the visual impact but they are talking about a 120 feet tower, but the 8 foot fence is not going to block the tower to hide it from the surrounding area. He stated in terms of undue hardship, after listening to the cell tower representatives they were aware they would need these exceptions early on in the process. One of the items on the application listed was the hardship of having to go and look for other sites and go through the design process again.  He stated they knew they would need two exceptions and they knew there was a residence next door and they could have talked to the Goss’s to give them an indication of where this was headed. There apparently was a lot of discussion between the cell tower builder and the Rescue Squad but no discussion with the Goss’s.  He stated that when granting exceptions the standards of this body has put forth is 125% for by-right and now they need two exceptions to bring it under 100% in both directions. The relative hardship, if any, to the Rescue Squad would be not getting future income from the cell tower. The cell tower company didn’t have to be in a position to ask for any exceptions.  He stated that the  Goss’s have lived there for 15 years and have retired and they would be watching their property value reduced substantially by granting those exceptions and putting a 120 foot tower out in the open, not in the character of the  general neighborhood with no way to visually soften the impact of the  cell tower.  Mr. Eubank asked to Planning Commission to deny the communication tower.

LC Campbell, Captain of Gladstone Rescue Squad

Mr. Campbell stated that he understands the Goss’s situation. The cell tower company approached the Rescue Squad and it seemed like something good for our community. He stated that whether we like it or not it looks like internet, cell phone service is here to stay and it’s only going to get larger. He stated that they hadn’t been getting the money but this was an opportunity to receive some money. Budgets are going south; county and state is cutting. He stated that being in the Rescue Squad for 12 years and it’s a struggle to operate on the money we get.  He stated that they are volunteers and they need the money and they are here to help the community out. He stated when this opportunity was approached it was a great opportunity to get some money. He asked how much is the value of the Goss’s property value going to go down and did they have it appraised? They didn’t give specific figures on how much their property is going to go down. He stated that there are bigger carriers that are going to want to get on board.   He stated that using dial up to communicate is not sufficient. They have to send big packages to Richmond every month and they cannot do that on dial up. They use a satellite company, Hughes Net, to send out these packages. This tower would provide high speed internet for the Rescue Squad through AT& T. He said that the Rescue Squad has asked for a spot on this pole. He stated that it would be giving to the community to have high speed internet.  The State is requiring more of them and they are all volunteers.  They have to have equipment, trucks and fuel. The County does reimburse the Rescue Squad but they have to carry the costs for an entire year. With the economy being unstable this extra check would be easier on the Rescue Squad. Commissioner Russell asked if the Rescue Squad property is used as an emergency landing. Mr. Campbell stated that at this time it was not used as an emergency landing and that the air strip was being used for that.

Dennis Goss, Adjacent Property Owner

Mr. Goss stated that he was a volunteer fire fighter for five years at the Gladstone Fire Department. He understands what volunteering is and he has volunteered in this community. As for the rescue squad and the amount of money they may make from the cell tower is very attractive but feels they are doing that as a poor neighbor to him by taking down the value of his property. The Rescue Squad has operated for years without a cell phone tower and they can still operate without the money from this tower. He understands that it is hard to raise money but hey have operated for years by raising money and from grants from the county. He stated that his wife was the secretary for volunteer fire department for five years. They understand the problems being faced by volunteers but that is no reason for the Rescue Squad to be a poor neighbor and to take down their property value to put up a cell tower which they would have to grant variances for. He stated that he also operates a business out of his home and he also uses Hughes Net and finds it adequate to do the job. He is a software designer, self-employed contractor for a company in Houston.  He stated if the cell tower goes in and his satellite connection is impacted it could cause him to lose his contract with his business. He feels that the impact from the cell tower could impact him beyond the value of his property.

The public hearing was closed.

Chair Proulx asked the applicant, David Larsen, if he would like to address concerns of statements from the public hearing. Mr. David Larsen stated that he wanted to reaffirm what Mr. Campbell had said. This will provide a lot more income for them. Since this tower will be on public property it would benefit the entire community as opposed as to locating the tower on a single land owner where they would be the sole benefit. The reality is you cannot put the tower someplace where it’s not going to be seen or adjacent to another property owner.  He stated that there is nothing out there to show the devaluation or increase of the property value. He stated that he has spoken to land owners that only have a cell phone for service. He stated that realtors have gotten sales when they have cell service on their property. More people are relying on cell phone usage and for emergencies.  Land lines have been lowered 5% each year. He stated that if they were able to put a tower in a location where it didn’t affect an adjacent property owner, it wouldn’t be a need for the tower.  One of the pros and cons with towers is that you have to put them where they can be of use. The issues with the setbacks are that they are asking for one exception which covers all the property lines with the closest one being 64 feet.

Commissioner Russell stated that the Commission have viewed the simulations to see how obvious this tower is from the Goss’s property and put the towers in tall trees and the main road. She stated that it is the Commission’s policy for the taller towers to try and hide these towers as much as possible.   This applicant is 120 feet.  If they could find woods that are at least 90 feet high the impact would be a lot less. She stated that she has not seen any evidence that the applicant has looked at other areas.  The Rescue Squad would not get the rental income but would get the high speed internet. She stated that unless the applicant could prove this is the only place they can get adequate coverage that they need she is not in support of the tower

Supervisor Brennan stated that the county is in the process of putting a backbone down thru the county for high speed internet. She stated that she felt very bad for the Goss’s that there may be a devaluing of their property. She questioned whether or not there was some consideration of sharing some of the revenue from the cell tower with the neighbor or providing free internet service for the neighbor.

Chair Proulx stated that there was not enough information to approve or not to approve the tower and pointed out that other areas need to be looked at. Mr. Larsen stated that this was discussed at the Site plan review meeting. Commissioner Russell stated that as she recalled that it was Mr. Larsen understanding that the County preferred that this tower be put on public property. Mr. Larsen stated that one of the requirements was that they look at public or county property first and they did. It wasn’t the original site acquisition. They had spoken to Mr. Campbell and Mr. Brechlin and they indicated they really wanted it on this property. If it wasn’t public property they would have never considered it because of the size of the property. They pursued this property because it was public property. The Ordinance doesn’t give that much detail to the order of what property to search for first. They try to make public property work first and with the setback issue they were able to make it work if the exception is granted. He stated that they didn’t look at other properties for that reason. Based on the information discussed with the county this property was workable under those circumstances and they didn’t pursue any other properties.

Commissioner Tapager stated that he knows what the Rescue Squad has to go through doing fund raisers to have money to operate. He stated that he understands that it looks like a great solution to the economical situation, on the other hand the Commission has the precedent that they try to go by and if this were a question of public safety infrastructure it would be less of a problem. He stated that the Commission doesn’t know what is going to happen in the next twenty years with communication towers. What the Commission has tried to do as a commission is find out what people want and how to give it to them. What the Commission has tried to do in general is have more towers at a lower level and that has been the guidelines. He stated that whenever the Commission grants special exceptions, the factors that are taken into account is that the tower doesn’t change the character of the neighborhood. He stated that at this point he couldn’t support the tower at this time and that there may be a better place that can still serve the area and that is not in sight.

Chair Proulx stated that the income to property owner is a separate issue and if it was a safety issue it would be different.  Commissioner Russell asked if the Commissioners wanted to take a vote, or if the applicant wanted to look at another site and fill in the blanks on this application. Mr. Larsen stated that it depended on if the application was going to be denied and the reasons for the denial. He said he may be able to fill in the blanks there. He stated that it is impossible to place a tower where no one can see it and the fact that they only had one person opposing the tower was a miracle. He stated that he can’t say if he wants to defer the decision because the tower hasn’t been denied.  If the tower is denied, it will be up to Central States Tower if they want to look for another site. Another location could affect more people and they run into problems every time they want to change tower sites.

Commissioner Russell stated if you put a tower in trees it’s not as much of an impact as a bare 120 foot tower. She asked if the site picked was the only place the tower could be located to get this coverage. Mr. Larsen stated that there is nothing the ordinance that it’s the only place they can put it. Mr. Larsen stated that the Ordinance suggest public property first. Mr. Larsen stated that the reason they picked the spot at the Rescue Squad is because the Ordinance states to look at public property first and that is what they did and there was precedence to show that they could get an exception to the fall line. Commissioner Russell stated that she didn’t have objections to the setbacks it was the issue that the tower would have no trees around it that she was concerned about.

Section 20-7-2b- reference from David Larsen.

Phil Proulx we are not reasonably satisfied.

Page 137 of the ordinance height of the proposed tower fred discusses. Phil does not recommend approval of this tower at that location

Emily does agree.Looking at other towers we approve this one is totally out of character.

Mike tapager not sufficient information can’t consider the application as it is considered now.

Phil Proulx said we are talking about the color and the fence is not the underlying issue of why we would want to deny.

Fred said continue to next meeting. Contine to get the motion correctly phrased

Linda motion in the applicaiotn of white pine land company to install a 125 feet tower in Gladstone would like to defer a motion until a next meeting June 22,

Emily seconded.

Connie abstains. All others in favor.

Public hearing has been completed will have a resolution;

Next planning commission meeting chance for the applicant to speak. Letter ahead of time to show what that proposed motion. When it’s availbiel can send to applicant.

Nash has been resolved. \fre

Fred request to relocated an existing right of way. Bos has to adopt an ordinance

Doesn’t have to go to the pc. g\when it goes to board they want to know if planning commission has looked at it . easy way to do it is adopt an ordinance to

Linda doesn’t understand what’s being vacated.

Massie saunders

Hardees own 19 and 23 a on the tax map. And they own 0.122 acres. They did not realize there was a 30 feet rt/way which is the .059 acres. In process of the working of the lot to the east, thinking they own the whole thing they want to add the .059 acres back to their property.

Will gian rt’wway to existing in the back. No need if the .05 aces if t

No problems with this. Skyline swnnioa inc.

None of thes rt/way are roads. If they are ever developed vdot has to come back and approve. They have already signed off because there are no roads there to begin with. They belived that their propertyes were contiguous

Now they are working with skyline swannonia to fix it. It is only impacting the hardess and the

swannonia.

Fred said no data

Do you have to come back to the pc no but will have to go before the board.

Send Massie an email with date when it will be heard by the BOS.

More changes to come on the subdivision ordinance. Use the last proposal

Rezoning at Vito’s talked to Sharon Ponton today. Has no problem with it.

Ashlee rescue squad has no problems

Linda Russell Make motion to advertise of specific property is along rt. 29 near Vito’s’

Second by mike Harman.

Connie

Has been planning commission

Specific points. Things he put in bold.

Recommendation from staff comments from Fred. Nothing that is new

If there is anything in staff comments that the pc

Staff comments

Phil pc the last two or three so that the public knows what is going on.

Everyone look thru the staff report. Let Connie know

The planning commission has gotten that impression from the board. The process streamlined. The reason the they are so slow the applicant can’t get the information together.

Connie will find out the concession from the board on that.

Phil said we Need a more formal communication from the board of supervisors. We need something from them. General statement from the feeling of the board.

Connie said that is a good idea.

Came up when Allan was here. Linda. Taller towers and fewer towers and more towers

Didn’t’ think there was consensus

Connie said that last month that Phil Payne was looking it over in her report board of liaison report.

Connie asked Fred to check on that with phil.

Mike tapager would like to just pass the

Phil

Motion to adjourn mike tapager

All in favor

9:15

Other Business