Browse
Search
P ORD-2002-030 Telecommunications Tower Ordinance Amendments
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Ordinances
>
Ordinance 2000-2009
>
2002
>
P ORD-2002-030 Telecommunications Tower Ordinance Amendments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/29/2013 2:09:00 PM
Creation date
4/23/2012 4:48:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/6/2002
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Resolution
Agenda Item
9b
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20021106
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
120
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Sep 04 02 01:37p American Tower carp. (7041 S48 -8545 <br />. 3 p.4 <br />Orange County Planning Board 74 <br />' <br />C/O Mr. Craig Benedict <br />September 4, 2002 <br />Page 3 <br />identical to the approach allowed by the County widt respect to <br />structural evaluations in § 6.18.4(e)(2)(a), Moreover, we on, o oppo the se the <br />provisions of the ordinance that allow the County to pass <br />industry, all costs of these inspections plus 1096, particularly when we <br />have no voice in the personnel chosen, the standards to be evaluated, <br />the time they will occupy, the methodologies they will employ — all <br />with no limit or ceiling on these expenses. <br />2. Existing towers: With respect to the structural analysis required for <br />existing towers in § 6.18.4(e)(5)(e), we would request that this <br />requirement be eliminated or at least waived for towers on which a <br />collocation has been placed within the last 3 years (as to which the <br />County should have in its possession the structural analysis completed <br />for the collocation). To require that all towers undergo this evaluation <br />when that has already been done as a part of recent collocations is <br />simply to impose additional unnecessary expenses on the industry, and <br />require the re- submission of documentation that the (county <br />presumably retains in its records and archives. <br />We appreciate your consideration of these points. I will be present at the <br />Planning Board hearing this evening to answer questions and explain our position further. <br />Yours very truly, <br />ICAN TOWER CORD TION <br />illiam G. Howard <br />Zoning Manager <br />WGH: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.