Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
9 <br /> investment standpoint. Another area in which he expressed concern was the "fall zone" <br /> requirement. The industry does not feel that "fall zones" are necessary. There are 2000 towers <br /> across the United States and there has never been a tower failure. He requested that these <br /> towers not be compared with the T.V. towers which are in excess of 1000 feet. He also <br /> commented that the 100 foot setback is not necessary or reasonable. <br /> John Weldon, with BellSouth Personal Communications, expressed agreement with <br /> previous comments. He addressed the issue of"stealth technology" which refers to antennas <br /> that do not look like antennas. He recommended that a task force be created to look at this <br /> technology to assure that they meet the intended nature and intent of the technology. When <br /> they are approved as "stealth technology" the industry could be provided relief from subdivision <br /> setback regulations and other Special Use Regulations. He indicated that he would work with <br /> staff to present examples of how the Special Use Request process and subdivision process <br /> work together to create burdens on their industry. <br /> Jerry Eatman, North Carolina General Counsel for Sprint Cellular, expressed several <br /> concerns. He mentioned that the requirement to share tower space indicates that a letter <br /> needs to be sent to all owners of towers within a one mile radius. This raises the concern for <br /> industry staff that they could be requested to locate a mile from their original requested site. <br /> The site locations are not flexible and would not provide the necessary coverage if they were <br /> required to locate at another location. There is a real financial motivation to locate on existing <br /> towers where that is possible. The additional paperwork will not increase that motivation. He <br /> also felt that requiring that applicants for new towers send notification to a preexisting list is not <br /> workable for industry staff. The Special Use Permit process already requires co-location <br /> wherever possible. This adds additional paperwork and questions about who gets on the list. <br /> He asked for clarification that the buffer is to be around the tower compound rather than the <br /> entire perimeter of the tract. Also, that the setback is from the base of the tower to the adjacent <br /> property line rather than the base of the tower to the lease line. <br /> Mary Willis indicated that the buffer is to be around the tower compound but that the set <br /> back is from the base of the tower to the lease line. <br /> Mr. Eatman asked that the setback requirement be reconsidered so that it deals with <br /> adjoining property owners and adjoining property lines rather than simply increasing the size of <br /> the parcel that needs to be leased. <br /> Jeff Lansing, with DialCall in Cary, agreed with the previous comments. He requested <br /> that a open discussion be held with industry and County staff, the Planning Board, citizens , <br /> and County Commissioners to facilitate developing standards. <br /> Commissioner Willhoit asked if it was true that land in an easement area could not be <br /> cultivated. He mentioned that many of the issues to be addressed in the application do not <br /> relate to telecommunications, but to the tower itself. He asked that the Planning Board address <br /> the issue of whether the Special Use Permit ought to apply to a tower. <br />