11A. PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT VERIZON WIRELESS

Transcription

1 SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Regular Session i January 25, A. PUBLIC HEARING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT VERIZON WIRELESS This public hearing is held pursuant to Section(s) and of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended to consider a request by Frederick Womble, SBA Communications Corporation on behalf of Verizon Wireless, applicant, on behalf of Jeremy and Jessica Edsall, owners, for a Conditional Use Permit to install a 199 monopole tower on property known as Tax Parcel 47-10, located on the east side of Johnsons Mill Road (SR 641) approximately 0.67 miles south of its intersection with Vicksville Road (SR 645), with a property address of Johnsons Mill Road. The property is in the Jerusalem Voting and Magisterial Districts. The notice of public hearing was published in the Tidewater News on January 10 and January 17, 2016 and all adjacent property owners were notified as required by law. Following its public hearing on December 10, 2015, the Southampton County Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the conditional use permit. After conclusion of the public hearing, the Board of Supervisors will consider the comments offered this evening and will proceed to approve, deny or defer action on the request. Mrs. Beth Lewis, Secretary to the Planning Commission, will provide introductory remarks after which all interested parties are invited to come forward and express their views. MOTION REQUIRED: If the Board is so inclined, a motion is required to accept the Planning Commission recommendation and approve the conditional use permit.

2 CUP 2015:02 Jeremy and Jessica Edsall, owners Fred Womble, SBA Communications Corporation for Verizon Wireless, applicant Application Request: Conditional Use Permit for telecommunications monopole IDENTIFICATION AND LOCATION INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan designation: Zoning designation: Agricultural/Forest/Open Space/Rural Residential A-2, Agricultural Acreage: Total acreage, 37.5+/- Area to be considered, 20,200+/- square feet disturbed area Current Use: Tax Map No.: portion of TP Location: Magisterial District: Voting District: Adjacent Zoning: Adjacent Land Use: PROJECT ANALYSIS One single family residence, agriculture/forestry Proposed monopole is on the east side of Johnsons Mill Road (SR 641) approximately 3528 south of its intersection with Vicksville Road (SR 645), with an address of Johnsons Mill Road Jerusalem Jerusalem North: A-2, Agricultural South: R-1, Residential East: A-2 West: A-2 North: Scattered residential, agriculture and forestry South: Scattered residential, agriculture and forestry East: Agriculture and forestry West: Scattered residential, self-storage, County solid waste collection site Overview The applicant is seeking a Conditional Use Permit to construct a new 199 self-support monopole and associated equipment to provide enhanced wireless service in the Sedley area. The A-2, Agricultural zoning district permits the following: (33.1) Wireless communication facilities per section of this chapter.

3 The Supplementary Regulations portion of the Municipal Code (above-referenced Sec ) provides the following: Conditional use permit review process. Applications requiring a conditional use permit require approval by the board of supervisors in order to permit construction. The following information shall be supplied as a minimum requirement for application requiring a conditional use permit: (1) Scaled drawings signed and sealed. (2) Photographs from a minimum of five (5) points surrounding the site. (3) A statement from an electrical engineer regarding NIER exposure levels. (4) An inventory of the existing facilities. (5) A radio frequency technician's statement regarding specifications. (6) Evidence demonstrating the inadequacy or unavailability of other structures within a three-mile radius. (7) An engineering report describing antenna support structure. (8) A statement regarding applicant s co-location policy. (9) FAA Air Navigation Hazard Determination report. (10) FCC Environmental Compliance regarding NEPA. (11) Report regarding NHPA. (12) FCC license for each wireless provider associated with the application. (13) Engineer s report regarding structural issues. Sec continues with the following requirements: General standards. The following general standards shall apply to all applications proposing wireless telecommunication facilities: (1) The maximum height shall be determined through the conditional use permit process. (2) The following setback requirements shall apply: a. All antenna support structures must be setback two hundred (200) percent of the height of the structure from nearest residential structure. b. All antenna support structures shall be setback one hundred ten (110) percent of the height of the structure from property lines. c. All facilities must satisfy the minimum zoning district setback requirements for primary structures. (3) Speculative structures are not permitted. (4) All antenna support structures shall be enclosed by appropriate security fencing. (5) The following requirements shall govern the landscaping: a. Buffers shall be provided around the perimeter of the site. b. Existing trees shall be preserved as possible. c. All trees shall be protected except where clearing is required. d. The owner is responsible for maintaining landscaping.

4 (6) The treatment, color and lighting system for wireless telecommunication facilities shall be as follows: a. Antenna support structures shall either be galvanized steel finish, or to FAA standards, painted a neutral color. Antennas shall be a neutral, non-reflective color with no logos. b. The buildings shall use materials, colors, textures and screening that will blend with the natural surroundings. c. Antenna support structures shall not be artificially lighted unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority. (7) Commercial advertising is not permitted. (8) Facilities shall not interfere with the county or other public safety radio systems. (9) All facilities must meet or exceed current standards of all agencies with the authority to regulate their operation. (10) When the facility ceases to be operated for twelve (12) months, it shall be considered abandoned, and the owner of such facility shall remove it per county ordinance. (11) The owner shall have a safety inspection conducted annually by a registered professional engineer licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia. (12) Any additional costs in the review process shall be reimbursed by the applicant. (13) The owner of the antenna support structure shall provide the name and address of a contact person and notify the department of planning in writing of any changes. (g) Technical review/fees. Applications for all wireless telecommunication facilities shall require a technical review that will be conducted by consultant selected by the county. The following is provided: Monopole height including the lightening rod will be 199. The monopole will allow room for future co-location of additional wireless carriers on the same site. The applicant proposes a prefab equipment shelter, backup emergency generator, and other associated equipment. The required fencing will be included, as per the report. Landscaping will be installed around the equipment site as required. Silt fence will be installed to retain any mature trees outside of the area to be disturbed in conjunction with construction, an area of approximately 20,200 square feet. The closest off-site residence is over 500 from the proposed monopole. The onsite residence is 438 from the proposed monopole site. The monopole is over 300 from the nearest property line. The facility will be designed so as not to interfere with the County s public safety radio system or the public safety systems of other jurisdictions.

5 The facility will meet or exceed all applicable regulations and shall have a safety inspection on an annual basis. Should any component of the facility cease to be operated for a continuous 12 month period, it shall be considered abandoned and removed within 90 days of receipt of notice from the County. The required review by the County s consultant was performed and is attached. RECOMMENDATION OF CONSULTANT From Page 2 of Consultant report The consultant believes that this Application conforms with all Federal, State, and County regulations regarding the construction of telecommunications support structures, represents a sound design, and should therefore be granted approval by way of issuance of the requested conditional use permit. COMMUNITY COMMENTS No comments were received prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Several citizens spoke in favor of the request at the Planning Commission public hearing. CONCLUSION Strengths of application: More wide-spread and/or better wireless coverage is a concern throughout the County and any new facilities will make a positive contribution to the residents. The County s consultant recommends approval of the monopole application. Weaknesses of application: None noted SUPPORT INFORMATION AND ATTACHMENTS 1) Staff report 2) Consultant report 3) Application and submitted materials 4) Soils map 5) Adjacent property owner notification PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION At their regular December 10, 2015 meeting, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit as requested:

6 Chairman Drake states and Mr. Day is not here; thank you. Okay, moving right along to item number three on our agenda. We have a public hearing scheduled tonight. Mrs. Lewis I am going to ask that you proceed if you will. Mrs. Beth Lewis states this is a request for a conditional use permit from Verizon Wireless for a monopole for telecommunications on Johnson Mill Road; the property address of Johnson Mill Road. This is the same type of request that you heard two months ago for the property in Sedley. The consultant is not able to be here tonight but his report is in your material and he recommends approval of this. In his report he shows the propagation maps. I have those on the computer if you would like for me to show them on the screen. You can see that the coverage is filling in. It is Mr. Condyles opinion that when this third one gets approved they will most likely build all three of them at the same time. This is coverage today in the north part of the county. At the bottom of the screen is U.S. 58 and it goes from Windsor over to just north of Sebrell. This is how it is today. This one adds the Millfield Road site that was approved two years ago. That is the black start approximately in the middle; that kind of starts to fill in with some color in the county. This is the one you looked at a couple of months ago; the tower in Sebrell. You can see Courtland and Capron north of there. When that one is built, then that area will get filled in. This is the Sedley area today. You can see Courtland, Barrett s Store and then you can see in the Ivor and Zuni area that there is some color. If this proposed tower gets approved, then you will have a little more coverage in the middle of the county. So, between these three towers, the space between the one that says Barrett s Store, Courtland, and Ivor will start to fill in with some usable coverage. The request tonight for this tower is 199 tower; 194 of tower with a 5 lightening rod on top just like the other ones. It is set sufficiently back from the road. It meets all of the setback requirements. I got a phone call from an abutting property owner who had concerns about what impact it would have on her property. This proposed application is at the southern end of the applicant s property and it is a long and skinny property. It is more than 500 away from her property. It is quite a distance. I don t see any of the Verizon people here tonight. I don t know if the property owner is here. Chairman Drake states can I interject? Mrs. Beth Lewis states yes. Chairman Drake states you are doing a fine job by the way. Now, just because we have these, it does not mean today cell phone service is not workable. This is the data; making data more accessible. Is that correct? Commissioner Tennessee states that s correct. Mrs. Beth Lewis states right. A couple of months ago when you talked about the one on Plank Road, the discussion that went on well over an hour was the difference between cell phone service and the data service that everyone needs. Yes, even in the areas that have no color there is cell phone service. But, this makes it more suitable for data. Chairman Drake states I just wanted to clarify for the ones that may know because it was quite an extensive meeting we had last time. Mrs. Beth Lewis states we learned a lot. Chairman Drake states we are not going to take any short cuts tonight if anybody needs to be well versed but it is a lot of information to absorb. Anyway, let s proceed and see

7 where we are at. If anyone has any other concerns, we will try to answer those questions. Is that all that you have at this time? Mrs. Beth Lewis states yes. Chairman Drake states I will open the public hearing. If anyone would like to come forward, you may do so at this time. I am going to ask that if anyone wants to come forward first supporting the construction of the cell phone tower. Does anyone want to come speak in support of it or is everyone in support of it? Can you give me a show of hands of who is in support of it? People in the audience raised their hands. Chairman Drake states now don t be intimidated; if you are not supporting it we want to hear your concerns as well. Yes sir, come forward. If you will, for the record give your name and address please. Mr. Jay O Berry addressed the board. My name is Jay O Berry and I live on Ivor Road. The entire part of Ivor Road as soon as you get out of the Berlin area and then all the way across to Sedley is sketchy at best for voice. Laying aside those maps we would need those in order to have communication because there is no voice communication in many parts of that area. It sure would be nice to have data too but just to have a cell phone work would be great. Chairman Drake states thank you. Ms. Evelyn Turner addressed the board. My name is Evelyn Turner and I also live on Ivor Road at Ivor Road and I am in support of this. I feel that it is really unfair to the citizens of the county that live in that area not to have access to data and cell phone in the day and time that we live in. Even in the case of an emergency and the electricity go out, we can t even use our cell phones to call out or send text messages so I am in support of it. Thank you. Chairman Drake states thank you. I am going to ask if anyone has a problem or if you are opposed to it or have a concern; or if you are an adjourning land owner and have any issues if you would come forward. Mr. Glenn Updike addressed the board. My name is Glenn Updike at Statesville Road. I am speaking on my behalf and no one else. I am 100% for it of course but I do have some concerns. At the least, the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors, make an official request to Verizon. They have two divisions; landlines and then the cell lines. In both cases, I think they have gathered up their resources but have not accomplished one complete system. I am sort of frustrated and I am sure that everybody else that lives in the county is; even if you have a landline, it is so small and out of date that your computer is like snail mail when you try to get anything on the internet and will take a whole day. The lines are not sufficient. The second thing is cell phones. I don t know anything more frustrating than almost the last two years with Verizon with telephone numbers books. They don t register cell phone numbers and half the people this day in time don t have a landline. Trying to get in contact with individuals, you look in the telephone book and they don t have it. I would like to see Verizon with complete telephone numbers for both landlines and cell phones. Like I said, they have two divisions; put them together to work and provide services. You know the south side of Southampton has absolutely no communication as far as cell phones are concerned and the internet is real slow. I would like for you all to discuss it and make a

8 recommendation; send a letter to Verizon and ask for better service for the people of the county. Chairman Drake states thank you. Anyone else? If not, I will close the public hearing. I will ask if there is any other discussion from the Commissioners. Commissioner Tennessee states I would just like to say to Mr. Updike, I got my phone book last week and it was probably about 25 pages and it covered from Southampton all the way to Alberta, Stonecreek; right along the Carolina border there. Of all the counties that it covered, it was about 25 pages. Most people don t want their cell phone numbers published. If they don t give it to you, not to be smart, but they don t want to talk to you. Everybody has gone to cell phones now so my point made is there is only like 25 pages in the book from Verizon. It was the smallest telephone book that I have ever seen. The other thing is cell phone technology; I got my first phone I want to say 1989 or 1990, the first phone that I had. We all know that the revolution has steadily increased. As the man told us last week we are going to 5G. Right now everybody hopefully has a 4G signal. So, if we go to 5G that is a stronger, faster data streaming signal. So, we have to keep up with the times and stay ahead of the game. We have asked a lot of questions in the last meeting so my recommendation would be that we go ahead and approve this tower. Chairman Drake states okay I have a motion. Commissioner Parker seconded the motion. Chairman Drake states any other discussion? Before we vote on it, I would like to follow up on Mr. Updike s comment. Mrs. Lewis would it be out of order if we could let the Board of Supervisors know or our consultant know that we would continue to support as the request came forward. We would like to see the entire county at some point have good service. We would be willing to support those endeavors as a Planning Commission. Mrs. Beth Lewis states and the staff report that the Board of Supervisors get with this request includes the minutes from this meeting so that will all be part of the information package that they get when this goes to the Board of Supervisors in January. Chairman Drake states okay, so before we vote and I am just asking is that appropriate that we would continue to support as these towers come up. Unless there is a landowner or someone that has an issue, I think the Planning Commission will support getting full coverage for all citizens of the county. Is that agreeable? Okay. Commissioner Mann states now this applicant is actually Verizon Wireless; is there another antenna company, tower company? Mrs. Beth Lewis states the applicant is Verizon Wireless. Commissioner Mann states okay and how about a bond? Mrs. Beth Lewis states that is at the building permit stage. All new communication towers require a bond by the zoning ordinance when they seek a building permit. Commissioner Mann states so it doesn t have to be included in this application. Mrs. Beth Lewis states no. Chairman Drake states and I would like to mention for those that weren t here the first time, they may not start construction immediately but as the funding becomes available we will see that construction take place. Mrs. Beth Lewis states that is the way that it

9 was explained to us. Commissioner Randall states this will be our third approval in the past what, two years? Mrs. Beth Lewis states yes, two years. Commissioner Mann states and the bond is still there in case it needs to be taken down. It will cover that? Mrs. Beth Lewis states yes, the bond is required to cover that. Chairman Drake states we have a motion and a proper second that we approve the tower site. Chairman Drake called for the vote which carried unanimously.

10

11

12

13

14

15

16 SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY, VA TECHNICAL REVIEW PROPOSED NEW WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY VERIZON WIRELESS/SBA At JOHNSON S MILL ROAD SEDLEY, VA Submitted by: ATLANTIC TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANTS, INC. A Member of The Atlantic Group of Companies, Inc. ATC PROJECT #: October 22,

17 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Verizon Wireless (Verizon) with SBA Communications (SBA) has made application to the County for the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a new telecommunications 194 self-support monopole tower (with 5 lightning rod for a total height of 199 ) at Johnson s Mill Road on property owned by Jeremy and Jessica Edsall. Verizon Wireless is an FCC licensed telecommunications provider authorized and mandated to provide coverage to the Southampton County area and proposes the addition of a 199 monopole style transmission tower to support service delivery in an area of documented lack of system coverage in the central geographic region of the county. This report outlines the specific areas of evaluation with respect to this proposal, and this consultant s several recommendations regarding the site plans as presented. Supporting and clarifying evidence regarding the suitability of the proposed design in meeting the specified coverage goals is also included. The consultant believes that this Application conforms with all Federal, State, and County regulations regarding the construction of telecommunications support structures, represents a sound design, and should therefore be granted approval by way of issuance of the requested conditional use permit. George N. Condyles, IV CPM President and COO Mechanicsville, VA Page 2 of 20

18 1.0 TECHNICAL 1.1 Siting The proposed tower site is a 100 x 100 square area on 37.5 acres of property east of Route 641/Johnson s Mill Road located on land owned by Jeremy & Jessica Edsall. The 60 x 80 chain-link fenced compound will provide ground space for location of the telecommunications equipment and will enclose the foundation of the proposed self-supported monopole tower. The physical site is located at coordinates N and W on County tax parcel map # and is zoned Agriculture, A-2. Detailed Site Plan of Compound Surrounding tracts are zoned agricultural (A-2) as well as Residential (R-1). Site placement as described represents the location of most minimal visual impact. The site is off the road but not placed deep within the property. Landowner approval for this site has been documented and supplied. The collapse zone for this tower is entirely within the proposed site property lines; all required setbacks for this project have been observed. Mechanicsville, VA Page 3 of 20

19 1.2 Setback Requirements The Applicant s site plans list the setbacks as follows: Tower Setback Requirements Required Actual Front setback Side setback Side setback Rear setback Nearest Residence Mechanicsville, VA Page 4 of 20

20 1.3 Photo Simulations As per Article XV, Section , Wireless Telecommunication Facility Regulations, (e) (2), photographs of the site from a minimum of five (5) points surrounding the site are required. A simulated photographic image of the proposed monopole prepared by NB&C Engineering Services, LLC, and a map indicating the location and distance from the point at which the photograph was taken to the proposed site was submitted with the application. The Consultant has reviewed the applicant s photo simulations and concurs with their findings and views. View from the West Mechanicsville, VA Page 5 of 20

21 Views from East Mechanicsville, VA Page 6 of 20

22 View from the South View from the North Mechanicsville, VA Page 7 of 20

23 1.4 Colocation While co-location is preferable to construction of a new site, with such co-location minimizing visual impact of telecommunications equipment on the surrounding area, no additional sites are available in the area which would meet the Applicant s coverage objectives. The Applicant has stated in their Application Narrative to Southampton County dated September 30, 2015 that: Verizon Wireless is committed to a policy of co-locating on existing towers or other tall structures capable of supporting its communications equipment. A thorough search of the subject area was conducted and no existing towers or structures tall enough to meet the network needs were identified. Mechanicsville, VA Page 8 of 20

24 Existing Towers with 3 New Verizon Towers The Applicant submitted a map demonstrating their existing, proposed, and future locations to serve Southampton County. As observed by this Consultant during the site visit the closest existing tower sites to the proposed site are almost 5+ miles to the west on Rt. 35 in the Courtland area on which they are already located. Therefore, the proposed site is the only viable option to allow the Applicant to meet their coverage needs as demonstrated in their coverage maps submitted with the Application. 1.5 Structural The proposed 199-foot self-supportive monopole tower design is of high strength steel, and represents a highly stable structural design not known by this consultant to have failed at any installation in this region. This structure, as proposed, shall be in compliance of EIA/TIA-222-G guidelines (the accepted industry standard) for structures which is mandated to withstand the structural loading of all appurtenances, plus additional wind and ice loading. Mechanicsville, VA Page 9 of 20

25 Applicant Verizon + 4 additional LMR Carriers Mechanicsville, VA Page 10 of 20

26 The size of the proposed monopole tower makes this design an ideal choice to support the proposed appurtenances, and yet minimize visual impact. This tower structure, as proposed, would allow room for future co-location of at least five (5) wireless carriers on the same site, minimizing the number of towers needed for all wireless telecommunications carriers to eventually optimize service in this area. Verizon Wireless proposes the addition of twelve (12) panel-type antennas, sixteen (12) 1 5/8 coax cables of 220 ± length, one (1) 11 x 20 concrete equipment shelter with various equipment cabinets, 4 x 8 concrete pad with standby generator, and associated utilities. Furthermore, in conformance with County ordinance, work at this site will remain in compliance with ALL federal, state, and local building codes and regulations if work proceeds as outlined in the application. Mechanicsville, VA Page 11 of 20

27 1.6 Engineer s Certification The engineering firms of Clark-Nexson Engineering, PC and Hayden Frye & Associates (the engineering Site Planning and Design companies) are both licensed to perform this work in the Commonwealth of Virginia and propose plans and designs that meet current engineering practices. 1.7 Radio Frequency Exposure & Interference FCC bulletin OET-65 provides guidance for a licensee proposing to construct a telecommunications support structure in calculation of RF exposure limitations, including analysis of the cumulative effect of all transmitters on the structure. Appropriate steps, including warning signage at the site, must be taken to protect both the general public and site workers from unsafe RF exposure in accordance with federal guidelines. Documentation of an RF exposure study is included with this application. The consultant sees no evidence of interference by or with this site after a general evaluation of the surrounding transmitter sites. Should any interference issues be posed with respect to this site, mitigation would nevertheless remain the responsibility of the tower owner and affected carrier(s), and would be regulated by the Federal Communication Commission, having no effect or burden on the County. 1.8 Grounding Grounding of all structures and equipment at an RF site is critically important to the safety of both personnel and equipment at the site Even a single component not meeting this standard places all other site components at risk for substantial damage. All structures and equipment at the site should maintain a ground potential difference of less than 5 ohms. If the construction is performed as proposed, it is imperative that sufficient grounding is appropriately planned and maintained at this site. Mechanicsville, VA Page 12 of 20

28 The Applicant has addressed this issue in the drawings submitted. 1.9 General Safety As clearly indicated in the proposed site plans, this 60 x 80 site compound will be surrounded by a suitable 8 chain-link security fence with three strands of barbed wire on top, which will prevent unauthorized access to the tower site. It is planned that additional safety measures to be placed at this site include RF exposure warning signage, site identification information, and routine and emergency contact information. The site plans include the installation of an OSHA-approved style of fall prevention cable. Mechanicsville, VA Page 13 of 20

29 2.0 PROCEDUREAL 2.1 FAA Study An FAA TOWAIR study has been conducted for a tower at a height of 199 AGL at the proposed location. Based on its findings the FAA determined that the structure is not a hazard to air navigation. 2.2 FCC Antenna Site Registration This site is not required to have an antenna site registration number. 2.3 Environmental Impacts The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), delineated in Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1, Subpart I, sections , requires federal agencies to incorporate environmental considerations into their decision-making process when evaluating new construction proposals. As a licensing agency, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) requires all licensees to consider the potential environmental effects from their construction Mechanicsville, VA Page 14 of 20

30 of antenna support structures, and to disclose those effects in an Environmental Assessment (EA) that must be filed with the FCC for review. A NEPA Screening Report was not submitted with the application. This report should be completed prior to issuance of a building Permit. The consultant believes upon a field inspection that there will be no disturbance of endangered species or environmental concerns. The Application should move forward. The proposed site location is raw farmland and is remote in nature. 2.4 Historic Impacts Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) requires that State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPO) and the President s Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given a reasonable opportunity to comment on all undertakings with the potential to affect historic properties. Prior to construction, the licensee is required to submit to the SHPO a detailed description of the project, a listing of local historic resources, and a discussion of any measures being undertaken to mitigate impacts (if any) on historic resources. Upon receipt, the SHPO has thirty (30) days to review and respond to those submissions. All agencies with authority to permit construction are required to consider the SHPO response in its decision making process with respect to new construction applications. A response from SHPO was not included with the application. This report should be completed prior to issuance of a building Permit. The consultant believes upon a field inspection that there will be no historic concerns. The Application should move forward. The Department of Historic Resources will review and comment on this application. The Applicant should supply the County with this Section 106 Report and any comments concerning historic impacts and remediation prior to issuance of a Building Permit. Mechanicsville, VA Page 15 of 20

31 2.5 Supporting Documentation The Applicant has included documentation supporting the construction of the proposed site in the form of propagation mapping. The analysis of the system coverage expected from this site, in the opinion of this consultant, represents an accurate RF engineering assessment. An independent RF analysis has been performed by this consultant verifying that the applicant will be able to meet their stated coverage objectives by construction as proposed. Additionally and as indicated, no proximal sites affording colocation potential and meeting the stated coverage goals are available. In summary, this tower will provide the radio coverage to fill a hole in coverage. Mechanicsville, VA Page 16 of 20

32 3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS This application represents an appreciable intent on the part of the Applicant to conform to the letter, spirit, and intent of all applicable federal, state, and local regulations, accepted industry practices, and specific County ordinances regarding construction of new telecommunications towers. The design presented represents sound engineering. It is therefore the recommendation of this consultant that the request for issuance of a conditional use permit to allow construction of this site as proposed be issued. Recommendations: 1. Grant this application as submitted by the Applicant: 194 tower with 5 lightning rod for a total structure of 199 AGL. 2. Applicant could possibly provide, free of charge, one antenna slot on this tower for Public Safety. 3. The NEPA Report should be completed prior to issuance of a building Permit. The consultant believes upon a field inspection that there will be no disturbance of endangered species or environmental concerns. The Application should move forward. 4. The Applicant should supply the County with a Section 106 Report and any comments concerning historic impacts and remediation prior to issuance of a Building Permit. In closing, this consultant remains available to address any comments or questions that may arise during review of this report. Any interested party with such comments or questions may feel free to contact this firm, which remains committed to delivering independent, objective, unbiased, and thorough consulting services. Respectfully submitted, George N. Condyles, IV, CPM President & COO Mechanicsville, VA Page 17 of 20