Orange County NC Website
Approved 7/8/2013 <br />OC Board of Adjustment – 6/10/2013 Page 13 of 92 <br />doesn’t happen. Obviously you have to receive the signal but that means the telecommunications 1 <br />company has to build more nodes so yes DSL is available in some locations but on a general basis. 2 <br />You need terrestrial antennas to maintain that broadband. 3 <br /> 4 <br />Michael Harvey: The last person to speak is Ann Lee-Blythe. 5 <br /> 6 <br />Ann Lee Blythe: I am a resident on Bill Poole Road. I am here to testify not necessarily against 7 <br />because it is clearly a needed telecommunications with the county to improve. I am more concerned 8 <br />about the performance that will be on this tower versus what AT&T has been and also would it 9 <br />interrupt other service that people have like Verizon. I have Verizon down the street and it works well. 10 <br /> I don’t have any other phone in my house. My fear is that I don’t want to have an interruption in my 11 <br />service because of the erection of this tower because I am already committed and I am using it for 12 <br />work from home and I also think the residents are due to understand whether this a 4G LTE whatever 13 <br />kind of tower or performance and interference that it can have. 14 <br /> 15 <br />Jill House: I can give a general answer to that because different carriers have different frequencies 16 <br />there will be no interference between AT&T and Verizon. As far as what will be available…. 17 <br /> 18 <br />David Lacava: I am the specialist for AT&T. 19 <br /> 20 <br />Ann Lee-Blythe: And what would be the time table of the LTE. As residents… those of us who have 21 <br />services and are paying over two years, if there is any problem it causes us… 22 <br /> 23 <br />David Lacava: LTE would be launched on this tower with the initial construction of the tower. 24 <br /> 25 <br />Larry Wright: Any questions? 26 <br /> 27 <br />Michael Harvey: Beginning on page 39, we have the Findings of Fact that you need to go through 28 <br />this evening. We have provided recommendations what we believe to be evidence submitted in the 29 <br />record as justifying either an affirmative or a negative finding. I am going to go over these briefly. 30 <br />Beginning on page 40, we are dealing with compliance with Sections 2.2 and 2.7.3 of the Unified 31 <br />Development Ordinance dealing with the submittal of a Class B Special Use Permit application. You 32 <br />will find that staff has made an affirmative finding of compliance with respect to Sections 2.2 and 33 <br />2.7.3. We have provided the various documentation in the record that justifies an affirmative finding. 34 <br />For example, Tab 2 of the application packet contains a complete application, Class B Special Permit 35 <br />Application; there are copies of the checks demonstrating the applicant has paid the necessary fees. 36 <br />As required by 2.7.3 (B)(1), there is a full and complete application project narrative. In Tab 3 37 <br />outlining complies not only with the code but answering the basic questions in compliance with the 38 <br />ordinance. We have found that Section 2.7.3 (B)(5) on page 41 is not applicable, that requires a 39 <br />submittal of a preliminary subdivision plan. They are not proposing a subdivision so they are not 40 <br />required to submit. They have provided the required elevations and a listing of all property owners in 41 <br />1,000 feet as required by the code. Turning to pages 42 and 43, we have found that Section 2.7.3 42 <br />(B)(8) of the code requiring an environmental assessment is not required given this property is 43 <br />disturbing less than two acres per our Unified Development Ordinance. We have also provided 44 <br />additional insight why the applicant is not required to adhere to this provision. The applicant has 45 <br />answered the necessary questions with respect to the method and disposal of trees, limbs, stumps 46 <br />and construction debris associated with the project as well as the anticipated schedule for buildout 47 <br />which is in Tab 37 and we have found that 2.7.3 (B)(11) is not applicable as they are not requesting 48 <br />vesting. Does anyone have any questions? 49 <br /> 50 <br />Larry Wright: There has been mention here of the Walnut Church Grove and the Phelps Road sites, 51 <br />we are not addressing those…. 52 <br /> 53