Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
57 <br /> DRAFT <br /> 162 Beth Bronson: I was just wondering about the maintenance and inspection because you were saying that one of <br /> 163 the leftovers from the 1988, or in the 2011 UDO was that there would be an annual meeting to <br /> 164 decide what the needs were. Did you create any kind of ordinance that would keep or make <br /> 165 mandatory, any kind of periodic review that was maybe, say 5 years versus annually? <br /> 166 <br /> 167 Patrick Mallett: Let me preface that by saying I came to the County 12 some odd years ago. Prior to that, I was in <br /> 168 the private sector fresh out of grad school in the early'90s. My first job,the City of Burlington was <br /> 169 ripe,the first telecommunications ordinance I agree with Al and Lydia. What we have now is not <br /> 170 too dissimilar with what I spat out years ago. There are some distinctions that the balloon test <br /> 171 requirement which we were deleting,which is redundant and not necessary,this annual meeting <br /> 172 is redundant and not necessary. It's a classic example of having the idea to have a grand <br /> 173 convention. Not everybody has the time or the willingness to come,or the ability to come. And <br /> 174 technology is such that people can provide us real time input about the need. Whether it's people, <br /> 175 community leaders or industry folks. <br /> 176 <br /> 177 Beth Bronson: And so, in the last 12 years here, how many of those meetings ever occurred?That you were a <br /> 178 part of? <br /> 179 <br /> 180 Patrick Mallett: We would have some sort of meeting to have a meeting but if I'm honest every year in some <br /> 181 shape or form, either with the Planning Department or with IT, but participation was some years <br /> 182 heavy some years not so heavy. I would also add that in the timeframe that I've been here,we've <br /> 183 had on average, over 3 dozen co-locations and switch outs on existing towers, and we do a lot of <br /> 184 little stealth towers. We've only had one special use permit, new tower. We've had a lot start and <br /> 185 then pull out and withdraw the request, but only one new tower 10 years. That's kind of <br /> 186 extraordinary. And we're realizing that if you weed through the co-locations and the switch-out, <br /> 187 we're kind of reaching a point where saturation is probably occurring and there is a need for new <br /> 188 towers if you want to provide incentives for people to go out to say the Hurdle Mills area and <br /> 189 service that. <br /> 190 <br /> 191 Beth Bronson: You have to create friendly regulations. <br /> 192 <br /> 193 Patrick Mallett: Not a carte blanche open door, but a minimal amount of barriers to entry. <br /> 194 <br /> 195 Beth Bronson: Understandable. <br /> 196 <br /> 197 Patrick Mallett: That's what we're trying to achieve is that balance that's not intrusive. <br /> 198 <br /> 199 Beth Bronson: Out on New Sharon Church Road, there's an AT&T tower. It's been abandoned for however <br /> 200 many years, but it hasn't gone anywhere,or is it still managed by AT&T? <br /> 201 <br /> 202 Patrick Mallett: I think they still have one antenna there. If they have no antennas,they have to take it down. <br /> 203 <br /> 204 Beth Bronson: I guess enforcement of abandonment. <br /> 205 <br /> 206 Patrick Mallett: Sure. But that can be achieved outside of an annual meeting. <br /> 207 <br /> 208 Beth Bronson: For sure, yes, separate from the meeting. <br /> 209 <br /> 210 Patrick Mallett: You've heard this before. We have a new Energov central permitting system that,the tracking <br /> 211 ability for this is ten times better than it was years ago. <br /> 212 <br /> 213 Cy Stober: One thing I would add is that the original texts that we are proposing to amend and replace <br /> 214 presumes that planning is the primary point of contact on this land use matter. Well, wireless <br /> 215 communications is much more of a public service than it was when this was adopted and we, <br />