Browse
Search
Agenda - 10-05-94 - VIII-J
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1994
>
Agenda - 10-05-94 Regular Mtg.
>
Agenda - 10-05-94 - VIII-J
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/7/2016 8:25:09 AM
Creation date
10/7/2016 8:23:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/5/1994
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
VIII-J
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
3 <br /> PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT <br /> ORDINANCE: ZONING ORDINANCE <br /> REFERENCE: ARTICLE 8 .8 . 17 RADIO, TELEVISION, AND <br /> COMMUNICATIONS TOWERS, AND ELEVATED WATER STORAGE <br /> TANKS (CLASS B SPECIAL USE) <br /> ORIGIN OF AMENDMENT: _x_ Staff Planning Board <br /> BOCC Public <br /> Other: <br /> STAFF PRIORITY RECOMMENDATION: High Middle _x_ Low <br /> Comment: <br /> EXPECTED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: August 22, 1994 <br /> PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT: <br /> To add new requirements for additional information and standards <br /> of evaluation regarding communications towers to the Class B <br /> Special Use section. <br /> IMPACTS/ISSUES: <br /> The Zoning Ordinance does not presently address the location or <br /> number of communications towers in the County. The Orange County <br /> Board of Adjustment has grown increasingly concerned about the <br /> number of communications towers they have seen applications for <br /> recently. The Board has reviewed five Special Use applications <br /> for towers since 1990. Four of these applications have been <br /> approved. The concerns raised deal directly with the number of <br /> towers and the reasons they cannot co-locate on an existing tower <br /> in the vicinity. Generally, loading capabilities, frequency <br /> incompatibility, and directional focusing of signals may keep <br /> towers from co-locating. In these cases towers would be needed <br /> to provide appropriate communications coverage. However, in some <br /> instances there may be situations where towers can co-locate. <br /> The proposed standards would require an applicant to first look <br /> into co-locating on an existing tower and second where feasible <br /> to provide lease space on their tower for other users. <br /> If it is found to be feasible to lease space on an existing tower <br /> instead of erecting an additional tower, the number of towers in <br /> Orange County could be reduced. <br /> EXISTING AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT: <br /> 8.8.17 Radio,Television and Communication Towers, and Elevated <br /> Water Storage Tanks (Class B Special Use) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.