Browse
Search
BOA minutes 121216
OrangeCountyNC
>
Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active
>
Orange County Board of Adjustment
>
Minutes
>
2016
>
BOA minutes 121216
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/26/2018 9:14:19 AM
Creation date
3/7/2018 9:58:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/12/2016
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Advisory Bd. Minutes
Document Relationships
BOA agenda 121216
(Attachment)
Path:
\Advisory Boards and Commissions - Active\Orange County Board of Adjustment\Agendas\2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
156
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
Approved 3113117 <br />1 stealth. The other thing is when you put up smaller cell towers that are below the tree line you're <br />2 going to get better coverage. Just remember cell tower... a cell phone works best when you've got <br />3 line of sight from the phone right to the cell tower. When you've got 191 -foot cell tower and then <br />4 you've got all this foliage growing in the summer below it, it actually interferes with the signal. <br />5 Especially after heavy rain and you've got these trees full of water that are between your phone <br />6 sitting in the passenger seat and that cell tower. So the design you want is smaller cells, that are <br />7 not circular patterns, they're strip patterns, they're focused up and down on the road, and they're <br />8 below the tree line. <br />.9 <br />10 John Price: Also in that same letter in Exhibit 4 Mr. Haughney states, "There are evolving <br />11 morphological applications that include micro cell, small cell, and DAS but those technologies are <br />12 not appropriate for large covering area situations... <br />13 <br />14 Samantha Cabe: What are you reading from? <br />15 <br />16 John Price: Mr. Haughney's August 11, 2016 letter to Mr. Harvey. Exhibit 4 of the application of <br />17 TowerCom. <br />18 <br />19 Samantha Cabe: Oh, ok. <br />20 <br />21 John Price: "Or we've a feasible number of installations that make it impossible to provide <br />22 seamless high quality service over a large geographic area, such as Clearwater Lake area." <br />23 <br />24 Ben Levitan: I disagree again. And I think I've laid that out. On top of that, these are not evolving <br />25 technologies. These are technology that Verizon, themselves, is using today... I'll give you one <br />26 example, San Antonio, Texas, which is probably relatively the same size as we are. And last year <br />27 Verizon signed with an agreement with San Antonio to install these small cells on lampposts, <br />28 utility poles, buildings, all over San Antonio and their stated goal is to have a better visual impact, <br />29 basically, to be less intrusive and they signed that agreement with the City of San Antonio so that <br />30 they will pay $1,500 a small cell for the next 25- years. Verizon just signed this, has been doing <br />31 this for a year in San Antonio... <br />32 <br />33 Laura Goode: At this point in time I'm going to object to this line of testimony, in terms of it just <br />34 being discussions about facts not in evidence. There has not been any of this factual... talking <br />35 about their small cell plans in other cities, and what contracts they have signed has not been <br />36 provided to us, it's not been provided to the Board. <br />37 <br />38 Ben Levitan: Alright, well I'm just saying the letter implies that this is kind of voodoo or paper wear <br />39 technology. It's absolutely incorrect. On top of that, Verizon and Telecom are working on <br />40 advanced small cell, the next generation small cell. They've got special permission from the FCC <br />41 to test that in three cities. Oklahoma City, Cary, and Raleigh. So clearly, this is an appropriate <br />42 technology to use... this is one of the best alternatives you could use. This 191 -foot cell tower is <br />43 basically, I hate to say it, obsolete technology, or obsoleting technology. We're moving away from <br />44 this, Verizon's moving away from this. <br />45 <br />46 John Price: In your opinion, are there existing facilities or alternative existing structures of <br />47 sufficient height within the Clearwater Lake area that could be used for co- location to provide the <br />48 proposed telecommunications service needs using available technologies without building a new <br />49 cell tower? <br />50 <br />OC Board of Adjustment — 12/12/16 Page 109 of 156 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.