Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
r <br />1 Catalini said that structural inspections were good for much longer than three years. <br />2 <br />3 The Board spoke about leaving the ordinance as it is as it relates to inspections unless there is <br />4 some evidence that the towers show some structural faults. <br />5 <br />6 Davis said that an inspection has to be done when the tower is first built. He said that someone <br />7 with a professional license on the industry staff could do an inspection and it would not have to <br />a be done by the County. <br />9 <br />10 Schofield suggested asking the industry to submit a report to the County on an annual basis that <br />11 would not require a major inspection, since the industry does inspections quarterly. If a report is <br />12 not submitted, this would be a red flag. <br />13 <br />14 The following language was suggested for page 15 of the agenda packet, item `b': "At least once <br />15 every 12 months, a visual inspection from the ground shall be conducted by a properly trained <br />16 staff of a tower provider or consultant." <br />17 <br />1s The Board then discussed whether to leave in item 2 -a on page 14 of the agenda abstract about <br />19 the major inspections every 36 months. The Board will vote on this at the end. <br />20 <br />21 The Board decided to discuss the fees at the end. <br />22 <br />23 The comments from American Tower were addressed above, except for the fees, which will be <br />24 addressed at the end. <br />25 <br />26 The next handout was from Verizon. A representative from Verizon said that he withdraws <br />27 comment #1 based on what he has heard. Regarding comment #2, he said that it was very finite <br />28 as to what would be deemed an unforeseen circumstance. He would like this definition to be <br />29 broadened and not limited to the four categories. <br />30 <br />31 McAdams said that item 2 on page 4 of American Tower's handout was not addressed. <br />32 <br />33 Benedict read what this was referring to on page 16 of the agenda packet, item e. This item <br />34 speaks to existing towers. <br />35 <br />36 Bill Howard of American Tower said that to require after the fact structurals when they have <br />37 never been the law in the County seems to impose additional costs and may impose some <br />38 practical problems. They are more than willing to cooperate with the staff, but they question the <br />39 requirement of information on existing towers. <br />40 <br />41 Benedict said that the purpose was to have all the information about all the towers in the County <br />42 and their structural integrity so that if there is a tower somewhere that is 250 feet tall with one <br />43 user on it, we want to be able to know if the tower can handle more users. He said that out of the <br />44 49 towers on the map, we probably have good information on 10 -12 of the towers. <br />45 <br />46 Chair Gooding -Ray asked Bill Howard if he had a structural analysis of the existing towers. Mr. <br />108 <br />