Browse
Search
BOA agenda 031317
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Board of Adjustment
>
Agendas
>
2017
>
BOA agenda 031317
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/6/2018 4:35:07 PM
Creation date
3/6/2018 4:26:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/13/2017
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Document Relationships
BOA minutes 031317
(Message)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Board of Adjustment\Minutes\2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
192
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
DRAFT <br /> <br />OC Board of Adjustment – 11/9/15 Page 128 of 156 <br /> <br />David Haughney: I feel that I’ve already testified that we do have other solutions for UNC 1 <br />Campus, including some of the technologies that you mentioned. It’s an integral part of the 2 <br />solution. 3 <br /> 4 <br />John Price: So you don’t need the tower… 5 <br /> 6 <br />David Haughney: This tower is an integral part of that solution. It is going to be necessary yes. 7 <br /> 8 <br />John Price: So are you saying that the tower is not needed for the offload capacity at UNC 9 <br />Campus? 10 <br /> 11 <br />Samantha Cabe: I think he’s testified earlier that it’s all part of a plan with the tower and the small 12 <br />cells, as what I’ve heard him say at least three or four times. That it’s all part of their plan to solve 13 <br />these two problems that they’ve identified. Correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s what I’ve heard him 14 <br />say three or four times at this point, that the tower and the small cells are part of their plan. Am I 15 <br />wrong? Did you hear that? 16 <br /> 17 <br />(General multiple comments) 18 <br /> 19 <br />Samantha Cabe: And I’m just trying to cut to the chase and not keep repeating the same things. 20 <br /> 21 <br />John Price: Well it seemed to be… there’s a contradiction here between on the one hand saying 22 <br />that… 23 <br /> 24 <br />Samantha Cabe: Do you have any further questions for him? 25 <br /> 26 <br />John Price: Yes, yes. The proposed tower, as I understand the statements that have been made 27 <br />into the record, TowerCom says in support of this proposed tower is that this proposed tower will 28 <br />satisfy the needs, all the needs that you’ve identified. Is that correct? 29 <br /> 30 <br />David Haughney: Yes sir. 31 <br /> 32 <br />John Price: The tower by itself will do that? 33 <br /> 34 <br />David Haughney: Yes sir, it would. This is needed for identified service needs. I believe I already 35 <br />explained that it’s not the one and only solution for the UNC Campus area, obviously. 36 <br /> 37 <br />John Price: I think we’re just disagreeing with the definition of service needs …. 38 <br /> 39 <br />Ben Levitan: If you look at Mount Carmel Church Road… 40 <br /> 41 <br />Samantha Cabe: Ok, hang on one second. We’re getting a little back and forth here. We’ve 42 <br />already addressed you, you’ve testified, we’ve cross-examined you, do you have any further 43 <br />questions for Mr. Haughney. 44 <br /> 45 <br />John Price: I have not further questions for Mr. Haughney. 46 <br /> 47 <br />Samantha Cabe: Alright. Does the Board have any questions for Mr. Haughney? Alright, thank 48 <br />you. Are there any other members of the public who would like to be heard? Either in support of or 49 <br />opposition? 50 <br />130
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.