Browse
Search
Agenda - 02-03-2004-8i
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2004
>
Agenda - 02-03-2004
>
Agenda - 02-03-2004-8i
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/1/2008 10:36:13 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:37:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
2/3/2004
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
8i
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20040203
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2004
ORD-2004-001 - Zoning Ordinance Amendment Article 6.18 & 8.8.17a-Telecommunications Towers & Equipment
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Ordinances\Ordinance 2000-2009\2004
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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
Ordinance as Recommended by <br />Planning Board and Administration <br />23 <br />3-9n-properties listed-sn-the4V1TD.-.-,LP4aw* <br />f <br />3. On industrially- or commercially-zoned properties; <br />4. On-Cow#y--owned-property <br />4. On a stealth facility; <br />5. At another location not identified above as priority 1, 2, <br />3or4. <br />b) If an Applicant proposes to place telecommunications <br />equipment at a location that is not a preferred priority 1 site, <br />then the Applicant must provide a detailed explanation as to <br />why a higher priority site is not proposed. The explanation <br />shall be in the form of a written report demonstrating the <br />Applicant's review of the above locations in order of priority <br />and the reason(s) for the site selection. The explanation <br />shall, at a minimum, include the information required by <br />Subsection 8.8.17a.1a.e). <br />c) The application shall not be approved unless it demonstrates <br />that the telecommunications equipment may not be sited at a <br />higher priority site because of commercial impracticability or <br />because no higher priority site is available that would serve <br />to provide the telecommunications service need identified by <br />the Applicant as provided for in Subsection 6.18.4 d)(10). <br />d) An Applicant may not by-pass sites of higher priority merely <br />because the site proposed is the only site leased or selected. <br />Agreements between providers limiting or prohibiting co- <br />location shall not be a valid basis for any claim of commercial <br />impracticability. <br />e) Notwithstanding that a potential site may be situated in an <br />area of highest priority or highest available priority, an <br />application shall not be approved if it conflicts with the <br />provisions and requirements of this Ordinance. <br />f) Within or adjacent to residential zoning districts, minimum <br />setbacks from the base of the tower to the property boundary shall <br />be equal to 110% of the tower height. If the tower is proposed as <br />an accessory use to a residential use, the tower setback shall be <br />110% of the tower height from any residence or dwelling unit on <br />the subject property. <br />g) Adjacent to non-residential uses or non-residential zoning districts, <br />minimum setbacks from the base of the tower to the property <br />boundary shall be the greater of 20% of the tower height, or the <br />minimum required setback. <br />h) A Type C Landscape Buffer shall be provided between the tower <br />and its accessory structures and adjoining property/properties. <br />Existing vegetation may be removed only to the extent necessary <br />to accommodate the tower, equipment buildings, and support
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.