Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
SEP -Q4 -2002 02:17PM FROM- PENNINGTON AND LOTT +18030291075 T -379 P- 005/008 F -403 <br />two (2) hours each to present. This is not logistically <br />feasible. <br />3. TOWER SEPARATION. Section 8.8.17a.1 a.d. Page 15. The Ordinance <br />prohibits a new communications tower from being located within one- <br />half (1 /2) mile of an existing communications tower, without <br />exception. Some exception should be made in those cases where the <br />existing communications tower is at capacity or cannot be expanded <br />to accommodate further coloration. It may be that the only way to <br />provide wireless coverage in a given area is to have a second <br />communications tower in the general vicinity of the existing <br />communications tower. It is unfair and discriminatory to those carriers <br />not located on the existing communications tower to prohibit them <br />from constructing a second communications tower in the general area. <br />In some cases, carriers can design around such a separation <br />requirement, but not in all cases. Most jurisdictions have an exception <br />to communications tower separation -rules, such as the inability to <br />colocate, or . an inability to modify the existing structure to <br />accommodate coloration, etc. For example, the communications <br />tower may not be spaced within one -half (1/2) mile of an existing <br />communications tower unless there is written documentation that (1) <br />appropriate space on the existing communications tower is not <br />available; or (2) the applicant has made good faith efforts to negotiate <br />an agreement with the owner of the current existing communications <br />tower and has been unsuccessful, which must be documented in <br />writing; or (3) the equipment on the existing communications tower is <br />not compatible with the proposed equipment of the applicant; or (4) <br />the coverage objective of the applicant cannot be met at the location <br />of the existing communications tower; or (5) the existing <br />communications tower cannot not be reasonably modified to <br />accommodate additional coloration by the applicant. <br />In some cases it makes sense to group communications towers <br />together. If the wireless carrier can show by demonstrative evidence <br />that it cannot provide the necessary coverage without locating within <br />the prohibited one -half (1 /2) mile area, it should be allowed to <br />construct a new communications tower in this area if all other criteria <br />of the Ordinance are satisfied. The Impact at the site may be <br />increased; however, the overall visual impact in the general area is <br />decreased by grouping communications towers in some cases. <br />Section 8.8.17a.1.a.c. is not clear if grouping of communications <br />towers is allowed. <br />77 <br />