Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
6 <br /> the height of a tower by: <br /> • No more than 10% of the existing height, or <br /> • The height of 1 additional antenna, with separation from the <br /> nearest existing antenna, not to exceed 20 feet. <br /> The law indicates this 'increase' in height should be permitted as a <br /> matter of right. For example: an existing tower, 160 feet in height, can <br /> obtain approval for a 16 foot (10% of 160) increase in height without <br /> review/action so long as applicable development standards are <br /> adhered to. <br /> A tower 199 feet in height seeking a 19 foot height increase, however, <br /> exceeds established permitting thresholds as detailed herein. Staff is <br /> attempting to ensure these 'thresholds' are recognized and appropriate <br /> review occurs. <br /> Staff had proposed language recognizing these thresholds in an effort <br /> to ensure local permitting processes were adhered to. <br /> The County Attorney's office has requested staff revise the proposed <br /> language to clarify when Board review is required, specifically in those <br /> instances where permit thresholds are exceeded and where the <br /> proposed change alters the various facts relied upon with respect to <br /> the original permit approval. <br /> Agenda materials for the public hearing can be viewed <br /> at- http://orangecountync.gov/occlerks/131125.13df. <br /> January 23, 2014 - Receive Planning Board recommendation. <br /> d. Other <br /> 3. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PROGRAM. <br /> Mission/Scope: Public Hearing process consistent with NC State Statutes and <br /> Orange County ordinance requirements <br /> a. Planning Board Review: <br /> October 2, 2013 — Ordinance Review Committee (ORC). <br /> This item was reviewed at the October 2, 2013 ORC meeting where there <br /> were no comments on the proposal by Board members. <br /> December 4, 2013 — Recommendation <br /> The Planning Board reviewed this item at its December 4, 2013 regular <br /> meeting where the following comments were made: <br /> 1. A Board member asked staff if they had any concerns with the <br /> new language recommended by the Attorney's office. <br /> Specifically if staff was concerned that the use of the term <br /> `physical changes' would limit staff's review authority and allow <br /> 4 <br />