HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-08 Comments (3)t SHENr'El,
P.O. Box 459 • Edinburg, Virginia 22824-0459 • (540) 984-4141
July 16, 2008
Mr. Mark R. Cheran
Zoning and Subdivision Administrator
107 North Kent Street, 2 Floor
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: Conditional Use Permit Application for Shenandoah
Mobile Company (Shentel) — Site 046 — Red Bud — Tax Parcel 55 -A -129A,
Owned by David M. and A. Katherine Gregg
Mr. Cheran:
Please accept this letter as written confirmation that, upon approval by Frederick County, of the
construction of a proposed 195- foot tall Monopole structure, located on the property owned by David M.
and A. Katherine Gregg, with a designation of Tax Map 55 -A -129A, in the event Shentel's facilities
located thereon become non -operational for a continuous period of 12 months, Shentel will comply with
Section 165-48.6B(7) that states the following:
"Any antenna or tower that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall be considered
abandoned, and the owner of such tower shall remove same within 90 days of receipt of notice from the
Frederick County Department of Planning and Development. Removal includes the removal of the tower,
all tower and fence footers, underground cables and support buildings. If there are two or more user of a
single tower, then this provision shall not become effective until all users cease using the tower. If the
tower is not removed within the ninety -day period, the County will remove the facility and a lien may be
placed to recover expenses."
Under Section 165-48.6A(3), this letter shall also serve as certification that Shentel, at all of its
telecommunications facilities, complies, and will continue to comply with all FAA and FCC regulations
for the operation of its facilities, including, but not by way of limitation, all reporting requirements
regarding radio frequency emissions.
Please contact me should you have questions or require additional information.
Sincerely yours,
Leonard Greisz
Site Acquisition Manager
LOCAL AND LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE • INTERNET AND DATA SERVICES • CABLE TELEVISION
WIRELESS VOICE AND DATA SERVICES • ALARM MONITORING • TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT
WE MUST SERVE WELL TO PROSPER • WE MUST PROSPER TO SERVE WELL
SHENiEI,
P.O. Box 459 • Edinburg, Virginia 22824-0459 • (540) 984-4141
July 16, 2008
Mr. Mark R. Cheran
Zoning and Subdivision Administrator
107 North Kent Street, 2"d Floor
Winchester, VA 22601
RE: Conditional Use Permit Application for Shenandoah Mobile Company (Shentel)
Site 046 — Red Bud — Tax Parcel 55 -A -129A,
Owned by David M. and A. Katherine Gregg
Dear Mr. Cheran:
It is the ongoing policy and objective of Shenandoah Mobile Company (Shentel) to
lease its telecommunications facilities in order for other wireless services providers to
co -locate. All of Shenandoah Mobile Company's towers have been engineered to
accommodate additional service providers, and all towers meet the existing construction
specifications established by the American National Standards Institute at the time of
construction. Shenandoah Mobile Company adopted the standards of the International
Building Code as of June 1, 2005, and all facilities erected since that time comply with
those standards.
Shentel is committed to the concept of co -location to avoid the unnecessary
proliferation of towers in its service areas and seeks to co -locate on other facilities if at
all possible. By offering its facilities to other service providers, Shentel offers
technically up-to-date communications to residents of our rural area while preserving
the natural beauty of the area to the extent possible.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely yours,
Leonard L. Greisz
Manager — Site Acquisition
LOCAL AND LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE • INTERNET AND DATA SERVICES • CABLE TELEVISION
WIRELESS VOICE AND DATA SERVICES • ALARM MONITORING • TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT
WE MUST SERVE WELL TO PROSPER • WE MUST PROSPER TO SERVE WELL
JIV
P. �. �= i^g E :i�:i-urs;, 'A s a_ 2232-!-04-A 9 !j4i :• 9C4-11 1 4'
July 15, 2008
RF Brief Overview for the Proposed Redbud site
Shentel is proposing to build a PCS cell site near Redbud Road to provide PCS coverage northeast of
Winchester. The proposed site will cover the residential areas in Frederick Heights/Shenandoah Hills
and Redbud Run, the Redbud Run Elementary School / Milbrook High School sports complex, and
provide highway / road coverage along 1-81 and Highway 11 (Martinsburg Pike) leading to
Martinsburg, Highway 7 (Berryville Pike) leading to Berryville, Morgan Mill Road, and Redbud Road.
The proposed PCS site (Site Number: WA10SH046A) referred to as "Redbud" is located at
coordinates: Latitude: 38° 12' 14.5" N and Longitude: 78* 6' 10" W. The site address is 1203 Redbud
Road, Winchester, VA 22824. The PCS antennas will be placed on the proposed 195 -ft monopole that
will be built in the given location. The RF signal strength simulation study shows that the minimum
height required for antenna deployment at this location to meet the coverage objective is 195 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 046X shows the current covered area. The RF
simulation map labeled as "Coverage of Existing Sites with Site 046X shows coverage from the
proposed PCS site when the antennas are deployed at a height of 195 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 046A without Existing Sites" shows coverage only from the proposed
PCS site when the antennas are deployed at a height of 195 ft above ground level.
..2
LOCAL AND LONG DISTANCE TELEPHONE • INTERNET AND DATA SERVICES • CABLE TELEVISION
WIRELESS VOICE AND DATA SERVICES • ALARM MONITORING • TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT
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 d8m 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 coverage
and capacity in the northeast part of Winchester. 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 195 ft AGL be built at the proposed site location. The proposed PCS site will provide
adequate in -building RF signal in this location and outdoor coverage in the surrounding road /
highways, thus fulfilling Shentel's desired coverage objective and meet company standards for reliable
wireless service.
Anthony S. Peralta
Shentei — RF Engineer
Office: (540) 984-5426
Fax: (540) 984-5493
George R. Aldhizer, Jr. (Retired)
Donald E. Showalter
Glenn M. Hodge
Gregory T. St. Ours
Charles F. Hilton -
Daniel L. Fitch
Thomas E. Ullrich
Marshall H. Ross
Stephan W. Milo
Humes J. Franklin, IIOC(
George H. Roberts, Jr. " ``
P. Marsl}all Yoder
jj i,
WHARTON ALDHIZER & WEAVERPLc
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
100 SOUTH MASON STREET
P.O. Box 20028
HARRISONBURG, VIRGINIA 22801-7528
WWW.WAWLAW.COM
TELEPHONE
HARRISONBURG (540) 434-0316
STAUNTON (540) 885-0199
LEXINGTON (540) 463-3691
FAX(540)434-5502
WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL: (540) 438-5352
WRITER'S E-MAIL: JJOHNSON@WAWLAW.COM
October 10, 2008
June Wilmot, Chairman
Frederick County Planning Commission
107 North Kent Street, 2° Floor
Winchester, VA 22601
Jeffrey R. Adams
Matthew W. Light
Trisha A. Culp
Michelle K. Bishop
Kristin A. Zech
James L. Johnson
Whitney J. Levin
Robert C. Lunger
Jill M. Lowell
Lauren R. Darden
David C. Nahm
Matthew Dunne
Reply to the Harrisonburg office
RE: Conditional Use Permit Application for Shenandoah
Mobile Company (Shentel) — Site 046 — Redbud — Tax Parcel 55 -A -129A,
Owned by David M. and A. Katherine Gregg
Dear Ms. Wilmot:
As you may know, this firm represents Shenandoah Mobile Company ("Shentel") in the above
referenced application for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Since our last public meeting was
curtailed by time constraints, Shentel has asked that we take this opportunity to recap the
important aspects of the proposed site. Mostly, by this letter we intend reemphasize the need to
have the proposed structure located on the property at 1203 Redbud Road, Winchester, VA (the
"Site"). The purpose of locating the tower there is to improve the telecommunications
infrastructure of eastern Frederick County and to offer cell phone coverage in areas that did not
have it before.
The key points regarding the need for this telecommunications facility at this location are:
The Site is necessary to fix network coverage and capacity issues in the area in which
it is proposed.
2. Radio frequency engineering shows a large area of inadequate service in this area.
3. During periods of heavy loads of data or call volume, the cell towers' radio frequency
coverage will shrink. Radio frequency adjusts depending on the amount and/or
volume of calls handled by individual cell cites. When a cell site becomes loaded
Page 2 of 5
with call traffic, the effective range of radio frequency coverage is minimized. This
results in increased call failures, such as blocks and drops, which will occur unless the
calls are redirected to another cell site that is lightly loaded. As eastern Frederick
County continues to develop and its cell sites handle more and more calls and
information, the effective range of radio frequency coverage from the existing cell
sites will be minimized resulting in increased call failures during periods of heavy
loads. The proposed Site will provide the capacity relief for all the neighboring sites
that are experiencing the "heavy loading" conditions.
4. Real time signal performance monitoring (also known as "drive test data") of the
existing wireless coverage confirms the need to improve the service of this area.
There is very limited in -building coverage there.
5. Statistical operating data of the existing wireless network shows a compelling need
for improved service of the five existing neighboring sites. The five existing sites,
which comprise 26% of the total number of sites now in the service area, Themselves
account for a disproportionate amount of activity. This 26% carries 30% of the call
volume, and creates 28% of the call blocks, and 33% of the drops. An additional
tower will not only expand the coverage area now in Frederick County, it will take
some of the increased burden off of the existing sites and improve the phone service
of those sites (including, but not limited to, reducing the number of call blocks and
drops).
6. Shentel already has facilities at all of the available nearby co -location opportunities.
The remaining locations are inadequate or too far away to be of use to fulfill the
needs in this particular area. Those locations, however, may be of use in the future as
the service is further extended and improved.
7. This Site addresses communications needs of the high traffic -count roads in the area
and the fast growing retail, residential and commercial developments, and schools.
The Conditional Use Permit application has been submitted in accordance with Frederick
County's zoning regulation as provided in Paragraph 165-48.6 (B) of the Frederick Countv
zoning regulation and are addressed as follows:
The Planning Commission may reduce the required setback — The Site complies with
the setback requirements and no waiver of Frederick County's setback requirements
have been, nor will be, requested by Shentel.
2. Monopole -type construction shall be required - Shentel is proposing a monopole
structure.
3. Advertising shall be prohibited - Shentel will not advertise except for ownership
signage.
Page 3 of 5
4. When lightingis s required on a commercial telecommunication facility - The FAA
does not require lighting for the proposed site. However, the Winchester Airport has
requested that as a condition of approval that dual lighting be utilized which provides
daytime white strobe lighting and nighttime red pulsating lighting. Shentel is
agreeable to this condition if so required by the Commission/Board.
5. Commercial telecommunication facilities shall be constructed with materials of a
galvanized finish or painted a non -contrasting blue or gray - Shentel is agreeable to
paint the tower at the direction and specified color if so conditioned by the
Commission/Board.
6. Commercial telecommunication facilities shall be adequately enclosed - Shentel
proposes to secure the facility with an 8 foot tall chain link fence. Additionally, the
site is located near the rear of the property and is surrounded by medium density
woods and accessory structures at the facility would be shielded from the view from
adjoining properties.
7. Any antenna or tower that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall
be considered abandoned - Shentel is agreeable to a condition requiring removal of
the tower that meets the definition of abandoned.
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 would be engineered to accommodate a
minimum of three (3) wireless carriers, thus reducing the need for additional towers in the area.
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 TRIAD Engineering
under the provisions of Section 106 of the NEPA. It should be noted that DHR singled out the
Millburn Historic District for special review, and requested additional information about the
project. Still, upon final review of the additional information, the determination of DHR is 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. DHR is the agency the federal government has
contracted with to assess and determine whether a site will have an adverse effect on historic
sites. Please also keep in mind that the preponderance of the Millburn Historic District is on the
other side of the proposed Hwy 37, away from the proposed site.
As part of the Section 106 review, an archaeological survey was conducted. The field crew that
conducted the survey walked all parts of the project site and a total of 19 shovel tests were
excavated. Upon examination, the crew concluded that the project area will not directly impact
potentially significant archaeological resources. Reference to this study can be found at
Appendix 7 of the Federal Communications Commission National Environmental Policy Act
Checklist Screening Report dated July 14, 2008 that was provided to staff with the application.
Additionally, TRIAD performed a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) in general
accordance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527-05, Standard Practice for
Environmental Site Assessments: Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Process. The findings
Page 4 of 5
of this environmental site assessment indicate no recognized environmental conditions for the
site.
The site is located in an area zoned RA -Rural Area. The issue of whether or not the site is in a
Forestal District (as was stated at the previous meeting) has no legal bearing on whether a site
may be approved by the Commission or the Board of Supervisors. The state law allows for
telecommunication facilities in such districts, and, in fact, a property owner can withdraw his
land from the district at any time. See Va. Code Ann. § 15.2-4300 et. seq. The proper district
identification (including whether the site is located within a Forestral District) was discussed
with Mr. Cheran at a meeting on November 9, 2007.
The Site is well positioned a considerable distance away from the scenic byway. The proposed
tower is nearly 2,000 feet away from Redbud Road.
This site is consistent with the Frederick County 2007 Comprehensive Plan (the "Plan") in that
the Plan calls for responsible growth, and responsible growth calls for development of
infrastructure. In the Frederick County Zoning Administrator's recommendation to the Planning
Commission on September 3, the Administrator opines that Shentel Site 046 "may not be
consistent" with the Plan. However, the Plan itself does not address telecommunications towers
directly. If the Site is not in compliance with the Plan, the Administrator has not made clear 1)
which provisions he is referring to, and 2) how the tower is not in compliance with those
provisions. Moreover, we have reviewed the Plan and have been unable to find any provisions
of the Plan to which the tower would not conform. We understand that there is the concern of
ensuring that scenic areas and properties of significant historic values are not negatively
impacted. Shentel has already presented how it has complied with all controlling law to that end.
Throughout the site approval process, the properly mandated federal and state agencies have
determined that the tower poses no adverse affect on any area the law would otherwise protect.
According to the Plan, "as development continues in Frederick County, there is a need to
carefully plan for the facilities and services that will be required. Planned development will
affect the expenditures and facilities that will be needed. It will also effect the location and types
of facilities that must be provided. There is a need to carefully monitor growth and to plan land
use and facilities in a coordinated fashion." See Frederick County 2007 Comprehensive Plan §8-
219. The Plan calls for development of this area of the county. Such development will require
infrastructure, including adequate cell phone and broadband service. The day the Site is turned
on it will 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. Sprint has already
introduced WiMax service in Baltimore and will follow shortly with Chicago and Washington,
DC. Your Plan advocates smart and planned growth and calls for infrastructure to support such
growth. We feel this site is a necessary component of the communications infrastructure and
would do just that.
Shenandoah Mobile Company requests your favorable review and positive recommendation to
the Board of Supervisors.
Page 5 of 5
Please contact me should you have questions or require additional information.
JLJ/jtf
Cc: Roger L. Thomas, Vice Chairman, Planning Commission (via email and U.S. Mail)
Cordell Watt (via email and U.S. Mail)
Greg L. Unger (via email and U.S. Mail)
George J. Kriz (via email and U.S. Mail)
Charles E. Triplett (via email and U.S. Mail)
Rick C. Ours (via email and U.S. Mail)
Gregory S. Kerr (via email and U.S. Mail)
Christopher Mohn (via email and U.S. Mail)
Lawrence R. Ambrogi (via email and U.S. Mail)
H. Paige Mannuel (via email and U.S. Mail)
Gary R. Oates (via email and U.S. Mail)
Richard A. Ruckman (via email and U.S. Mail)
Gary A. Lofton (via U.S. Mail only)
Roderick B. Williams (via U.S. Mail only)
Eric R. Lawrence (via U.S. Mail only)
Mark Cheran (via email and U.S. Mail)
Michael T. Ruddy, AICP (via email and U.S. Mail)
08023413
v em A i W A-
Shlued Analysi's Of s ed To-,-,-e.r LocanOr-I
661
81 Carter -Hard sty House
A
Sud r bi; w a
7
660
r
prifeles-Sernpl S H usev
7
\j
--T-,"— Proposed Cell HentMil IS,
664
ower Locations
Al 65ft)
X,
X
X,
Third Battle of Winchester
cl
Wood-Sibell Ho use
'
656
•
661
W Miller's House
Bru ley House
0 375750 1,500 Feet
Landmarks! 1 1 1
Proposed Tower Locatior.
Cell Tower Visible
Agricultural & Forestal Districts
4W South Frederick District
Double Church District
Red Bud
Coverage of Existing Sites with Site 046A
Coverage of Existing Sites without Site 046A
t
4rT —,v -Y
FCC Licensed Cell Towers
in Frederick County,
Virginia
o
u
0 Cellular
Structure Types
ANTENNAE
MONOPOLE
Q TOWER
Current and Potential Co -Location
Antenna Structure Register
Cell Tower 3 Mile Buffer
62
lob
Serkelcy
rs
IIRD21 0
J�XE rso;i
Fmdai i
CIO
LIS
ST.y,
60
66
Hardy 5.
oy
22
);henFFdc@
0
00 Fauqui_
I�k
June wilmot
;f OCT
Pagel of 2
From TrudiP@aol-com L -
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 11:40 PM
To: Roger.L.Thomas@usace.army.mil; elawrenc@co.frederick.va.us; Iwfarm@shentel.net;
cmohn@bowmanconsulting.com; TRFF@visuallink. com-, gkriz@visuallink.com;
gkerr@hallmechanical.net; greg lunger@yahoo. com-, june.wilmot@verizon.net; Clambrogi@aol.com;
hpm@visuallink.com; ruckman@verizon.net,- rours@su.edu
Subject: Shentel CUP - Citizen Comments
Since my message may have gotten lost in the lateness of the hour during the Planning
Commission meeting two weeks ago, I am sending you an unabridged copy of my speech given
at that meeting. Thank you for your attention.
My name is Trudi Dixon and I live on Redbud Road in the Stonewall Magisterial district. I am
once again asking that you recommend denial of Shentel's Conditional Use Permit for the
construction of a 195 -foot commercial telecommunications facility.
In looking at Shentel's in -building and in -vehicle coverage maps, I see no appreciable difference
in the populated areas of the county. My house is in one of the areas marked as currently having
no coverage or in -vehicle coverage only (it's hard to tell since there are no property lines
marked). But I can tell you that I have coverage even in the darkest corners of my basement. I
also drove along Woods Mill road while making a call, and I never lost coverage once.
Additionally, it appears that the applicant is only providing part of the picture. They are
providing information as it pertains to the coverage provided by their own arrays. They do not
include towers and arrays belonging to other cell phone companies when showing areas lacking
existing coverage. While they are well within their right to capture as much of the market as
they can, they are providing incomplete information to this commission in trying to show there is
a genuine need.
At last month's meeting, there was some discussion about Shenandoah County's restriction of a
1000 -foot setback from Scenic Byways. If you have been reading the Northern Virginia Daily,
you will have read that they are reconsidering their zoning ordinances in regards to cell towers.
In the last year, they have denied five of the six cell tower applications that have come before
them.
It was also pointed out at the last meeting that the applicant has looked for potential co -location
sites and their representative said, 'ewe looked and there's nothing out there." I have heard
nothing about which sites they investigated and why they are not acceptable. Just from my
familiarity with the area, I can think of four locations along major transportation routes and near
approved future developments that would be more suitable for use than a new structure on the
Scenic Byway of Redbud Road.
1) First would be the light poles at Millbrook High School. If you have driven on I-81 past
Shenandoah University's stadium, you have seen one possible solution. The stadium lights are
attached to a monopole structure with the cellular array at the top.
2) There are also tall power transmission lines extending into the M-1 zoned property at the end
of Redbud Road from Route 11. I have seen similar transmission towers used in conjunction with
cell towers. There are several such co -locations along Routes 37 and 11. There are also three
unused power line structures within the new Rutherford Crossing shopping plaza. The two
structures to the immediate south, on both sides of the interstate, already have cellular arrays
10/15/2008
Page 2 of 2
situated at the top of them.
3) There is a silo on Route 11, on the property across from Old Charlestown Road. Buildings are
often used as a mounting structure for this type of array.
4) The Clearbrook gUarry has a 120 -foot berm on its eastern edge. I would think that placing a
tower here would have the farthest -reaching benefit.
The first location would serve any development along Route 7 not already covered by the tower
at the wastewater treatment facility. The other three could service the Snowden Bridge
development, which, I assume, is the market they are trying to secure.
Also, Shentel's example photographs only showed their own array placed at the top of the pole.
On a structure this tall, there is the potential for Shentel to lease tower space for several other
companies to place their arrays. The photographs they have shown are not necessarily
representative of this tower's potential visual impact.
I find it disheartening that the people who make the planning decisions in this county
are willing to disregard rural and scenic areas in favor of providing infrastructure for
development. Yes, it may be cheaper and easier for companies like Shentel Ito place
their services in agricultural areas but it should not be at the expense of the people
:who enjoy living in, and driving through, these open spaces.
I am not convinced that Shentel has exhausted all other possibilities for placing their
services in the area best suited to the needs of our community. They are going for the
path of least resistance, and it runs right through an agricultural community and
through this Planning Commission.
I am once again requesting that you preserve one of the few remaining scenic areas of
this part of the county and support the iHRAB's recommended denial of this application
to the Board of Supervisors. Thank you.
New MapQuest Local shows what's happening at your destination. Dining, Movies, Events, News & more. Try
it out!
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http:/twww.avg.com
Version: 8.0.173 /Virus Database: 270.8.0/1722 - Release Date: 10/14/2008 2:02 AM
10/15/2008