Browse
Search
BOA agenda 101016
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Board of Adjustment
>
Agendas
>
2016
>
BOA agenda 101016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2018 4:14:58 PM
Creation date
3/6/2018 4:09:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/11/2016
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
BOA minutes 101016
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Board of Adjustment\Minutes\2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
133
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
applicable public safety, land use, or zoning issues required in this Ordinance; I’m going to refer you to the 1 <br />applicant contained in attachment 2, staff testimony this evening. And we have made it an affirmative 2 <br />finding. Fences and walls; we are making an affirmative finding both in the application attachment 2 and the 3 <br />site plan show fences and walls, not only existing but proposed. The tower is structurally designed to 4 <br />support additional users; we will refer you to the supplemental information specific with the structural 5 <br />analysis reports completed and August of 2010 and April of 2014 showing that there are multiple 6 <br />opportunities for additional to be erected on the tower. To minimize the number of antenna arrays the 7 <br />County may require the use of dual mode antennas; I have made a finding of N/A, there are no antennas 8 <br />proposed as part of this application. It is objective and as there are no antennas proposed we’ve said that 9 <br />the findings N/A in this particular case. Page 131, Structures shall be galvanized and/or painted with a rust-10 <br />preventive paint of an appropriate color to harmonize with the surroundings; we’re going to refer you to the 11 <br />supplemental information, original SUP application and the recorded SUP. Information’s contained within 12 <br />these documents indicating how the tower complies with the standard. The next standard, both the wireless 13 <br />telecommunications support structure and any and all accessory or associated telecommunication 14 <br />equipment and related facilities shall maximize the use of building materials, colors and textures designed 15 <br />to blend with the structure to which it may be affixed and/or to harmonize with the natural surroundings; I’m 16 <br />going to refer you to the site plan that’s been submitted as well as the supplemental information we have 17 <br />provided you as documenting in compliance with the standard. Next, on page 132, antennas shall be flush 18 <br />mounted; again I’m going to refer you to the original SUP application file and the structural analyses 19 <br />provided. They provide detail that the antennas that are erected on the tower are flush mounted. Lighting; 20 <br />staff is recommending the finding of this provision in N/A. The tower is not going to have to be illuminated 21 <br />based on current FAA or FCC standards or guidelines, it is not legally required as part of this application 22 <br />proposal because the tower is not going to be required to be illuminated and the application site plan does 23 <br />not indicate that they’re going to installing street lighting in or around the driveway. So that’s our 24 <br />recommended finding. 25 <br /> 26 <br />James Bryan: I think that this one is 50/50. Lighting has 4 sub parts. The vast majority of them say that 27 <br />where the… So all of this is applicable. And some of them say where the feds require you to do it, you have 28 <br />to do it this way and then there are some parts where if you have lighting it’s going to have to be done this 29 <br />way. 30 <br /> 31 <br />Samantha Cabe: So I understand what you’re saying and I guess what… Correct me if I’m wrong, but 32 <br />because the towers already erected and we know that the feds are not requiring lighting because the 33 <br />tower’s under 200 feet, is that why you’re saying it’s not applicable? 34 <br /> 35 <br />Michael Harvey: Correct. I’m hanging my hat on Q sub section 2, if lighting is legally required or proposed 36 <br />the applicant shall provide a detailed plan for sufficient lighting that’s unobtrusive and offensive in effect as 37 <br />permissible under state and federal regulations. So, lighting is not required because the tower’s under 200 38 <br />feet and it’s not proposed. And that’s my rationale for making it N/A finding. And then sub section 3; for any 39 <br />facility with lighting is required, this facility is not required to have lighting. 40 <br /> 41 <br />James Bryan: The … it’s for that and for any reason road lights are attached. So if they want to attach lights 42 <br />for their own, so their guys can look at it while they work… 43 <br /> 44 <br />Samantha Cabe: Ok. 45 <br /> 46 <br />Michael Harvey: The last standard in this case, the tower and antenna will not result in a significant adverse 47 <br />impact on the view of or from any historic site, scenic road, or major view corridor; the application we’re 48 <br />currently reviewing the site plan, the property vicinity map in attachment 1 as well as we’re going to refer 49 <br />24
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.