Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
r <br />. 2 <br />telecommunication carriers. The tower will be a free standing lattice structure and <br />light steel gray in color. <br />The application proposes a type C 40-foot landscaped buffer around the facility <br />with existing trees meeting the buffer requirement. The site is presently wooded <br />and existing vegetation will only be disturbed to accommodate the tower and <br />entrance road. <br />There are no existing towers within one mile of this site on which the applicant <br />could co-locate. An application from Spectrasite Communications, Inc. fora 199 <br />foot telecommunications tower approximately 1.33 miles east of this site was <br />denied by the Orange County Board of Adjustment on November 9, 1998. <br />The application indicates this tower can structurally accommodate 5 users. Gearon <br />has indicated they are willing to negotiate with other users to attach additional <br />communication facilities provided they do not interfere with the primary purpose <br />of the tower. <br />The facility will be unmanned; therefore, water and sewer facilities will not be <br />required. Once constructed the tower will only be visited for scheduled <br />maintenance and emergencies. <br />August 24. 1998. Public Hearing <br />The application was presented at a joint public hearing before the Orange County <br />Board of County Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board on <br />August 24, 1998. Minutes of that public hearing and items submitted as evidence <br />are included in the binder provided. <br />Planning Board Recommendation <br />On October 13, 1998, the Planning Board, in a 5 to 2 vote, recommended denial <br />of the Class A Special Use Permit for the following reasons: 1) photographs, as <br />required by Article 8.8.17a.1 d.2.h, of aclearly-visible balloon floated at the <br />proposed tower location to the maximum height of the tower were not taken from <br />property of residents that would be impacted by the use, so the visual impact of <br />the proposed tower could not be assessed from the submitted photographs; and 2) <br />the applicant failed to provide convincing evidence, as required by Article 8.2.1 2, <br />that the use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. The <br />minutes of the Planning Board meeting on October 13, 1998, (continuation of the <br />October 7, 1998, meeting) are included in the binder provided. <br />The Public Hearing was resumed in the November 17, 1998, Board of County <br />Commissioners meeting. Additional comments were heard from the applicants <br />