CALVERT COUNTY BOARD OF APPEALS ORDER

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "CALVERT COUNTY BOARD OF APPEALS ORDER"

Sabrina Quinn
5 years ago
Views:

constructed as a 195' monopole with a 4' lightning rod within a proposed 80' x 80' fenced compound and for a variance in the setback distance requirements from adjacent properties for the proposed

1 CALVERT COUNTY BOARD OF APPEALS ORDER Case No Public Hearing: May 1, 2014 Telecom Capital Group, LLC has applied on behalf of the property owners David & Robin Harris for a Special Exception to install a wireless communications tower constructed as a 195' monopole with a 4' lightning rod within a proposed 80' x 80' fenced compound and for a variance in the setback distance requirements from adjacent properties for the proposed tower. The property is located at 3737 Dalrymple Road, Chesapeake Beach, (Tax Map 16, Parcel 265) and is zoned RCD Rural Community District. The case was presented May 1, 2014 before Board of Appeals members Mrs. Susan Hance-Wells, Chair; Mr. Daniel Baker, Jr., Vice Chair; and Mr. Kenneth Moore, Sr., Alternate Member (the Board). Carlton Green, Esquire served as the Board's counsel. Mr. Manny Dureja from Telecom Capital Group, LLC and Mr. Kevin Shaver from Wilkerson & Associates, Inc. were present at the hearing, testified and were represented by Mark Davis, Esquire. AUTHORITY OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS The jurisdiction of the Board of Appeals is based on Section of the Land Use Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland, as amended. Article of the Calvert County Zoning Ordinance provides that the Board of Appeals shall have the authority to hear and decide petitions for Special Exceptions. A Special Exception is defined as, "A grant of a specific use that would not be appropriate generally or without restriction. Approval of a Special Exception is based upon a finding that certain conditions as detailed in the Zoning Ordinance are met, that the use conforms to the Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the existing neighborhood." Article A of the Calvert County Zoning Ordinance provides that the Board of Appeals shall have the authority to grant variances from the strict application of the lot area, lot width, setback, and height requirements of this Ordinance.

Case No. 14-3817 Page 2 TESTIMONY & EVIDENCE PRESENTED 1. The following Applicant's Exhibits were dated and entered into the record at the May 1, 2014 hearing: Exhibit No.

2 Case No Page 2 TESTIMONY & EVIDENCE PRESENTED 1. The following Applicant's Exhibits were dated and entered into the record at the May 1, 2014 hearing: Exhibit No. 1: Board of Appeals Application Exhibit No. 2: Site Plan Harris Property Exhibit No. 3: FAA Letter of Determination dated 2/25/14 Exhibit No. 4: MAA Letter of Determination dated March 20, 2014 Exhibit No. 5: Radio Frequency Engineering Studies, TCG Chesapeake Beach Candidate Site, Calvert County, MD, dated January 31, 2014 and April 09, 2014 Exhibit No. 6: National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Screening Report, David & Robin Harris Property, dated March 12, 2014 Exhibit No. 7: Affidavit of Sign Posting Exhibit No. 8: Letter of Intent dated April 13, 2014 to Telecom Capital Group, LLC, from Brian Stover, Principal Engineer Network Real Estate, Verizon Wireless, Annapolis, MD; regarding Proposed Telecommunications Facility to be located at 3737 Dalrymple Rd., Chesapeake Beach, MD Exhibit No. 9: Statement of Consent dated April 29, 2014, from Elwira Harris, Trustee to Telecom Capital Group, LLC; Request for Variance to Reduce the Setback From 199 Feet to Feet, Plus or Minus, for the Construction of A Cellular Communications Monopole Tower Exhibit No. 10: dated November 22, 2013 from Michael Candland, Site Acquisition Manager, Dynis, Columbia, MD to Keith Hull, P.E., R&D Service Division, Naval Research Laboratory, Advising Proposed Verizon Cell Tower on Navy Research Lab Property is Not Approved 2. A Staff Report prepared by the Board of Appeals Administrator, Roxana Whitt, was entered into the record at the May 1, 2014, hearing, and marked Staff Exhibit No Jeffrey Martin, Senior RF System Consultant, Altaris Technology Partners, the County's tower consultant, was present and testified at the May 1, 2014 hearing. A report prepared by Mr. Martin, dated April 18, 2014, regarding Special Exception Case No , was entered into the record as part of Staff Exhibit No. 1.

Case No. 14-3817 Page 3 4. The following person testified at the May 1, 2014 hearing: Linda Hall, P. 0.

Conclusions pursuant to Article 11-1.01.A and Article 11-1.02 of the Calvert County Zoning Ordinance: 1. The Board finds that the application was filed pursuant to Article 11-1.01.A and Article 11-1.02 of the Calvert County Zoning Ordinance, which provides the Board the authority to hear and decide Special Exception and Variance requests.

3 Case No Page 3 4. The following person testified at the May 1, 2014 hearing: Linda Hall, P. 0. Box 164, Chesapeake Beach, MD FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS Based on the application and testimony and evidence presented at the hearing, the Board makes the following Findings of Fact & Conclusions pursuant to Article A and Article of the Calvert County Zoning Ordinance: 1. The Board finds that the application was filed pursuant to Article A and Article of the Calvert County Zoning Ordinance, which provides the Board the authority to hear and decide Special Exception and Variance requests. 2. The Board finds the case was properly advertised, the property was posted, and affected property owners were notified in accordance with the Board's Rules of Procedure. 3. The Board finds that the subject request is for a Special Exception for construction of a 195' tall telecommunications monopole tower with a 4' lightning rod to be located within a proposed 80' x 80' fenced compound; and for a variance in the setback distance requirements from adjacent properties for the proposed tower, which will be located on the Harris property at 3737 Dalrymple Road, Chesapeake Beach, MD The Board finds that the Comprehensive Plan is the primary policy document for the County, establishing goals and objectives for the overall development of the County; that the Zoning Ordinance is adopted to implement the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan; that the Zoning Ordinance allows the installation of communications towers in the Rural Community District zone, subject to Special Exception approval; that the applicant filed required documents in accordance with Article B of the Calvert County Zoning Ordinance; that the applicant demonstrated that co-location of communications antennae on existing communications towers is infeasible; and that the applicant demonstrated that the tower is needed to meet the projected demand for cellular service in the immediate vicinity. Based on these findings of fact the Board concludes that the granting of a Special Exception does not adversely affect the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan for the physical development of the County. 5. The Board finds that the approximately 300' distance from Dalrymple Road to the proposed construction location is well screened by woodland; that there is adequate woodland on the tract such that visibility to the tower site from adjacent properties will be limited; that the applicant demonstrated that the proposed tower will not degrade nor interfere with County wireless communication systems; that the applicant provided Federal Aviation Administration and Maryland Aviation

4 Case No Page 4 Administration letters of determination for the proposed site indicating no concerns; and that the applicant demonstrated the tower is not required to be lit and will therefore have no lighting effect on other properties. Based on these findings of fact the Board concludes the requested Special Exception will not be detrimental to the permissible use and enjoyment of adjacent properties or adversely affect the health, safety or general welfare of the County. 6. With specific regard to the Special Exception request, the Board finds that due to the nature of the communications tower compound it does not attract traffic or visitors; does not include storage of combustible materials; does not make demands of public services or facilities; does not create noise or dust or otherwise interfere with the surrounding environment; and that it offers the opportunity for future co-location of communications antennae. Based on these finding of facts the Board concludes the proposed use will not create congestion on roads or streets, create fire hazards, tend to overcrowd land or unduly concentrate population, interfere with adequate provisions for schools, parks, water, sewerage, transportation or other public services or adversely interfere with the surrounding environment. 7. The Board finds that the applicant has met the conditions identified in the Zoning Ordinance for review and approval of this application; that it appears the applicant can meet typical development requirements imposed during site plan review; and that the applicant can meet the additional condition that the existing roadway serving neighboring properties must be maintained and open during tower construction. Based on this finding the Board concludes that the applicant can meet the conditions for Special Exception approval. 8. The Board finds that the subject property is not a Historic District. Based on this finding the Board concludes that any requirements related to Historic District are not applicable. 9. With specific regard to the variance request, the Board finds that the engineering data identify the proposed tower site as necessary for building an effective communications network in the vicinity, and that the need for protection of environmental features and the existing topography of the land limit the placement of the tower on the property to the specific proposed location. Based on these findings of fact the Board concludes there are special circumstances related to the property that affect its overall development. 10. The Board finds that the property is fairly remote and well screened by existing woodland; that the adjoining property that is affected by the reduced setback is owned by two members of the same family, one of whom is the applicant in the subject case; and that the other owner has signified no object to the reduced setback. Based on this finding of fact the Board concludes the requested variance will not result in injury to the public interest.

sustainable development, encourages a stable and enduring economic base and provides for safety, health and education while seeking to preserve the natural, cultural and historic assets of Calvert

5 Case No Page The Board finds that the Comprehensive Plan is the official policy document establishing goals and objectives for the development and operation of the County; that the Comprehensive Plan promotes sustainable development, encourages a stable and enduring economic base and provides for safety, health and education while seeking to preserve the natural, cultural and historic assets of Calvert County; that the Zoning Ordinance is adopted to implement the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and to regulate land uses while promoting the health, safety and general welfare of Calvert County residents; that the Zoning Ordinance provides for the construction of towers on properties that are zoned Rural Community District, as is the case with this property; and that Article B.3 of the Zoning Ordinance provides for a mechanism for reducing the setback for towers. Based on these findings of fact the Board concludes the requested variance will not adversely affect implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. 12. The Board finds that the proposed setback of 62.5 feet, plus or minus, is the maximum setback that allows placement of the tower on the subject property, due to the topography and other environmental constraints. Based on this finding of fact the Board concludes the requested variance is the minimum adjustment necessary to afford relief from the regulations. 13. The Board finds that the engineering data support placement of the tower in this location. The topography and other environmental features of the property limit the land available for tower construction and prompt the request for the variance. Based on these findings of fact the Board concludes the requested variance does not result from actions by the applicant. ORDER It is ordered, by a unanimous decision, that the Special Exception to construct a 195' tall telecommunications monopole tower with a 4' lightning rod located within a proposed 80' x 80' fenced compound and the variance in the setback distance requirements from adjacent properties for the proposed tower, as requested by Telecom Capital Group, LLC on behalf of the property owners David & Robin Harris, are hereby GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT EXISTING ROADWAYS USED BY NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS MUST REMAIN OPEN AND BE MAINTAINED IN GOOD ORDER DURING CONSTRUCTION.

6 Case No Page 6 APPEALS In accordance with Section 6 of the Calvert County Board of Appeals Rules of Procedure, "any party to a case may apply for a reconsideration of the Board's decision no later than 15 days from the date of the Board's Order." In accordance with Section of the Calvert County Zoning Ordinance, Board of Appeals decisions may be appealed to the Circuit Court of Calvert County by (1) any person aggrieved by any decision of the Board of Appeals or (2) any taxpayer, or (3) any officer, department, board or bureau of Calvert County. Such appeal shall be taken according to the Maryland Rules as set forth in Maryland Rules, Title 7, Chapter 200, as amended from time to time, within 30 days of the Board of Appeals Order. Entered: May q 2014 Pamela P. Helie, Clerk Susan Hance-Wells, Chair

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS CASE NUMBER S

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS CASE NUMBER 2015-0110-S VERIZON WIRELESS AND THOMAS AND IMOGENE BROWN, TRUSTEES OF THE THOMAS A. AND IMOGENE BROWN TRUST DATED JULY 2, 1984 SECOND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT