Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
i-1q <br />Rusty Monroe: No one has expressed the desire to at this point. I would speculate the County <br />would use it. <br />Glenn Bowles: In the report, Jack Ball and Todd Jones expressed the desire but no action has <br />been taken. I would expect this in the future. There are few changes. There is tower structure <br />removal bond for <br />$75,000 to replace the bond documents on pages 147 and 148 for $16,500, which was the actual <br />replacement cost. There is a document that is an extension of their FAA license. There is an <br />analysis from a licensed real estate appraiser regarding the potential impact on real estate values <br />in the area on page 149. <br />Jay Bryan: (to Luther Misenhimer) Your letter states that the supply of homes for sale in the <br />subject's market area is considered low in comparison to other parts of the Triangle, thus demand <br />is high. I am not clear how you actually reached that opinion. <br />Luther Misenheimer: It was actually difficult. Typically we look at the direct impact associated <br />with a specific area. I looked at the surrounding properties as a whole and at the tether study that <br />was done and at the horizon lines associated with the houses, and found that within most of the <br />subdivisions, it was not visible. I didn't find there would be an overall effect on the property <br />based on the tower. <br />Jay Bryan: Based on the lack of visibility of the tower itself? Have you done these for other <br />towers? <br />Luther Misenheimer: No. I have not. <br />Glenn Bowles: Both in the rezoning for the Planned Development and the SUP, the same <br />question is asked, on page 13, under Article 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 where the staff did not make a <br />recommendation regarding the finding which leads to the discussion of the public necessity. <br />Jay Bryan: We need to make those specific. Is there a motion that we approve the Planning <br />Staff's recommendation? <br />MOTION made by Joel Knight to approve the Staff's findings of fact. Brian Crawford seconded. <br />VOTE: Unanimous <br />MOTION made by Brian Crawford to approve Article 8.2.2 and 8.2.3 regarding public necessity. <br />Jeffrey Schmitt seconded. <br />VOTE: Unanimous <br />MOTION made by Jeffrey Schmitt to approve Article 8.2.1.2. Brian Crawford seconded. <br />VOTE: Unanimous <br />MOTION made by Brian Crawford to approve Article 8.2.1.3. [Article 8.2.1 Item 3 states that <br />"The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan submitted, will be in <br />harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use is in compliance with the general <br />plan for the physical development of the County as embodied in these regulations or in the <br />Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners "] Sam <br />Lasris seconded. <br />VOTE: Unanimous <br />