Laserfiche WebLink
Planning and Zoning Commission <br />Minutes <br />October 11, 2022 <br />permit whether the tower as proposed would maintain or enhancethe property values of <br />surrounding properties. Given that,thenwhat he providedwas a quantitativeanalysiswith <br />others, there wasWyndham Estates, there is Skybrook,andthere were several examples in <br />which he was able to gather adequate data to provide a quantitative analysis that provides no <br />empiricalevidence that the tower would injure values of adjacent properties. <br />Also,froma qualitative standpoint, the iron maidens that are out there,and the electrical <br />transmission lines,hewould say that it is consistent with that area,andthat above ground <br />infrastructure is much more of a visualimpact than this proposed tower.He would be happy to <br />answer any questions that the Board may have. <br />There were no questions for Mr. Berkowitz. <br />Mr. Johnson said he can have the RF Engineercome up and speak to the mapsifthereare <br />questions regardingthose,or anybodyfrom our team if you have questionsregardingthe <br />engineered drawings,whichare in the record or any other questionsofthe team.He proposes <br />thattothe Board,and have them available for questions, otherwise it is in the record. <br />Mr. Corley does have a question but does not know who on your team mightneedto answer. <br />He said the height ofthe transmission line towers,that are running sort of across this property <br />already, do we know how tall those are? <br />Mr. Johnson said great question. Typically,they are shorter than this, obviously they are not 235 <br />feet. Typically,maybe90 feet or more, 90 to 100 feet approximately.The thing about those is <br />they just have more things hangingoutoroff of them. A monopole tower does not have much at <br />all hanging off of it. The electrical transmissionlinesarejust more of avisual impact because of <br />theappurtenancesthat are necessary for thosetransmission lines. That was basically what Mr. <br />Berkowitz was pointing out in his report. <br />His analysis goes throughtaking existing towers, looking athow the propertysold before and <br />after,or those that could see or not see the tower anddid an analysis.The fortunate thing is, <br />there have been a lot of recent towers that have been put inplace in Cabarrus County. So,there <br />were some good comparablesthat he could usein doing his analysis, which was very helpful. <br />Mr. Johnson asked if there were anyother questionsthe Boardmayhave regarding the design or <br />anything like that. <br />The Chair said in your presentation you notedthere was an existing tower, this tower replacesan <br />existing tower?You are collocated on another tower? <br />Mr. Johnson said AT&Tis collocated on another tower, we needed tomoveit further so we <br />couldcover thoseother two towers better. The separation is still there, the separation <br />requirements under the ordinance. <br />21 <br /> <br />