Planning commission recommends approval of two telecommunications towers after public questions on visibility and record accuracy

The Montgomery County Planning Commission on July 15 recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve two special-use permits for freestanding telecommunications towers: a 158-foot monopole at 3249 Meadow Creek Road (SUP204) and a monopole at 4752 Old Pike Road (SUP26-5).

Staff planner Kim Wright presented SUP204, describing location, zoning (agricultural district enrollment), a 75-by-75-foot leased area with a 50-by-50-foot fenced compound, VDOT review with no safety concerns, grading below the county's land-disturbance threshold, and a balloon test that showed limited visibility. Wright said FAA lighting is not required, wiring will be internal to the monopole, and staff recommended approval with conditions that limit tower height (158 feet exclusive of the 2-foot lightning rod), require monopole design, and require site development generally conform to submitted concept plans.

For SUP26-5 at Old Pike Road, staff explained the application initially listed a lattice tower but was revised to a monopole to align with the county's comprehensive-plan preferences. Staff described a 100-by-100-foot lease area, a roughly 45-by-45-foot compound, required access easements, VDOT review with no exception, and a recommendation for approval with conditions similar to those for SUP204.

Laurie Schweller, attorney for Towers LLC (the proposed lessee and a joint venture including Verizon Wireless), said the Old Pike Road facility would host Verizon as an anchor tenant, provide space for collocators, be galvanized stainless steel to blend with the sky, require no lighting, and sit about 1,870 feet from the nearest neighbor. Schweller emphasized coverage and emergency-communications benefits for the pilot-area rural communities and travelers.

Two nearby residents spoke during the Old Pike Road public hearing. Joan Wolf, who said she has lived on Gold Rush Road for 41 years, asked the commission to deny or at least delay the application until the public record is "accurate and complete," citing what she described as inconsistent packet materials (tower type listed differently in narrative and drawings, conflicting compound dimension figures of 50-by-50 versus 75-by-75, and incomplete generator information including noise, fuel-capacity and spill-prevention details). "The commission should not have to guess which plan is accurate," Wolf said, and asked for realistic visual information before a decision.

Kathy Anderson, a neighbor at 4670 Old Pike Road, said the posted public-notice signs were "barely visible" and that many in the community might not have had a fair opportunity to see the advertisement. She urged better on-site notice in future applications.

Commissioners questioned the applicant about how the Old Pike Road site was selected. Schweller described the typical process: an RF engineer defines a search ring (commonly about a one-mile radius) where service is needed; site-acquisition managers then identify available and accessible options and present candidates to engineering for final selection. She said she did not prepare a full alternative-site analysis for the commission and that lease agreements typically are in place by the time zoning approval is requested. A commissioner asked the applicant to confirm other candidate sites had been evaluated if that information could be provided.

After discussion, the commission moved and seconded recommendations of approval for each special-use permit with the conditions noted in staff reports. The commission recorded the motions and voted to forward both applications with recommendations for approval to the Board of Supervisors.

Votes at a glance: SUP204 (3249 Meadow Creek Road) ' planning commission: recommendation for approval to the Board of Supervisors (conditions: height limit 158 ft exclusive of 2-ft lightning rod; monopole design; wiring internal; no lighting unless FAA-required). SUP26-5 (4752 Old Pike Road) ' planning commission: recommendation for approval to the Board of Supervisors (conditions: height limit per staff report; monopole design; wiring internal; no lighting unless FAA-required).

The commission's recommendation does not constitute a final land-use decision; the Board of Supervisors will consider the planning commission's recommendation at a later meeting.