My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
January 10, 2023 Agenda
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Meeting Minutes
>
Planning
>
2020
>
January 10, 2023 Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/9/2022 11:36:59 AM
Creation date
12/9/2022 11:36:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
1/10/2022
Board
Parks
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
120
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
Planning and Zoning Commission <br />Minutes <br />October 11, 2022 <br />requirements that are required by the ordinances. He is available for the Commission if you <br />should have any. <br />The Chair askedif there were any questions for Mr. Patterson. <br />Mr. Paxton wants to be sure of this. At the present time they are on your tower? <br />Mr. Patterson said yes that is correct. <br />Mr. Paxton said a suspicious person might ask the question, are you doing this just because you <br />want to keep them on the tower or are you in the public interest. <br />Mr. Patterson said it would be in the public interest. Hesays that particularly because obviously, <br />building another metropole, finances aside,that is what the question is really, finances aside it <br />does not change much of any.It is just the fact that they are going to be on a different pole,a <br />higher pole. Andso,they have to comply with theFAA,and they are going to put a light on it <br />andall that stuff. But at the end of the day,theycan get the same coverageat the same pole that <br />they are already on. Maybe it is splitting hairs,but in terms of looking at the ordinance itself, <br />does it meet the general welfare and public safety,and whether there is a reasonable alternative. <br />The alternative is just to move higher on the polethatyou are already on,as opposed to building <br />another235-footpole or 285-foot pole.It would be that it does not meet the application standard <br />Mr. Hudspeth saidyou say they can do the same thing on your pole. How high can they go on <br />you pole? <br />Mr. Patterson said they could go up to 235 feet if they wanted to. <br />Mr. Hudspeth said how tall is yours? <br />Mr. Patterson said right now it is 220 feet and he thinks it has the capability of goinga little <br />higher. <br />Mr.Stephen Wise said this says it is 190-feet. <br />Mr. Patterson said they are at190 feet. <br />Mr. Wise said if they leave what happens to that pole? Is there another provider on that pole? <br />Mr. Patterson there areother providers on the pole. <br />Mr. Hudspeth asked how far apart are these two poles? <br />Mr. Patterson believes they are 1,804 feet. <br />Mr. Hudspeth said that is allowed by the County Ordinance. <br />28 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.