Browse
Search
Agenda - 11-01-2000-8j
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2000
>
Agenda - 11-01-2000
>
Agenda - 11-01-2000-8j
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/2/2008 1:39:41 AM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:16:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/1/2000
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8j
Document Relationships
Minutes - 11-01-2000
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
34
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
AUGUST 28, 2000 DRAFT PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES <br />4 <br />1 only people interested in co-location are government agencies, school systems, emergency <br />2 services, fire departments, etc. He said that some of the tower companies were very prejudiced <br />3 about who would co-locate on their towers. <br />4 Commissioner Brown asked for a list of all the towers and a map. She asked about <br />5 how these towers were being located. She asked if the trend was for the towers to go along the <br />6 interstates and major highways and Craig Benedict said yes. Commissioner Brown is interested in <br />7 having the County Commissioners review the requests for telecommunications towers. <br />9 (The three members of the Planning Board who spoke next did not.speak into a <br />to .microphone, so I relied completely on the notes) <br />11 <br />12 -Karen Barrows said that she would like for the County Commissioners to take over the <br />13 telecommunications tower process. She said that the County should have an independent <br />14 engineer who is familiar with this to advise the County Commissioners. <br />15 Howard McAdams said that the Board of Adjustment has had six applications with two <br />16 denied. For one application, 500 notification letters were sent out and no one spoke against the . <br />17 tower. <br />18 Bob Strayhorn said that a lot of pain needs to be taken to be sure that the towers are <br />t9 located appropriately. He feels it should be a high priority to put the towers in conservation <br />20 districts. <br />21 Commissioner Jacobs asked about the contract with Metrosite or any contract with a <br />z2 comparable company.. Craig Benedict said that Metrosite was sanctioned with the North Carolina <br />23 Association of Counties and there is a standardized contract that can be used around the country. <br />24 He will bring forward a contract for the County Commissioners' consideration. <br />?5 <br />z5 PUBLIC COMMENT <br />27 Sharlene Pilkey, member of the Board of Adjustment, said that there were forty-one towers in this <br />28 County. The problem is that the range is two miles and this is not far enough. <br />z9 Grey 5tyers spoke on behalf of Bell South Mobility DCS and American Tower Corporation. <br />3o He said that he has spoken with all of the towers companies operating in North Carolina and most <br />31 carriers, and they are very interested in the proposal tonight. He said that they (I'm assuming <br />32 'they' is his law firm) worked with the County in 1995 and 1996 in drafting the current ordinance. <br />33 They would like to be involved in the process to explain and provide illustrations. He said that <br />34 wireless communication was becoming a fact of life. He agrees that it is bad when two towers are <br />35 located next to each other. He said that. ordinances are needed that encourage and require co- <br />36 location and minimize the number of towers. He does have answers to some of the questions <br />37 raised about accessory uses, stealth, etc. <br />38 <br />39 MOTION <br />4o A motion was made by Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to <br />41 discuss the telecommunication towers and antenna amendments at a work session. <br />42 VOTE: UNANIMOUS <br />43 <br />44 3. ORANGE COUNTY REGIONAL LANDFILL (MODIFICATI,ON~ SPECIAL USE <br />45 PERMITS CLASS "A" <br />46 Commissioner Halkiotis explained that the process for receiving public comment on a <br />47 Special Use Permit is different in that it is an evidentiary hearing where evidence is heard. An <br />48 explanation of this type of hearing was available at the back table. Evidentiary zoning hearings, <br />49 unlike legislative hearings, are not designed to solicit broad public opinion about how the Board <br />so should vote on a matter before it. Rather, evidentiary zoning hearings provide an opportunity for <br />51 the Board to gather the facts it needs to apply policies already set in the ordinance. Therefore, the <br />52 standards and gathering evidence are much stricter than they are for legislative hearings. <br />53 The Clerk gave an oath to Planner Eddie Kirk and Landfill Engineer Mike Meagher. <br />54 Planner Eddie Kirk explained the proposed modification. The particular property is <br />30 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.