Agenda - 10-05-94 - VIII-J - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

11 The Orange County Board of Adjustment has grown increasingly concerned about the increasing number of applications for communications towers. The Board has reviewed five Special Use applications for towers since 1990. The concerns relate to the number of towers and the reasons they cannot co-locate, i.e. , loading capabilities, frequency incompatibility, and directional focusing of signals. However, in some instances there may be situations where towers can co-locate. The proposed amendments would require an applicant to first look into co-locating communication equipment on an existing tower. If use of an existing tower was not feasible, then approval of a Special Use Permit for a new tower could be considered. However, permit approval would include provisions related to the sharing of space on the tower with other users in the future. At the public hearing, David Helms, with Cellular One, indicated his support for the amendment but he was concerned about other communications companies sharing their equipment buildings. Diane Shaw and Frances Douglass, both Board of Adjustment members, spoke in favor of the amendment. Paul Cook, a resident on Buckhorn Road, indicated he would like an amendment that would require gates at the entrance road to the tower. The Planning Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment including a provision for a gate at the access entrance to such facilities, and allowing the applicant the option of leasing space within an equipment storage area or building or providing separate facilities for this purpose. Burklin stated that he liked the emphasis on co-locating towers. Waddell agreed, noting that the Board of Adjustment also agreed with co- locating towers. Waddell continued that he also liked the idea of gates at the access entrance. MOTION: Burklin moved approval of the Planning Staff's ,recommendations. Seconded by Barrows. VOTE: Unanimous. (Rosemond out of the room during this vote. )