CFE 011303 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

d� 5 4 ) Added language to Section 6 . 18 . 4 to require that towers be minimally visually intrusive . ning rods to be included in the determination of 5 ) Added provision to require lighte maximum height . 6 ) Recommended amending Section 6 . 18 . 4 (f) ( 2 ) ( a ) to remove provision for 36 - month inspections if a fall zone is provided . 7 ) Requires trained staff member or consultant to perform annual visual inspections . 8 ) Recommended amending Section 6 . 18 . 4 (f) ( 5 ) ( e ) to remove provision that a North Carolina Registered Professional Engineer certifies that the tower meets current standards by replacing current with original/initial status if the tower is less than six years old . 9 ) Master Telecommunications Plan not required but optional at BOCC discretion . 10 ) Recommended adding language setting criteria and clarifying the exceptions to the 1/2mile spacing limitation between towers . 11 ) Clarifies that balloon test cannot be used as a criteria to deny a SUP but only can be used to assist in the reduction of visual intrusiveness . 12 ) Added provisions to minimize light diffusion from site . 13 ) Amended ordinance to define ` Fall Zone ' . 14 ) Recommended reducing the application fees to $ 2 , 500 for Class A SUP and $ 1 , 500 for Class B SUP and to require an escrow account from which consultant ' s review fees are paid , with residual amounts returned to the tower owners . Initial amounts of the escrow to be $ 7 , 500 for Class A SUP and $ 7 , 000 for Class B SUP . 15 ) Added language that exclusion of co - locators from towers is not permitted and that the consultant will advise the County regarding exorbitant market rate leases . 16 ) Adds section to ordinance to require the establishment of an escrow account . The Planning Board voted 54 to approve the entire ordinance , with the amendments . The four members in opposition to the entire ordinance expressed concern about the development of the Master Telecommunications Plan ( MTP ) , which does not go into effect with this Ordinance amendment . The MTP is being investigated and formulated by a multi - departmental task force that includes IT , EMS , Purchasing , Budget , ERCD , Planning and stakeholders ( such as Agricultural District landowners , and volunteer fire departments ) that may be part of the MTP system . The MTP section of this ordinance will not be used until a Public Hearing is held , a recommendation provided by the Planning Board and adoption by the Board of County Commissioners . Any actions associated with the MTP will be subsequent to the adoption of this ordinance and do not affect the validity or enforceability of these telecommunications ordinance amendments . Fourth Action : Board of County Commissioners to make a decision within a reasonable time . FINANCIAL IMPACT : There is no public fiscal impact related to this decision . RECOMMENDATION : Administration recommends Approval of the telecommunication ordinance as revised by the Planning Board with the exception # 8 above . See page 19 Subsection e . in the Administration Ordinance for the recommended language . Administration recommends Approval of the amendment to the Orange County Schedule of fees ( page 67 ) .