The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About04-10 Statement of JustificationLrnn hocrner-- j {l)_;; i-Oot) S'rtc_�cyur.erhon <rndl'rotc�ctDc•relnp�ncnt Consultant for Shentel June 17, 2010 Frederick County Department of Planning and Development 107 North Kent Street, Suite 202 Winchester, VA 22601 RE- Letter of Justification - Conditional Use Permit Application - Shenandoah Mobile Company (Shentel) — Site 532 — North Armel — Tax Map 76 ((A)) Parcel 54, Owned by Timber Ridge Ministries Inc Dear Mr. Cheran: Shenandoah Mobile Company (Shentel) is proposing to build a 95 foot monopole structure on the property located at 2835 Front Royal Pike. The proposed tower is designed to provide coverage in the area along US Highway 522. This site will also provide capacity to the existing and upcoming residential areas in the northeast part of Stephens City. The additional coverage and capacity will benefit the business establishments near Highway 522 and Tasker Road (Home Depot Distribution Center, Comcast Digital Cable, Storage Solutions), small commercial businesses along Warrior Drive and Tasker Road, Armel Elementary School and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Office on Marcel Drive. The proposed site is located in an area that has had complaints of degraded service and lack of or loss of signal strength. The search ring objective and vicinity map are attached as Attachment 1. 1 have attached a map and site detail sheet identifying the existing towers and structures on which Shentel currently has operational equipment installed. The site detail sheet starts with the site located at the top of the map and moves around clockwise. This attachment is provided as Attachment 2. As you can see from the provided information, Shentel has coverage from all of these sites and the proposed site will correct the problems that are being experienced in the area. CUP Application Site 532 Page 2 June 17, 2010 Opportunities for co -location were reviewed in the approximate one-half to three quarter mile area and no tall existing structures were found that would provide the necessary platform. Evaluation was conducted on the tower located at the Kernstown exit on 1-81 and owned by Washington Gas_ This tower was determined to be in close proximity to an existing site (022) located on Soldiers Rest Lane and to far away from the area to meet the expanded coverage objective. The Federal Aviation Administration was contacted regarding the potential use of their recently approved tower on Marcel Drive. This site is not available as it is conditioned as being available for "Public Use" providers_ I have attached as Attachment 3, the email correspondence with the FAA as well as the portion of the Board of Supervisors regular meeting minutes from September 23, 2009 providing the boards approval and conditions of approval. A small 72 foot crank up tower is located on the property and was determined to not be available for our use. The structure is a crank up design and is lowered for maintenance and during periods of high wind. The email from the tower owner is attached. I have also attached as Attachment 4 is the RF Brief and plots that represent the current coverage and projected coverage. The brief also outlines the purpose and extent and the recommendation for the site at a minimum height of 95 feet. The key points regarding the need for this telecommunications facility at this location are: It is necessary to fix network coverage and capacity issues in the area in which it is proposed. 2. Signal engineering shows an area of inadequate service in this area requiring additional capacity. 3. Statistical operating data of the existing wireless network creates a compelling need for improved service in this area. 4. Shentel has already located facilities at all of the available nearby co -location opportunities. There are no other existing facilities in this area that would provide the necessary platform to fulfill the needs in this particular area. 5. This site addresses communications needs of the high traffic -count roads in the area as well as the residential and commercial developments. 6. The structure height of 95 foot (99 foot with lightning rod) will have little impact on the surrounding area_ CUP Application Site 532 Page 3 June 16, 2010 It is the ongoing policy and objective of Shentel to make the tower available to other wireless service providers for co -location. The proposed tower will be engineered to accommodate a minimum of three (3) wireless carriers. Thus reducing the need for additional towers in the area that create an impact on the community. This site has been fully evaluated by the mandated agencies in accordance with the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). As part of that evaluation, the Virginia Department of Historical Resources (DHR) has reviewed the information submitted by BL Companies under the provisions of Section 106 with the determination that the proposed site will have "No adverse effect" on historic properties listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. This site is consistent with planned growth, and planned growth calls for development of infrastructure. Sites like this are necessary components of the communications infrastructure. This site can provide DSL quality (commonly called 3G or EVDO) wireless broadband internet to the area and, it establishes the platform to introduce advanced WiMax and/or LTE wireless broadband service at speeds up to 70 Mbits/s and 326.4 Mbit/s, respectively. Shenandoah Mobile Company requests your favorable review and positive recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. Please contact me should you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely yours, ynn e�re r Site Acquisition and Project Development Consultant for Shentel Page 1 of 2 Lynn Koerner From: Anthony Peralta [Antho ny- Pe ra Ita@e mp- shentel. cc ml Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 3:55 PM To: Lynn Koerner Subject: PE 532 - Double Toll Gate F41 j_v r, __Flc?u i, ry t nii nturl,,,; 52.2 1-1 wf, -i i t h- 1- Li r -, L, Vit: at f7,�,oplk� ✓E--th. ra-( Cover m3 Pi -,Ps count vci-.dJ 1!p rrurf bj and .36 (1-thei one, :�'o nt, of I f ;E FJIQ df -E. L i r C- i 1'?I Y L4.. i J-o,'Z, -,Ve yxierl dip whin --te -434 - VAh;---, PC --_- nd -Site P, It a4 ei , if I u r :-f :,:tea r -: r III: t e (A1 ri -i v N� v er ',-:1 o i o 55). K, r c., p t h e, I i e it7 f - ; -'; � ` 1. f t (h i gh, e r w,,- , L , I d e L ct t e r 1. L L 1� 1 mi 1 -km 812412009 F5 R Cs D46 'jY 0 4 LUcYL(WGCT SKYLARK CT1G'�N IINI w xJ,F�s�uc Cr v��ysr s m l7 0 A� 5Q- FR�� 5 277 I•gJRFpx PNCC �g 2 S y �= 2n 522 d 'P SR 647 R�f��hE�f / �E z Street Atlas USA R- 2405 SR 644 m ti 646 r ~ "Ffon i Data use subject to license. r 2004 Del-omie_ Street Atlas USAF • 2005. Y 0 G00 1200 1800 2400 3000 www.delonne.coin MN 00.1 ° VV) Data Zoom 13-4 6d4 I �2� 1�1 v 4Ypq� 3O 0 4 LUcYL(WGCT SKYLARK CT1G'�N IINI w xJ,F�s�uc Cr v��ysr s m l7 0 A� 5Q- FR�� 5 277 I•gJRFpx PNCC �g 2 S y �= 2n 522 d 'P SR 647 R�f��hE�f / �E z Street Atlas USA R- 2405 SR 644 m ti 646 r ~ "Ffon i Data use subject to license. r 2004 Del-omie_ Street Atlas USAF • 2005. Y 0 G00 1200 1800 2400 3000 www.delonne.coin MN 00.1 ° VV) Data Zoom 13-4 ly (71 FIV IV I SOA ~~ Site Details Order, Site Number Site Name Address city State County Zip Code I 052A Parkins Nfllls 283 Laiurelwood Drive Winchester Virginia F'rede:rick 22602 2 167'J Buffalo Lick 3175 Millwood Pike Winchester Virginia Frederick 22e92 3 385,A Boyce 4 South Greenway Avenue Boyce Virginia Clarke 22663 4 384A White Post 14314 Lord Fairfax Hlgway WIte Post Virginia Clarke 22661- 158A Nineveh 395 Fairgrounds Road Front Royal 22630 6 139,A Shera,ndo 221 Spotswood Court Ste,ohens,Cwlty Virginila Frederic': 22C-155" 7 022A Winchester South 121 Soldiers Rest Lane Wiric,",lester Virginia, Frederick 22/602 8 055A Stephens City North 738 Fairfax Street . Step,hens City Virginia Frederick 22656 N A%�ln mE .v K 3 From: anthony.ctr.mosca@faa.gov [mailto:anthony.ctr.mosca@faa.gov] Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 7:48 AM To: Lynn Koerner Cc: jim.leard@faa.gov; al.rhett@digitalpontis.ca,m; Brian.Gough@faa.gov; MarSmith@mmart.com Subject: RE: FW: Shentel 532 Lynn, As we have spoken in the past, you are correct. The conditional Use permit # 04-09 indicates "The tower shall be available for co -locating public use wireless service providers". I hope your effort to for another site location is successful. Thanks, Tony Mosca, cell - 202-664-3206 cell - 910-398-2533 ------'Lynn Koerner" <lynnk@shentel.net> wrote: ----- To: Jim Leard/AWA/FAA@FAA, Mark Hayman/AEA/FAA@FAA From: "Lynn Koerner" <lynnk@shentel.net> Date: 04/22/2010 04:50PM cc: Anthony CTR M osca/AWA/CNTR/FAA@ FAA Subject: RE: FW: Shentel 532 Jim: I am working with Shentel which is the Sprint affiliate in the Winchester, VA area. I have been working on a site in the vicinity of your approved tower site and getting down to the final stages and ready to get things rolling finally. I believe that the conditions of your approval and nature of the use of the tower would not allow us to co -locate on your structure. Could you please check your records and verify if a co -location opportunity exists for your tower. If the opportunity does exist, at what Rad Center would we possibly be able to place our antenna? Please let me know at your earliest convenience so that I can move forward with getting another Sprint site on air. Regards; Lynn Koerner 540-335-0030 Contractor for Shentel From: robert.corcoran@faa.gov [mailto: robert.corcoran@faa.gov ] Sent: Wednesday, December 16, 2009 9:36 AM To: Lynn Koerner Cc: anthony.ctr.mosca@faa.gov; jim.leard@faa.gov Subject: Re: FW: Shentel 532 Lynn , I am no longer with the organization that owns the tower. Please contact Jim Leard at 202-494- 9616 or at Jim.Leard@faa.gov. Best Regards, Robert J. Corcoran Manager, Program Management Staff AEP -10 202-267-8184 (x78184) From: "Lynn Koerner' <lynnk c@shentel.net> To: Robert Corcoran/AWA/FAA@FAA, Anthony CTR Mosca/AWA/CNTR/FAA@FAA Date: 12/16/2009 09:04 AM Subject: FW: Shentel 532 Robert: I am resending the below message to inquire about co -location opportunities on your tower at Marcel Drive . I do not recall receiving a response previously so apologize if you did respond and I missed it. Please let me know if co -location is possible at any height. Thanks and Happy Holidays Regards Lynn Koerner Contractor for Shentel 540-335-0030 From: Lynn Koerner [ mailto:lynnk@shentel.net ] Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 6:06 PM To: ' robert.corcoran@faa.gov '; 'anthony.ctr.mosca@faa.gov' Subject: Shentel 532 Robert I see by the final minutes and agenda that you have received approval for the tower at Marcel Drive in Winchester. As you may recall from earlier communications, Shentel, the Sprint PCS Affiliate for the area is in need of a communications facility in the general vicinity of your proposed tower. Shentel understands that your tower is proposed to be 80 feet tall. Shentel would propose a 10 ft extension to your pole if possible or would ask for a co -location opportunity below your installation. I would need our RF group to fully review and evaluate our coverage with the placement of antenna on this structure. Prior to having them run a full evaluation, I wanted to contact you to determine if Shentel would be able to negotiate an agreement to allow for antenna placement on the tower. Please advise if co -location is possible at your earliest convenience Regards; Lynn Koerner Contractor for Shentel 540-335-0030 171 D. -��»-�» •-�•••.• •.a<..•k: rvau n nr-a -wa all " ;I_ shall be laced within a eblu access easement and maintained by the develo er and/or homeowner's association. § 144-19. Streetlights. Streetlights of adequate type and intensity shall be required to promote public health and safety in any subdivision in the RP (Residential Perfar,,.o",j ➢s �➢a. t ,e...r ., or__ _ me one 1"Is nrearcal Support) Districts. eentaining jets 0 • . Streetlights shall be provided at all intersections. The design proposal for sfteettighting shall be approved by the Subdivision Administrator. The Planning Commission may waive the requirement for strectlights. § 144-33. Commercial and industrial design standards:exemptions. All commercial and industrial subdivisions shall be exemprliom the following sections of article V of this chapter: A. Section 144-17L, Curbs and gutters. E.B. Section 144-19, Streetlights This ordinance shall be in effect on the day of adoption. Passed this 23`d day of September, 2009 by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing I Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Nay Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Absent Gary A. Lofton Nay OTHER PLANNING ITEMS: TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 170 MAR('F.7. nwrvr invv r% - Zoning % Zoning and Subdivision Administrator Mark Cheran appeared before the Board regarding this item. He advised the line of sight and direction of the communication tower issues had been addressed. He noted a representative from the Federal Aviation Administration was present to answer any specific questions the Board might have. Zoning Administrator Cheran advised the Planning Commission recommended approval and reviewed the proposed conditions. 1. All review agency comments and requirements shall be complied with at all times. 2. The tower shall be available for co -locating public use wireless services providers. Aunt, Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 09/23/09 172 3. A minor site plan shall be approved by Frederick County. 4. If the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) relinquishes their lease of the property, the tower will he removed by the FAA. 5. In the event a telecommunications tower is not erected within twelve (12) months of the approval of this Conditional Use Permit, the CUP will be deemed invalid. 6. Any expansion or modification of this use will require a new Conditional Use Permit. Chairman Shickle asked Ron Mislowsky if his client's concerns had been addressed. Ron Mislowsky, Patton Harris Rust & Associates, advised his client was satisfied this project would not impact the adjacent property. Tony Messner, Federal Aviation Administration, advised the proposed tower would have a '/< degree vertical angle, which would clear the tree line at its farthest point by 40 to 50 feet. Upon a motion by Supervisor Fisher, seconded by Supervisor Dove, the Board approved Conditional Use Permit #04-09. The above motion was approved by the following recorded vote: Richard C. Shickle Aye Bill M. Ewing Aye Charles S. DeHaven, Jr. Aye Gary W. Dove Aye Gene E. Fisher Aye Philip A. Lemieux Absent Gary A. Lofton Aye ROAD RESOLUTIONS: CHANNING DRIVE (RESOLUTION #026-09) — APPROVED UNDER CONSENT AGENDA WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Form AM -4.3, fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Frederick County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer of the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have entered into an agreement on June 9, 1993, for the comprehensive stormwater detention which applies to this request for addition; and WHEREAS, the Board assures total responsibility for all cost and expense incurred to correct faulty workmanship or materials identified by VDOT and associated with the construction of one or more of the roads and/or related drainage facilities described on the attached AM -4.3 form for a period of one calendar year after the date of the legal acceptance of the referenced roads into the secondary system of state highways. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described in the attached Form AM4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to 33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and Minute Book Number 35 Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting of 09/23/09 From: Rick C. [mailto:rixy@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 9:00 AM To: Lynn Koerner Subject: Re: Shentel 532 - I think it's a US Tower TX472 72' self supporting with 4x4 concrete foot. It is a crank up tower and there are times we crank it down for maintenance or high wind conditions. Obviously with rigid coax on the panels this would not be feasible and PCS coverage would suffer. Rick Choy VP/GM WTRM-FM a - anENTEL SHENANDOAH TELECOMMUNICATIONS P.O. Box 459 • Edinburg, Virginia 22824-0459 a (540) 984-4141 April 22, 2010 RF Brief Overview for the Proposed North Armel Site Shentel is proposing to build a PCS cell site off of US Highway 522, Front Royal Pike. The proposed site will mainly provide coverage on the aforementioned highway and provide capacity to existing and upcoming residential areas / subdivisions in the northeast part of Stephens City. Furthermore, business establishments near Hwy 522 -Tasker Road (like Home Depot Distribution Center, Storage Solutions, Comcast Digital Cable), small commercial businesses along Warrior Drive -Tasker Road, Armel Elementary School, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation office in Marcel Drive are seen to benefit to the additional coverage and capacity that this site will bring. The proposed PCS site (Site Number: WA09SH532C) referred to as "North Armel" is located at coordinates: Latitude: 39° 05' 11.36" N and Longitude: 78° 08' 52.99" W. The site address is 2839 Front Royal Pike, Front Royal, VA 22602. The PCS antennas will be installed in the proposed 95 -ft monopole. The RF signal strength simulation study shows that the minimum height required for antenna deployment at this location to meet the coverage objective is 95 feet; a height lower than this would result in less than the desired signal strength because of the terrain and clutter limitations. The loss in signal strength occurs because of the fact that the radio frequency signals, in general, are very susceptible to objects in their path such as buildings, trees & foliage and vehicles etc. In addition, RF signals degrade in strength as distance increases between transmit and receive antennas even when there is no obstruction present in the path between the antennas. The result of RF signal strength simulation is shown in the plots enclosed. The RF simulation map labeled as "Coverage of Existing Sites without Site 532C" shows the current covered area. The RF simulation map labeled as "Coverage of Existing Sites with Site 532C" shows coverage from the proposed PCS site when the antennas are deployed at a height of 95 ft above ground level (AGL) along with the coverage from existing Shentel sites in the neighboring places. The RF simulation map labeled as "Coverage of Site 532C without Existing Sites" shows coverage only from the proposed PCS site when the antennas are deployed at a height of 95 ft above ground level. WA SHE^IANDOAH TELEPHONE COMPAN • SHENTEL SERVICE COMPANY • SHENANDOAH CABLE TELEVISION COMPANY SHEPL-:�1D0�. l LONG DISTANCE COivIPAINY • SHENANDOAH VALLEY LEA91NG COMPANY • SHENANDOAH MOBILE COMPANY SHENAI\iDOAH NETWORK COMPA..NY • SHENTEL COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY SHI=1 I dDOAH PERSONAL CC,MN1Ui JICATiONS COMPANY WE MUST SERVE WELL TO PROSPER • WE MUST PROSPER TO SERVE WELL Page two The colors "yellow' and "green" in the RF simulation maps represent the strength of RF signal in the given geographical area. The "yellow color" represents In -Building PCS coverage level — RF signal strength of -84 dBm while the "green color' represents In -Vehicle PCS coverage level — RF signal strength of -98 dBm. The In -Building PCS coverage level warrants uninterrupted service to the user who is using a PCS device in -door when little or no interference is present. Similarly, the In -Vehicle PCS coverage level warrants uninterrupted service to the user who is using a PCS device while traveling in vehicle if little or no interference is present. Shentel complies with all FCC guidelines and standards for Radio Frequency (RF) emissions. Shentel will operate, maintain and monitor this PCS cell site under the rules and guidelines of the FCC. In conclusion, it is evident from the RF simulation maps that this PCS cell site would provide additional coverage and capacity to residential and commercial structures surrounding it. Considering the purpose and extent of the site coverage, the RF engineers at Shentel recommend that a PCS site with antenna located at a minimum height of 95 ft AGL be built at the proposed site location. The proposed PCS site will provide adequate in -vehicle coverage in these highways, thus fulfilling Shentel's desired coverage objective and meet company standards for reliable wireless service. Anthony S. Peralta Shentel — RF Engineer Office: (540) 984-5426 Fax: (540) 984-5493 f Exi, - . ' n 052A ut to 53�� -�1� ■ �p p 2A," 1fi ■ ■■ . , IN • y. - CIE _ ® + ■ �i A f ► ; ., moi"„ �` � � � `�y ��'' s,'►�0 5A _ fiairf i. Id�e L X1. ■ ■ ■ 7 LEGEND 1 z� In -building coverage � ,■,� : �, � ■ In-vehicic coverage 158A � - ..r .. .* f Ex■ n s 052A ■ w Sit 32C U22A IL rId 9 y., • 167J ■ !S y P 46 al w1 S6 38 A5 � y u55A ■ .. max pAl '!e' . . LP ■. ■ r ®ism ■ 51 mm r 15 jqor, LEGEND ^v � In-building coverage .,,� •� �, 1� in vewcie coverage f' „,