Minutes 08/08/2017 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

August 8, 2017 WHEREAS, T-Mobile Communications, the contract lessee of the subject property, by and through its agent C. E. Forehand, has made application pursuant to Section 40.1-2.3B of the Code of the City of Portsmouth, Virginia (2006) for the granting of a use permit to construct a 165 foot monopole telecommunications tower at 3637 Victory Boulevard; and WHEREAS, NTW Properties, LLC, the owner of the property, has consented to the filing of the application; and WHEREAS , the applicant and the Planning Director have done all things required to be done in connection with said application; and WHEREAS , the Planning Commission has recommended the DENIAL of the application for a use permit; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 40.1-2.3B(4) of the Zoning Ordinance, an application for a Use Permit may be approved only upon a finding that the applicant demonstrates that all of the standards listed therein are met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Portsmouth, Virginia: 1. That it makes the following findings and determinations under Section 40.1- 2.3B(4): a. The use for which the permit is sought is NOT consistent with the comprehensive plan; b. The use for which the permit is sought is NOT compatible with the character of surrounding lands and the uses permitted in the zoning district(s) of surrounding lands; c. The use for which the permit is sought is NOT configured to minimize adverse effects, including the visual impacts of the proposed use on adjacent lands; d. The use for which the permit is sought DOES NOT allow for the protection of property values and the ability of neighboring lands to develop the uses permitted in the zoning districts. 2. That it makes the following additional determinations and findings: a. That the location of the proposed tower is incompatible with existing detached single family residences located directly across Rapidan Street. b. That there are no land uses or site improvements proposed that would provide an adequate transition or buffering between the proposed tower and the single family residences located directly across Rapidan Street. c. That the proposed use of this property would be inconsistent with the Policies and Strategies contained in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, particularly the Chapters on Land Use and Housing and Neighborhoods. d. That a more suitable site, particularly north of Interstate 264, would provide a better location for a new tower, since that area is either commercial or industrial in nature with no residential development in the near vicinity. e. That the applicant has demonstrated through materials submitted that existing towers provide coverage of the general area and that the proposed tower is only intended to expand and enhance service.