Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
3 <br />Attachment 1 <br />__ <br />___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ <br />telecommunication support structures. ; <br />At the November 21, 2011 dinner meeting between the BOCC and the Planning <br />Board a discussion ensued over the need to modify existing permit review processes : <br />for telecommunication support structures (hereafter'Tower'). <br />Specifically a recommendation was made to modify the maximum allowable height of <br />a Tower reviewed under the existing Special Use Permit processes. <br />Currently the Ordinance requires an applicant proposing a tower over 75 feet but ; <br />under 150 feet in height to apply for a Class B Special Use Permit, which is acted ; <br />upon by the Board of Adjustment. Towers over 150 feet in height are reviewed by ' <br />the BOCC through the submittal of a Class A Special Use Permit application. <br />The proposed modification would allow towers over 75 feet but under 200 feet in <br />height to be processed as Class B Special Use Permit while towers 200 feet and : <br />higher would be processed as a Class A Special Use Permit. <br />The changes were recommended to coincide with lighting requirements enforced by <br />the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and to foster additional tower development <br />opportunities in an effort to address communication needs in the County. <br />In reviewing the proposed change staff noted the following issues: <br />1. Existing regulations and development standards contained within Section <br />5.10 of the UDO are contradictory and confusing thereby exacerbating the <br />permitting review and approval process, <br />2. `Submittal Requirements' for permits are unnecessarily repeated in several <br />different sections of the UDO, and <br />3. A general lack of cohesion amongst the various sections regulating Towers <br />leading to the confusion of the reader. <br />Staff determined that a comprehensive reassessment and re-organization of existing <br />regulations was necessary to address these concerns. <br />2. Analvsis <br />_ _._ __ _. _ __ _. _ _ ___. _ <br />The amendment is necessary to address suggested modifications with respect to ; <br />tower heights and clean up existing redundant, confusing language contained within ' <br />Section 5.10 of the UDO. <br />_ ___ _ _ __ _ _ __ <br />3. Comprehensive Plan Linkaae (i.e. Principles, Goals and Obiectives) <br />_ _ ___ __ _ _ __._ <br />__ . <br />This is a house keeping item to address comments made by Planning Board and <br />BOCC members as well as to address identified inconsistencies contained within the <br />UDO. <br />These modifications are supported in the following portions of the Comprehensive <br />Plan: <br />2 <br />