Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
Approved 10/10/2016 <br />6 <br />proposed 15 foot wide gravel access road across the site in adjacent land and parts on number 1 <br />9883177293. The applicant has an executed easement agreement which is recorded with the adjacent 2 <br />property owned. With respect to harmony; with the surrou nding area in compliance with the comprehensive 3 <br />plan the location and character of the use will largely remain the same as it was approved in 1996. Hence, 4 <br />no tower will be raised, just an access road we’re trying to get to the tower site. There will not be an 5 <br />increase in traffic with the site. Between 2001 and 2015 there are approximately 26 trips by Crown service 6 <br />technicians to the tower. That amounts to approximately 2 trips a year. So, with respect to this use being in 7 <br />harmony with the area the same factors that led the Board in 1996 will remain applicable with the grant of 8 <br />this request. With respect to the method and adequacy provisions of sewage disposal facilities, solid waste, 9 <br />and water there will be no negative impacts to the provisions of services a nd utilities, soil, erosion and 10 <br />sediment or public community or private water supplies. We don’t supply water to the tower site. We do 11 <br />supply electricity to the site, that’s it. Crown will obtain all necessary soil and erosion permits as a part of 12 <br />the zoning compliance permitting requirements of the county after this request is approved. With respect to 13 <br />method and adequacy of the provision police, fire, and rescue squad protection the site is appropriately 14 <br />located to be served by police, fire, and rescue services. As indicated in the staff report Orange County 15 <br />Emergency Services and the Sheriff’s Offices have indicated the project can be served. With respect to the 16 <br />method and adequacy, vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site, the change in the 17 <br />access road location will not result in an increased traffic to the site. Again, that would be approximately 2 18 <br />visits to the site per year by Crown employees. Does anybody have any questions? 19 <br /> 20 <br />Henry Kampen: One question, just to be clear… My understanding that Crown’s not proposing a single 21 <br />solitary change to the existing tower… Is that correct? 22 <br /> 23 <br />Paul Parker: That is correct. The only change is that we are adding additional foliage and landscaping 24 <br />around it. 25 <br /> 26 <br />Michael Harvey: Mr. Parker, you may have said this but I didn’t hear it. Would you please state if you were 27 <br />sworn? 28 <br /> 29 <br />Paul Parker: I am Paul Parker. Raleigh, North Carolina, and I am sworn. 30 <br /> 31 <br />Michael Harvey: Thank you. 32 <br /> 33 <br />Barry Katz: You are going to move the gate? 34 <br /> 35 <br />Paul Parker: We will have a gate at the… 36 <br /> 37 <br />Barry Katz: From one side to the other? 38 <br /> 39 <br />Paul Parker: Yes… This will be an extremely secure site, as all of our sites are. From where we come off of 40 <br />the public right away there’s going to be a gate and then when we exit the Perry Sloan parc el there’s going 41 <br />to be another locked gate there. And then, on either side there’s going to be an 8 foot chain link fence with 42 <br />razor wire at the top. 43 <br /> 44 <br />Barry Katz: Will the gate be after the turn or at the turn? 45 <br /> 46 <br />Paul Parker: The gate is proposed to be, it should show it on the site plan… 47 <br /> 48 <br />Samantha Cabe: Right at the edge of the state access. 49