Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD-2006-105 - Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation (PEMC) Planned Development (PD-OI) and Special Use Permit, Class AORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS oQ.� -tea ©G - J95 AGENDA ACTION ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: December 12, 2006 Action Agenda Item No. q SUBJECT: Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation (PEMC) Planned Development (PD-01) and Special Use Permit, Class A DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections PUBLIC HEARING: (YIN) Yes ATTACHMENTS: (Under Separate Cover) 1) Planned Development Amendment Resolution 2) Recommended Findings of Planning Board with Supporting Data for the Planned Development Amendment 3) SUP Resolution 4) Exhibit A Recommended Findings of Planning Board with Supporting Data for the Special Use Permit 5) PEMC Environmental Assessment with Supporting Data 6) Legal Advertisement 7) Notice to Property Owners with Documentation 8) Property Posting 9) Technical Data Supporting Application 10) September 14, 2006 BOCC Resolution and Time Line 11) The Center for Municipal Solutions Report 12) 1/26/06 Annual Telecommunications Meeting Notes 13) Tower Bond & Tower Removal Agreement 14) Real Estate Valuation Report 15) Site Plans 16) October 3, 2006 Special Public Hearing and November 1, 2006 Planning Board Minutes INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig N. Benedict, Planning Director, 245 2592 Glenn R. Bowles, Planner II, 245 2577 PURPOSE: To consider the Planning Board recommendations regarding the PEMC request to amend its Planned Development — Office /Institution (PD-01) zoning district and its Class A PURPOSE: To consider the Planning Board recommendations regarding the PEMC request to amend its Planned Development — Office /Institution (PD-01) zoning district and its Class A Special Use Permit to permit the principal use of a 350 -foot replacement tower at its administrative and operations. center located at 2500 NC Highway 86 South, Hillsborough. BACKGROUND: On October 3, 2006 at a special, joint public hearing, the BOCC referred this item to the Planning Board for its recommendation. Issues revealed at the October 3 Public Hearing include the following topics (The responses to the questions are in italics.): 1. The applicant would like to construct a higher tower to provide better coverage, to better communicate with the other towers, and to transfer data between its three offices. 2. What impact will the proposed tower have on migratory bird patterns? The applicant does not believe the impact will be significant. The proposed tower is self - supporting and does not require guy wires. The lighting is a white strobe fixture with long periods. A self - supporting tower has a less fatal effect on birds than a guyed tower and white lights, with a long strobe period have less negative effect on birds than the normal red lights with a short period. The County's tower consultant stated that if guy wires were used for this project, then there would be more reason for concern about the tower's impact on migratory birds. The consultants recommend that the lighting be shielded because of the bird attraction and ground scattering of the light. The replacement tower's impact on aviary wildlife raised no concerns from the consultant's viewpoint. 3. What effect will the electronic emissions have on the human population in the neighborhood? The replacement tower will be using the same frequency as is presently used, but with less power. The tower is nearly double the vertical distance as the present antenna. The County's consultant estimated that a tower of the height proposed for this project will result in negligible human exposure to radio frequency emissions. The tower consultant advised that the FCC has pre - empted local enforcement or enactment of electro- magnetic tower antenna emissions standards. Any facility located on a tower that is more than 10 meters above the ground is "categorically excluded" from local review according to FCC regulations. However, local govemments are vested with the authority to verify that a tower is operated in compliance with FCC regulations. A condition of the SUP approval is that the tower emissions are regularly tested to insure compliance with applicable regulations. 4. Questions were raised concerning the balloon test, the notification procedures, and the time of day the test took place. Board members did not like the quality of the photographs used in the information packet. It was suggested that County rules governing notification and the specifics of the balloon test be reviewed. The balloon test was held on a Monday from 8.00 am to 1:00 p.m., one hour longer than required. All property owners within 1, 000 feet of the 35 -acre Piedmont property were notified by registered mail, as is required. The second legal notification (for the Public Hearing) was also sent to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the Piedmont property, as is required. 5. Co- location is a possibility. Is the tower structure designed to accommodate such additional loads? The tower is designed to support four additional co- location facilities. 6. Is the tower proposed for public safety and is it a public need (necessity)? It is the burden of the applicant to prove that the replacement tower will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property unless the use is found to be a public necessity, in which case the use need not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. The review process was expedited because of the public health, safety and welfare benefits the proposed replacement tower presents. The applicant must prove either that the replacement tower is a public necessity or that the construction of the replacement tower 4 will maintain or enhance contiguous property values in order for the Board to approve the SUP. 7. Can the tower withstand hurricane strength winds? When designing a tower, engineers look at the soils first and then work up to the top of the structure. Towers fail if there is a fault in the foundation. About 400 towers a year fail. The tower was over - designed and there was a break point built in to the design. The applicant is requesting an amendment to its existing PD zoning district and the associated Class A Special Use Permit under Articles 7.2 -(.3) (.5) and 8.8.17a of the Zoning Ordinance to construct a 350 -foot replacement tower. On January 4, 1983, the BOCC approved Piedmont's facility upon the 33.92 acres tract of land as a PD-01 (Planned Development — Office /Institutional), with the associated Special Use Permit, Class A. The Special Use Permit specified that its approval be "in accordance with the Proposed Headquarters Building Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation Site Plan dated November 8, 1982." At the October 3, 2006 Special Public Hearing, the BOCC referred the Piedmont requests to the Planning Board for their review and recommendations. The Planning Board considered the Piedmont requests at their regular November 1, 2006 meeting and voted unanimously to: 1. Accept the Planning Staff findings of fact for both the amended Planned Development and the Class A SUP. 2. Affirm that the use will maintain or promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, if located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan, as submitted. 3. Affirm that the use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. 4. Affirm that the location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan submitted, will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use is in compliance with the general plan for the physical development of the County as embodied in County regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. 5. Recommend the BOCC adopt the. resolution to approve an ordinance for a zoning atlas amendment for an amended Planned Development district of Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation. 6. Recommend the BOCC adopt the resolution to approve an ordinance for a Special Use Permit, Class A for Planned Development - Office Institutional of Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation for offices and a telecommunications tower greater than 150' in height. Minutes from the October 3 Special Joint Public Hearing and the November 1 Planning Board meeting are attached. Conditions of the original 1983 approval for the PD-01 district and SUP were: 1. That all signs for the development shall be according to Section 7.16 and Article 9 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Drainage, soil erosion and sedimentation plans shall be reviewed and approved by Orange County. The installation of control devices .and on going construction work shall be inspected by Orange County. The site shall at all times conform to the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance. 3. That the proposed dumpster be placed on a 10'x 20' concrete pad 6" thick, with wire mesh. 4. That the service entrance from NC -86 to the entrance gate into the storage yard be paved to NC Department of Transportation buffeon the perimeter r of the site and take 5. That the developer marks the 100 precautions to insure that the grading contractor does not disturb the area. 6. The final site plan and narrative of the project incorporating all changes, deletions and additions through the final approval of the project are incorporated herein and made part of the Special Use Permit. A copy of the final site plan and narrative are to be maintained on file with the Orange County Planning Department. Only those uses specified in the project narrative and on the site plan, including but not limited to the offices, warehousing, maintenance service and outside storage of utility materials will be permitted at the office facility. All improvements as indicated shall be constructed according to the construction schedule set forth in this permit. 7. The following construction schedule shall be adhered to by the applicant. Construction shall begin within six months of the issuance of the Special Use Permit. 8. All necessary easements to permit utility (electricity, telephone, sewer and water) installation, servicing and hookups to the development shall be provided at no cost to the utility provider. 9. That the site plan be revised to adhere to the recommendations contained in a letter dated December 15, 1982 from S. H. Jones, District Engineer, NCDOT. 10. That the lighting shall be shaded and shielded so it does not produce glare in surrounding neighborhoods. On June 30, 1983, subsequent to the rezoning action, a small portion of property owned by PEMC located across NC Highway 86 from the PEMC offices was merged with the Wildwood residential subdivision. In exchange for that portion across NC Highway 86, PEMC received approximately one acre of land adjacent to the PEMC offices. This property has now been merged with the PEMC tract at issue in this rezoning application. The subject tract now consists of approximately 34.737 acres. On April 2, 1984, the BOCC approved a Class B Special Use Permit to erect a 150' tower on the PEMC tract. PEMC now wants to construct a 350 -foot replacement tower for the purposes of updating its total communications system throughout Orange, Person, and Caswell counties. New towers in Caswell and Person counties have already received local approvals. This new proposed tower will allow PEMC to complete improvements to its radio coverage across its service territory and to better coordinate storm restorations and routine field communications. The Department of Homeland Security Maintenance has defined the PEMC trunked radio communication system as critical infrastructure because, if severely damaged, there would be a significant impact on the ability to serve large quantities of customers for an extended period of time. Such damages would have a detrimental impact to the reliability or operability of the energy grid, and could cause significant risk to public health, safety and welfare. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has permitted three new radio frequencies for the facility. PEMC has requested an extension of its FCC license for the tower. (Please refer to pages 89 and 92 for the FAA and FCC approval.) SUP approval will facilitate the processing of the FAA and FCC approval applications. When this new PEMC tower is operational, the LAWS tower, located in the Hurdle Mills neighborhood in the northern part of the County, will be available for other public and private communication antennas. The North Carolina Highway Patrol VIPER 800 mega hertz communication system has requested co- location of the LAWS tower. This will allow multiple public agencies, such as the NC Highway Patrol, Orange County Sheriffs Department, and EMS to better communicate during emergencies such as hurricanes and ice storms. PEMC has offered its existing tower, after de- construction, to the Orange County EMS facility on New Hope Church Road. If this happens, it would be a cost savings to the County. PEMC has also offered free co- location space on the replacement tower to the County Sheriffs Office and to EMS. If EMS communications systems are co- located on the replacement tower, then EMS will improve its communications system and allow for better use of the. VIPER system tower on Eno Mountain. The County Information Technology Department is interested in establishing campus -to- campus network connections using tower - mounted equipment. The use of the existing tower for County purposes once that tower is deconstructed and relocated could be an important first step in acquiring tower access rights for the implementation of the campus -to- campus network. As access rights are negotiated for other towers in the County, the Information Technology Department could replace leased fiber lines and provide more reliable network availability during emergencies. Ordinance references Article 7.2.3 of the Orange County Zoning Regulations states that , if the petitioner elects to apply for a Planned Development District the petition must specify the actual use(s) intended for the property specified in the petition and the intended use(s) must be permitted in the corresponding general use district" and that "in the petition for a Planned Development District, the County Commissioners are to approve, approve with conditions or disapprove the petition on the basis of the proposed site plan and the specific proposed use." The petitioner has designated Offices and Telecommunications Tower (greater than 150 feet in height) as the principal uses. Pursuant to Article 7.2.3, "any change in the use shown on the plan will be treated as an amendment to the Planned Development as set forth in Article 7.8." The PD-01 District is being amended by adding the use of Telecommunication Tower (greater than 150' in height) and also by adding the acre parcel that was not a part of the original SUP legal description. Article 7.2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance states that "within the Planned Development District only those uses authorized by Article 4 as permitted in the zoning district with which the PD corresponds shall be permitted, and all other requirements of the corresponding district shall be met. Only the two uses set forth in the petition (offices and telecommunication tower greater than 150 feet) are proposed; all other district. requirements will be met. Further, Article 7.2.5 specifies, "Within a PD no use shall be permitted except pursuant to a Special Use Permit authorized by the County Commissioners which shall specify the use or uses authorized as required in Article 8.8.23." The uses must be specified in the Special Use Permit, Class A also. Additionally, Article 7.2.5 states that "the authorization of a Special Use Permit in any Planned Development District for any use which is permitted only as a 'Class B' special use in the zoning district which corresponds to the Planned Development District shall preclude any requirement for Board of Adjustment approval but shall be approved by the Board of County Commissioners." The existing Special Use Permit, Class B will be replaced and will not longer be valid under a 'sunset provision' once the new Special Use Permit, Class A is recorded. According to Article 6.3.1, there can be "no more than one principal use on any zoning lot except where a) permitted as part of a Planned Development; or... c) One of the uses is an unmanned telecommunications tower subject to a year -to -year or other short-term lease." The Telecommunication Tower will become the second principal use on this property. On September 12, 2006, the BOCC approved by resolution PEMC's request for an expedited zoning review according to the attached timeline. Also attached are findings of fact for both the amended Planned Development District and the associated Special Use Permit, Class A. All required documentation including, but not limited to, the appropriate application forms, environmental assessments, the adjoining property mailing list with a map, and the technical telecommunications analyses relating to the need for the tower are included herein. AGENCY REVIEW: Sheriff's Office: See letter on page 61. Orange Rural Fire Department: See letter on page 62. EMS: See letter on page 63. PROCESS: Joint Public Hearing — October 3, 2006 Planning Board review — November 1, 2006 BOCC fora decision — December 4, 2006 (earliest available date) FINANCIAL IMPACT: Any costs involved in staff review or the normal public outreach will be reimbursed through the application fees or through the.escrow account in the case of consulting services. RECOMMENDATIONS: The Administration recommends approval for the Zoning Atlas amendment and the Special Use Permit, Class A application in accordance with the attached resolutions. Planning Board recommends approval for the Zoning Atlas amendment and the Special Use Permit, Class A application in accordance with the attached resolutions. RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BORD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO APPROVE AN ORDINANCE FOR A ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT FOR AN AMENDED PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT OF PIEDMONT ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION Date: December 12, 2006 Owners: Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation The Board of County Commissioners hereby approves a petition submitted by Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation ( "PEMC ") to amend the Orange County Zoning Atlas by amending its Planned Development Office/Institutional (PD-01), Special Use Permit, Class A for offices and a telecommunications tower greater than 150 feet in height on property located at 2500 NC Highway 86 being further identified in the Orange County Land Records Office by Parcel Identification Number 9873 -65 -7456 and containing 34.737 acres more or less. The property is identified by the following legal description: BEGINNING at an. iron in the line of Archie E. Millis, the Northwest corner of Willie D. Jones, running thence along with the line of Millis North 4 deg. 36 min. East 368.35 feet to an iron, the Southeast comer of Kendrick Estates Investment Corporation; thence along the north line of said Millis property North 87 deg. 49 min. 27 sec. West 237.73 feet; thence from the centerline of NC Highway 86 South, North 27 deg. 52 min. 45 sec. East 499.1 feet'; thence North 33 deg. 09 min. 30 sec. East 293..04 feet to a nail; thence South 86 deg. 02 min. East approximately 578.09 feet to a concrete monument, corner with Joppa Oaks Estates; thence with Joppa Oaks South 85 deg. 50 min East 707.33 feet to a concrete monument; thence continuing with Joppa Oaks South 3 deg. 39 min. West 683.35 feet to concrete monument, corner with Duke University Forest; thence with Duke South 5 deg. 09 min. West 433.60 feet to a buggy axle, comer with Willie D. Jones; thence with Jones North 84 deg. 07 min. West 1347.72 feet to the place and point of beginning, containing 34.737 acres. The Board of County Commissioners finds that the petition submitted by Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation to amend the Orange County Zoning Atlas by amending its Planned Development Office/Institutional (PD -On, Special Use Permit, Class A for offices and a telecommunications tower greater than 150 feet in height is consistent with the adopted Orange County Comprehensive Plan and that the zoning request is reasonable and in the public interest because it will allow for the continuation of an appropriate type of business on the property which will enable County residents to receive access to electrical distribution services, and it will allow for the enhancement of PEMC's communication system so that PEMC may provide a secure communications network in order to better coordinate power restoration during storms and other emergencies throughout its service territory. The findings made by the Board are based on the recommended. findings of the Orange County Planning Board and the Planning Staff. This ordinance shall become effective upon approval. Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , the foregoing resolution was adopted this the 12'h day of December 2006. Ayes: Noes: Absent or Excused: I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on December 12, 2006 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this _ day of 2006. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners E RECOMMENDED FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD & THE PLANNING STAFF PERTAINING TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION OF PIEDMONT ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION 2500 NC Highway 86 South Planned developments must comply with general and specific standards as set forth in Article 4.2 for Office /Institutional Uses, Article 7 for Planned Developments as well as those set forth in Article 8 for Special Uses. Article 8.2.1 b) requires written findings certifying compliance with the following: (1) Specific regulations governing individual Special Uses as set forth in Article 8.8. These regulations are divided into two (2) sections which include: (a) Application components; and (b) Specific standards for Planned Developments (Article 8.8.23 refers to Article 7 standards) and Special Uses (Article 8.2.4 and 6.29.2). (2) Other requirements as set forth in the Listed below are the findings of the Orange County Planning Board and Planning Staff regarding the pending application. The findings have been presented by Article and requirement to assist the Board in its deliberations. ARTICLE 4.2 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR OFFICEnNSTITUTIONAL USES ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) (continued) Ordinance Reauirements Article 4.2 identifies the criteria which will normally be used to determine the application of a zoning district designation. The applicant has applied to amend a Planned Development -Office /Insitutional Development designation. The criteria for the Office /Institution district are set forth in Article 4.2.16 as follows: a) Site is located in areas designated by the adopted Comprehensive Plan as Commercial Transition or Industrial Activity Nodes. b) Site would provide a buffer or step down in intensity of land use from a commercial use in a Neighborhood or Community Activity Node. c) These areas should have water and sewer mains existing at site or are to be made available during the development process. d) The maximum amount of land zoned to this 0/1 classification shall not exceed five acres. PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS x Yes _N The property is within a designated o Commercial /Industrial Node. x_Yes _N While the use is office and o institutional in nature, its impervious cover (3.6 %) is more compatible with typical low density residential uses. x_Yes _N Water and sewer are available at o the site. x Yes _N 0 e) Vehicular access must consist of x_Yes _N direct access to a street o classified either arterial or collector as the Comprehensive Plan designates. The Planned development nature of the activities on site required more than five acres to accomplish the intent of the other criteria. NC Highway 86 South is designated as a minor arterial road in the Plan. ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION /PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) 10 Ordinance Reauirements Article 7.4 indicates the application must first comply with all requirements specified in Article 20 - Amendments. Those requirements include: 20.3.2 a) Map showing affected property at scale of not less than 1" =100' nor more than 1 " =20'. *20.3.2 b) Legal description of property. 20.3.2 c) Explanation of alleged error, if any, to be corrected by proposed amendment. 20.3.2 d) Changed conditions, if any, which make amendment reasonably necessary to promote public health, safety and general welfare. 20.3.2 e) Manner in which proposed amendment will carry out purpose and intent of adopted Comprehensive Plan. PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS x Yes No Site plan provided at a scale of 1"=20'. x Yes No The legal description is provided. _Yes _No N/A - No error alleged. N/A x X Yes No The enhanced communications N/A abilities because of the new tower _ promote the public health, safety and general welfare. x Yes _No The proposed tower is located in a planned Office /institutional property in the Hillsborough Transition Area. ARTICLE 8.8.23 SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION /PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non .compliance) Article 8.8.23 indicates that the application shall comply with the applicable sections of Article 7 - Planned Developments ARTICLE 7 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS FOR EVALUATION /PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) (continued) Ordinance Requirements Article 7.4 then indicates the application must comply with certain specific requirements common to all Planned Developments. These include: 7.4.1 So located with respect to major streets and mass transit facilities and designed so as not to create traffic on minor streets in residential districts. 7.4.2 So located with respect to water, sewer and storm drainage facilities that enlargement or extension will not result in higher net public cost or earlier incursion of public cost; and So located with respect to police, fire and rescue services, and schools and parks so as to have access in the same manner as permitted under the existing zoning. 7.4.3 Site suitable for development within hazard from flooding, erosion, and soil subsidence of slipping. PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS x Yes No Access is provided NC 86 South. No minor residential streets will be affected by this project as proposed. x Yes No The proposed development has public water and sewer, therefore, no higher net public cost will result. x Yes No Letters regarding adequate service provision have been received from the Sheriff s Department, and fire and rescue services. (Pages 61, 62, and 63) x_Yes No The site is not located in a flood hazard or poorly drained area. ARTICLE 8.2.1 & 8.2.2 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS (Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) III PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS Ordinance Re uirements In accordance with Article 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance the Board of County Commissioners shall also consider the following general conditions before the application for Special Use shall be approved:. Article 8.2.1 & 8.2.2 X Will _Will Not The applicant believes that the 1. The use will maintain or promote replacement tower, in the same the public health, safety and general general location as the existing welfare, if located where proposed tower will promote the public and developed and operated health, safety, and general welfare according to the plan as submitted. be enhancing emergency communications within the community, particularly during catastrophic conditions. Article 8.2.1 X Will Will Not Applicant has submitted evidence 2. The use will maintain or enhance for consideration documenting the value of contiguous property those values of contiguous (unless the use is a public properties will be maintained or necessity, in which case the use enhanced. Accor -ding to need not maintain or enhance the information submitted, the tower value of contiguous property). will not have impact on the availability or affor- dability. (Pages 149 to 153) Article 8.2.1 X Is Is Not The proposed tower is a 3. The location and character of the replacement tower for the existing use, if developed according to the 150 -foot communi- cations tower, plan submitted, will be in harmony which has been in use since 1984. with the area in which it is to be The proposed new tower is just to located and the use is in the east of the existing tower in compliance with the general plan for the same forested tract. No the physical development of the change in use or intensity of use is County as embodied in these foreseen. The applicant will regulations or in the Comprehensive provide additional evidence at the Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by Planning Board meeting. the Board of County Commissioners. ARTICLE 8.2.4 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS ALL SPECIAL USES ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED EVIDENCE SUBMITTED FINDINGS TO SUPPORT FINDINGS _ Ordinance Reouirements Article 8.2.4 requires the applicant to address the following: a) Method and adequacy of _x —Yes No The Town of Hillsborough provision for sewage supplies water and sewer disposal facilities, solid services to the property. waste and water service. b) Method and adequacy of _x —Yes No The Orange Rural Fire police, fire and rescue Department provides fire squad protection. protection will be provided, rescue service by the Orange County Emergency Manage- ment, and police protection by the Orange County Sheriff s Department.(Pages 61 -62- 63) c) Method and adequacy of _x —Yes No The property will have direct vehicle access to the site access onto NC Highway 86 and traffic conditions around the site. South. Changes have been made to the site plan to meet NCDOT and the Orange County Transportation Planner's recommendations when the site was originally improved in 1982. ARTICLE 8.6 AND 8.8 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS ("Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) Ordinance Requirements 8.6 - Application submitted on forms providing full and accurate description of proposed use, including location, appearance and operational characteristics. 8.8 a) - Twenty -six (26) copies of the site plan prepared by a registered N.C. land surveyor, architect, or engineer. 8.8 b) - Elevations of all proposed structures to be used in the development. 8.8 c) -A fee, as set by the Board of County Commissioners. PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS _x —Yes No _x Yes No _x Yes No EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS A complete application on appropriate forms has been submitted. (Pages 36 and 37) Twenty -six (26) copies of the site plan, prepared by Obrien Atkins Architects have been submitted. _x Yes No Application fees in the amount of $2,736.85 for the PD amendment and $10,000 for the tower SUP have been paid. (Pages 42 to 43) 112 The Planning Board & Staff have not received any information, which would establish grounds for making a negative finding on the general standards. These standards include maintaining or promoting the public health, safety, and general welfare, maintaining or enhancing the value of contiguous property, and the use being in compliance with the general plan for the physical development of the County. The Planning Board & Staff have reviewed the application, the site plan, and all supporting documentation and has found that the applicant has submitted information for the specific standards and requirements. Provided the Board of County Commissioners finds in the affirmative on the specific and general standards, the Planning Board & Staff recommend approval of the request. The Planning Board & Staff do recommend the attachment of conditions to the approval which are specified as follows: 1. That a telecommunications tower be added to the listing of permitted uses in the zoning district. 2. Any lighting on the Telecommunications tower shall be shielded so as not to be seen from the ground for a distance of one mile at the height of twelve degrees (120) vertical. 3. The navigational lighting shall be white, rather than red, and the strobe period shall be the longest under FCC regulations. 4. The height of the telecommunications tower may not exceed three hundred fifty (350) feet, including the 30 -foot antenna at the top of the tower. 5. The area subject to this Planned Development — Office /Institutional (PD-01) zoning district is now 34.737 acres. 13 RESOLUTION OF THE ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO APPROVE A SPECIAL USE PERMIT, CLASS A FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT- OFFICE/INSTITUTIONAL OF PIEDMONT ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION FOR OFFICES AND A TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER GREATER THAN 150' IN HEIGHT Date: December 12, 2006 Applicant/Owner: Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation The Orange County Board of County Commissioners hereby adopts the recommended findings of the Orange County Planning Board & Planning Staff concerning compliance with specific and general standards for this special use as detailed in Exhibit A attached hereto. The Orange County Board of County Commissioners' resolution herein relates to the application submitted by Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation ( "PEMC ") for a revision to its Special Use Permit, Class A for a 350 foot telecommunications tower.and the as -built site plan dated July 7, 1987, applicable to the following property and subject to the following conditions: Located at 2500 NC Highway 86 South being further identified in the Orange County Land Records Office by Parcel Identification Number, 9873 -65 -7456 and containing 34.737 acres more or less. The property is identified by the following legal description: BEGINNING at an iron in the line of Archie E. Millis, the Northwest corner of Willie D. Jones, running thence along with the line of Millis North 4 deg. 36 min. East 368.35 feet to an iron, the Southeast corner of Kendrick Estates Investment Corporation; thence along the north line of said Millis property North 87 deg. 49 min. 27 sec. West 237.73 feet; thence from the centerline of NC Highway 86 South, North 27 deg. 52 min. 45 sec. East 499.1 feet'; thence North 33 deg. 09 min. 30 sec. East 293.04 feet to a nail; thence South 86 deg. 02 min. East approximately 578.09 feet to a concrete monument, comer with Joppa Oaks Estates; thence with Joppa Oaks South 85 deg. 50 min East 707.33 feet to a concrete monument; thence continuing with Joppa Oaks South 3 deg. 39 min. West 683.35 feet to concrete monument, corner with Duke University Forest; thence with Duke South 5 deg. 09 min. West 433.60 feet to a buggy axle, comer with Willie D. Jones; thence with Jones North 84 deg. 07 min. West 1347.72 feet to the place and point of beginning, containing 34.737 acres. The following are conditions of approval: 1. A shield shall be installed on the replacement tower that prevents tower lighting from being seen at ground level. Alternatively, in place of an actual shield, PEMC may use available technology that prevents tower lighting from being seen at a 12 degrees vertical height angle for a distance of l .mile from the tower base. 14 2. The navigational lighting shall be white, rather than red, and the strobe period shall be the longest permitted under FCC regulations. 3. The height of the tower may not exceed three hundred fifty (350) feet above the pre - disturbance or pre - construction ground level including the 30 -foot antenna at the top of the tower. 4. Security shall be submitted and approved by the County Attorney guaranteeing the removal of the tower in the event it is abandoned or unused for a period of 12 months. A qualified contractor shall provide a cost estimate. The amount of the security shall be 110 percent of the estimate. The tower owner shall deliver a fully executed Tower Removal Agreement. The security guaranteeing removal of the tower and the Tower Removal Agreement each shall be in a form approved by the County Attorney and such approvals must be obtained before building permits are issued for the construction of the replacement tower. 5. County or State wireless communication systems shall be allowed free co- location space on the PEMC tower, as offered by PEMC. 6. The existing tower must be de- constructed. De- constructed tower materials shall be made available to public agencies, as offered by PEMC. 7. The tower facility and its equipment shall comply with all federal, state and local emission requirements. 8. Electro- magnetic radiation levels shall maintain compliance with requirements of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), regarding emission of electromagnetic radiation. Within thirty (30) days of installation of equipment on the tower, and within 30 days of the installation of any additional equipment in the future, the tower owner shall provide documentation of emission levels in relation to FCC standards. In addition, the tower owner must provide documentation of emission levels within five working days if so requested by Orange County. Orange County may make such requests at any time, not to exceed two (2) times per year. 9. Two (2) ten -pound 2- A:20 -B:C dry chemical portable fire extinguishers shall be installed at the site as required by Orange County Emergency Management. 10. The Special Use Permit will automatically expire within twelve (12) months from the date of approval if the use has not commenced. This Special Use Permit will expire within twelve (12) months from the date of approval if construction has not commenced or proceeded unless a timely application for extension of this time limit is approved by the Board of County Commissioners as provided in 8.4.11 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. 11. Any zoning violations present on the site shall be corrected prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 12. The issuance of a Building/Electrical Permit by the Inspections Division shall be according to the approved site plan. 13. Piedmont Electric shall submit a report to the Inspections Division certifying structural is and electrical integrity at the time of the building permit review, upon completion of the initial construction, and at intervals as specified in Section 6.18.4f of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. 14. Piedmont Electric shall keep inspection records and make them available upon request to the Inspections Division during regular business hours. Inspections shall be performed as required in Section 6.18.4 f of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, as recommended under EIA/TIA 222F of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). 15. The following inspection schedule shall be followed except in cases where a tower has no structures other than those associated with telecommunication tower use located within the tower's fall zone. At least once every thirty -six (36) months, or thirty -six (36) months from the date of a co- location- approval, a structural engineer who is regularly involved in the maintenance, inspection and/or erection- of telecommunications towers shall inspect the tower and submit a- report to the Inspections Division within a reasonable time thereafter. At a minimum, this inspection shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and in accordance with the tower inspections check list provided in the EIA -222 (as amended from time to time). This is considered a major inspection review. 16. At least once every twelve (12) months, a visual inspection from the ground shall be conducted by a properly trained staff member of a tower provider or tower consultant and a report shall be filed with the Inspections Division within a reasonable time thereafter. This inspection shall include, but shall not be limited to, visual inspection of tower foundations, structures, guys, and connections for evidence of settlement or later movement; soil erosion; condition of paint or galvanizing; rust or corrosion, loose or missing bolts, loose or corroded lightning protection connectors; tower plumbness, significant variation in guy sags (i.e. tensions), and other material areas or matters relating to the structural integrity of the tower. This .is considered a minor inspection review. 17. In addition to the regularly scheduled major and minor inspections set forth above, a minor inspection, at a minimum, will be conducted if the tower or its appurtenances are noted at any time to be visibly damaged. Additionally, a major inspection shall be conducted if the visible damage to the tower is significant or when, after conducting a minor inspection, significant questions remain about the structural integrity of the tower. Structurally Unsafe or Unused Towers. Any tower found, through inspection by the owner or by inspection of the Inspections Division, to be structurally unsafe and cannot be brought into compliance within one hundred eighty (180) days shall be removed at the owner's expense. 18. Compliance with Standards. Current or former EIA standards shall apply to the addition of antennas or other appurtenances to communications towers under the following conditions: a) Additions to towers constructed prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, regardless of whether the additions are accounted for in the original design, shall comply with the current EIA standards, and the wind loading specified therein. Additions to towers constructed subsequent to the effective date of this Ordinance shall comply with standards set forth elsewhere in this Section. 16 b) Existing towers, which will not have any appurtenances added to them shall at a minimum comply with the EIA standards in existence at the time the tower . was erected. c) Replacement of antennas or other appurtenances shall at a .minimum comply with the EIA standard in existence at the time the tower was erected if the replacement does not add to the original design loading. d) If a structural analysis shows a tower is not in compliance with the appropriate EIA standards, the owner shall submit an application to the Inspections Division with a plan to bring the tower into compliance within six (6) months. 19. An analysis by a North Carolina Licensed Professional Engineer (P.E. Analysis) shall be performed and shall be submitted to the Inspections Division upon completion of initial construction. The analysis shall determine the tower's compliance or lack thereof with the EIA standard in effect at the time the tower was constructed and when the most recent structural loading change was made. The letter or existing P.E. analysis shall include the types of modifications that would be required to bring the tower. up to standard. If the tower does not meet the aforementioned EIA standards, the owner shall submit an application to the Inspections Division with a plan to bring the tower into compliance within (6) months of the date of the P.E. Analysis report. The replacement tower shall be subject to an annual electrical inspection conducted by the Inspections Division including any associated inspection fees. 20. The Inspections Division shall be notified in writing when a required analysis is complete. A copy of the analysis report shall be made available to the Inspections Division upon request. That report shall also give details of the net result of any changes made to the tower or its appurtenances since the last inspection. 21. A copy of the final invoice from the Center for Municipal Solutions will be provided to PEMC once it is received by the County. All monies owed to the County from PEMC must be paid before the facility transmits or receives data 22. PEMC shall not transmit or receive data from the facility until the Certificate of Occupancy or its functional equivalent has been issued. 23. If any condition of this Special Use Permit shall be held invalid or void, then this Special Use Permit shall be void in its entirety and of no effect. This Special Use Permit, Class A shall become effective upon approval. Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner , the foregoing resolution was adopted this the 12'h day of December 2006. Ayes: Noes: Absent or Excused: I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the 17 proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on December 12, 2006 as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of said Board. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said County, this day of 12006. Clerk to the Board of Commissioners 18 EXHIBIT A RECOMMENDED FINDINGS OF THE ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD & PLANNING STAFF PERTAINING TO PIEDMONT ELECTRIC MEMBERS CORPORATION'S SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION 2500 NC Highway 86 South Special Uses must comply with general and specific standards as set forth in Article 8. Article 8.2.1 b) requires written findings certifying compliance with the following: (1) Specific regulations governing individual Special Uses as set forth in Article 8.8. These regulations are divided into two (2) sections, which include: (a) Application components; and (b) Specific standards for Special Uses (Article 8.2.4, Article 8.8.17.1 and 8.8.17.2). (2) Other requirements as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance, including the provisions of Article 5 (Dimensional Requirements) and Article 6 (Application of Dimensional Requirements). Listed below are the findings of the Orange County Planning Board and Planning Staff regarding the pending application. The findings have been presented by Article and requirement to assist the Board in its deliberations. ARTICLE 8.2.1 & 8.2.2 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS ("Will" indicates compliance, "Will Not" indicates non - compliance Ordinance Reauirements In accordance with Article 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Board of Adjustment shall also consider the following general conditions before the application for a Special Use can be approved: Article 8.2.1 1. The use will maintain or promote the public health, safety and general welfare, if located where proposed and developed and operated according to the plan as submitted. 2. The use will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property (unless the use is a public necessity, in which case the use need not maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property). PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS _X Will _ Will Not X Will _ Will Not EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS The applicant believes the replacement tower, in the same general location as the existing tower will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare be enhancing emergency communications within the community, particularly during catastrophic conditions. Applicant has submitted evidence for consideration documenting those values of contiguous properties will be maintained or enhanced. According to information submitted, the tower will not have impact on the availability or affordability. (Pages 149 to 153) 3. The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan submit -ted, will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use is in compliance with the general plan for the physical development of the County as embodied in these regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners. X Will _ Will Not The proposed tower is a replacement tower for the existing 150 -foot communi- cations tower, which has been in use since 1984. The proposed new local is just to the east of the existing tower in the same forested tract. No change in use or intensity of use is foreseen. The applicant will provide additional evidence at the Planning Board meeting. ARTICLE 8.6 AND 8.8 - APPLICATION COMPONENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance, "No" indicates non - compliance) 19 19 PLANNING BOARD /STAFF EVIDENCE SUBMITTED RECOMMENDED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS FINDINGS Ordinance Reouirements 8.6 - Application submitted on forms X Yes No A complete application on providing full and accurate description appropriate forms has been of proposed use, including location, submitted and is attached. appearance and operational (Pages 40 and 41) characteristics. 8.8 a) - Twenty-six (26) copies of the X Yes No Twenty-six (26) copies of the "as site plan prepared by a registered land built" site plan, prepared by surveyor, architect, or engineer. Keener, Williams, & Adams have been submitted. 8.8 b) - Elevations of all proposed X Yes No An elevation drawing is attached. structures to be used in the development. 8.8 c) - Twenty-six (26) copies of the _X —Yes No Ten (26) copies of the Environmental Assessment and/or Environmental Assessment have Environmental Impact Statement, if been provided. required, by the Orange County (Pages 64 to 71) Environmental Impact Ordinance. 8.8 d) - A fee, as set by the Orange X Yes No Application fees in the amount of County Board of Commissioners. $2,736.85 for the PD amendment and $10,000 for the tower SUP have been paid. (Receipt copy found on pages 42, 42a, 42b, and 43) 8.8 e) — Method of disposal of trees, X Yes No Cleared tress will be properly limbs, stumps, and construction debris. landfilled. PEMC proposes to deconstruct the old tower and make the material available to other public agencies, such as EMS for their future needs. 19 19 ARTICLE 5 - DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) PLANNING ARTICLE 6 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) Ordinance Requirements Article 6 lists specific standards, which apply to various types of development applications. Article 6.12 contains those development intensity standards which apply to group developments controlled by the Land Use Intensity (LUI) system a) Minimum gross land area b) Maximum gross land area c) Maximum floor ratio - .230 348,023 sq. ft. based on acreage d) Required minimum open space ratio - .75 or 1,134,858 sq. ft. based on acreage e) Required minimum pedestrian/landscape ratio - .188 or 284,471 sq. ft. based on acreage Article 6.18.4 Minimum Standards for Telecommunications Towers All telecommunications towers must meet the following standards: PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS X Yes BOARD /STAFF EVIDENCE SUBMITTED 0 RECOMMENDED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS X Yes FINDINGS Not applicable. Ordinance Requirements Article 5 lists standards for minimum N 0.036 based on floor area of lot size, lot width, front, side and rear 55,161 sq. ft. from information the setbacks, maximum building height applicant supplied . and lot coverage, and development N 1,165,121 sq. ft, are provided. intensity. The applicant has applied for a Special N 1,328, 000 sq. ft. are provided Use Permit on property zoned Planned outside of roofed and paved areas. Development - Office Institutional. The standards for the PD-01 district are set forth in Article 5.1.2 and are as follows: a) Minimum lot area per use 5,000 sq. X Yes N The parcel contains 34.737 acres. ft. o b) Minimum lot width - 50 ft. X Yes N The parcel has 790 feet of road o frontage on NC Highway 86 S. c) Required front setback - 25 ft. X Yes N The closest building to NC o Highway 86 S. is 800' form the r.o.w. d) Required side /rear setbacks - 10 ft. X Yes N The least side or rear setback o distance is 280 feet. e) Maximum building height - 35 ft. X Yes N The tallest building is 32 feet in o height. ARTICLE 6 - APPLICATION OF DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) Ordinance Requirements Article 6 lists specific standards, which apply to various types of development applications. Article 6.12 contains those development intensity standards which apply to group developments controlled by the Land Use Intensity (LUI) system a) Minimum gross land area b) Maximum gross land area c) Maximum floor ratio - .230 348,023 sq. ft. based on acreage d) Required minimum open space ratio - .75 or 1,134,858 sq. ft. based on acreage e) Required minimum pedestrian/landscape ratio - .188 or 284,471 sq. ft. based on acreage Article 6.18.4 Minimum Standards for Telecommunications Towers All telecommunications towers must meet the following standards: PLANNING BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS X Yes N Not applicable. 0 X Yes N Not applicable. 0 X Yes N 0.036 based on floor area of 0 55,161 sq. ft. from information the applicant supplied . X Yes N 1,165,121 sq. ft, are provided. 0 X Yes N 1,328, 000 sq. ft. are provided 0 outside of roofed and paved areas. 20 20 b) All telecommunications towers shall be placed in heavily wooded areas on the site to the maximum extent possible so as to lessen the visual intrusiveness of the structure and accessory structures. The applicant stating how the proposed tower will be minimally visually intrusive to surrounding properties in the area shall submit a statement. Criteria that may be used for such evidence may be height and type of existing trees surrounding the proposed tower, and local topography. c) A statement shall be submitted, prepared by a professional engineer licensed in the State of North Carolina, which through rational engineering analysis, certifies the tower's compliance with applicable standards as set forth in the State of North Carolina Building Code, and any associated regulations; and describes the towers capacity, including an example of the number and type of antennas it can accommodate. d) Applicants shall provide: 1) The existing cell sites (latitude, longitude, power levels) to which this proposed site will be a handoff candidate, 2) A Radio Frequency plot indicating the coverage of existing sites, and that of the proposed site, 3) The search area utilized in finding the proposed site, 4) Antenna heights and power levels of proposed site, and 5) The frequency, modulation and class of service of radio or other transmitting equipment. 6) The actual intended transmission and the maximum effective radiated power of the antenna. 7) The direction of maximum lobes and associated radiation of the antennas. X Yes X Yes N 0 M X Yes N 0 X Yes N 0 X Yes N 0 X Yes N 0 X Yes N 0 X Yes N 0 X Yes N 0 This tower is being placed in a heavily wooded, mature hardwood forested area just east of the existing tower at the PEMC Headquarters. It has been situated so as to utilize as much of the tree coverage as possible. As is evidenced from the attached balloon test report, , the new tower will practically be unseen from the north- looking south along NC Highway 86 and from the south near the mini - storage looking north along NC Highway 86. (Page 47) Drawings sealed by a registered engineer in the State of North Carolina indicated that the tower is constructed so as to support the PEMC antennas and is equipped to support at least, five (5) other antenna systems and there could be room for many more than five. PEMC is willing to make the site available to other antenna systems for a fee. PEMC has offered the Orange County Sheriffs office space on the tower at no- charge. The PEMC radio system is a trunked, two -way VHR system and does not utilize cellular technology. (Page 48) Attached propagation maps indicate the two-way radio coverage for both outgoing and in coming messages. (Pages 102 and 103) A search area is not applicable for this tower since PEMC has determined that the tower will be more securely located on their existing property. (Page 112) The tower is a 350' self - supporting model NSX Nello tower. The antennas will be Andrew DB264 antennas with 6dBm of gain mounted at 350' AGL. The total effective radiated power of the site will be about 160 watts. (Page 48 and 49) VFH frequencies assigned to this site are 153.530, 153.470, and 153.605 mHz. The modulation scheme for the proposed radio will be analog with an emission code of 11 K2F1 D. The class of service will be F132 per the FCC license. (Pages 97, 98, 99, 100, and 101) The antenna systems will be installed in an omni- directional fashion with an effective radiated power of about 160 watts. (P. 49) No directional antennas will be used on this radio system. All antennas will be omni - directional. (Page 49) 21 21 8) A written affidavit stating why "the X Yes N Radio coverage areas of all nearby proposed site is necessary for their o towers would reduce the proposed communications service" (e.g., for PEMC two-way radio coverage by coverage, capacity, hole - filling, etc.) 30 %, from 20 miles to 14 miles. and a statement that there are no (Pages 49 and 51) existing alternative sites within the provided search area and there are no alternative technologies available which could provide the proposed service enhancement without the tower. a) County staff will utilize the services X Yes N Orange County Planning and of a registered professional engineer o Inspection Department retains the to confirm the statement made in item services of Municipal Solutions to 8) above. No tower shall be permitted evaluate all tower applications for to exceed its designed loading compliance with the technical capacity. For all towers attached to aspects of the site evaluation. existing structures, the statement shall (Their report on this tower is found include certification that the structure on Pages 142 to 144) can support the load superimposed from the tower. All towers shall have the capacity to permit multiple users; at a minimum monopole towers shall accommodate two (2) users and self - supporttlattice or guyed towers shall, at a minimum accommodate three (3) users. e) Standards of evaluation. X Yes N The replacement tower is necessary 1) A proposed tower shall not be o to upgrade the emergency permitted if it is not substantially communications capabilities of the necessary for the identified PEMC system. (Page 51) telecommunications service need. '2)Tower height shall be measured X Yes N The replacement tower height is 350 from the base of the tower to the o feet, which includes a 30 -foot highest point of the proposed antenna mounted on top of the antennas, with lightening rod, to be structure. (Please refer to the site located atop the tower structure. plan.) .3) Telecommunications towers X Yes N A site plan is attached, along with shall conform to all of the o detailed plans for the proposed requirements of Sections replacement tower site. 8.8.17a.1a(a -g) and 8.8.17a.2 of Landscaping will not be required the Zoning Ordinance. because of the existing dense forest cover. No tower is within 0.5 miles of the site. Other sites have been evaluated and the proposed replacement tower complies with the appropriate local, state, and federal regulations. (Pages 46 to 51) 4) All towers shall be engineered X Yes N The applicant tower is designed to to allow for co- locations. No co- o allow at least five (5) co- locations locator shall be refused access for and there could be room for many co- location by charging exorbitant more than five (5). Orange County lease fees. Public safety co- systems. will be allowed free of locations shall take priority over charge and private companies will other co- locators. be charged a fee. (Recommendation 5 on Page 34) 5) A tower consultant shall X Yes N Orange County Planning and provide Staff assistance on o Inspection Department retains the exorbitant rate leases. services of Municipal Solutions to evaluate all tower applications for compliance with the technical aspects of the site . evaluation. (Their report on this tower is found on Pages 142 to 144) 6) Fees and charges 22 22 a) A filing fee as set- by the Orange County Board of Commissioners shall be paid upon application for a Building Permit, Site Plan approval or Special Use Permit. In addition, an inspection fee is due the County at the time of future inspections. b) Public land or right -of -way lease agreements shall be established by separate instrument and recorded prior to the issuance of Building Permits. c) Escrow Account. An escrow account of an amount determined by the Board of County Commissioners shall be paid by check to Orange County upon filing of a telecommunication tower application. The account shall be drawn upon to pay associated consultant review fees during the review process. Any unused funds in the account after the approval of the Certificate of Occupancy (CO) shall be returned to the designated party. X Yes N Application fees in the amount of o $2,736.85 for the PD amendment and $10,000 for the tower SUP have been paid. (Receipt copy found on pages 42, 42a, 42b, and 43) _Yes N Not applicable, the tower, all support X N/A o facilities and the access road are located on private property. X Yes N Application fees in the amount of o $2,736.85 for the PD amendment and $10,000 for the tower SUP have been paid, of which $7,500 has been set aside into an escrow account. (Receipt copy found on pages 42, 42a, 42b, and 43) ARTICLE 8.2.4 - SPECIFIC STANDARDS /ALL SPECIAL USES ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) (continued) Ordinance Requirements Article 8.2.4 requires the applicant to address the following: a) Method and adequacy of provision for sewage disposal facilities, solid waste and water service. b) Method and adequacy of police, fire and rescue squad protection. c) Method and adequacy of vehicle access to the site and traffic conditions around the site. d) Other specific standards set forth in Section 8.8 PLANNING . BOARD /STAFF RECOMMENDED FINDINGS EVIDENCE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS X Yes N The Town of Hillsborough supplies o public water and sewer to the site. X Yes N Letters regarding adequate service o provision have been received from the Sheriffs Department, and fire and rescue services. (Pages 61, 62, and 63) X Yes N Access is provided NC 86 South. o (Please refer to the site plan) X Yes N See the comments below. 0 ARTICLE 8.4.1 - PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE ( "Yes" indicates compliance: "No" indicates non - compliance) (continued) PLANNING BOARD /STAFF EVIDENCE SUBMITTED RECOMMENDED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS FINDINGS Ordinance Requirements: Article 8.4.1 requires the following: 23 23 a) A pre - application meeting is to be X Yes N A pre - application meeting was held held with the Orange County Planning o at the Planning and Inspections Department. Department Conference Room on July 6, 2006. b) A plan indicating proposed search X Yes N Piedmont gave proper notice at the area was submitted to Zoning Officer o January 26, 2006, a copy of map of on or before December 31st of the proposed site and attendance previous year to be considered at the log are attached. (Minutes of the Annual Telecommunications meeting are found on Page 145) Projection Meeting (ATPM). ARTICLE 8.8.17a - TELECOMMUNICATION TOWERS ( "Yes" indicates compliance-, "No" indicates non - compliance) PLANNING BOARD EVIDENCE SUBMITTED RECOMMENDED TO SUPPORT FINDINGS FINDINGS Ordinance Reauirements 8.8.17a. Overall Policy and Desired Goals for X Yes N Piedmont did investigate the Special Use Permits for o possibility of utilizing existing towers Telecommunications towers. Pro- in the nearby area. The analysis is moting and encouraging, wherever attached to these findings. Co- possible, alternatives to constructing location on near -by towers would new towers, including but not limited to reduce two -way radio coverage the co- location of wireless areas by 30 %, reducing the telecommunications equipment and proposed 20 -mile coverage to 14 mitigating the visual effect of a miles. (Page 49) telecommunication tower to an extent not commercially Impracticable; The tower is proposed to be placed promoting and encou- raging, wherever in a heavily wooded, mature possible, the place -ment, height and hardwood forested area just east of quantity of wireless the existing tower on the PEMC telecommunications towers and equip- headquarters campus. Situated as ment in such a manner, including but such to take advantage of the not limited to the use of stealth existing topography and tree technology or camouflage techniques, canopy, the tower will be minimally to minimize adverse aesthetic and visible from the surrounding visual impacts on the land, property, subdivisions. buildings, and other facilities adjacent (Page 47) to, surrounding, and in generally the same area as the requested location of such telecom - munications towers, which shall mean using the least visually and physically intrusive facility that is not technologically or commercially impracticable under the facts and circumstances. a. A Site Plan showing the entire site X Yes N An "as- built" site plan, dated July 7, (including property boundary lines) and o 1984, provided at a scale of 1 " =20' size•of all existing structures within 500 and a site plan for the replacement feet of the site, existing and proposed tower, dated December 13, 2005 structures on site, the fall zone of the are attached. No buildings are tower, existing and proposed located within the replacement topography at a contour interval of five tower fall zone. feet and any officially designated floodways and floodplains, or the The site is not located in a flood presence of alluvial soils. hazard. b. Plans, and elevations for all X Yes N The FAA license requires the tower proposed structures and descriptions o be lighted, precluding the need to of the color and nature of all exterior paint the tower in contrasting colors. material. The tower will be galvanized grey in color. (P. 50) 24 24 c. A Landscape Plan showing, at the _Yes N The replacement tower is proposed same scale as the Site Plan, existing X N/A o to be constructed in a heavily and proposed trees, plus shrubs, wooded, mature hardwood forested ground cover and other landscape area just east of the existing tower materials. This plan shall minimize on the PEMC headquarters campus. adverse visual effects of No additional landscaping is telecommunications towers and required. antennas through careful design, (Page 50) siting, landscape screening and innovative camouflaging techniques. Notwithstanding any other provision of this article, to minimize adverse visual impacts associated with the proliferation and clustering of telecommunications towers, co- location of telecommunications equipment on existing or new towers shall be encouraged. d) Monopole, lattice or guyed _X Yes N A 157' monopole tower is located telecommunications towers shall not o 0.66 miles north of the site on Old be located within '/ mile of any NC Highway 10. Another 160' existing monopole, lattice or guyed guyed tower is located 0.66 miles to telecommunications tower. An the south along NC Highway 86 exception may be allowed when the South. applicant can sufficiently demonstrate that 1) appropriate space on the Neither of the towers is adequate for existing telecommunication tower is Piedmont's purpose. It is not not available; or 2) the applicant has technologically or commercially made good faith effort to negotiate an practicable to use the existing agreement with the owner of the towers or use multiple smaller existing telecommunication tower and towers. has been unsuccessful, which must be documented in writing; or 3) the (Page 50) telecommunication equipment on the existing telecommunication tower is not compatible with the proposed telecommunication equipment of the applicant; or 4) adequate coverage by the applicant cannot be met at the location of the existing telecommunication tower, or 5) the existing telecommunication tower cannot be reasonably modified to accommodate additional co- location by the applicant. Exceptions shall only be allowed after the County s consultant or Staff indicating that coverage is not possible on an existing tower at the four - carrier capacity or other user capacity that can be achieved performs a thorough analysis of the search area provided by the applicant. There must be an 80% approval vote of the deciding board for this specific finding to pass the exception criteria. e. Evidence that the applicant has investigated the possibilities for locating the proposed facilities on an existing tower., Such evidence shall consist of: 25 9V 1) A listing of all telecommunications towers within a 1 -mile (for towers 150 feet in height or shorter or 2 -miles (for towers greater than 150 feet in height) radius of the proposed tower site. Documents shall be submitted at the time of application filing that indicate the applicant's ability or inability to co- locate on the identified tower(s) and reasons why. _Yes N 0 2) Delineation of the boundaries of the _Yes N maximum search range within which X N/A o the telecommunication equipment can function as intended. The following information shall be provided for all existing towers within the search range: (a) Tower height, as measured from XYes N the base of the tower to the highest o point of the proposed antenna, including lighting rods, to be located atop the tower structure; (b) Existing and planned tower users; XYes N 0 (c)Whether the existing XYes N telecommunication tower could o accommodate the antenna to be attached to the proposed tower without causing structural instability or radio frequency interference; and There are six telecommunication towers within two miles of the PEMC site. They area: 1. 15T monopole on Old NC 10, 2. 160'guyed tower on NC 86, 3. 178' monopole in Hillsborough, 4. 160' monopole on Landau Dr. 5. 254' lattice tower on New Hope Church Road, and 6. 180' monopole on Palmers Grove Church Road. A radio propagation study included these tower sites. Because of terrain, coverage is not concentric. The best coverage for PEMC is the proposed 350' tower. Each of the existing tower sites listed have coverage deficiencies that would have a sever impact on the radio coverage PEMC requires due to structure height, antenna height, ground elevations, and terrain features. The PEMC radio system is a trunked, two-way VHR system and does not .utilize cellular technology. PEMC requires a radio system that will optimize existing frequency spectrum and provide increased voice channel capacity and data functionality, This will require a three tower system consisting of a VHF trunked repeater equipment, VHF top antenna, transmission line for the VHF radio system, and microwave dishes to interconnect the three tower sites. The other two towers are already installed in Person and Caswell Counties. The replacement tower height is 350 feet, which includes a 30 -foot antenna mounted on top of the structure. Piedmont Electric system. The applicant tower is designed to allow up to five (5) co- locations. Orange County systems will be allowed free of charge and private companies will be charged a fee. 26 26 Ordinance Reauirements 8.8.17a.1a Additional Information (d) If the proposed telecommunication equipment cannot be accommodated on the existing tower, assess whether the existing tower could be structurally strengthened or whether the antennas, transmitters and related equipment could be protected from electro- magnetic interference, and generally describe the means and projected cost of shared use of the existing tower, and XYes _No Piedmont did investigate the possibility of utilizing existing towers in the nearby area, including its existing tower. The analysis is attached to these findings. Co4ocation on near -by towers would reduce two-way radio coverage areas by 30 %, reducing the proposed 20 -mile coverage to 14 miles. (e) Any restrictions or limitations of the FCC or FAA that would preclude the shared use of the tower; and 3. A summary explanation of why proposed X Yes _No telecommunication equipment cannot be located on any of the existing towers in the search range. f. Documentation, from applicable state or federal X Yes _No agencies indicating requirements, which affect the appearance of the proposed tower, such as lighting and coloring. g. Draft bond which will guarantee the removal of the XYes _No tower in the event that it is abandoned or unused for a period of 12 months. h. A listing of,, and current tax map identifying, all property owners within 1000 feet of the parcel shall be provided. Addressed, first class stamped envelopes to said property owners shall be submitted with the application. Each property owner shall be notified of the public hearing in accordance with Article 2.3.3.4 (Class B Special Use Permit) or Article 8.4.5 (Class A Special Use Permit) of this Ordinance. L The applicant shall, after submission of an application for a Special Use Permit, arrange to fly, or raise upon a mast, a minimum of a three -foot (3) in diameter, brightly colored red or orange balloon at the maximum height of the proposed new tower. A notice of the dates (including a second date in case of poor visibility, weather or atmospheric conditions on the initial date), times, and location of the balloon test shall be mailed, by certified mail, return receipt requested, by the applicant, to all persons owning property within 1,000 feet of the subject parcel no less than fourteen (14) days in advance of the first test date. The applicant shall inform the County Planning Staff, in writing, of the dates and times of the test at least fourteen (14) days in advance. The balloon test shall be flown for at least four (4) consecutive hours sometime between 7:00 A.M. and 4:00 P.M. on the dates chosen. XYes _No The PEMC radio system is a trunked, two-way VHR system and does not utilize cellular technology. The FAA license requires the tower be lighted, precluding the need to paint the tower in contrasting colors. The tower will be galvanized grey in color. Please refer to the tower /structure removal bond for $16,500.00 on Pages 147 and 148. The tax map for the properties within 1,000 feet of the replacement tower and the listing of properly owners is attached. XYes _No The balloon test, originally scheduled for Saturday, April 22, 2006, was re- scheduled for Monday, April 24 from 8:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. The test was rescheduled because of high winds in the area. The Balloon Test Report is found on Pages 118 to 139. 27 27 The primary date shall be on a weekend, but to prevent delays in the processing of the application, and in case of poor weather or atmospheric conditions on the initial date, the secondary date may be a weekday. The applicant, as evidence that this requirement has been met, shall submit a notarized statement and listing of the property owners notified of the test, a copy of a current Orange County Tax Map showing the subject property and all properties within the notification ring, and copies of the certified mail returned receipts from the mailout. The applicant shall also post a sign on the subject property, and directional signs posted at locations to be determined by Planning Staff. The signs shall measure no more than nine (9) square feet in area and no less than four (4) square feet in area, giving the proposed dates, times, and location of the balloon test. The signs shall be posted to meet the same time limits as provided for in the balloon test notification and as stated above. A notarized statement that this requirement has been met is also required from the applicant and shall be submitted no later than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Photographs of a clearly visible balloon floated at the proposed tower location to the maximum height of the tower, as well as photographs with the proposed tower and associated antennas superimposed upon them showing what the proposed tower will look like, shall be submitted no later than ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Photographs shall be taken from locations such as: property lines, and /or nearby residential areas, historic sites, roadways, including scenic roads and major view corridors, and other locations as deemed necessary by the Planning Staff to assess the visual impact of the proposed tower. The visibility of the balloon to adjacent properties and the surrounding area shall not constitute sole justification of denial of a permit application, but is an indication of what location on the site may be less visually intrusive. j. The Special Use Permit application shall include a statement that the facility and its equipment will comply with all federal, state, and local emission requirements. XYes _No k. All buildings and other structures to be located on the XYes _No same property as a telecommunication tower shall conform with the setbacks established for the zoning district or as established through the subdivision process, whichever is greater. The proposed PEMC tower will not exceed the FCC peak power limits. PEMC will meet all local, state and federal requirements regarding construction, height, location, and transmit power levels. (Page 97 to 101) The closest building to NC Highway 86 S. is 800' form the r.o.w. The least side or rear setback distance is 280 feet. The minimum in the Office - Institutional (OI) zoning district are 25' and 10', respectively. The proposed replacement tower is 440 feet from the closest property line and 210 feet from the nearest on -site structure. (Please refer to the site plan.) S I. An Applicant may be required to submit an Environmental Assessment Analysis and a Visual addendum. Based on the results of the Analysis, including the Visual addendum, the County may require submission of a more detailed visual analysis. The scope of the required Environmental and Visual Assessment will be reviewed at the pre - application meeting. The Applicant shall furnish a Visual Impact Assessment, which shall include: A " Zone of Visibility Map" which shall be provided in order to determine locations from which the tower may be seen. Panorama photo simulations of the proposed tower, superimposed on the existing landscape, to scale, showing "before and after" views including but not limited to State highways and othe major roads; State and local parks; other public lands; historic districts; preserves and historic sites normally open to the public; and from any other location where the site is visible to a large number of visitors, travelers or residents. An assessment of the visual impact of the tower base, guy wires and accessory buildings from abutting and adjacent properties and streets as relates to the need or appropriateness of screening. All Applications shall contain a demonstration that the tower be sited so as to have the least visually intrusive effect reasonably, possible and thereby have the least adverse visual effect on the environment and its character, on existing vegetation, and on the residences in the area of the telecommunications tower. Both the telecommunications tower and any and all accessory or associated telecommunication equipment and related facilities shall maximize the use of building materials, colors and textures designed to blend with the structure to which it may be affixed and/or to harmonize with the natural surroundings, this shall include the utilization of stealth technology as may required by the County. At a telecommunications tower site, an access road, turn around space and parking shall be provided to assure adequate emergency and service access. Maximum use of existing roads, whether public or private, shall be made to the extent practicable. Road construction shall at all times minimize ground disturbance and the cutting of vegetation. Road grades shall closely follow natural contours to assure minimal visual disturbance and reduce soil erosion. Ordinance Reauirements 8.8.17a.2 Standards of Evaluation The following specific standards shall be used in deciding upon an application for approval: a. Within or adjacent to residential _Yes zoning districts, minimum setbacks from XN /A the base of the tower to the property boundary shall be equal to 110% of the tower height. If the tower is proposed as an accessory use to a residential use, the tower setback shall be 110% of the tower height from any residence or dwelling unit on the subject property. X Yes _No The visual impact of the tower is addressed the balloon test (Pages 118 to 139).. The tower is in compliance with the FCC standards on electromagnetic discharge. The FCC requires a separate study if the peak power of the site is in excess of 1,640 or if any antennas are mounted less than 10 meters from the ground. Neither condition applies to this tower since Piedmont's peak power is only 160 watts and the closest antenna is 182' or about 55 meter from the ground. There are no known migratory bird paths in this area of Orange County. Lighting detailed will be designed to minimize any impacts to migratory birds and the surrounding neighborhood by screening the lights from the ground, using while lights with the maximum permitted strobe period. (Pages 64 and 65) N The property is zoned PD-01. (Please refer o to the Zoning Atlas.) 29 29 b. Adjacent to non - residential uses or XYes N non - residential zoning districts, _ N/A o minimum setbacks from the base of the tower to the property boundary shall be the greater of 20% of the tower height, or the minimum required setback. c. A Type C Landscape Buffer shall be provided between the tower and accessory structures and adjoining property. Existing vegetation may be removed only to the extent necessary to accommodate the tower, equipment buildings, and support structures such as guy wires. Plantings around the compound perimeter shall be composed entirely of fast growing evergreen vegetation. New plantings and existing vegetation used for screening shall be at least six (6) feet in height or greater at planting. Proposed plantings (name, type, height) shall be shown on the Landscape Plan for the facility. d. The site plan shall indicate a location for at least two equipment buildings in addition to that proposed for use by the applicant. Lighting for equipment buildings shall be situated so that the sources of light and subsequent light spill are wholly contained on the site. Photometrics of the lighting for the proposed facility shall be submitted as part of the site plan. Shields shall be placed on all lighting fixtures to prevent light diffusion extending upwards from the light source. e. An 8 -foot fence or wall shall be required around the base of any tower. This fence or wall shall encompass all accessory equipment within the compound. Fences shall be required around guy wire tie downs as well. The fence or wall may .be placed around the perimeter of the facility to include guy wire tie downs and associated equipment should the applicant/owner Wish to do so. f. The telecommunications equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated on an existing tower due to one or more of the following reasons: 1. The planned equipment would exceed . the structural capacity of existing and approved towers, considering existing. and planned use of those towers and the towers cannot be reinforced to accommodate planned or equivalent equipment at a reasonable cost. X Yes _X _Yes XYes XYes N/A N 0 _No Please refer to the attached site plan. The distance from the proposed replacement tower site to any adjacent property line is well over 385' (110% of its height). All PEMC headquarters buildings are at least 210 feet from the tower, which is greater than the minimum 70' (20% of its height) The tower is proposed to be placed in a heavily wooded, mature hardwood forested area just east of the existing tower on the PEMC headquarters campus. Situated as such to take advantage of the existing topography and tree canopy. No additional landscaping is required. (Pages 46 to 51) The equipment building will not be lit on the exterior. N The eight -foot high fencing around the 0 existing facility will be duplicated for the proposed support facility. The tower is self - supporting. No guy wires are required. (Please refer to the site plan.) No A radio propagation study included these tower sites. Because of terrain, coverage is not concentric. The best coverage for PEMC is the proposed 350' tower. Each of the existing tower sites listed have coverage deficiencies that would have a sever impact on the radio coverage PEMC requires due to structure height, antenna height, ground elevations, and terrain features. (Pages 46 to 51) 30 30 2. The planned equipment would cause _Yes X No radio frequency interference with other _ N/A existing or planned equipment for these towers, and the interference cannot be prevented at a reasonable cost. 3. Existing or approved towers do not XYes No have space on which the equipment _ N/A can be placed so it can function effectively and reasonably in parity with similar existing or approved equipment. 4. No tower or other suitable facility exists in an area where the equipment to be placed on the tower will function in its intended manner. g) The communications tower is structurally designed to support addi- tional users as provided for in Section 6.18.4 d) 5a, and the Special Use Permit includes a statement that the owner of the tower is willing to permit other user(s) to attach com- munication equipment which do not interfere with the primary purpose of the tower, provided that such other users agree to negotiate a reasonable compensation to the owner from such liability as may result from such attachment. h) The color of the tower is of light tone, except to the extent required by law, so as to minimize its visual impact. 1) The towers will not be artificially lighted unless required by the FAA, FCC, or other federal or state agency. Where such agencies allow a choice between painting the tower or installing strobe lighting, painting shall be the preferred choice. j) The tower and antenna will not result in a significant adverse impact on the view of or from any historic site, scenic road, or major view corridor. k) A determination shall be made that the facility and its equipment will comply with all federal, state and local emission requirements, and the Special Use Permit shall include a statement that the facility and its equipment will comply with all federal, state and local emission requirements. X Yes No The PEMC radio system is a trunked, two-way VHR system and does not utilize cellular technology. PEMC requires a radio system that will optimize existing frequency spectrum and provide increased voice channel capacity and data functionality, This will require a three tower system consisting of a VHF trunked repeater equipment, VHF top antenna, transmission line for the VHF radio system, and microwave dishes to interconnect the three tower sites. The other two towers are already installed in Person and Caswell Counties. (Pages 46 to 51) Piedmont did investigate the possibility of utilizing existing towers in the nearby area, including its existing tower. The analysis is- attached to these findings. Co- location on near -by towers would reduce two -way radio coverage areas by 30 %, reducing the proposed 20- mile coverage to 14 miles. (P 46-51) (See #3 above.) XYes No The applicant tower is designed to allow at least five (5) co- locations. Orange County systems will be allowed free of charge and private companies will be charged a fee. (Please refer to Recommendation 5 or Page 31.) X Yes No The FAA license requires the tower be lighted, precluding the need -to paint the tower in contrasting colors. The tower will be galvanized grey in color. (Pages 46 to 51) X Yes No (See h) above.) X Yes No Please refer to the letter from Tina Moon, of the ERCD found on page N/A 66. X Yes No The proposed PEMC tower will not exceed the FCC peak power limits. PEMC will meet all applicable local, state and federal requirements regarding construction, height, location, and transmit power levels. (Pages 46 to 51) 31 31 m) The Special Use Permit shall include a condition that the electro - magnetic radiation levels maintain compliance with requirements of the Federal Communications Commission, regarding emission of electromagnetic radiation. Within 30 days of installation of equipment on the tower, and within 30 days of the installation of any additional equipment in the future, the tower owner shall provide documentation of emission levels in relation to FCC standards. In addition, the tower owner must provide documentation of emission levels within five working days if so requested by Orange County. Orange County may make such requests at any time, not to exceed two times per year. X Yes No n) High voltage and "No Trespassing" X Yes No and other warning signs. 1. If high voltage is necessary for the operation of the telecommunications tower or any accessory structures, "HIGH VOLTAGE - DANGER" warning signs shall be permanently attached to the fence or wall and shall be spaced no more than forty (40) feet apart. 2. "NO TRESPASSING" warning signs shall be permanently attached to the fence or wall and shall be spaced no more than forty (40) feet apart. 3. The letters for the "HIGH VOLTAGE - DANGER" and "NO TRESPASSING" warning signs shall be at least six (6) inches in height. The two (2) warning signs may be combined into one (1) sign. The warning signs shall be installed at least five (5) feet above the finished grade of the fence. 4. The warning signs may be attached to freestanding poles if landscaping may obstruct the content of the signs. 5. Signs noting federal registration (if required) shall be attached to the tower structure in compliance with federal regulation. o) Equipment storage. Mobile or immobile equipment not used in direct support of a tower facility shall not be stored or parked on the site of the telecommunication tower, unless repairs to the tower are being made. p) Signs and advertising. The use of any portion of a tower for signs or advertising purposes including company name, banners, streamers, etc. shall be strictly prohibited. X Yes No X Yes No X Yes No X Yes No X Yes No X Yes No X Yes No Because of the height of the tower (distance of the antennas from the ground), the facility is deemed categorically excluded by the FCC. (Please refer to the tower consultant's report.) Please refer to the attached photos of the existing signage. These signs Will be moved to the new facility. (Pages 52 to 55) Please refer to the attached photos of the existing signage. These signs will be moved to the new facility. (Pages 52 to 55) Please refer to the attached photos of the existing signage. These signs will be moved to the new facility. (Pages 52 to 55) The existing warning signs will be moved to the new location. (Pages 52 to 55) The existing warning signs will be moved to the new location with the new registration numbers. (Pages 52 to 55) Other than that equipment required for the operation of the tower, no other equipment will be stored at.the tower site. Advertising is strictly prohibited and not proposed by the applicant. 32 32 Recomendations The Planning Board & Staff have not received any information, which would establish grounds for making a negative finding on the general standards. These standards include maintaining or promoting the public health, safety, and general welfare, maintaining or enhancing the value of contiguous property, and the use being in compliance with the general plan for the physical development of the County. The County's telecommunications consultant recommends project approval. The Planning Board & Staff have reviewed the application, the site plan, and all supporting documentation and has found that the applicant has submitted information for the specific standards and requirements. Provided the Board of County Commissioners finds in the affirmative on the specific and general standards, the Planning Board & Staff recommend approval of the request. The Planning Board & Staff do however, recommend the attachment of conditions to the approval which are specified as follows: 1. Any lighting on the replacement tower shall be shielded so as not to be seen from the ground for a distance of one mile at the height of twelve degrees (120) vertical. 2. The navigational lighting shall be white, rather than red, and the strobe period shall be the longest under FCC regulations. 3. The height of the tower may not exceed three hundred fifty (350) feet, including the 30 -foot antenna at the top of the tower above the pre - disturbance or pre - construction ground level. 4. Security shall be submitted and approved by the County Attorney guaranteeing the removal of the tower in the event it is abandoned or unused for a period of 12 months. A qualified contractor shall provide a cost estimate. The amount of the security shall be 110 percent of the estimate. This must be completed before building permits are issued. 5. County or State agency wireless communication systems shall be allowed free co- location space on the PEMC tower, as offered. 6. De- constructed tower materials shall be made available to other public agencies, as offered. 7. The tower facility and its equipment shall comply with all federal, state and local emission requirements. 8. The electro-magnetic radiation levels shall maintain compliance with requirements of the Federal Communications Commission, regarding emission of electromagnetic radiation. Within thirty (30) days of installation of equipment on the tower, and within 30 days of the installation of any additional equipment in the future, the tower owner shall provide documentation of emission levels in relation to FCC standards. In addition, the tower owner must provide documentation of emission levels within five working days if so requested by Orange County. Orange County may make such requests at any time, not to exceed two (2) times per year. 9. Two (2) ten -pound 2- A:20 -B:C dry chemical portable fire extinguishers shall be installed at the site as required by Orange County Emergency Management. 10. The Special Use Permit will automatically expire within twelve (12) months from the date of approval if the use has not commenced or construction has not commenced or proceeded unless a timely application for extension of this time limit is approved by the Board of County Commissioners as provided in 8.4.11 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. 11. Any zoning violations present on the site shall be corrected prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 12. The issuance of a Building /Electrical Permit by the Inspections Division shall be according to the approved site plan. 13. Piedmont Electric shall submit a report to the Inspections Division certifying structural and electrical integrity at the time of the building permit review, upon completion of the initial construction, and at intervals as specified in Section 6.18.4f of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. 14. Piedmont Electric shall keep inspection records and make them available upon request to the Inspections Division during regular business hours. Inspections shall be performed as required in Section 6.18.4 f of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance, as recommended under EIA/TIA 222F of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). 33 33 34 15. The following inspection schedule shall be followed except in cases where a tower has no structures other than those associated with telecommunication tower use located within the tower's fall zone. At least once every thirty- six (36) months, or thirty-six (36) months from the date of a co- location approval, a structural engineer who is regularly involved in the maintenance, inspection and /or erection of telecommunications towers shall inspect the tower and submit a report to the Inspections Division within a reasonable time thereafter. At a minimum, this inspection shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and in accordance with the tower inspections check list provided in the EIA -222 (as amended from time to time). This is considered a major inspection review. 16. At least once every twelve (12) months, a visual inspection from the ground shall be conducted by a properly trained staff member of a tower provider or tower consultant and a report shall be filed with the inspections Division within a reasonable time thereafter. This inspection shall include, but shall not be limited to, visual inspection of tower foundations, structures, guys, and connections for evidence of settlement or later movement; soil erosion; condition of paint or galvanizing; rust or corrosion, loose or missing bolts, loose or corroded lightning protection connectors; tower plumbness, significant variation in guy sags (i.e. tensions), and other material areas or matters relating to the structural integrity of the tower. This is considered a minor inspection review. 17. In addition to the regularly scheduled major and minor inspections set forth above, a minor inspection, at a minimum, will be conducted if the tower or its appurtenances are noted at any time to be visibly damaged. Additionally, a major inspection shall be conducted if the visible damage to the tower is significant or when, after conducting a minor inspection, significant questions remain about the structural integrity of the tower. Structurally Unsafe or Unused Towers. Any tower found, through inspection by the owner or by inspection of the Inspections Division, to be structurally unsafe and cannot be brought into compliance within one hundred eighty (180) days shall be removed at the owner's expense. 18. Compliance with Standards. Current or former EIA standards shall apply to the addition of antennas or other appurtenances to communications towers under the following conditions: 1) Additions to towers constructed prior to the effective date of this Ordinance, regardless of whether the additions are accounted for in the original design, shall comply with the current EIA standards, and the wind loading specified therein. Additions to towers constructed subsequent to the effective date of this Ordinance shall comply with standards set forth elsewhere in this Section. 2) Existing towers, which will not have any appurtenances, added to them shall at a minimum comply with the EIA standards in existence at the time the tower was erected. 3) Replacement of antennas or other appurtenances shall at a minimum comply with the EIA standard in existence at the time the tower was erected if the replacement does not add to the original design loading. 4) If a structural analysis shows a tower is not in compliance with the appropriate EIA standards, the owner shall submit an application to the Inspections Division with a plan to bring the tower into compliance within six (6) months. 19. An analysis by a North Carolina Licensed Professional Engineer (P.E. Analysis) shall be performed and shall be submitted to the Inspections Division. The analysis shall determine the tower's compliance or lack thereof with the EIA standard in effect at the time the tower was constructed and when the most recent structural loading change was made. If the tower does not meet the aforementioned EIA standards, the letter or existing P.E. analysis shall include the types of modifications that would be required to bring the tower up to standard. The new, replacement tower shall be subject to the annual electrical inspection conducted by the Inspections Division including any associated inspection fees. 20. The Inspections Division shall be notified in writing when a required analysis is complete. A copy of the analysis report shall be made available to the Inspections Division upon request. That report shall also give details of the net result of any changes made to the tower or its appurtenances since the last inspection. 21. After the County's receipt of The Center for Municipal Solutions final invoice, all moneys owed the County must have been paid before the facility shall be allowed to be used to transmit or receive. 22. PEMC shall not be permitted use of the facility to transmit or receive data until the Certificate of Occupancy or its functional equivalent has been issued. 23. If any condition of this Special Use Permit shall be held invalid or void, then this Special Use Permit shall be void in its entirety and of no effect. 34 �5 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION Orange County Planning & Inspections P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 919 245 -2575 FAX 919 644 -3002 1. I(we) Piedmont EMC Application For Planned Development District Zoning Atlas Amendment ® Owner CASE# 36 of 2500 Highway 86 South Hillsborough NC 27278 919 - 732 -2183 Street Address City State Zip Code Telephone do hereby petition to amend the Zoning Atlas of Orange County. 2. By reclassifying from the Zoning District p p_ p 1 to the Zoning District p n n I to in c l u d e a tower 3. The property located .2500 Highway 8 6 S m i t h - Hillsborough, NC 27278 and having frontage(s) along bordering streets as follows —fig h w a y 8 6 4. Containing 3 4.7 3 7 acres. 5. TMBL(s) 4.45. .2 2 PIN #(s) 6. Intended use(s) of the property: , ; Communication T o.w e r (Please attach on a separate sheet any additional information about the intended use or any special conditions to which the petitioner wishes to be bound) 7. G%Mer(s) Signature (s): We aclrnowledge the provisions in the Zoning Ordinance for general use and armed development zoning and hereby proceed with a planned development zoning petition- 8. If the petition is executed by property owner, but an attorney or an agent will handle public speaking, etc., please indicate: Attorney or Agent Street Address City State Zip Telephone 9. Notification signs will be prepared and posted by the Planning Staff when the rezoning application is scheduled for Public Hearing. The required legal advertising is also handled for you by the Planning Staff PLR ASE MAKE AN APPO'IN TMENT POP, SUBMITTAL OF YOUR APPLICATION MORTANT: Only Applications with original signatures are considered complete. Faxed Applications NOT accepted. REZONING REQUEST CHECKLIST 1. Owner's Name - Piedmont Electric NA--ership Corporation 2. Address FO Drawer.1179 - 2500 IC 86 S 3. Current Zoning PD-01 4. Total Number of Acres 34.737 5. Current Land Use office Bu i I d i ng .6. Type of Rezoning request Rev i s i n4 PD-01 to include tower 7. Proposed land use Office Building i nc I ud i ng tower 8. Tax Map # 4.45..22 9. Block # 45 10. Number of lots 22 11. Proposed Water Supply: Public X Community Individual 12. Proposed Sewage Treatment: Public X Community Individual septic tank 13. Access onto state road # E/S FWY 86 14. Average daily traffic count on the state road 15. Describe existing critical areas: Flood prone areas WA Poorly drained areas WA Streams severa I sma I I streams Other sensitive areas WA 16. Describe land uses in: General Area West -Res i dent Nxth -Res i dent Er-Duke Forest s 37 Adjacent parcels of laud -oO t Storage West -Fbs i dent Kbrth-giurch Er-Duke Forest GACurrent Planning DivisionTorms \Rezoning Checklistdoc ORANGE COUNTY LANNING and INSPECTI NS DEPARTMENT 306 F Revere Road . 38 Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 (919) 245 -2600 (919) 644 -3347 Fax Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director RECEIPT RECEIPT NUMBER: R06- 002841 TO: PIEDMONT ELECTRIC PERMIT #: ZAA06 -0003 TYPE: Zoning Atlas Amendment SITE ADDRESS: 2500 NC 86 S OCPL PARCEL: 9873657456 TRANSACTION DATE: 08/11 /2006 TOTAL PAYMENT: 1,736.8S TOTAL PAID FROM CURRENCY: 1,736.85 TRANSACTION LIST: Type Method Description Amount ---- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- --------------------- - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- Payment Check 00092810 1,736.85 TOTAL: 1,736.85 ACCOUNT TTEM LIST: FEE DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CODE CALCULATED FEES SITE PLAN REVIEW 103410056 -XP 350.00 Total: Balance Due: RECEIPT ISSUED BY: GBOWLES INITIALS: GRB ENTERED DATE: 08/11/2006 TlNffi: 0 3: 5 6 PM 1,736.85 $1,736.85) Please retain this receipt for your records. Net AmOW1a ORANGE COUNTY PO BOX 8181_ 11'000009 28 100 _;4.053 2000 19i: 20 799004 76 7 7 Gill w7mv nnaddnan91 nR /n4 /n6 CHK NER 00092810 SUMMARY OF.INVOICES OIC IN • DA ( NYPic. *5 ::.:.:..::..:::.::::'1I!�Y DAf:....:.:: COMM TOWER PERMI 08/03/06 10736.85 TOTAL SUMMARY OF EXPENSE DISTRIBUTION E?:P,AC7. DEPT..':.. AMQUNT:.:. :.:::::: :.; E)CR;ACC[ `• UI rPT :. : :`.;.,AMON1...:.:::'.::::. EX.P.:.:ACCT:. DEPT :..:::::::. AMQU111R :.:.....:•::....... TOTAL 10736.85 Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation Q.L LJZ2 vi. va- vs O' (PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT - INK ONLY) 8/88 APPLICATION FOR CLASS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS DATE: /. / APPLICATION NUMBER: PD- - I (We) request a Class 'A Special Use Permit as provided for in Article of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance for a 'tower Jill improve .radi n nnvprnge fOr Piedmont's 2 way radio system The following information is provided in support of this request: A. PROPERTY INFORMATION: Street Address or Location: P.O-Drawer 117.9 — NC Hwy 86 South Orange County Tax Map 4 Block 45. Lor(s) 22 Township H1.1 Isboro Zoning District(s): FD}01 Lot /Parcel Size: 34.737 acres or square feet. Number of Existing Buildings: 2 Gross Floor Area: square feet Number of Proposed Buildings: Gross. Floor Area:. square feet Water Supply: X Public (Specify) Community Individual Wastewater Disposal: X Public (Specify) Community Individual School District:. Orange County Fire District: y General Land Uses in Area: Critical Areas: X Stream /D rain age way Flood Prone Area Watershed (Specify) Historic Site Other (Explain) B. SITE PLAN INFORMATION: Twenty -six (26) copies of a Site Plan, prepared by a registered North Carolina surveyor.or engineer, are provided as required by Article 8.8 and which contain the following information: North point, scale, and date. Extent of area to be developed. Locations and widths of all easements -and rights -of -way within or adjacent to the site. Location of all existing and proposed structures on the site. Location of all areas on the site subject to flood hazard or inundation as shown on flood maps or soils maps. Location of all water courses on the site, including direction of flow. Existing topography at a contour interval of five (5) feet based on mean sea level 'datum. Existing and proposed fencing, screening, gates, parking, service, and storage areas. Access to site, including sight dista4ces on all roads used for access. (PLEASE COMPLETE REVERSE SIDE) 41 C. OTHER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION: Elevations of all structures proposed to be used in the development. Two (2) full -size copies of the. applicable Orange County Tax Map, one (1) with the property in question clearly marked. The names and addresses of the property owners) and /or applicant(s), and names and addresses are all persons owning property within five hundred (500) feet of the property in question. Application fee as set by the Orange County Board of Commissioners. Traffic impact study- as required by Article. 13 of the Zoning Ordinance. Additional information regarding the proposed Special Use as required by Article $ of the Zoning Ordinance. Narrative (or letters from appropriate agencies) indicating: 1. Method and adequacy of provision of sewage disposal facilities, solid waste- disposal, and water service. Where public sewer is not available, a letter from the Orange County Health Department certifying the suitability of the existing and %or proposed wastewater treatment system for the property. 2. Method and adequacy of police, fire, and rescue squad protection. 3. Method and adequacy of vehicular access to the site and traffic conditions around the site. COPY I (We), the applicant(s), hereby certify that the foregoing application and supporting documentation is complete and accurate. I understand that it shall be my (our) responsibility to present evidence to the Board of Commissioners the form of testimony, exhibits, documents, models, plans, and the like to support the request for approval of the Class A Special Use Permit. APPLICANT SIGNATURES) DATE NOTE: If title to the above mentioned property is not in the name of the applicaut(sb please include a letter from the owner(s) sig'n ifying .approval of the request. the FEES: Amount $ Date Paid: _/_/ Receipt #. 'AY 'O THE ORANGE COUNTY IRDER OF PO BOX 8181 11'000009 28 LOIi' '�*QS3 2000191: 20 ?99004 76? ?611' ORANGE COUNTY NBR 0044406011 08/04/06 CHK NBR 00092810 SUMMARY OF INVOICES ' :INVOICES #.: ..'...:Iryy RATE';? r,,.:.::.. ANIQUNT'." ....:....: .:...`..NVICF„Si`..:..::......: INY.;PAT>{...... COMM TOWER PERMI 08/03/06 10736.85 TOTAL SUMMARY OF EXPENSE DISTRIBUTION TOTAL 10736.85 Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation STUB 01 OF 01 ORANGE COUNTY . LANNING and INSPECTI STS DEPARTMENT , 306 F Revere Road 42a Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278 (919) 245 -2600 (919) 644 -3347 Fax' Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director RECEIPT RECEIPT NUMBER: R06- 002838 TO: PIEDMONT ELECTRIC PERMIT #: SU06-00007 TYPE: Special Use Permit STIR ADDRESS: 2500 NC 86 S OCPL PARCEL: 9873657456 TRANSACTION DATE: 08/11/2006 TOTAL PAYMENT: 9,000.00 TOTAL PAID FROM CURRENCY: 9,000.00 TRANSACTION LIST: Type Method Description Amount ---- - - - - -- -- - - - - -- ------------------- - - - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- Payment Check 00092810 9,000.00. TOTAL: 9,000.00 ACCOUNT ITEM LIST: FEE DESCRIPTION ACCOUNT CODE CALCULATED FEES ------------------ - - - - -- ------ - - - - -- --------- - - - - -- COMM TOWER SUP CLASS A 653300001 -XP 9,000.00 Total : 9,000.00 Balance Due: $0.00 RECEIPT ISSUED BY: GBOWLES INITIALS: GRB ENTERED DATE: 08/11/2006 TIME: 03:46 PM Please retain this receipt for your records. RECEIPT, I Orange County Finance DA PO Box 8989 0000091 2i2ai2oos Hillsborough, NC 27278 Page 1 Salesperson Payment terms Discount Subtotal 1,000.00 % Tax 0.00 TOTAL 1,000.00 Net Amount D THE ORANGE COUNTY RDEROF PO BOX 8181. ii'00000931,19111;1110532000 &91; eU'e44UU4'(h'r'(611. ORANGT? r()TRN= NER 0044406011 09/18/06 CHK NBR 00093415 SUMMARY OF INVOICES TOWER REZONING 09/18/06 1000.00 TOTAL SUMMARY OF EXPENSE DISTRIBUTION J).F X 1 A'G. TOTAL 1000.00 Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation STUB 01 oy U. 14 ii'00000931,19111;1110532000 &91; eU'e44UU4'(h'r'(611. ORANGT? r()TRN= NER 0044406011 09/18/06 CHK NBR 00093415 SUMMARY OF INVOICES TOWER REZONING 09/18/06 1000.00 TOTAL SUMMARY OF EXPENSE DISTRIBUTION J).F X 1 A'G. TOTAL 1000.00 Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation STUB 01 oy U. June 28, 2006 Mr. Glenn R. Bowles, AICP Planner 11 Orange County Planning & Inspections Department 306 -F Revere Road P.O. Boa 8181 Hillsborough,. North Carolina 27278 SUBJECT: Piedmont Electric Membership Cooperative Inc. Application Package for 350'(ft) Self-Supporting Lattice Tower — Orange County, NC Dear Mr. Bowles: Enclosed for your review and processing is the Piedmont Electric Membership Cooperative aEMC) Application Package for submittal of a Special Use Permit to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners. This permit seeks approval to construct a 3 50'(ft) self - supporting communications tower to replace the existing 220'(ft) self - supporting tower on our property at 2500 NC Hwy 86, Hillsborough, NC. Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. as an engineering consultant for PEMC, has prepared this Application Package. Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. has worked with Jackie Hicks and Rusty Monroe of The Center for Municipal Solutions, the consultant for Orange County, to assure that all terms and conditions of the applicable Communication Tower Ordinances have been met. PEMC has tendered the initial $1,000 escrow fee and is prepared to tender the remaining fee as directed by Orange County. PEMC is ready to begin construction and looks forward to a timely review and approval of the tower application. By notarized signature below, I certify that to the best of my knowledge all terms and conditions of the Orange County Ordinances have been met and as par&Wwly required in Ordinance 8.8.17a.1 for notification of all adjacent landowners within 1000'(ft) of the PEMC properties. Sincerely yours, Robin W. Blanton, P.E. Manager of Engineering 45 State of North Carolina County of Orange § BEFORE ME, the undersigned, Notary Public, on this day personally appeared 73 tan, ) v - Known to me to be the person and Officer whose name is subscribed to the foregoing instrument and acknowledged to me that the same was the act of the said _�/�L �I� N�d�✓ /_t r' and that (he/she) has executed the same as the act of such corporation for the purposes and consideration therein expressed, and in the capacity therein stated. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE, this (P day of J , / y . 20-&&_. 1 // ..� • '14',Ric, State of Nordi Carolina ,.r.u• 'OFFICIAL L • Nota Pubfic, North Carorna ry My commission expires: 7— Z3 - x°06 County Sio Orange i M Canmissbn as Telecommunication Tower application Piedmont Electric Membership Corp ORANGE COUNTY ORDINANCE 6.18 COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTATION Telecommunication Towers and Equipment The following compliance documentation is provided to assure Orange County, North Carolina, that Piedmont Electric Membership Cooperative Inc. (PEMC) is willing and has complied with all provisions of the above mentioned Ordinance 6.18 as last amended on February 3, 2004. This information has been prepared for PEMC by Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. who certifies that all information included has been prepared in accordance with standards adopted for utility -based homeland security two -way radio systems. Synopsis: This documentation is issued in support of a planned 350'(ft) self - supporting telecommunication tower to support a private two -way radio system for Piedmont Electric Membership Cooperative Inc. at it's corporate headquarters, 2500 Hwy 86 South, Hillsborough, N.C. This new tower will replace an existing 220'(ft) tower located at the same location. This service will not be typical cellular telephone service but will be a private "homeland security - first responder" network used to support electric utility operations. Included in Tab 6 of this Application Package are the security guidelines established for the Electric Utility Sector as defined by the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) as a response to homeland security measures initiated as the result of 9/11 events. The availability of a reliable two -way private radio system is a key component of these guidelines. This tower application is in support of those services for Piedmont Electric Membership Cooperative, Inc. 6.18.2 Telecommunication Tower and Equipment as Principal Use The referenced new tower is in compliance with Provision # a)3). A special zoning of "PDOI" (Planned Development Office and Institution) has been obtained for this location. Since this is the site of PEMC Headquarters, the site is not planned to be re- developed for purposes other than the existing operations. All provisions to obtain a Special Use Permit (SUP) including the balloon test, public hearing and payment of fees have been completed. 6.18.3 Antennas Not Located on Telecommunication Towers PEMC understands the desire of Orange County to locate as many antennas as possible in "stealth" locations. The design of the two -way radio system and the proposed coverage required does not lend itself to a "stealth" installation. Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 1 of 6 46 Telecommunication Tower Application Piedmont Electric Membership Corp a) 1) Antenna dimensions are documented on the engineering drawings included in Tab 9 of this Application Package and will be limited to only those antennas required for two -way radio service. A Professional Engineer seal is included on these drawings. Tower capacity has been included for the addition of up to five (5) other antenna systems. b) Aircraft hazards have been researched and have been approved by the FAA. Included in Tab 3 of this Application Package is the approved documentation information from the FAA for this referenced tower. C) Stealth rooftop or building antennas are not applicable to this project. d) Building or rooftop stealth antennas are not applicable to this project. e) Building or rooftop non - stealth antennas are not applicable to this project. f) All fees have been submitted and will be paid to Orange County as required. An initial $1,000 escrow payment to begin the pre - application process was submitted and accepted by Orange County. 6.18.4 Minimum Standards for Telecommunication Towers a) A complete Site Development Plan is included in Tab 10 of this Application Package. Photos of the proposed tower were included in the balloon test held on April 22, 2006 and are included in Tab 8 of this Application Package. b) This tower is being placed in a.heavily wooded area at the PEMC Headquarters. It has been situated so as to utilize as much of the tree coverage as possible. The balloon test included in Tab 8 of this report indicates that the new tower will practically be unseen from the North looking South along Hwy 86 and from the South .near the Mini- Storage looking North along Hwy 86. The tower will.be visible along the east and west axis due to its location on top of the hill. c) A sealed drawing by a registered engineer in the State of North Carolina of the proposed tower is included in Tab 9 of this Application Package. Sheet 5 of the drawing package indicates Prepared by: . Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 2 of 6 47 Telecommunication Tower ,ipplication Piedmont Electric Membership Corp that the tower is constructed so as to support the PEMC antennas and is equipped to support as many as five (5) other antenna systems. PEMC is willing to make the site available to other antenna systems for a fee. PEMC has also offered the Orange County Sheriff s office space on the tower at no- charge. d) Other information required at time of submittal includes the following: 1) The PEMC radio system is a trunked two -way VHF system and does not utilize cellular technology. The frequency range for PEMC is typically 153MHz while cellular technology is 1900MHz. Therefore no hand -off from site to site is applicable for this system. 2) Propagation studies for the proposed site are included in Tab 5 of this Application Package. One study is included for the "talk -out 'coverage in which the radio repeater is sending information to a mobile and a "talk- back" coverage in which the mobile is sending information to the radio repeater. 3) A search area is not applicable for this- tower since PEMC has determined that the tower will be more secure located on their existing property. 4) The tower is a 350' self - supporting model # NSX as manufactured by Nello Corporation and , indicated on the drawings included in Tab 9 of this Application Package. The antennas will be Andrew DB264 antennas with 6dBm of gain mounted at 350'AGL. The total effective radiated power of the site will be approximately 160watts. 5) The VHF frequencies assigned to this site are: 1. 153.530 2. 153.470 3. 153.605 The modulation scheme for the proposed radio will be analog with an emission code of 11K2F1D per the FCC license included in Tab 4 Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 3 of 6 48 Telecommunication Tower application Piedmont Electric Membership Corp of this Application Package. The class of service will be FB2 per the FCC license. 6) The antenna systems will be installed in an omni- directional fashion with an effective radiated power of approximately 160 watts. 7) No directional antennas will be used on this radio system. All antennas will be omni- directional. 8) The proposed PEMC tower in Orange County will not exceed the FCC peak power limits. PEMC will meet all local, state and federal requirements regarding construction, height, location and transmit power levels. The FCC has stated that base stations need evaluation for peak equivalent isotropically radiated power (EMP) in excess of 1640 watts or antennas mounted less than 10 meters from the ground. Neither criterion will apply to this Orange County site. 9) AUE has engineered the proposed radio system and has utilized the services of Comsearch, Inc. to provide frequency coordination services for the FCC. The approved frequencies are certified to not cause any interference to other adjacent communication devices. 10) In response to Orange Counties desire for co- location, AUE conducted a detailed analysis of all nearby towers that might be considered for usage by PEMC. In Tab 7 of this Application Package, propagation maps are included that indicate the radio coverage areas of all the nearby towers would reduce the two -way radio coverage area by 30 %. A total of approximately 20 miles coverage is proposed by the new PEMC tower while the best coverage available, from the American Tower in the area would be 14 miles. AUE thereby certifies that no other radio tower sites are available in the Orange County area to meet PEMC's requirements. Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 4 of 6 ELI', Telecommunication Tower application Piedmont Electric Membership Corp 8.8.17a.1 a Telecommunication Towers — Additional Information a) A site plan and detailed construction drawings are included in Tab 10 of this Application Package. As indicated, PEMC plans on reusing the existing communication building in place and removing the existing 220' (ft) tower once the new system is in place. b) No new structures are planned for this site. c) Since this site is on PEMC property and not accessible to the general public, no additional landscaping is proposed other than what is already in place. PEMC is prepared to utilize this tower for co- location purposes and will do so for a fee. d) The location of the tower will not be located within a V2 mile of any other tower suitable for use. As indicted above, the existing 220' tower at this site will be removed once the new tower is constructed. e) AUE did investigate the possibility of utilizing existing towers in the nearby area. A complete analysis is included in Tab 7 of this Application Package. In response to Orange Counties desire for co- location, AUE conducted a detailed analysis of all nearby towers that might be considered for usage by PEMC. In Tab 7 of this Application Package, propagation maps are included that indicate the radio coverage areas of all the nearby towers would reduce the two -way radio coverage area by 30 %. A total of approximately 20 miles coverage is proposed by the new PEMC tower while the best coverage available from the American Tower in the area would be 14 miles. f) The FAA approval requires that the tower be lighted. It will utilize a dual lighting system for day and night operations. This precludes the need from painting the tower with contrasting colors. PEMC will deploy a white medium intensity strobe light for daytime marking and dual -red marker lights for nighttime marking. The tower will be galvanized grey in color. g) Since PEMC is constructing the tower on its own property and has no intention of abandoning or not using the tower since it will be utilized for utility operations, a draft bond is not being submitted at this time. Should Orange County require this, it will be provided. PEMC respectfully requests that this requirement be waived for this application. . h) Included in Tab 8 of this Application Package is the listing of all property owners who are located within 1000 feet of the PEMC Headquarters parcel. Also included is a copy ofthe letter that was mailed by certified mail return receipt requested to each of the property owners advising them Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 5 of 6 Telecommunication Tower Application Piedmont Electric Membership Corp of the tower and the proposed balloon test, which was scheduled and held on Saturday, April 22, 2006. The results of the balloon test are also included in Tab 8 of this Application Package as previously discussed i) All conditions of the balloon test were performed as specified in the Orange County Ordinances. j) PEMC and AUE certify that this Special Use Permit will comply with all Federal, State and Local emission requirements. k) All buildings and structures exist on the PEMC Headquarter property and meet all setbacks established for the "PDOI" zoning classification in -place for this subject property . 1) The Visual Assessment documentation is included in Tab 8 of the Application Package and shows the visual impact of the tower from various locations around the area. Also included in Tab 8 are photo simulations of the proposed new tower and the old tower located on the PEMC Headquarters property. The foregoing information has been prepared by Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. who certifies that all information has been prepared in accordance with standards adopted for utility -bas ed homeland security two -way radio systems located on privately owned communication towers. Signed: Dan R Banks, KC.D.D. Vice President - Communications ® Bic. ® •'s3PEC1P� -� EXPIRES 1&311m . 20 8 SI NAn E Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Date: 6 d "Gf1 4 Page 6 of 6 51 i �� t ,+, : Y'✓�'k'-a � 1 Y s�y �,. ra �� tl �r -� i iF� , f � s ' /l f fi> M:• � -. r� � rf` k! ,jJ *n �` ¢d• ^r � r ��"' - �I. f� •. � r•nrJ f,t ' ^'.c. i N-1 �'t`,J�fi'��. ri�s {y, �� i' Y_ r' :'y�U h.��ti. ra J, rw t�r�" r '�� �r • .Fl., t ♦ `Iti C,� �y�+.�r��,_`- � .t.. r 'r �, "X V'X J ?7}[r 1�� , "i'..::ac.�.�ka, :'k� .�.. 'I -+'. �r7t �A` r'��( - �•',.4 't ';;' rh,,��:^ ';%%; !� •.�. ^f_ '°+,fr -pr f '£t f.. � y,rtxtJ:>.. ,): "!! -:'+n .ti5'r',,.r,•,.c• r1,c';::�'Tt.,�. * .X' r. r..;y` .'a .�"'" ,�F " -!^'i- t.,r t .4. _.r � �`. ,MFi � r.rr'n'v'f F. r�yrp,, y�: y. 1. +�. �t �i �,,;'r � ".. >t 7.. C �f, �,.i'). .a�,,,.._! t: �;. v�f7,,yJ� �r!:c rt r,. ip.� -.t ! f. /ry;�'�..rfyf :,f.. f yt°!'1` r4"nl� 4h ,�,' r„••[�!'r� r ��.., �r t'' {, o ,4, - ,,,P. '. •s^ r1r, + ;'tfr C '`'� "f3 •.i`' ! r r. � .+r; 1 t'y; "', iF' �`�'. s :.fit c.:'S �d. i � ! . 'f: r ;tr 4tr. �f -/,`:. .,�pti x1 �:.. S`n4 •. �,'Y'.fc_ - � /'-'� �•r.. .,s r,' t,-- �. ^:d �,�`•V -.�' ': }7 `fir'" � r )r•: ,,y,. .`.�,'i'• '�,,. ;61 i.t A,,.r. r „it." y, ..•i�,M�fi'.. ,k, }: : -r7 ;r'. :�I 1' 'a:.;{ '.c%f.. r. 7 '.•- *`f��, nj, :�-' r ,,� F� rr ..t :� qd `;;. "A"',ai;,•� ;tl;✓ F a •. ;r. ':` a.,•* st`•:�i /i'.r't,.. ;s,}1,y� T,�'�'P rr "i. .'�,}" , i rF� ? a:, r �y�,''<, '!b � tn`: ',' <Y n :iiE {„ f+r,r f,•.13 '7. t fit: � r.'..,yo�. as "fa �1i'. .N,•.,._fi -• rrr f - ,: "%2 ,:.Y �y. ,,•y . -; `�Y �tk�:, e � "i`rt'� ., ... x i.;, + -F"¢ '�' 3y'�fl�' t. �. t.,ti, f,.. '1'�,`. '' i, �R.'T.. -., I, j: ,t, +� r,.;.,.,. ,,.... - � :- �f;r;, t, ::rhz. � - .:. Y,�.,rx: ;'. _;,'s;:hrV" ar -r'�t: ;.,r ,�. .d '.,t,,r, +C''% eI;'.vt� i _ h,f,{ }.,a R'• ., f�e•p. f. r ✓f; . ,, vim, ;t;.t .. ,,., , _s} „. s, :� - -.,r. :. i.." "' :;,, ja.' .�.4 a ..: � a,j,� }f >:`k' ,�. ,. ;., '�'„ �9�i i't' -'F:'xr n.. rF - ,rt..t', (. -, aai.•,r Tr^p :r.F•,ft, t. `.:�,.. ,,.. .., ,� ;, t . t a _ ;. a.: , � n �,�ti .:.,r .._. r, ..✓", ';.�: r � ,,.. 4.rw,t Y ., F . r� , ';1 'r, �:tA. +'�� s� r.., t. , �.- r'.`i -fir. ."'t. n�,,r mF t , . r- c. . ...�i ,-�as A11. '� sl *: p 5 #'� #� r ai � t - ti,�f;�'a� 0.'l r. ,.h:1 J.,l , n �''k r ?�_..�' rye..: ;1.• :�Y f� �4M , 'k;r.•, c. "� y4,.i '.:t �. ? s'.•'.- ����,.t `' sr ..'r 1^a yst,. r ,�/ i -i, i - •t : 3 F'• 9. S�r•'� "r' ti �', f ':" 1-•' � . 7 - 'rr'r'. °i1a:�I.. .. .:t ta''fi2 I ,i L f' +. .. f..r' •s �. r.X a. ter. a. -f?,. ?i -, ,(' " - "c t '. ,,00 'r' •F,, C'j' 'k. t y.«� i.,. 'y ::•.+, i.tc#, 'L ,l'` �, j �` t✓f:' �y }' .r,,, ;F , Jb!'-...,r •.:.r,, •,F.r(r .. fr /7(�,, r... ,,.,{ :'7 .,+..^� _ .r r :; _ t �, r .,, ,': s r• t ``�f• 1 .F.- ..''St. �. ,; r ':.. -y;,. ;:. l -,� ..� t.. P; ., �^• n ft i7 )�' ••t� _,,• :, - ,. .. a .. , ft, rJ .,. ',.:.>.- _, f•, ,7 :, r e .r r� � .. rw h ;}i�.. s� L^. ;-t 7 �rtr £ p i � ` ,r � ..r ,ry� � r« r 1, � r,� . ft , fn' .� •4 ! '� f ' ���' - �, ' r: - r if u f `'I" 'is`3 _.J'�. ,, f,, ., r � 14r • s � '^r 4f�, .+ 7 t' � f , r , .f y' �;" 'v - :t,:, ' -F �, „Fit $s :fir,' .7,. �r.B ✓�,` „=t''.,. ,.. %.A,4 +,� � �f.tt t;' ro '.t ,r,' ':,� "t %. r. aP, 7 �f n ! -y Yr'S' ,.Th•y .tf ''C <.. , "S a. -r$r' :� ,, '�3 ,�. r~';,4 ,a ",`a .✓ ��'',r^ ar, E`` ,� „�� ;f.� - �..l.n. ..f. ---. ��_ .i✓ i :'�. .`r�...t `,�.'�. ':,`•}” �. -..� t # / _ r„ r I. .fr f hG ,.?, ,,r. �r;, p __ ��`• in.,.. ' ,,� -' 1 -, ,} t 5 ry. ,c [ F � ', a hF.•' il, i ,�. yr �,rC. *x +.- i t'�%'1• "'I. -� :.t. c/ j. `, �;^ i`•r . �y':� sf, -� 4 .r r�': Et.;;.' � r: h ' r�,•''- � i ;'s:�, { . -. �,,. � h, -s sv °�'f �' f,:4' tc � r''y't.r �r as � ,::''�+ ;r':;:r'� r r tcc'4r �� )t r � k �: :' r ',�r f n .��i 'lr�f,, r r,r a � i'i' y �, +s•r•. �r J` -- `�` � ;�.fr,�' •t(, fi.�.r�,:. s !r r. r + . r� •'�h b': Ir• .p,:. .rr tR... ,.i:'%d WtrS y. ,r' rrlA' ,'�- f . ! s, � t'r♦ -'r' 'q, r..�,, r .✓. F is "k. _ I•w l l' , 1, r t.+r.: E, ' �,) } .i. � v.. 1:•,.i4•" .�r' - a s, %,r.'- r �;�.:. - ' i,,.,�,r- :ti,', 4. — "E �:X:• s , �( '.y• '�,., 'c `� • :�* ,,1 r .,�_, r t, -. ry %I ,'y ,.r 4 r .i, ,, -k w-.r. F .3 n' -;T:• it ,t. �!`'.3rr. ,1 ''� ri4. - :4r•74r r�� : „�* �: l N,:x .,:�, : `�t:,.,7J'�.. �I.;� .�. !, h „y.� f ri.., { n �tT` , •x .�-•,'. <<.. •t, -.'�: 1.v. ..0 "- i".. qq y. �•. .. r. x'A .: +?S {><+.. ,.F F^ �. n •k ? �`i ;; d! r �'�.., {. �1..'�f!`„- f l) '",'.+t y ?rs�.,'a.5r, , "i' f%` ,t :�,A7 ..,.:i� ,;. t fit' 14t'., r.. . �a f ,. rt •; }f 'R w r, �. i, r r . , , � _ •r'- _ '�::; t ,y} �{* 7• ;'r..,. �i. a;.. A', '.10- t "'",� { +� *r +a�w .''.''"`, ,r _ „� ` }., y -, l' .q, ..t, :'3� �'�Y 1 ,'t. ..'n -;;s'. f -+J. .ti'f: hh V F'+ �! •�/ �nF Ji, rF ♦ 7r ��ii � a r �a JT ar', .� D �r'�' -fZ. .'r FY,. iA.',x r h:'t,� : :':) 'yr � :r. �A ` �"'' -Ik .z i S r yr- 1 a:::.. Sri rty " f j✓?:, €t.,� '��, .r� fit, ,f.,� r >� .r��P ?w > ,�,� ;A:,�” ✓' �' ,....;4 3[.`::'h S �`'f,.'`. _ . .. -7- ..�,I ,. u. ��. • -p�, �. 1, �v..' rlr .1 ,; 'Y .r ^r. h +4. , �. ,x ..:: _.• .,:jj.,„, .- �� ., : ,... , ,_ : ,- , �� > �' °' K.. �" u„ t tit ^� Itf '' s � � �, , � ; �!'` � , r: ^ �f, ,,�._.. :9, `K a'<f -x-, %�.r .,,e'rM' 1. "'�:.-,rv.t.g Ca;� "- 3A5.,,..; �'k` t ., ?:-tS�p'� d!`• k..k,. r, -4. r —Ni t �„q 4`;G-n Y'-•,� a' -_'„ ��' .', ! ,, . I.;�f _ r.���,�', ., kH'. {t 4.,. •r.�,r =o %.4,� 't.1 c vT r"`a+t ,s- �.�.r' �+�!,'�t ✓,` 'x, ,� •l ak.; ti X" f" 5 r- ''t,':'k';5.. `p i- ,"', .T, ,r 4 .h l`tA�., ,:�,..� ,f•��t �yir� f✓` � „r� �'Ar� ,i�' s$ 1 �.. t'fr�.t�ch y �cUl..M t5 J �.S 'r � �� 70'€� 7 r +�" a?jiLFA' le,r/iNr� '�i �{ e � a, ,i�y �%�� J,l e f J �+,t"� ,, a'xt � ♦ ; 7 I r � t� ;.; so � ��,%/. ''./,%•%% t �'r�J'�•�.% %l� -jj'. % l � �J /, Jlfs%G%rr1h9'=3kr 1 +� �'„� �� x✓ �`i ,ee �2`�, r Tp f i �) J �F 'J�3f�% J��`� f}Y1f% filli �i7fl T�G1 w t °r �sLdPtyx< r r : • i' �% 1 ,� i �1 �. • ����.1� j�!'.r f'4, ,JS/.,�f,%i � , •lTJ I '�J ,. (1 %�lir ��/ &a..r71 . ��•` � d � • ,'�•,,.' 1�; + . /��!4) ���)�)1Jt����f �,�� � ?i������1 /i %j� 'UfUJyrl.,h��• � � 0 _ _ 4 __. _ v '�j���!1/Jl,��'� rt�ll�;,llllliji YlJ �' r •. r r r '�` ►t/ ))) lffl%Jt +wJlf u r a s }'' {��r��ltr� %J!. ,J�f ��J.l%,{ r � ��� �� t` ♦ � ��. � • � C -�^ m'rt-4 - '^'rig` ' ' :w t ��i� *.�if�l��J�.'�± "elJ�� „J1� nrn�' f�:.la,,'�r�: ``� 1 tf°r i Srs �` !mot .'(, , a ✓ldl f •' '(.tA 77, 1 ,, J f k t ti{�� � %� � �'� . • In -';r i tr s � w, a, 1 � " ,. ;w �} ` - �,�,(r;�ULCiIIi ✓ f.. a S�" +{r t'� �iu ..� �"'� �sixar,£3rt�"f�,�>p��y�Ctt.� G,x�� �7�!' ✓F t 1 a'iNJ'M a ti..�Yl,� r' r, ,; `> �a�''� ^�i -n �, . ( , �c ° �,. ..23 i.dr�- '�`s �'.r � it rr*�,r'�„�r '' �' 9q � 73 4° " �5 s�. >� �. � �,a'�•'.. �I rr7 ��� ''' +`' -1 } 'd- a,°°'. ;:.�`;,d. IS ; �r ;::i J y � �tt� � 4 a }J�f � � ��..�� ,t {i' f �" 'L a, �r ;� "' r�1� � �„� �� �•'t �p..rt �� �-'1s a� ,f ,�*e� q � `�hx, Hill =w h D 1 Z)77 � �� "C'� • -M1'#fi t V gig �.ft' 3•A 1- w i, Y d vn F ��� }� 1+ F° 7 rJ•. - <L- - p., �", �""� ^..� IA "����'�z� ✓ _� rI1 i �``+r`" s � j � j .`�r � d l ,:'k � i �,ff rs 4 7 i r rl t j ITF t ! Mk of, � .f tr. 4K -. Al I tr j v..+ •'. � "fit t. �` n'1� i .. I�� � "0 1, i �� , faf� ` r�. ; ��"�N�.Ar+s.O 3`i.4�• • ,�� �� t! 3K� � ';°�� , [l*�'`9 �1�.��'tt 1�0 I 350.6' - 340' - 201- 300'- 280' - 260' - 240' - 229- Self- Supporting Tower- NSX Section Data Number Bottom Elevation (ft) Top Elevation . (ft) Model Bottom Face Width (ft) op Face Width ft Number Leg Type Leg Leg Wall hickness (in) . Leg PN Non Climbing Leg PN Diego at Diagonal Size (in) Panel 1 Diagonal PN Panel 2 Diagonal PN Panel 3' Diagonal PN Panel Diagonal PN Approx. Weight (lb) 18 340 350.6 NSX 3.5 3.5 2 PI a 2.375 0.154 104917 104916 n le ng 1 -1/2 x 1 -1/2 x 1/8 103199 103200 3/4' x 2-1/4" 11 360 17 320 340 NSX 5 3.5 4 ipe 2.375 0.218 102918 102917 n le An I 1 -1/2 x 1 -112 x 1/8 102003 102004 102005 102008 680 16 300 320 NSX 6.5 5 4 PI a 3.500 0.216 102064 102026 Ingle n 1 -112 x 1 -112 x 3116 106001 106002 106003 106004 1050 15 280 300 NSX 8 6.5 3 P e 4.500 0.237 102517 102515 n e An 2 x 2 x 3116 106367 106368 106369 1450 14 260 280 NSX 9.5 8 3 P e 5.563 0.258 102591 102590 In le n I 2 x 2 x 1/4 110753 110754 110755 1880 13 240 260 NSX 11 9.5 2 P e 6.625 0.280 1'03670 103668 Ing a Ang 3 x 3 x 3116 107240 104347 •2350 12 220 240 NSX 12.5 11 2 ipe 8.625 0.322 104180 104179 ngle Angl 3 x 3 x 3/16 104940 104941 3170 11 200 220 NSX 14 12.5 2 e 8.625 0.322 104180 104179 ng a Ang 3 x 3 x 1/4 104937 104939 3460 10 180 200 NSX 15.5 14 2 Pipe 8.625 0.322 104180 104179 n a ng 3 -1/2 x 3 -12 x 114 104968 104969 3720 9 160 180 NSX 17 15.5 2 Pipe 10.750 0.365 104912 104911 Ingle Angle] 3 -1 /2 x 3 -12 x 114 104209 104210 4400 8 140 160 NSX 18.5 17 2 Pie 10150 0.365 104912 104911 Ingle ngl 4 x 4 x 114 105989 105990 4710 7 120 140 NSX .20 18.5 2 pipe 10.750. 0.365 104912 104911 Ingle An I 4 x 4 x 5116 105991 105992 5490 6 100 120 NSX 21.5 20 2 Pipe 12.750 0.375 106037 106036 Ingle An 4 x 4 x 5116 108040 108041 6240 5 80 100 NSX 23 21.5 2 PI a 0 0.375 106037 106036 In la An I 4 x 4 x 3/8 110751 110752 6850 4 80 80 NSX 24:5 23 2 e 0 0.500 106921 n e An 5 x 5 x 5118 105929 105930 8370 3 40 60 NSX 26 24.5 2 PI a t2.7 0 0.500 105921 n le An I 5 x 5 x 5 /16 105931 2 20. 40 NSX 27.5 26 2 ipe 0 0.500 105921 n le An I 5-x5 1 0 20 NSX 29 27.5 2 P e 0 0,500 105919 n e Angl x 5 x 3/8 105935 105936 9660 I 200' - Section Number , Leg Bolts 1801- Stitch Bolts 18 2 4 x 2-3W' (4) 1 x -12" 1 x 1 -1 140' - (12) 314 x 3-1/4" (48) 1/2" x 1 -112" 120' - 16 (24) 4" x 3 -314 48) 112 x 1 -12" 12) 12" x 1 -314 Tower Reactions (24 ) /4 x -3 4 36) 5/8" x 1 -314 No Ice 100'- 14 Shear: 111.5 kips 38 5 x 1 -3/4" (9 Moment 18939.1 ft -kips 13 (4 )1' x 431 " Weight: 99.8 kips 801- 6 /8' x 2 1. 12 42) 1 x 4 -3/4 (24 ) K. ,72r With Ice 3/4' x 2-1/4" 11 Shear. 12.4 kips 801- (6) Moment: 2245.9 ft -kjps 40'- ) x 4-1/411 Weight: 247.5 kips Self- Supporting Tower - NSX Section Botts Section Number , Leg Bolts Side Plate Bolts Stitch Bolts 18 2 4 x 2-3W' (4) 1 x -12" 1 x 1 -1 17 (12) 314 x 3-1/4" (48) 1/2" x 1 -112" (12) 12" x 1,12' 16 (24) 4" x 3 -314 48) 112 x 1 -12" 12) 12" x 1 -314 15 (24 ) /4 x -3 4 36) 5/8" x 1 -314 (9) 5/8" x 2" 14 (24) /4 x 3 -3/4" 38 5 x 1 -3/4" (9 B x 2' 13 (4 )1' x 431 " (24 5/8 x - /4' 6 /8' x 2 1. 12 42) 1 x 4 -3/4 (24 ) K. ,72r () 3/4' x 2-1/4" 11 (42 ) 1 x 4 -3/4' 24 4 'x 2l' (6) 3/4" x 2-1/4" 10 ) x 4-1/411 (24 ) 314" x 2 (6) 3/4". x 2-1/4P 9 2) 1 x 4-1/4' (2413/4" x 2" (6) 3/4 x 2-1/V 8 x4 x2 x 2-1/4" 7 4 x 4-3141 4) 3/4 x -1 4' 6 4' x 2-1/2" 6 41x4 -314 4 "x -4' ( x -4 5 (54) 1 x 4-3/4" (24 1 x 2 -3/4 (6 1" x 2 -314" 4 (54 1 x 5 (24)1' x 2-3/4" (6) 1"x 2 -314" 3 (54 1 x 5 x 2 -3/4" 2 54 1" x 5" 24) 1' x 2 -3/4" 6 1" x 2 -314" 1 (24 ) 1' x 2-314" Self- Supporting Tower - NSX Girt Data Section Number Girt Elevation (ft Model Girt Type Girt Size (in) Girt PN Horizontal Bolts 18 350.6 NSX Single Angl 2 x 2 x 114 1109134 (6)1/2110-112" ,rrunrr'pq,, Section Notes: CH Cfi?,10 1. Panel 1 is the bottom panel of an NSX Section. ,"Op 4A, SEAL - 03 1E09 JUN 0 b 2005 Leo Reactions ILTIL Compression: 787.3 kips Contemporary Constructors 20'- Uplift: -689.6 kips N ELLO Shear. 68.4 kips NSX 29.0 x 350.6' CORPORATION Piedmont Electric, 1301 Stahly Drive 0.- Hillsborough, NC Nappanee, IN 46550 Bus: (574)773.4827 COPYRIGHT NOTICE, DRAWN BY: RCH Few (574)773 -5840 7Ms drawkV Is Bu property of REV 13Y DATE DESCRIPTION Neso Ina It a not to be reproduced. CHECKED: AM ORIG. DATE; 5/12/2008 DVYG NO: 110449 w�,.. ..d.. r... �..•.Ne I ENG. APP JMI. I MAG. PROG. v2.01 I SHEET. 1 OF 8 r i lit All angles shall be oriented so that the angle leg sticking out is toward top of tower, Space NSX Section Detail Assembly Notes: 1. A spacer shall be Installed at the Intersection of each pair of diagonals. 2. A part number Is stamped on the bottom footpad of each leg. 3..A part number Is stamped and/or labeled on the bottom and of each diagonal bracing angle. . 4. Be sure to place diagonal bracing angles In the correct positions. Depending on the section width and taper, the angle in the top panel may be longer then they are In a middle panel because the vertical spacing between side plate eonnectlons (s greeter In the top panel. 5. The bolt head must bear against the diagonal bracing, and the lockwasher and nut must bear against the side plate to ensure the bolt threads are not In the shear plane of the connection. Cover Plates One plain nut and one lockwasher per bolt. NSX Leg Connection Detail REV I BY I DATE I DESCRIPTION I One plain nut and one lockwasher per bolt. NSX Bracing Connection- Detail ,,o�p o�ESSlo y;' l ;Q Y SEAL 031809 v9S FNQi�E�c''��•' . %�V M. U&N Contemporary Constructors Bey NELLON NSX 29.0 x 350.6' CORPORATION Piedmont Electric, Hillsborough, NC 1301 Stahly Ddve Nappanee, IN 46550 Bus:(574)773.4827 COPYRIGHT NOTICE: DRAWN BY: RCH Fax: (574)773 -5840 This dewing is the property of Nello In¢ It Is not to be reproduced, CHECKED: AJK ORIG. DATE: 5/12/2006 DWG NO: 110449 willed w Quad In whole w hr part without ax written wnsent. ENO. APP: JML . I DWG. PROG: v2.01 I SHEET: 2 OF 8 In I -------------- -�- - -- 29' Face Width of Tower I 1-30- DETAIL Bolt hole must be aligned With center of tower. Notes: 1. All Dimensions are from Center of Boll Circles. NM -.LO CORPORATION 1301 Stahly Ddve Nappanee. IN 48550 Bus:(574)773.4827 Fax: (574)773-5840 DWG No: 110449 SHEET' 3 OF 8 / / -------------- -�- - -- 29' Face Width of Tower I 1-30- DETAIL Bolt hole must be aligned With center of tower. Notes: 1. All Dimensions are from Center of Boll Circles. NM -.LO CORPORATION 1301 Stahly Ddve Nappanee. IN 48550 Bus:(574)773.4827 Fax: (574)773-5840 DWG No: 110449 SHEET' 3 OF 8 o� T' Diameter x 80" ASTM F1554 Grade 105 anchor bolts, PIN 102970 on a 17 -112" boll circle, 18 par leg, 54 total. O 00 O O O .. O O c O O 0 O 4 ® O O O O O L N •E o O E Ii Drainage hole must Template used to align anchor be installed In grout bolts In concrete must be w or drainage. removed before tower is installed. �_ II111111 II II IIIIIIII 91e• 9 Use non - shrink, cement rout with a minimum III I I I I I I I I III I I compressive strength of 5000 psi. Mix and Install I I I I I I i I I according to manufactuees recommendations. 11111 I I I I I I I I I 1 11111 IIIIIIII II II II 111111 . VIII 111 1 I� I I I! �I 11111 .. 111111 I I I I I I I I 111111 . 11111 II II II II I11II IIII 1 1 I I I I I I I I %.�!rrrrrrr oPSN><; Cs o01;2,,�`� VIII 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 III 11111 ; -:q4a 111111 11 I I I I III 1111 ;: , 31 oais8 VIII I � I � I I I I I I iljil o9. oi 111111 11 11 11 I. I i I I I I I '' `9so •:�t�lti���'• ,: 11111 111 11 I I I 1 111111 r •,... 111111 I I I I I I I I 111111 . I�IIII�I jl jl III�1111 � JUN 052006 I lljll j I 1 I I I I I I I III�� TITLE: Contemporary Constructors Iiili i i i i i I( I I 1 11 NSX 29+0 x 350.fr CORPORATION 1 I 1 Piedmont Electric, 1301 Slahly DNve Nappanee, IN 46560 Bus: (574)773-4827 COPYRIGHT NOTICE: DRAWN BY: RCH Fax: (574)773 -SB40 This drewlna U Ihs property of REV BY DATE DESCRIPTION Napo Inc. It Is not to be rsprodueed, CHECKED: AM ORIG. DATE: 5/1212006 DWG NO: 110449 copied or t W N whole ar n pan ENO. APP: JML DWG. PROM V2.01 SHEET: 4 OF 9 • wl ut ow wrtpan mmenL Antenna Loading Height Qty, Peacription 350.6' 1 'Lightning Rod 350.6' 6 12" x 36" 350' 0--330- K 350' (1-5/8 OAM) " pe ffileacon 350' 0 O Sector Frames, No P pes 330' 8 x anel Anlenna on 48" pe 330' 0' -270' KD Sector rames, No Pl es 310' 8 ) x 3" Panel Antenna on 48" Pipe 310' 3 10'-6' KD Sector Frames, No P- I es . 290' 6 ' x 1' x 3" Panel Antenna on 4" P e 290' 3 10'-6" KD Sector Frames, No Pipes 270' 6 Vx 1 x 3" Panel Antenna on 48" Pi e 270' 3 10'- K actor rames, No P pea 250' B 4'x 1' x 3' Panel Antenna on 48 Pipe 250' 3 104" KD Sector Frames, No Pipes 200' 3 -900 Feedline Loading Height Qty. )ascription 0'- 350.6' 1 1" Conduit V- 350' 6 -50A (1-5f6 FDA 0--330- 6 7 -50A (1-5/8 OAM) 0'- 310' B 0 1301 Stably Drive 0--290- 8 -O F7-50A (1-5/8 FOAM) 0' -270' 6 ;P501- 8 ) 0'- 250' 6 / 0'- 215' 1 7 -50A 1 .61" 51 F AM) 0'- 200' 3 DF4R -50A (112 FOAM) 0'- 182' 1 D - 1 -5/8 AM) I REV I BY I DATE I DESCRIPTION I .Dish Loading Height I Qly. Pescription 215' 1 1 R' Dish with Radome 182' 1 1 ' Dish with Radome err CCEAL JUN1 ?GDS Contemporary Constructors Iir r4 ML. L0 NSX 29.0 x 350.8' CORPORATION Piedmont Electric, Hillsborough, NC 1301 Stably Drive Nappanee, IN 46550 Bus: (574)7734827 COPYRIGHT NOTICE: DRAWN BY: RCH Few (574)7735840 This drawetg to the prop. of Nello Ina Il u not to be reproduced, CHECKED: AJK ORIG. DATE: 5112/2006 DWG NU: 110449 copied w traced In whole w to part shout nur wriaen consent I ENG. APP: JML DWG. PROG: V2.01 SHEET. 5 OF B 61 Office of the Orange County Sheriff Lindy Pendergrass, Sheriff &'guir Ora P.O. Box 8181 - Margaret Lane HILLSBOROUGH Hillsborough, NC 27278 919 732- 81811644 -3050 �Ot�► laca��• August 11, 2006 Eddie Kirk, Planner II Orange County Planning 306 -F Revere Rd. Hillsborough, NC 27278 RE: Communications Tower Site: PIEDMONT ELECTRIC OFFICE Highway 86 South Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear MrAGrk, Piedmont Electric plans to erect a new communications tower at their office on 86 South. They have asked if we can provide law enforcement services without additional personnel or equipment to this new tower and property. I do not need additional staff or equipment We routinely patrol this area on a 24 -hour basis. CC: PIEDMONT ELECTRIC FAX- 644 -1030 ATT: ROBIN W. BLANTON PIEDMONT ELEC MEM CO 919 7322493 08/18 '06 07:42 NO.217 02/04 Orange Rural Fire Dept. F.O. Box 1511 a H 1sborough, NC ,27278 919- 732 -7911 •. www.orfd.org August 14, 2006 Piedmont Elootric Membership Corp. P.O. Drawer 1179 Hillsborougb, NC 27278 To Whom It May Concern: This is in response to your letter dated August 9, 2006 concerntag a new communications tower to replace your existing tower. The Orange.Rural`Pim Department, will be able to cover the new tower with existing staff. No additional staff will need to be added to continue coverage. Tf you have any additional questions, please feel tree to contact me at 919 - 7327911. Sincerely, Jeff Cabe, Fire Chief f 62 PIEDMONT ELEC MEM CO 919 7322493 4 a e fy ,�J�yG 4P sat 94 �'<<r t.�•� "` August 10, 2006 ORANGE Go Y . ORANGE COUNT' EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PO Box 8181 HMsborougk NC: 27278 Emergency Medical Services Fire Maxsw Eamdous Materials Team Disaster Response 9 -1 -1 Communications Dr1d,VX0MW1Bv&i=sHo 9i9 -96$ -2050. . 919 -644 -3030 24ldorrr bY=hZrA ;-& 919 -988 -2600 919.782 -8161 Br�slnc�tFe�xMacl 919- 968.4066 2¢- IfonrAxMficft�v 919 - 967 -9026 DIRECTOR Jack Ball, Colonel lba11@co.0ra11ge:nc.us ' )EPM D3X=R/VZ /Ar)AM4SD 'U0N C. Kent McKenzie, Major h1 Cltg=zie@CO.0rebe.xlc.uS ]:)ZK I'k' DrREGZ'OR/MX MAR9M Mike Tapp, Major mtaPP@co-orange.nc.us DEKrf Y DUtSC!'O7i/GOMMUNtCARONS Gwent Snowden, Major gsmowden@co.orange.nc.us A 08/18 '06 07:42 N0.217 04/04 RoWn W Blanton, PD Piedmont Electric Membership Manager of Engineering PO Drawer 1179 Hillsborough,, NC 2727$ Dear Mr. Blanton, The new tower to replace the existing to at your FMborough office will cause no additional burden on Orange County Emergency Management. Our present staff WM meet * need of the tower. Please feel free to contact our office- if you Respectfully, ack W. Ball, colonel Emrgency Management.Dir9mor seed • additional. 63 64 Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation A Touchstone Energy® Cooperative General Office: P.O. Drawer.1179 Hillsborough, NC 27278 • (919) 732 -2123 • Fax: (919) 644 -1030 Branch Office: P.O. Box 1327 5135 Oxford Road • Roxboro, NC 27573 • (336) 599 -0151 • Fax: (336) 597 -9088 NC Toll Free: 1- 800 -222 -3107 Web Address: www.peme.org August 23, 2006 Glenn, Here are the answers to the environmental assessment questions concerning the Piedmont EMC tower at 2500 Highway 86 South. 1) The electro magnetic transmission signals: The proposed tower will not exceed the FCC peak power limits. PEMC will meet all local, state, and federal requirements regarding construction, height, location, and transmit power levels. The FCC has stated that base stations need evaluation for peak equivalent isotropically radiated power (EIRP) in excess of 1,640 watts or antennas mounted less than 10 meters from the ground. Neither criterion will apply to this site. 2) The visual impact. of the tower: Christina Moon was contacted. on the I P of August relating to any cultural or historic concerns relating to the new tower. I have not heard back from her at this time. At the time the office and tower were constructed, a Borrower's Environmental Report (BER) was completed per the Rural Utilities Services requirements. The BER covers any threaten and endangered species and none were found within the property boundaries. The BER also covers any cultural or historic sites and again none were identified. 3) Bird migration patterns: There are 227 species of Neotropical migratory birds listed in documented telecommunication tower bird kills and all but 28 are listed in the Chapel Hill Bird Club's inventory. Species found within Orange County represent 88% of all species documented in the tower kills, and over 9r /o of the total birds listed. Most of the Neotropical migratory birds of North America migrate through Orange County or are commonly found within the area. Migration occurs over a broad front in May and September- October across the Triangle region. Orange County does not seem to have a significant migratory flight pattern. Most species migrate fairly evenly across the county and can stop over wherever there are woods, according to local experts. Serving Orange. Person. Caswell, Alamance, Durham, and Granville Counties 65. Three factors influence bird tower mortality. First, lit towers over 200 feet in height attract migrating birds, particularly if the structure uses red strobe warning lights with a short, regular pulsing rate.. Secondly, electromagnetic towers emit energy in the microwave spectrum, which may disrupt migrating bird's ability to navigate at night, by creating force fields and resonating with avian magnetite, the bird's internal navigation system. There may be a trade off between lesser tower heights, which increase human exposure to electromagnetic radiation, and greater tower heights, which increase migratory bird exposures. Finally, the towers pose a physical obstacle in which birds can become entangled or into which they may collide. Piedmont is addressing the issues by first using white strobe lights on the tower and shielding the lights from below instead of using the red strobe lights. Second, the electromagnetic energy level will be well within the FCC peak power limits. The FCC regulations limit power output to 1,640 watts and this tower will have a peak output of less than 160 watts. Therefore, this should help to eliminate the disruption of the birds ability to navigate at night by generating a lower level of electromagnetic fields. Finally, Piedmont has proposed a self - supporting tower, which will eliminate the need for any guy wires. This will eliminate the amount of clutter in the air and should reduce the number of contacts with this structure when compared to a similar tower that has guy wires. The tower is not in a wildlife habitat, wetlands, or natural resource corridor. There is also minimal disruption of the natural habitat. since the only additional area to be cleared is for the tower itself. The existing communication building will be used for the new tower. The tower can accommodate up to 5 antenna arrays and no additional on-ground security lighting will be added. Let me know, if you have an r ditional questions. Robin W. Blanton, PE Manager of Engineering Piedmont EMC M. ORANGE COUNTY ENVIRONMENT AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM To: Robin W. Blanton, PE, Manager of Engineering, Piedmont'EMC Robert Davis, Current Planning Supervisor Glenn Bowles, Planner H From; Rich Shaw, Land Conservation Manager Tina Moon, Land Use /Preservation Planner Date: August 25, 2006 Re: Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation Cell Tower Replacement Thank you the opportunity to review and comment on your application to replace the existing cellular tower at 2500 Highway 86 South (TMBL #4.45..22), in Orange County with a taller unit. As you know the 34 -acre parcel is located along a section of "new" NC 86 that is changing from rural to low- and medium- density residential The attached map identifies properties included in our countywide inventory of historic resources (50 years or older) that are located within a three - quarter mile and one and one -half mile radius of the subject property. As you can, there are no identified sites within the three - quarter mile radius. There are two documented sites within the one and one -half mile radius — Blackwelder Service Station (OR 1006) and Rigsbee's Rock House (OR lb). Rigsbee's Rock House is listed in the National Register of Historic Places and is one of only four properties designated as an Orange County Local Landmark. It is likely, however, that both properties will be somewhat visually shielded from the tower due to the I -85 corridor. You should receive similar information through your environmental review process with the State Historic Preservation Office ( http: / /www.hpo.dcr.state.nc.us /er.htm). The Environmental Review contact for Orange County is Sarah McBride at (919) 733 -6545 ext. 225) or sarah.mcbride @mail.net. The proposed tower site is located adjacent to a 451 -acre property owned by Duke University and managed as the Eno Division of Duke Forest. While it is unlikely that the proposed cellular tower would pose significant adverse impacts to the forest itself, it would be prudent for the applicant to consult with the Duke forest manager to make sure that the tower would not interfere with any of the current or proposed research activities, nor with the public educational and recreational activities planned for this section of the forest. The contact person is Judd Edebum, Duke Forest Manager at (919) 613 -8014 or judeburn(a)duke.edu. Environment and Resource Conservation PO Box 8181 / 306-A Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 (919) 245 -2590 Piedmont Electric Membership corporation Te lecommunications Facilities 67 Y Page Z Conclusions Section 8.8.17a.2 in the Zoning Ordinance, Standards of Evaluation, speaks to the protection of historic properties and scenic views in provision j), "The tower and antenna will not result in a significant adverse impact on the view of or from any historic site, scenic road, or major view corridor." The attached map identifies some of the natural and cultural resources that are known to exist in the nearby vicinity of these proposed sites. The final placement of the telecommunications facility, in terms of topography and screening, will determine the visual impact of the tower on its surrounding community. Based on our initial review of one and one - half mile radius, however, it does not appear that the proposed new tower for the Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation property would negatively impact the natural resources of the adjacent, protected lands, nor would it impact any of the known cultural resources. If you have questions or would like to discuss further please contact this office at (919) 245- 2590. cc: David Stand Environment and Resource Conservation PO Box 81811306-A Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 (919) 245 -2590 i err igo, -,,,: z�• s r - - � K KFMVI�.K.-I 3 '' .F itt: ^} �,�5`•7 "T �i�� -� � tf 'v , l ti .n. gn�....,pp +1+:�- .e: ,v. �: 1 y; .. .1F�' ' i.- ''}E•,� ,`i}..i.' ,:t• 1.•-' ,. ,.. t t � . a4=t. �-.. y:'��� •G� ;:1:F1- ,N „ +:: 7.- -i! ` ' �'` `�` •5ic �. "`• . �tIC�$ 'its." =` Pr z• 'r - e 1 yr. f . 7 ' { 7,1 '��` t-t.£ ,�. _'� •mot'.; �t - '7"F'. ,,., Jac yjyyl� � t ••,;1 r � y AV V ..7• ?�l+ h��F � .y, l;. � -L :emu `. �* .t E� r �itu��i a� .}� �•.�:rr;,.:: J,.�,i{ -$' : _F”" t: ' �L- " 3 fxf _ l i - - _ � sv,•' t;.•'�t5- :n_ � '�y'•°' ray .',: y'? _ _ © l' ?,- t+ryk�:� -� _ Y� �(r'A `-t .�:n ,t ii t� ?ui:` .'�' �';r•"' - ,.'•T• �- ".ate - �F.I -•' - ,'+G%9'• ��- Asa t a t�< -�' '� ' . •`,,~ ' ! - ' ..5 S ,C `�('� q•� S° � •s -?fit :x!' rix-, s -t-.,. •'� p• - ^`..;�! � �' t s � � ` � �• ^•�..- '(?iPpY.'�, K -:.. :�� tr � .'i;"`" R' t. +' S�.;. .•F,^„i 4: i1•'.;. '.r. v- N. Clj ��•� �i!- >= .;•'L.' .!!{' ='ra i.�`i�` - - ''F,. t '_^r(: ,�'"r'i:^ ` :J .. /�'� hl. '. 670 -� 670 ` t J' �G} � ;. -,�; � - _ gi;P•RL "� N1OUN 5^ 1• �' .;r•Y•`ti';;;�. � ��sf` gc.:....._ t ,�..., �,1 �� �° �;'•;�: ,, � y • r'� :• .�,�• -i y`t �� � -,s• -. "r '` t" � .(. ` -� -��y ��.rr' yr•+r� ,�_, ' ^�'t�Y:� ;,,.� ^:: ..)r :7.5 .r h _- �, � BL"fi. At, li._ -�.. .'.[ci' f i�' i� '-,-,. 't - � ."r.€r '� .i' �'?<�„'{ �`•1• _ i' a ''yam' • t' -WOOD DR1($ 0.125 Ity useddell *TO\" Orange & , t nt ENiC �"" motion pepa`6 P r r piedMC) 456 �� rO Bp /0 P�os�m 3657 %wow �,00 � � P �g� 4.4 ® ® Pp�rodmtopcOt� t 37 aTres ,00YR 3.7 t wooc Sates YR FloadPW tand w0 sheen's — - fir: nto (665? Memorandum To: Craig N. Benedict, Planning Director From: Glenn R. Bowles, Planner II Date: August 30, 2006 Subject: BOCC request for information relating to the Piedmont Electric proposed replacement tower. At its August 22, 2006 meeting, the BOCC through a resolution, directed Planning Department staff to address environmental issues that might relate to the proposed Piedmont Electric replacement tower on NC Highway 57 South. The issues include flight patterns of migratory birds, the number and distribution* of similar towers in the County, and such other issues as might apply. Below, along with the attached map and ERCD memorandum; is the staff response to the BOCC inquiry. Bird Migration Researchers have estimated that four to five million migratory birds are killed annually after colliding with telecommunications towers. To put bird mortality rates in perspective and according to Audubon Society estimates, 10,000 to 40,000 birds die annually from collisions with wind turbines, sixty to eighty million birds collide with motor vehicles, and 98 million died after flying into plate glass windows. Local birders counted over 330 bird species in the Orange County area in 2002. Most of the local bird species are migratory and are potentially susceptible to the effects of telecommunication .towers. Some of the more well known bird. observation sites include the Bolin Creek Greenway, Cane Creek Reservoir, Dairyland Road, .Pew's Ford Access in the Eno River State Park, along the Eno River at Pleasant Green Road, Lake Orange, the Mason Farm Preserve, and University Lake; none are close to the Piedmont tower site. Piedmont's headquarters is not in any documented wildlife corridor, wetland, *flood plain corridor, nor is the tower site within any stream buffer. Of the 227 species of migratory birds listed in documented telecommunication tower bird kills, the Chapel Hill Bird Club's inventory lists all but 28. Species found within Orange County represent 88% of all species documented in the tower kills, and over 970/6 of the total birds listed. Most migratory birds of North American migrate through Orange County or are commonly found within the area. Along major bird migration routes, a single telecommunication tower may account for as many as 3,000 migratory songbird deaths annually, according to recent studies. Documented bird death events range as high as 12,000 fatalities for a single event. 70 Three factors influence bird tower mortality. First, lit towers over 200 feet in height attract migrating birds, particularly if the structure uses red strobe warning lights with a short, regular pulsing rate. Secondly, electromagnetic towers emit energy in the .microwave spectrum, which may disrupt migrating bird's ability to navigate at night, by creating force fields and resonating with avian magnetite, the bird's internal navigation system. Finally, the towers pose.a physical obstacle in which birds can become entangled or into which they may collide. Vulnerable migratory species breed during the spring and summer in North America and migrate to the southern states, the Caribbean, or Central and South America during the fall and winter. They generally fly at night and are most susceptible to tower collisions during misty, foggy, rainy, or low -cloud atmospheric. conditions. During these inclement weather conditions, .migratory birds seem to switch from their innate, nighttime navigational abilities to visual reckoning. They can become attracted, more accurately, they are reluctant to leave the lit area of red, pulsing navigational strobe lights, continue to fly around the lit tower, and often collide with or become entangled with the tower and tower guy wires. Migration occurs over a broad front in May and September - October across the Triangle region. According to conversations with local ornithologists, there are no organized, consistent migratory flight pattems in Orange County. Most species migrate evenly across the County and can stop wherever there are woods or water, according to the local experts. Neighboring Towers. There are six telecommunication towers within two.miles of the PEMC site. They are a: 1. 157' monopole on Old NC 10, 2. 160' guyed tower on NC 86, 3. 178' monopole in Hillsborough, 4. 160' monopole on Landau Dr. 5. 254' lattice tower on New Hope Church Road, and 6. 180' monopole on Palmers Grove Church Road. Piedmont's consultants evaluated each individually and collectively to determine if they could serve as co- locations for the two -way trunked radio communication system. The proposed. radio reception service area is reduced by 30% by doing so. Please refer to the attached scenario map. Historic Properties. Planning staff is in receipt of an August 25, 2006 memorandum from Rich Shaw and Tina Moon, ERCD staff, states that there are two historic sites within a one and one -half mile radius of the Piedmont property (Blackwelder Service Station and Rigsbee's Rock House). Both properties will be somewhat visually shielded from the tower by the 1 -85 corridor. Towers =EMS County i•22 Mile Buffer Townships -�- =City Limits 4:' ETJ Piedmont Property , Piedmont Electric Replacement Tower Scenario 71' N .' 1 inch equals 3 miles Mid p � 0 1 2 3 Op� InspecbOns �4 G75 map Prepared by aca NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA A public hearing will be held in the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom, 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, North Carolina, on Tuesday, October 3, 2006, at 7:30 p.m. for the purpose of giving all interested persons an opportunity to speak for or against the following item: PD -1 -06 - Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation (PEMC) Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation requests an amendment to a Planned Development - Office /Industrial .(PD -0/1) District and a modification to the associated Special Use Permit, Class A for their property, located in the Hillsborough Township, at 2500 NC Highway 86 South. Specifically, the applicant requests to add the additional principal use of 'Telecommunication Tower (greater than 150 feet in height)' to permit construction of a lattice design, 320 -foot tower with 30 foot antenna to replace their existing 220 -foot tower. The parcel is not located in a State classified protected watershed. It is identified as Parcel Identification Number 9873657456 and contains 34.74 acres more or less. Changes may be made in the advertised proposals that reflect debate, objections and discussion at the hearing. All interested citizens are invited to attend this hearing and be heard. Public comment, under oath, will be received during the public hearing. Accommodations for individuals with physical disabilities can be provided if the request is made to the Director of Planning at least 48 hours prior to the Public Hearing by calling the appropriate number listed below. Questions regarding the proposals may be directed to the Orange County Planning Department located in the Planning and Agricultural Center, 306 -F Revere Road, Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278. Office hours are from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. You may also call 245 -2575 or 245 -2585 and you-will be directed to a staff member who will answer your questions. Piedmont Electric Membership Planned Development Petition for Replacement Tower 72 ' ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 73 Craig N. Benedict, AICP, Director Current Planning w�• + ; 306F Revere Road (919) 245 -2575 a � P O Box 8181 (919) 644 -3002 (FAX) Hillsborough, www.co.orange.nc.us North Carolina, 27278 CERTIFICATE OF MAILING ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT ORANGE COUNTY, NORTH. CAROLINA I, Glenn R. Bowles, agent to the Zoning Officer, Orange County, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that I have mailed, or have had mailed, by certified mail, postage prepaid, a Notice of the Public Hearing to be held on the request for a Planned Development and Class A Special Use Permit under Article 8.8.17a of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance for Telecommunication Towers to each property owner, as listed on the Tax Records filed with the petition, as required by Article 20, Section 6.3 of the Orange County Zoning Ordinance. The mailed notice specified the date, time, place and subject of the Public Hearing. WITNESS my hand, this 15th day of September, 2006. Glenn R. Bowles, AICP Planner II 4.45.24 "' 4.45.27 4.50.5 4.49.8.18 Cr 4.45.AB 4.45..3D 4.450.8. 4.45�OA 4.450.8. s 4.45.22 v r 4A5.23 .. - . . 4.49.C.1 0 Busy 1 a v. —i. This map contains parcels prepared for the Inventory of real property within T..t 8b dT.A 4e.w Orange County, and is compiled from recorded deed, plats, and other public Pnur I records and data Users of this map are hereby notified that the aforementioned MR* R-d. pubfie primary information sources should be consulted for verification of the c„ Q information contained on this map. The county and Its mapping companies assume 7..e T....KPT.,e no legal responsibility for the information contained on this map. ..� T-11" T""qT°I Orange County GIS 74 4.45..14 4.45.28 4.45..17A 1:7200 200 i i i 'I ORANGE COUNT r PLANNING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT 75 Craig N. Benedict, AlCP, Director G•retr a s' Current Planning �, * A 306E Revere Road (919) 245 -2575 P O Box 8181 (919) 644 -3002 (FAX) Q killsborough, www.co.orange.nc.us North Carolina, 27278 NOTICE OF A PENDING REZONING ACTION A rezoning petition to amend the Official Zoning Atlas for Orange County, North Carolina has been filed for the property of Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation, to change the zoning classification from Planned Development - Office / Institutional (PD -OI). (Offices) (present zoning classification) to Planned Development - Office / Institutional (PD-01) (Offices, Telecommunication Tower (greater than 150 feet in height) (proposed zoning classification) with a Class A Special Use Permit, being located at 2500 NC Highway 86 South, and further identified by Orange County Tax Records Parcel Identification Number 9873 -73 -3084. The principal uses allowed in the proposed zoning district are: Offices: Telecommunication Tower (greater than 150 feet in height). The Orange County Board of County Commissioners and the Orange County Planning Board will hold a joint public hearing at 7:30 PM on. this rezoning on October 3. 2006 at the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom at 106 East Margaret Lane, Hillsborough, NC 27278. A public notice Will be posted on the premises at least ten 10 days before the hearing, and a legal advertisement will appear in the Durham Herald and the News of Orange for two successive weeks with the first notice appearing not less than ten (10) days nor more than twenty -five (25) days prior to the public hearing. This notice is being sent to you because your property is either included in this rezoning, is within 500 feet of the property proposed for a zoning classification amendment, or within 1,000 feet of the telecommunications tower Class °A" Special Use Permit application. This notice is provided pursuant to N.C. General Statutes 153A -343 and Orange County Zoning Ordinance Article 20.6. If you have any questions conceming this" rezoning, please contact the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department, P.O. Box 8181, Hillsborough, NC 27278, Telephone (919) 245 -2575 or 245 -2585 and you will be directed to someone to answer your questions. Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation Planned Development Petition 76 for Replacement Tower. 7. Q IU BPS . Ra ;Qo; i' R Q 86 R2 U: lu Z. �p�C! Old Property Line and ya. % ; o; Old PD Zoning Line �, R4 _ �i JA PE _ LN ' R4 Piedmont EMC Property New PD Zoning Line B�CKF -�.. t Existing Tower Site -� Tp - �.GF PD -01 r — Property Added to PD Replacement Tower Site GD4 ,off R! r r Duke Forest Ef)=L04 N Zoning 1 inch equals 350 feet Transition Area 0 350 700 Feet orange county Planning and I WrIlons-Departrra n- ... -..-a �, ne r-- member 14 2C PAGE . 1 OF • 11 TMBL OWNER OWNER2 9/13/2006 OLDPIN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 77 4.4�rs•�:•y ALLEN NANCY YARBROUGH 9873756723 PO BOX 1571 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -1571 4.45L..23 ALLRED JOEL 9873568839 2401 CHARLIE TEW CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L.:36 ALSTON MARSHA 9873661326 2412 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.20 ANDERSON YOLANDA 9873850679 27 WOODRIDGE CT CHESHIRE CT 06410 4:45L..26 ANDREWS EDWARD L III & MARIE P 9873569753 2404 CHARLIE TEW CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9525 4.45L..38 ARNOLD.ELIZA13ETH 9873660265 2502 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.55..108 ARROWOOD STEPHEN D & CMUSTY C CRISTOBAL 9873458713 2805 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45S..4 AUSTEN .SCHLIER LOIS & FRANK SCHLIER 9873550980 2504 SUMMIT DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..19 AUTRY LINDA PREUFF (PREUSS) 9873661731 2403 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8761 4.45J..8 BACHENHEIMER RACHEL 9873556587 1203 BRAXTON BRAGG CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.C.5 BALDIZON MIR . L 9873762653 2940 DOE TRL HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9157 4.45B.B.16 . BARBEE LUCILLE DAVIS 9873757491 2433 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27218 -9504 4.45B.B.15 BARBEE RONNIE WILLIS 9873756430 2429 LONNIE CIRCLE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9504 4.45A.C.21 BARBOUR ROBERT 0. & BARBARA B 9873764732 4900 LAKE WHEELER RD RALEIGH NC 27603 -3918 4.45N..16 BARNARD PATRICIA H 9873660897 1111 WALTER CLARK DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..13 BASS SHAWANDA N 9873662956 2309.WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9528 4.55..114 BECKETTS RIDGE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION INC 9873552748 3739 NATIONAL DR SUITE 101 RALEIGH NC 27612 4.45B.C.8 00 BENNINGTON JESSIE M & GLENN W 9873755643 _...luy 2420 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 Avv 4.45B.C.7 BENNINGTON JESSIE M & GLENN W 4.45A.B.8 BLALOCK THOMAS C & BARBARA 9873669636 2329 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.5 BRIGGS ERNEST L 9873761140 1815 W B ST BUTNER NC 27509 -1738 PAGE 2 OF 11 TM 3L OWNER OWNER2 9/13/2006 OLDPIN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 78 4.45..14 BRIGHT PAMELA DENISE SUITE 101 9873864195 1801 -452 OLD NC 10 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.D.2 BROWN IAN'THIA DEAN 9873766370 2344 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..6 BROWN VERNON W & KAREN NC 27278 9873663942 2308 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9528 4.45B.B.8 BROWNING LONNIE GALE & BETTY 9873763070 PO BOX 668 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..22 BROWNLEY KIlvIBERLY ANN & JOHANNA MARIE BOOBAc 9873567868 2846 CALLOWAY DR MEBANE NC 27302 4.45..16A BYRD JULIA H HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9873853831 1801 -440 OLD NC 10 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.E. I I BYRD NORMAN CARLYLE JR & DONNA G 9873861306 2324 OLD OAK PLACE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -7340 4.45B.B:22 BYRD ROGER LEE & KAY D 9873850887 1800 -442 OLD HWY 10 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..15 CARREIRO PHILIP HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8761 9873660941 105 STONEHAM CT MEBANE NC 27302 4.45B.A.1 CARTER GINGER YOUNG 9873760316 2341 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9506 4.45A.C.26 CASE BOBBY LEE 9873763282 1230 JASPERS LN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..14 CATANIO PATRICIA JEAN 9873567458 2503 GEORGE ANDERSON DR FnLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8749 4.45..28 ./ CATES WILLARD R & SUSAN F 4.45..17A MFG` CATES WILLIARD R & SUSAN F L 9873845517 1801475 OLD NC 10 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45K..1A CENTEX HOMES SUITE 101 9873554432 3937 NATIONAL DR RALEIGH NC 27612 4.45A.C.3 CHAVIOUS KENNETH E & BARBARA O 9873762434 401 N NASH ST HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..25 CHHORM SAMSAVATH D & BECKY A STRAUB 9873569769 2402 CHARLIE TEW CT - HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.55..5 CONRAD RITA MAE 9873459438 2806 BECKETT'S RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.12 COUCH ERNEST WESLEY JR 9873753539 2421 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9504 4.45L..35. CREWS CURTIS L & SHEILA G 9873661441 2410 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8761 4.45J..24 CRISP MARJAREITE 9873565048 1110 JOHN BRECKENRIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9536 PAGE 3 OF TMBL OWNER OLDPIN ADDRESS 11 OWNER2 9/13/2006 STATE ZIP 4.45L..4 CURTIN DAVID F 9873565250 1101 JOSEPH JOHNSTON CT HILLSBOROUGH NC .27278 T. 55 ST. 38 D R HORTON INC 2000 AERIAL CENTER PARKI' 9873562686 SUITE 110 MORRISVII;LE NC 27560 4.45S..39 OPI __ .qb► D R HORTON INC 2000 AERIAL CENTER PARK` QR'7Z 547 t Qc ■. [1T rr�*rl 1 1 n 4.45S..37 D R HORTON INC 2000 AERIAL CENTER PARK1 'FA 4.45A.D23 DAVIS OSCAR . & NANCY 9873768359 2508 LONNIE CIR S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9562 4.45A.D.6 DAY SHERWIN THOMAS HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9873767700 2519 NORTH ROXBORO RD DURHAM NC 27704 4.45J..9 DEPEW RYAN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9873556614 2610 WADE HAMPTON HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..7 9873567318 DETER DANIEL R 2535 RAINCREEK RD & MARGARET P WOLF (W) HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.451..8 Otl yta DETER DANIEL R & MARGARET P WOLF (W) 9873567375 2535 RAINCREEK RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..9 DETER DANIEL R & MARGARET P WOLF (W) 9873568332 2535 RAINCREEK RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..5 DICKENS PAMELA ANN 9873663856 2310 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9528 4.45A.B.14 DIXON GREGORY THOMAS 9873677070 2316 HWY 86S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.D.1 DIXON TULLOCH ELLEN G 9873766270. 2348 LONNIE-CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9507 4.49.C.1 DUKE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF FORESTRY 9873733084 402 OREGON ST DURHAM NC 27705 4.45L..29 ECHOLS CLARA L 9873568690 2504 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..15 EDLUND CATHERINE A 9873566570 2501 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..7 EDMONDS CYNTHIA CAROL 9873663949 2306 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.451..6 EDWARDS GEORGE E 9873558615 1204 BRAXTON BRAGG CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9541 4.45L..1 EIDE MARK A 9873567174 6333 OLDE SCARLETT CT MEBANE NC 27302 4.55.3 ERNY DENNIS ROBERT 9873551405 2810 BECKETT'S RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..12 ESTE MARGARET ELLEN 9873568453 2507 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8749 PAGE 4 OF 11 TMBL OWNER OWNER2 9/13/2006 OLDPIN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP ;1 4.45C.B.1 EVANS DANIEL W JR 9873541969 4200 OLD NC 10 LOT 7 DURHAM NC 27705 4.45A.D.4 EZELL ROGER DALE & SHAWNN 9873766590 2336 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9507 . 4.55..112 FLOWERS ELIJAH D III & JANET L 9873551695 2813 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.451..11 FLOYD JANE E 9873554566 2614 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..14 - FLYNT TERRI L . 9873671052 1110 WALTER CLARK DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8764 4.45A.D.8 FOUSHEE MICHAEL & JACQUELINE 9873767920 4 BILTMORE PL DURHAM NC 27712 -1459 4.45A.C.22 . FREELAND DONNA L 9873764632 PO BOX 726 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.D.19 FREEMAN FRANK E 9873768799 1619 BEN JOHNSON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4A5B.C.10 FRIENDLY.HILLS BAPTIST CH 9873756826 PO BOX 305 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.13 FULLER BETSY ANN 9873753455 2423 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.I I GALEANA ALFONSO NAJERA 9873753750 2417 LONNIE CIRCLE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..18 GAVAZOV JULIE H 9873565621 2415 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC . 27278 4.45B. .3 _d - GOOCH JAMES ALTON 4.45B.B.2 X"' GOOCH JAMES ALTON 4.45B.B.24 GOOCH JAMES W 9873861017 4309 GUESS RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.55..2. GREEN CHARLES B & SHAWNN 9873551494 2812 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.17 GRISSOM JERALDEAN E 9873759423 1241 S 5TH ST #Hl MEBANE NC 27302 4.45L..37 GUNN DARCY F 9873660380 2500 WADE HAMPTON RD- HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8762 4.45A.B.6 GURLEY JOYCE KEITH 9873669885 2321 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 _ 4.45N..17 HACKENBROCK LINDA 4.45N..18 HACKENBROCK LINDA 9873661777 3901 NOTTAWAY RD DURHAM NC 27707 PAGE 5 OF 11 TMBL OWNER OWNER2 9/13/2006 OLDPIN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 4.45N..2 "' Mft%"` HACKENBROCK LINDA I 81 4.451,34 HAGEN13ERGER JAMIE A & BRIAN RICHARD BOLDUC NC 27278 9873661476 2408 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45J..25 HARRIS ANTHONY D IV HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9873564058 3734 MALLORY CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8464 4.55.113 HATHAWAY RICHARD D & SHARLEEN H NC 27278 9873553638 2520 SUMMIT DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..1 HAYES VONDA R & JOAN F HILLSBOROUGH 9873667569 P 0 BOX 575 9873662536 2404 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8761 4.45A.D.20 HENDERSON VERNON HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9873768689 2520 LONNIE CIR S HILLSBOROUGH. NC 27278 -9562 4.45A.B.5 HEWETT MARVIN G HOMEOWNERS ASSOC INC HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9873669996 2317 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9506 4.45L..16 HICKS SHELLEY C HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9873566511 2419 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..2 9873567128 HOPPER. FAMILY VENTURES LL PO BOX 607 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 r5 -3-0- HILLSBOROUGH CHURCH OF GC 4.45J..20 9873557954 HOPPER JAMES E SR PO BOX 607 & JOAN F HILLSBOROUGH 9873667569 P 0 BOX 575 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..39 9873660139 HOYT GLORIA RISSOLO 2504 WADE HAMPTON RD . HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45..4B HILLSBOROUGH CHURCH OF GC 4.45L..27 9873569608 9873663261 2412 HWY 86 S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4A5.30A 00 9873667431 SBOROUGH CHURCH OF GC as P 0 BOX 575 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.A.5 9873666387 HILLSBOROUGH CHURCH OF GC P 0 BOX 575 • HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.A.4 9873666288 HILLSBOROUGH CHURCH OF GC P 0 BOX 575 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.1 HILLSBOROUGH CHURCH OF GC PO BOX 575 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9508 4.45L..19 9873565627 HILLSBOROUGH WILDWOOD PO BOX 478 HOMEOWNERS ASSOC INC HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45S..24 9873561262 HOOPER WILLIAM C JR 2503 SUMMIT DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..2 9873567128 HOPPER. FAMILY VENTURES LL PO BOX 607 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45J..20 9873557954 HOPPER JAMES E SR PO BOX 607 & JOAN F HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -0607 4.45L..39 9873660139 HOYT GLORIA RISSOLO 2504 WADE HAMPTON RD . HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..27 9873569608 HUNT JAMES 102 ARBOR CREEK CT & PHYLLIS CHAPEL HILL NC 27516 4.45L..33 9873662501 JARVIS JULIET A 2406 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 SA PAGE 6 OF 11 9/13/2006 TMBL OWNER OWNER2 OLOPIN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 4.451.2 JONES MICHAEL LYN 9873558518 225 MICHAEL JONES RD ROXBORO NC 27574 4.45..23 JONES RICHARD W & THELMA W -trr t -- -- -T—TT xTel •i %%rIA JORDAN DENNIS EARL & VONNIE M .C.4 �MI r .JORDAN DENNIS EARL & VONNIE M 4.45J..23 9873566028 JUSTICE CHARLES T 1114 JOHN BRECKENRIDGE DR & KATHY C HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9536 4.45S.23 9873562129 KADLECIK MARK 2505 SUMMIT DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..24 9873569805 KRAJEWSKI ERIC T 2400 CHARLES TEW CT & VIRGINIA K BOND HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.55..111 9873551714 KUHN KAREN 2811 BECKETTS RIDGE & THOMAS HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45J..1 9873558594 LAND KRIST.OFFER CARL 1205 JOHN BRECKENRIDGE DR & JAMIE M HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.D.5 9873767600 LANIER LUTHER QUINCY 2332 LONNIE CM & DOROTHY HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9507 4.45..6A 9873664838 LASSITER BILLIE MARGARET 2323 NC 86S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45J..7 9873557567 LEMMERMAN MARC D 1205 BRAXTON BRAGG CT & DEBORAH S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9541 4.451.18 LINDAHL LAWRENCE E 9873554992 1107 JOHN BRECKINRIDGE RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..3 LONG SHANNON L 9873566117 1103 JOSEPH JOHNSTON CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9526 4.45A.E.13 LOZANO MARTHA ELENA 9873861107 2501 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..13 LYNCH JASON A 9873567497 2505 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.55..109 MAHAFFEY ANDREW D & FONDA A 9873459733 2807 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278. 4.45N..20 MARTIN JAMES A & KIMBERLY SIDWELL 9873660696 2405 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8761 4.55..1 MAYHEW KAREN FOREHAND & STEVEN B 9873552485 2814 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH' NC 27278 4.45L..21 9873567840 MCCOY LYNN WOODALL 2405 CHARLIE TEW CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9525 4.45J..22 MCDONALD BRIAN LEWIS 9873567026 1118 JOHN BRECKENRIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 PAGE 7 OF 11 TMBL OWNER OWNER2 9/13/2006 OLDPIN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 83 4.45L..6 MEINHOLD HARRY STEPHEN 9873566358 1728 W SUGAR CREEK RD CHARLOTTE NC 28262 -4948 4.45B.B.10 MICOL PROPERTIES LLC 9873753769 6214 US HWY 70 W DURHAM NC 27705 4.45A.C.19 MILLS JEFFREY J & VANESSA A 9873764858 717 WILSON ST LITTLE CHUTE WI 54140 -1858 4.45B.B.21 MOORE HILDA S 9873850778 P O BOX 395 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.23 MOORE JOHN L & CARLA J 9873851907 2455 LONNIE CR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.D.21 MOORE KATHERINE LOIS 9873768579 501 BAY LAKE STREET - CHOCOWINITY NC 27817 4.45L .'.20 MOXLEY WILLIAM D & CAROLYN F 9873567711 2307 HODGES RD KINSTON NC 28504 4.45S..1 MURRAY GAIL 9873552983 2510 SUMMIT DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45K..5 NEWBY WILLIAM ANDREW & SHARON S. 9873557414 2821 BECKETTS RIDGE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.55..4 NG KIM KHUAN 9873550926 2808 BECKETT RDG HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -6623 4.45B.C.6 NICHOLSON REBECCA LARUE 9873757671 2436 LONNIE CIRCLE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9504 4.45N..3 NORTHEN ANGELA D 9873662697 2400 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..17 OLSON MATTHEW D & JENNIFER LEE 9873565576 2417 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45J..5 PALMER CASEY MARIE 9873557773 1202 BRAXTON BRAGG CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.6 PARSONS NED CAMERON 9873762049 1225 JASPERS IN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.D.24 PEREZ BENITEZ AMANDA & JUAN PEDRO FLORES JI II 9873768259 2504 LONNIE CIRCLE S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9562 4.45B.C.5 PERKINS JACK G & MARY E 9873757791 P O BOX 4545 EMERALD ISLE NC 28594 -4545 4.45A.E.9 PERRY ALICE M 9873861517 2517 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45J..19 PETERSON KAREN ANN 9873553809 1103 BRECKINRIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45..22 PIEDMONT ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORP 9873657456 PO BOX 1179 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.55.110 PLEASANTS JANE R & JAMES L 9873550222 2809 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 PAGE 8 OF 11 TMBL OWNER OWNER2 9/13/2006 OLDPIN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP m. 4.45J..12 9873554509 PLUNKETT PATRICIA 2615 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.B.9 9873669536 PRUDHON WENDY LEE 2333 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45S..3 9873551947 PURCELL MICHAEL J 2506 SUMIvIlT DR & MELISSA M HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 9873543114 4165 HWY 54 GRAHAM NC 27253 4.45P..4 9873566855 QUARLES KENNETH EUGENE 2408 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.50..5 RICHARDSON GARY C 4.45L..30 9873569537 RACHLIS IRVING M 2506 GEORGE ANDERSON DR & DORIS JUNE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8749 4.45B.B.14 9873754481 RAY HENRY BRADLEY 2425 LONNIE CIR & MARGARET C HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9504 9873459190 814 FLETCHER RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8737 4.45B.C.1 r RAY JERRY LEE & BETSY D 4.45B.C.2 v ht RAY JERRY LEE & BETSY DIANE 4.45L..I I 9873569317 RAY VIRGINIA A 2509 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8749 4.45B.B.18 9873850457 REDUMI1vIER ROBERT E 105 MOSSWOOD CT & PATRICIA M CHAPEL HILL NC 27516 4.50..6 RICHARDSON CHARLIE LEVI & PATSY C 9873543114 4165 HWY 54 GRAHAM NC 27253 4.50..5 RICHARDSON GARY C 9873546387 PO BOX 4186 BURLINGTON NC 27215 -6902 4.45C.B.2 RIDDLE STEPHEN KELLER 9873459190 814 FLETCHER RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8737 4.45A.D.25 RILEY ANNIE SUE HAYES TRUSTEE 9873768149 501 ORANGE HIGH SCHOOL RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8415 4.451.10 ROGERS WILLIAM ERNEST 9873555556 2612 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..41 ROVETTO BARBARA J 9873569078 2510 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8762 4.55..6 SALLARD BENJAMIN W JR. & CANDACE A MARLES 9873458459 2804 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45P..6 SCHOLL MICHAEL D & CELESTE MARIE GAGNON 9873564795 2411 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9531 4.45A.C.1 SEAGO DOROTHY T 9873762214 2344 LUTHER DR S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9506 4.45J..17 SHIVER CLAUDE B & MARSHA E 9873555982 1111 BRECKINRIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.B.7 SITYTLE WALTER RAYMOND 9873669786 2325 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 PAGE 9 OF 11 TMBL OWNER OWNER2 9/13/2006 85 OLDPIN ADDRESS 9873764402 PO BOX 765 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.C.25 SUNNYSIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH 9873763392. CITY STATE ZIP . 4.45C.B.3 SIlVIEONSSON RUNE & NANCY E SUNNYSIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH 9873457193 PO BOX 1120 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -1120 4.45J..4 SMITH ELIZABETH E 9873556787 2604 WADE HAMPTON CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8763 4.45N..29 SMITH GORDON SCOTT & LAURA NETTO -SMITH 9873569995 1105 WALTER CLARK DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.19 SMITH JACQUELINE T 9873850579 2441 LONNIE CIRCLE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.D.3 SMITH JAMES M & MARIE 9873766490 2340 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..31 SMITH NEEDHAM JR & REGINA A 9873569592 2411 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8761 4.45S..2 SPAKE GARY S & VICE 9873552916 2508 SUMMIT DR HILLSBOROUGH. NC 27278 4.50..4 SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY OF THE BAHA'IS OF ORANGE CO NC 9873546064 102 STONE CREEK COURT CHAPEL HILL NC 27514 4.45A.C.23 STAGG FRANCES 9873764512 2337 LONNIE CIR HILLSBOROUGH -NC 27278 -9507 4.45L..40 STARKS GREGORY GENE 9873660104 2506 WADE HAMPTON RD. HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45J..13 STEAK CHARLES 9873554608 2613 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.7 . STUART CYNTHIA W 4.45J..26 SUNNY SIDE OF HILLSBOROUG 9873563077 P O BOX 765 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.D.7 SUNNYSIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH 4.45A.C.4 Ot' .,XN- SUNNYSIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH 4.45A.C24 - SUNNYSIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH 9873764402 PO BOX 765 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.C.25 SUNNYSIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH 9873763392. PO BOX 765 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.C.13 SUNNYSIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH 9873766182 PO BOX 765 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.C.12 SUNNYSIDE OF HILLSBOROUGH 4.45N..26 SUVICK BRIAN & NOAH MATTHEWS 9873578010 1007 WALTER CLARK DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..10 SUVICK BRIAN JOSEPH & LAURA LESLIE 9873568258 2401 SUMMITT DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -6649 :. PAGE 10 OF 11 TMBL OWNER OWNER2 9/13/2006 OLDPIN ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 4.45N..4 9873663759 SWANSON INGRID F 106 STONELEIGH DRIVE CARY NC 27511 4.45L..42 9873569053 SYKES DESTINY BRIER 2512 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8762 4.45K..4 SZADEK MARY ANN 9873556425 - 2819 BECKETTS RIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45P..5 . TAYLOR JAMES DAVID & DEBORAH LYNNE 9873566767 2412 GEORGE ANDERSON DR HILLSBOROUGH NC' 27278 -9531 4.45J..16 TERRELL CLEVELAND A & JENNIFER R 9873555854 2605 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.49.B.16 TERRY JAMES F & MARY A 9873439660 2909 NC 86S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.B.11 TESTON JOSEPH ROBERT & JOYCE J 9873667715 2326 HWY.86 SOUTH HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..27 TOPTINE JOHN H & JOAN M 9873568979 1101 WALTER CLARK DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.457..15 TORAIN SANDRA A 9873555707 2609 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8763 4.45A.C.8 TURNER THOMAS WESLEY & CATHERINE 9873762964 2316 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45A.C.2 TUTTLE FRED H & JOAN M 9873762324 2340 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9506 4.45L..28 UBER LORI A . 9873568624 2408 CHARLIE TEW CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45N..28 VANDEVENTER WAYNE ROBER 9873569938 1103 WALTER CLARK DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -8764 4.45J..14 VANHOOK AVA M 9873554727 2611 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..32 ' WALDRON A MARIE 9873660620 2407 WADE HAMPTON RD HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45BA.2 WALLS. DWIGHT C. & MARIE M 9873663440 1206 JASPERS LN HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9508 4.45J..3 WALTON RHONDA COLLEEN 13 & _u WATKINS MARTHA SMITH 4.45A.B.13A NW"' WATKINS MARTHA SMITH 4.45A.D.22 WATSON JEFFREY C 9873768479 12800 -1217 LAURENS RIDGE CHARLOTTE NC 28273 4.45J..21 WATTS JAMES D JR 9873558768 1200 JOHN BRECKENRIDGE DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9537 PAGE 11 OF TMBL ' OWNER OLDPIN ADDRESS 11 OWNER2 9/13/2006 STATE ZIP 87 4.45B.B.9 WHEELER BESSIE JEAN WE=MORE AUDENRIED 9873753869 P O BOX 543 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -0543 4.45A.C.7 WHITE LARRY WILLIAM JR & JEFFREY A WHITE WOODS BROTHERS INC 9873762854 2320 LUTHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45B.B.4 WHITE LARRY WILLIAM JR & JEFFREY ALLEN WHITE 4.45..27 [rie 9873760161 1217 JASPER LANE HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45L..5 WHITSETT CHRISTOPHER G & EVA NC 27278 9873565380 1100 JOSEPH JOHNSTON CT HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9526 4.45A.C.6 WHITTEMORE AUDENRIED 9R7179"AA r%o _.%(& 471 ter v rnvan r,r, 4.45C.A.1 AK' WE=MORE AUDENRIED 9873449629 821 FLETCHER DR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 44 5..24` WOODS BROTHERS INC 9873553062 i11�". �a 2707 NC 96S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45..27 [rie WOODS BROTHERS INC 9873547960 2707 NC 86S HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 4.45K.B WOODS R TERRY & JOHN M WOODS 9873552457 D 06 PO BOX 16665 HILLSBOROUGH NC 27516 4.45K..I WOODS R TERRY & JOHN M WOODS 9873554336 PO BOX 16665 CHAPEL HILL NC 27516 4.45A.E.10 WRIGHT MAURICE LEE JR & TRACY L 4.45B 10 z _t. YOUNG RASTERS J YOUNG RASTERS JUNIOR 4.45A.E.12 ZVOBODA TOMAS 9873861207 2505 LONNIE CR HILLSBOROUGH NC 27278 -9562 88 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING OF Board of County Commissioners & Planning Board Location: F. Gordon Battle Courtroom 106 East Margaret Lane Hillsborough, NC 27278 Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2006 Time: 7:30 PM Purpose: To hear public comments regarding a proposed amendment to an existing Planned Development Office / Institutional District and to consider approval of a Class A Special Use Permit. Request: To add Telecommunications Tower (greater than 150 feet in height) as a permitted use in both the existing Planned Development Office /Institutional District and Class A Special Use Permit. The proposed tower height is 350 feet. For Information Call: 245.2575 or 245.2577 All interested persons are invited to attend this hearing and to be heard. Federal Aviat Administration Southern Regional Office . 1701 Columbia Avenue -ASO -520 College Park, GA 30337 Issued. Date: 4/5/2005 ROBIN BLANTON PIEDMONT ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE PO DRAWER 1179 HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278 ** EXTENSION ** Aeronautical-Study No. 2,003• -ASO- 3922 -OE 89- A Determination was issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) concerning: Structure Type: Antenna Tower Location: HILLSBOROUGH, NC Latitude: 36 -2 -42.49 NAD 83 Longitude: 19 -4 -42.04 Heights: 350 feet above ground level (AGL) 1049 feet above mean sea level (AMSL) In response to your request for an extension of the effective period of the determination, the FAA has reviewed the aeronautical study in light of current aeronautical operations in the area of the structure and finds that no significant aeronautical changes have occurred which would alter the determination issued for this structure.. Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated me, the effective period of the determination issued under the above cited aeronautical study number is hereby extended and will expire on 10/5/2006 unless otherwise extended, revised, or terminated -by this office. This extension issued in accordance with 49 U.S.C., Section 44718 and, if applicable, Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 77, concerns the effect of the structure on the safe and efficient use of navigable airspace by aircraft and does not relieve the sponsor of'compliance responsibilities relating to -any law, ordinance, or regulation of any Federal, State, or local government body. A copy of this extension will be forwarded to the Federal Communications Commission if the structure is subject to their licensing authority. If we can be of further- assistance, please contact our office at (404)305 -5614. On any future correspondence concerning this matter, please refer to Aeronautical Study Number 2003 -ASO- 3922 -OE. IS ignature Control No: 352046 - 358673 (EXT) Richard E Biscomb Specialist Attachment(s) Frequency Data page 1 Fret acy Data for.ASN 2003- ASO -39' OR 90 LOW FREQUENCY HIGH FREQUENCY FREQUENCY UNIT ERP ERP UNIT 153.53 0 MHz .4 KW 159.51 0 MHz .04 KW 153.47 0 MHz .4 KW 159.735 0 MHz •04 KW 153.605 0 MHz .4 KW 160.08 0 MHz .04 KW PaaFa 7 Form 7460 -1 for ASN: 2003 -ASO- 3922 -OE Form 7460 -1 for ASN: 200 ..Overview Study (ASN): 2003 -ASO- 3922 -OE Prior Study: • Status: Determined Letters: Determination's kSO- 3922 -OE :- Sponsor Information Sponsor: PIEDMONT ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE Attention Of: ROBIN BLANTON Address: PO DRAWER 1179 `City: HILLSBOROUGH State: NC Postal Code: 27278 j Country: USA Phone: (919)644 -3431 ,Fax: (919)644 -1030 ;Construction Info Notice Of: Construction Duration: Permanent (Months: 0 Days: 0) ;Work Schedule: i !-Date Built: .`Structure6D.etaiis. Latitude (MAD 83): 360 02'42.49' N i Longitude (MAD 83): 790 04'42.04" W Datum: NAD 83 iAccuracy: Marking/ Lighting: Dual -red and medium intensity Other Description: Name: City: HILLSBOROUGH State: NC Nearest Airport: IGX Distance to Structure: 40,261.71 feet On Airport: No Direction to Structure: 354.76 Traverseway: NO Description of Location: I Description of Proposal: PROPOSED ANTENNA TOWER rage 1 91 ..... Received Date: 0712412003 Entered Date: 07/2912003 Completion Date: 10/06/2003 Expiration Date: 10/05/2006 ±Sponsor's Representative Information Representative: ALEXANDER UTILrry ENGINEERING INC Attention Of: EDWARD GELSONE Address: 975 W BITTERS ROAD City: SAN ANTONIO State: TX Postal Code: 78216 Country: USA Phone: (210)496 -3200 Fax: (210)494 -9987 Structure Summary Structure Type: Antenna Tower Other Description: NACO Number: FCCNumber: 1�eight and Elevation Proposed DNE DET Site Elevation: 699 Structure Height: 480 0 350 Total Height (ASML): 1179 0 1049 frequencies _ _ -• - - Low Freq High Freq Unit ERP Unit 153.47 0 MHz 0.4 KW 153.53 0 MHz 0.4 KW 153.605 0 MHz 0.4 KW 159.51 0 MHz 0.04 KW 159.735 0 MHz 0.04 KW 160.08 0 MHz 0.04 KW FCC Antenna .Structure Registration REFERENCE COPY Page 1 of 2 92 This is not an official FCC authorization. it is a record of public information contained in the FCC's Antenna Structure Registration database on the date that this.reference copy was generated. In cases where FCC rules require the presentation, posting, or, display of an FCC authorization, this document may not be used in place of an official FCC authorization. United States of America Federal Communications Commission Antenna Structure Registration Owner. Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0001958883 Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation Registration Number: 1240619 Attention To: Robin W. Blanton 2500 Hwy. 86 S. P.O. Box 1179 Issue Date: 10/092003 Hillsborough, NG 27178 -1179 Location of Antenna Structure: Ground Elevation (AMSL): 213.1 meters 2500 Hwy 86 S. Hillsborough, NC Overall Height Above Ground (AGL): 106.7 meters Latitude: 36-02 -42.5 N Overall Height Above Mean Sea Level (AMSL): 319.8 meters Lbngitude: 079 -04 -42.0 W NAD83 Painting and Lighting Requirements: FAA Chapters 4, 8, 12 Paint and Light in Accordance with FAA Circular Number 70.1746D -1 K Special Conditions: This registration is effective upon completion of the described antenna structure and notification to the Commission. YOU MUST NOTIFY THE COMMISSION WITHIN 24 HOURS OF COMPLETION OF CONSTRUCTION OR CANCELLATION OF YOUR PROJECT. Use FCC Form 854. To file electronically, connect to the Antenna Structure Registration system'by pointing your web browser to http: / /wireless.foc.gov /antenna/. Electronic firing is recommended. You may also file manually by submitting a paper copy of FCC Form 854. Use purpose code "NT" for notification of completion of construction;'use purpose code "CA" to cancel your registration. The Antenna Structure Registration is not an authorization to construct radio facilities or transmit radio signals. It is necessary that all radio equipment on this structure be covered by a valid FCC license or construction permit. You must immediately provide a copy of this Registration to all tenant licensees and permittees sited on the structure described on this Registration (although not required, you may want to use Certified Mail to obtain proof of receipt), and display your Registration Number at the site. You must comply with all applicable FCC obstruction marking and lighting requirements, as set forth in Part 17 of the Commission's Rules (47 C.F.R. Part 17). These rules include, but are not limited to: • Posting the Registration Number: The Antenna Structure Registration Number must be displayed in a conspicuous place so that it is readily visible near the base of the antenna structure. Materials used to display the r _ K 7t- A --/A a nh i „, ;,, +e „ +�, FrC`. A fiR Fnrm.i Sn?rectKev= 263 940... 6/16/2006 FCC Antenna Structure Registration Page 2 of 2 Registration Number must be we and of sufficient size to be easily seen at the base of the antenna 93 structure. Exceptions exist for certain historic structures. See 47 C.F.R. 17.4(g)(h). • Inspecting lights and equipment: The obstruction lighting must be observed at least every 24 hours in order to detect any outages or malfunctions. Lighting equipment, indicators, and associated devices must be inspected at least once every three months. • . Reporting outages and malfunctions: When any top steady - burning light or a flashing light (n any position) bums out or malfunctions, the outage must be reported to the nearest FAA Flight Service Station, unless corrected within 30 minutes. The FAA must again be notified when the light is restored. The owner must also maintain a log of these outages and malfunctions. • Maintaining assigned painting: The antenna must be repainted as often as necessary to maintain good visibility. • Complying with environmental rules: If you certified that grant of this registration would not have a significant environmental impact, you must nevertheless maintain all pertinent records and be ready to provide documentation supporting. this certification and compliance with the rules, in the event that such information is requested by the Commission pursuant to 47 C.F.R. 1.1307(d). • Updating information: The owner must notify the FCC of proposed modifications to this structure; of ariy change in ownership; or, within 30 days of dismantlement of the structure. Copies of the Code of Federal Regulations (which contain the FCC's antenna structure registration rules, 47 C.F.R. Part 17) are available from the Government Printing Office (GPO). To purchase CFR volumes, call (202) 512 -1800. For GPO Customer Service, call (202) 512 -1803. For additional FCC information, consult the Antenna Homepage on the Internet at hftp : / /wireleis.foc.govlantennat or call the FCC's National Call Center at 1- 888 - CALLFCC (1- 888 - 225 - 5322). We have estimated the third party burden requirement associated with this collection to be 1 hour. This requirement has been identified under OMB control number of 3060 -0139. . • Tr • - - - - IA __c4 ____tv.,__ +n „ +1, W rAQPVnrm icn7rPOKev= 7(13940... 6/16 /2006 ASR Rea stratiori 1240619 ASR Registration Search Registration 1240619 Reference copy Map Registration Registration Detail Reg Number 1240619 File Number A0348009 FAA Study 2003 -ASO- 3922 -OE FAA Isslue Date 10/06/2003 Status Granted Constructed EMI No NEPA No Page 1 of 2 Antenna Structure Structure Type TOWER - Free standing or Guyed Structure used for Communications Purposes Location (in NAD83 Coordinates) Lat/Long 36 -02 -42.5 N 079 -04 -42.0 W 2500 Hwy 86 S. City, State Hillsborough , NC Center of AM Array Heights (meters) Elevation of Site Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground (AGL) 213.1 106.7 Overall Height Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground w/o Appurtenances 319.8 106.7 Painting and Lighting Specifications FAA Chapters 4, 8, 12 Paint and Light in Accordance with FAA Circular Number 70/7460 -IK Owner &. Contact Information FRN. 0001958883 Owner Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation Attention To: Robin W. Blanton 2500 Hwy. 86 S. P.O. Box 1179 Hillsborough , NC 27178 -1179 Contact Gelsone , Edward J 975 West Bitters Road .San Antonio , TX 78216 Last Action Statics Status Granted Purpose New Mode Interactive Related Applications 10/09/2003 A0348009 -New (NE) Licensee ID L00006174. P: (919)964 -4943 E: robin.blanton @pemc.org. P: (210)496 -3200 E: edward.gelsone @alexutil.com Received 10/09/2003 Entered. 10/09/2003 94 ^ nrf_A_ /A -C ....1,1/ " D nn;en ?rPVKPv =7A19405&nrintable 6/16/2006 ASR Registration 1240619 Page 2 of 2 95 Comments Comments None Automated Letters. 10/12/2004 Construction Reminder, Reference 363362 10/10/2003 Authorization, Reference 305283 r "T7_ A ---/A _�C� _ LI. ,_� �: +.. +;,.,, , ro.,Tro�r7iiZQdnSRTT1TT1fA}l�P. F1 /1 Fin-w NADC ON i age, i vi i 96 Output from NADCON for station Hillsborough tower North American Datum Conversion NAD 27 to NAD 83 NADCON Program Version 2.11 O Transformation #: 1 Latitude NAD 27 datum values: 36 02 42.00000 NAD 83 datum values: 36 02'42.50765 NAD 83 - NAD 27 shift. values: 0.50765 . 15.647 Magnitude of total shift: �`UR�fa'i Region: Conus. Longitude 79 04 43.00000. 79 04 42.04290 0.95710(secs.) - 23.957 (meters) 28.614(meters) - hV://www.ngs.noaa-govlcgi-bin/nadco'n.prl 6/12/2003 Land Mobile Service License Data: ULS Database Search FRN: 0001958883 Callsign: WPZQ957 Callsign: WPZQ957 Radio Service: YG FRN: 0001958883 Status: Active Licensee: Piedmont Electric Coop Site: 1 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 1 Address: 2500 N. C. 86 SOUTH Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 City, ST, Zip: HILLSBOROUGH, NC 27278 P O Box: Attn: Roiiin Blanton Phone: 2104963200 Issue Date: 3/17/2005 1:25:21 PM Mobile: Y FAC ID: Expire Date: 2/24/2014 8:59:12 AM Auth: N Parent Station Ind: Printed: 3/18/2005 7:16:46 AM Applicant: C Parent Class Code: Last Change: 3/17/2005 1:25:21 PM Non - Parent Type: Elig: 90.35A1 Broadcast City, ST: , Site: 1 Tower ID: 1240619 Status Transmitter Street: 2500 Hwy 86 S. City, ST. Hillsborough, NC County: JACKSON Ground Elevation: 213.1 Height Structure: 106.7 Area Op Tx Ant: Site: 1 Antenna: 1 Type of Structure: TOWER Deg Min Sec Dir Latitude: 36 2 42.5 N Longitude: 79 4 42 W Radius Op: Area Op Lat Lon: Hgt Aat: 142.9 Hgt to Tip: 106.7 Irac: Site: 1 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 1 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 Frequency: 00000153.53000000 ERP: 296.2 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: FB2 Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 11K2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 1 Antenna: 17requency: 2 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 Frequency: 00000153.47000000 ERP: 296.2 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: FB2 Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type I llK2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 11 K2F3E Site: 1 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 3 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 Frequency: 00000153.60500000 ERP: 296.2 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: FB2 Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 11K2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Page 1 6/16/06 97 Land Mobile Service License Data: ULS Database Search FRN:.0001959883 Callsign:.WPZQ957 Site; 2 Tower ID: 1246681 Status: Type of Structure: TOWER Transmitter Street: 1.2 miles SE of Jericho, NC at intersection of Hwy. 620 and ' Deg Min Sec Dir City, ST. Jericho, NC Latitude: 36 16 52.8 N County: JACKSON Longitude: 79 20 49 W Ground Elevation: 224 Height Structure: 82.3 Radius Op: Area Op Tx Ant: Area Op Lat Lon: Site: 2 Antenna: 1 Hgt Aat:. 107.4 Site: 2 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 1 Hgt to Tip: 85.3 Irac: . Type Power Output: Mobile Units: I Frequency: 00000153.72500000 ERP: 192.2' Coser. Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: FB2 Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2124/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 11K2F 1 D 2 I1K2F2D 3 I IK2F3E Site: 2 Antenna: I Frequency: 2 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 Frequency: 00000153.65000000 ERP: 192.2 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: FB2 Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 I1K2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 I1K2F3E Site: 2 Antenna: I Frequency: 3 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 Frequency: 00000153.50000000 ERP: 192.2 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: FB2 Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24 /2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 11K2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 3 Tower ID: 1246571 Status: Type of Structure: TOWER Transmitter Street: 1500 feet SW of the intersection of hwathorne DR & Bright Deg Min Sec Dir City, ST: Brooksdale, NC Latitude: 36 22 15.4 N County: PERSON Longitude: 78 57 44 W Ground Elevation: 214 Height Structure: 82.3 Radius Op: Area Op Tx Ant: Area Op Lat Lon: Site: 3 Antenna: 1 Hgt Aat: 119.4 Hgt to Tip: 85.3 Irac: Page 2 6/16/06 W Land Mobile Service License Data: ULS Database Search FRN: 0001958883 Callsign: WPZQ957 Site: 3 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 1 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 Frequency: 00000153.47000000 ERP: 324.6 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: F132 Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2124/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital.Mod Type 1 11K2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 3 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 2 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 Frequency: 00000153.03500000 ERP: 324.6 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: FB2 . Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate. Digital Mod Type I 11K2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 3 Antenna: 1. Frequency: 3 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 1 Frequency: 00000153.42500000 ERP: 324.6 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 100 Class: FB2 Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 11K2F1D 2 11 K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 4 Tower ID: Status: Type of Structure: Transmitter Street: 2500 Hwy 86 S. Deg Min Sec Dir City, ST: Hillsborough, NC Latitude: 36 2 42.5 N County: JACKSON Longitude' 79 4 42 W Ground Elevation: 0 Height Structure: 0 Radius Op: 40 Area Op Tx Ant: Area Op Lat Lon: A Site: 4 Antenna: 1 Hgt Aat: Hgt to Tip: Site: 4 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 1 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 150 Frequency: 00000160.03500000 ERP: 40 Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Upper Band: Type First Use: Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate 1 11K2FID 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Irac: Coser: Class: MO Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Digital Mod Type W. Page 3 6/16/06 - Land Mobile Service License Data: ULS Database Search FRN: 0001958883 Callsign: WPZQ957 Site: 4 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 2 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 150 Frequency: 00000159.81000000 ERP: 40 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Class: MO Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 llK2F1D 2 11 K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 4 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 3 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 150 Frequency: 00000160.08000000 EP P: 40 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Class: MO Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 IIK2FID 2 11K2F2D 3 l lK2F3E Site: 5 Tower ID: Status: Type of Structure: Transmitter Street: 1.2 miles SE of Jericho, NC at intersection of Hwy. 620 and Deg Min Sec Dir City, ST: Jericho, NC Latitude: 36 16 52.8 N County: JACKSON Longitude: 79 20 49 W Ground Elevation: 0 Height Structure: 0 Radius Op: 40 Area Op Tx Ant: Area Op Lat Lon: A Site: 5 Antenna: 1 Hgt Aat: Hgt to Tip: Site: 5 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 1 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 150 Frequency: 00000158.26500000 ERP: 40 Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Upper Band: Type. First Use: Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate 1 llK2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F311 Site: 5 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 2 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 150 Frequency: 00000158.22000000 ERP: 40 Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Upper Band: Type First Use: Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate 1 I1K2FID 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Irac: Coser: Class: MO Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Digital Mod Type Coser: Class: MO Date First Use: 2124/2004 ' Digital Mod Type Page 4 6116106 100 Land Mobile Service License Data: ULS Database Search FRN: 0001958883 Callsign: WPZQ957 Site: 5 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 3 Type Power Output: Mobile Units:. 150 Frequency: 00000160.02000000 ERP: 40 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Class: MO Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 11K2F1D 2 l lK2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 6 Tower ID: Status: Type of Structure: Transmitter Street: 1500 feet SW of the intersection of hwathome DR & Bright Deg Min Sec Dir City, ST: Brooksdale, NC Latitude: 36 22 15.4 N County: PERSON Longitude: 78 57 44 W Ground Elevation: 0 Height Structures 0 Radius Op: 40 Area Op Tx Ant: Area Op Lat Lon: A Site: 6 Antenna: 1 Hgt Aat: Hgt to Tip: Irac: Site: 6 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 1 Type Power'Output: Mobile Units: 150 Frequency: 00000158.19000000 ERP: 40 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Class: MO Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 - 11K2F1D 2 11 K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 6 Antenna: ! Frequency: 2 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 150 Frequency: 00000159.84000000 ERP: 40 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Class: MO Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/24/2004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 11K2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 11K2F3E Site: 6 Antenna: 1 Frequency: 3 Type Power Output: Mobile Units: 150 Frequency: 00000158.14500000 ERP: 40 Coser: Frequency Carrier: Power Output: 40 Class: MO Upper Band: Type First Use: Date First Use: 2/2412004 Emission Sequence Emission Code Digital Mod Rate Digital Mod Type 1 11K2F1D 2 11K2F2D 3 l lK2F3E Page 5 6116/06 101 r4±! l mr7=7 wK'i:%t:+e LLLL 1 � i � Llt��y �'+• -�-t�. ���Yj I 4'Y ��j�c�v �c i �r t i �'I � �ii�..y���,��1"1r�i :_ �" ►Jt� i �jR w �Ir� :�1 7 _ tt L }zf '�. lv . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 V . A lot fr Q Q- -tax WAS -, - i --� - , lw&-� Homeland Security Critical Infrastructure Status u � Piedmont Electric membership Corporation Ow— A - 104 `.Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. rror.�.i Enei.e.�m{ �n'iO�-E�celric Poxer k Cummmk.�fOns Homeland Security Critica, - -Afrastructure Status 105 Piedmont Electric Membership Corp HOMELAND SECURITY CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE STATUS - ORANGE COUNTY Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation (PEMC) is planning to implement a VHF trunked radio system. to provide coverage for the PEMC service area. The trunked radio system is to replace an existing VHF conventional radio system. PEMC requires a radio system that will optimize existing frequency spectrum and provide increased voice channel capacity and data functionality. This will require the installation of three (3) new towers. The radio system will consist of a VHF trunked repeater equipment, VHF top antenna, transmission line for the VHF radio system, and microwave dishes to interconnect the three tower sites. It should be noted that the installation of the microwave system is critical to the functionality of the trunked radio system. One of the towers is a proposed 350 -foot self - supporting tower to be installed in Hillsborough, North Carolina. The other two towers are located in Person and Caswell Counties and have already had their permits approved by the appropriate County Planning Boards. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has defined the electric utility system as part of the critical infrastructure facility. This infrastructure has been defined as any facility or combination of facilities, which if severely damaged, would have a significant impact on the ability to serve large quantities of customers for an extended period of time. These damages would have a detrimental impact to the reliability or operability of the energy grid, or would cause significant risk to public health and safety. In order to properly operate and maintain an electric utility grid, electric utilities require the use of a functional radio communications system/network. The radio communications system must function on a daily.basis as well"as during emergency conditions such as storms, hurricanes, floods, and other disasters. The North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) has established guidelines for electric utilities to protect critical infrastructure. A copy of this document, Security Guidelines for the Electric Sector and a copy of the Critical Infrastructure and Key Assets report to Congress on October 1, 2004, is attached for information. Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 1 of 1 106 Security Guidelines for the Electricity Sector: Physical-Security NERC Guideline Guideline Title: Physical Security Version: 1.0 Revision Date: Effective Date: June 14, 2002 Purpose: Each company should consider implementing physical security measures to safeguard personnel and prevent unauthorized access to critical equipment, systems, material, and information at critical facilities. Applicability: This guideline applies to facilities and functions that are considered critical to the support of the electricity infrastructure and the overall operation of the individual company. Each company is free to define and identify those facilities and functions it believes to be critical, keeping in mind that the ability to mitigate the loss of a facility through redundancies may make that facility less critical than others. A critical facility may be defined as any facility or combination of facilities, if severely damaged or destroyed, would have a significant impact on the ability to serve large quantities of customers for an extended period of time, would have a detrimental impact to the reliability or operability of the energy grid, or would cause significant risk to public health and safety. Guideline Statement: This guideline recommends "best practices" for the electricity sector in the area of physical security for facilities or functions identified as critical. It may be used in conjunction with the Vulnerability and Risk Assessment guideline, which assists companies in identifying critical facilities. Table of Contents:. Version 1.0 Security Guideline: Physical Security June 14, 2002 Page 1 of 4 North American Electric Reliability Council 107 Security Guidelines for the Electricity Sector: Physical Security Guideline Detail: Physical security typically comprises five distinct elements, or systems: • deterrence • detection • assessment • communications • response Together, these elements provide a consistent "systems approach" to protecting critical assets. Each company should prioritize its critical facilities and assets; characterize risks based on factors such as prior history of incidents, threat warnings from law enforcement agencies, system redundancies, overall operating requirements, etc. Each company also should consider.an inspection and survey program to review existing security systems and to make. recommendations for appropriate changes. (See guideline for conducting vulnerability assessments.) In determining the types of physical. security systems required for critical facilities, companies should consider the following: • fencing and gates to restrict access to the facility for both safety and security purposes; • limiting access to authorized persons through measures such as unique keying systems, "smart locks," access card systems, or the use of security personnel; • access control measures to identify and process all personnel, visitors, vendors, and contractors, (i.e. photo ids, visitors passes, contractor ids) to be displayed while on company property; . alarm systems to monitor entry into control rooms or other critical facilities; perimeter alarm systems to monitor unauthorized intrusion into the facility; • recorded CCTV systems which can provide local or remote surveillance capability of a given facility; Version 1.0 Security Guideline: Physical Security June 14, 2002 Page 2 of 4 - North American Electric Reliability Council 108 ' Security Guidelines for the Electricity Sector: Physical Security • roving security patrols or fixed station security staffing; • alarms, CCTV, and other security systems reporting to the facility or to a central security station which can then be evaluated and company personnel or law enforcement authorities dispatched to investigate a potential problem; • vehicle barriers; • projectile barriers; • security survey program; • adequate lighting; • signage; and • a comprehensive security awareness program. Physical security systems should be augmented based on changes in threat levels, scenarios, and categories. In designing a physical security system, the objective of the aggressor should be considered. The four major objectives in describing an aggressor's behavior are: • Destroying or damaging critical facilities, property, or equipment, • Stealing or damaging critical equipment, materials, or information, • Posing a threat to the safety of personnel or customers, and Creating adverse publicity. Exceptions: Certified Products/Tools: Version 1.0 Security Guideline: Physical Security June 14, 2002 Page 3 of 4 North American Electric Reliability Council 109 Security Guidelines for the Electricity Sector: Physical Security Related Documents: — Security Guidelines for the Electricity Sector: Guideline Overview — Security Guidelines for the Electricity Sector: • Vulnerability and Threat Assessment • Threat Response • . Emergency Plans • Continuity of Business Processes • Communications • Cyber Security • Employment Background Screeping • Protecting Potentially Sensitive Information — An Approach to Action for the Electricity Sector, Version 1, NERC, June 2001, http: /Iwww.nere.com — Threat Alert Levels and Physical Response Guidelines, NERC, November, 2001, http: / /www.nerc.com — Threat Alert Levels and Cyber Response Guidelines, NERC, March 2002, http: / /www.nerc.com Revision History: Date Version Number Reason /Comments Version 1.0 Security Guideline: Physical Security June 14, 2002 Page 4 of 4 North American Electric Reliability Council Alternate Tower Considerations W' Piedmont Electric m Membership Corporation 110 IT 92 is Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. rmr.:4e,W E� o io .g Serrket- Ekclrie Po.vsr k Canmmknio�s let call Alternate Tower Consider» ins Piedmont Electric Membership Corp ALTERNATE TOWER CONSIDERATIONS — ORANGE COUNTY Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation (PEMC) is planning to implement a VHF trunked radio system to provide coverage for the PEMC service area. The tnmked radio system is to replace an existing VHF conventional radio system. PEMC requires a radio system that will optimize existing frequency spectrum and provide increased voice channel capacity and data functionality. This will require the installation of three (3) new towers. The radio system will consist of a VHF h unked repeater equipment, VHF top antenna, transmission line for the VHF radio system, and microwave dishes to interconnect the three tower sites. It should be noted that the installation of the microwave system is critical to the functionality of the franked radio system. One of the towers is a proposed 350 -foot self - supporting tower to be installed in Hillsborough, North Carolina. The other two towers are located in Person and Caswell Counties and have already had their permits approved by the appropriate County Planning Boards. As part of the Orange County ordinance process, a search was completed to determine if other tower sites within a 2 -mile radius of the PEMC Hillsbrough site would meet the requirements for the PEMC radio system. A comparison of the tower data for these sites as well as the data for the proposed 350 -foot PEMC tower is listed below. Tower Ground Tower Height Available Tower type Elevation (feet) (feet) Antenna Height feet Proposed 698 350 350 Self- support PEMC Tower American 635 235 200 or less Guyed Tower Crown Piney 629 157 120 or less Monopole Grove Crown 671 178 110 or less Monopole Hillsbrough Global Signal 640 160 150 or less Monopole Laws Site Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 1 of 3 111 Alternate Tower Considerk ,ns Piedmont Electric Membership Corp A radio propagation study was completed for all of the listed tower sites. It should be noted that because of terrain features, the coverage is not an exact circle and the coverage radius is an average of the propagation study. The results of the study are listed below. A copy of the studies is included in this document. Tower Coverage Radius 'les Proposed PEMC Tower 20 American Tower 14 Crown Piney Grove 12 Crown Hillsbrou 13 Global Si al Laws Site 13 The best coverage for PEMC is the proposed 350 -foot tower. Further study of the propagation studies show that the proposed PEMC tower covers Orange County and surrounding areas that comprise the service territory of PEMC. Each of the existing tower sites in the study has coverage deficiencies that would have a severe impact on the radio coverage require by PEMC. This is due to structure height, antenna height, ground elevation and terrain features. Typically, leased tower sites are not maintained at the same level as PEMC maintenance. procedures require. This includes but not limited to proper grounding, lightning protection and emergency power systems. Having the proposed tower at the PEMC facility, PEMC will properly maintain the tower and the associated emergency power system, especially during emergency conditions. This includes but not limited to changing the oil, fueling the generator,and making preventative maintenance inspections during emergency operating conditions. Security Issues The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has defined the electric utility system as part of the critical infrastructure facility. This infrastructure has been defined as any facility or combination of facilities, which if severely damaged, would have a significant impact on the ability to serve large quantities of customers for an extended period of time. These damages would have a detrimental impact to the reliability or operability of the energy grid, or would cause significant risk to public health and safety. In order to properly operate and maintain an electric utility grid, electric utilities require the use of a functional radio communications system/network. The radio communications system must function on a daily basis as well as during emergency conditions such as storms, hurricanes, floods, and other disasters. The North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) has established guidelines for electric utilities to protect critical infrastructure. A copy of this document, Security Guidelines for the Electric Sector: Physical Security is included in Tab 6 of this Application Package. Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 2 of 3 112 Alternate Tower Consider:. ,ns Piedmont Electric Membership Corp Having the tower installed at the PEMC facility will allow PEMC to control access to the site and best protect their critical assets. Summary Based on the propagation studies, Homeland Security and NERC Guidelines, it is highly recommended that approval be granted for the construction of the proposed 350 -foot self - supporting tower at the PEMC facility. Prepared by: Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. 6/28/2006 Page 3 of 3 113 At¢xander Wty gngnee7ing Inc. Rgdmont&cbic Mgmbus?dp Corporation 25 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 Hillsbrough Towers - 37 dBu Contour 114 7lausday,.M4larch 02, 2006 ml 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 Brown- Pmposed 350 . ftPEMC,Towe4 Red- ExM%.CmwnPineyGrove Tower - CM*Bmdm - Stye B%da s Hidmp LD1mt Card Map Scale: 1:800000 1" =12.63 mi V111 Size:- 53.99 x 81.62 mi Alexander LUV Bng�neepixg Inc. PiedawmtBlecbic MgmbersWp Corpordon 25 a 15 10 5 0 5 i0 15 20 25 Hillsbrough Towers - 37 dBu Contour 115 Dwsky, March 02, 2446 10.2 I� I. ffd 40. 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 Browlt - Proposed 350 f . PEMC Towe 4 Bhz - Existing Global Signal Law Tower � CM*Bmft . &* Mika � E4m* Ulm W Map Scale: 1:800000 1" =12.63 mi - VIH Size: 53.99 x 81.62 mi Al¢ mthr Uflity.Ercgca vft Inc. 25 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 II° RgdawntEloebic Mono ¢rAp Corporafon Hillsbrough Towers - 37 dBu Contour 116 1 ednasduy, March 02, 2006 d 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 3 40 Brown - Proposed MIC 3501Towe4 Green -Exi# American Tower - CamtyBord= - Sm Bps frghwgs - LatlLon W Map Scale: 1:800000 1" =12.63 mi VJH Size: 53.99 x 81.62 mi Alexander U&Tty gngneeaing Inc. . PiedrnontMectiic 1Plembersldp Corporaion 25 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 Hillsbrough Towers - 37 dBu Contour WE WE N II 117 Wednesday, March 01, 2006 mi 40 30 20 10 0 10 20 30 40 Brown - Pmposed 350 ft. PEMC Towe4 Pink - Existing Cmwn Hilbbmngh Nve r - C=q Bm*n - State BOWW ® fftdmrfl idlm Gdd Map SWe:1:800000 1" =12.63 mi VJH Size: 53.99 x 81.62 mi Balloon Test Results Piedmont Electric J Membership Corporation u `. Alexander Utility Engineering, Inc. Pjormionol Englnm6nS Sen ;;EkkdAc Pour 8 Communioodonc Its tax- 118 119 PROPOSED COMMUNICATIONS TOWER FACILITY ' '� Piedmont Electric A 1xichst.r a En( Membership Corporation coopenttive 350.0'SELF SUPPORT COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY As proposed at the Piedmont EXEC 2500 Highlvay 86 South Hillsborough, N.C. Orange County, N.C. As Per Plans Submitted GRAHAM B. HERRING, GRI. PREPARED BY: GRAHAM HERRING COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE 8052 GREY OAK DRIVE, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27615 120 BALLOON PHOTO PRESENTATION Proposed 350.0' Self- Support Communications Facility To be located on the East side of Highw486 South At the Piedmont EMC campus south of Hillsboro, NC Specifications.- The balloon is a Blimp Type as pictured and is 10.0 feet long 3.5 feet in daameter, "cigar shaped" and Folds 90 cu. Feet of kelauns The balloon as pictured is tethered at Three Hundred FTy 350.0 feet in lreigkt/altatude above ground at the centerline of the proposed tower facility location The pi inres that follow are taken with a 1L0 mega p&d dWgifal camera with the leas set at 60tunt to represent a °Normar view ; that is representative of what a person would see atgraund le6d ifviewing the balloon at similar and representaGlve d1stances. °More: Some i frhe phorograpltr of the hulloou is_ • ;oomedl %lens to dh pla the bollootr in plaee iv/rrre necessan. wber► the subject bddfloon is nol risible on Me 64ntat lens se+tfin. GRAHAMHERRING COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE PROVIDING PROFESSIONAL SPECIALTY SERVICES TO THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY A,.,;a of Visibility Map Piedmont Eli_, �. 121 ang� Q + F r vi is 1j PDT R W + : �op{ar Ridges" • FRAI � . 70 �' t RIII • ��� •y+� �.'+,� i . `l.� ';c• =.ti. I � DEER HILL •!N >�g ANA �??oCounty Subsidiary rison N Photo Sim #I N� , _i • i _...,; D 1 ' Looking S /F_st to site t 4� � 1. �• 1 ART:_ �r N 1 R 1862_ 33 I it, j NV J 11 A° ovsel ity : NV SO �c a n "1 4, 11 Photo Sim#2 \ s Piedmont El41C a / Looking East to site es s0 mrt y { o_.._....._ i j V NV `Ra�.� NV pgKE , SCAR�T MtxJ AIN Ro ree Ston Ck' I 'j' 80 ,y� V CEIa�ARPgSS + CHEYENNO /' A, �Ptrsyhom Pondbarft FU �t g PWE.HILL O 1998 DeLorme. Street tlas USA ' Mag 14.00 .Thu Apr 2710:04 2006 Local Road O Point of Interest Scale 1:31,250 (at center) Major Cormector ® Geographic Feature ` 2000 Feet i State Route Park/Reservation 1000 Meters Intetstate/Limited Access Exit/Gas US Highway ExitA -odghV ❑ Exit ExitlFood Lrx. uUnty/Pipe EAVIDther Services Railroad };r =xr Water MapCard - Print your custom • Page 1 of 2 122 0 0.5 MI http:/ /www.mapeard.com/maps/print local. asp? print =l& scale = 5.08 &layer— DRG &lat= 36.... 4/27/2006 u y _ on +7 T yyd+ "k r.iY r rw At VIA; "MW AS r E2a3 1 Mat "Vx°ai r aU"l' r �" SPIN i i S •--, i' <i r,� .iG!r a'�'�3^: 51,1',.: `rs TA " o- t ati, el, effi t S4 P x J ST h�1 � w 1 pow s t x �J r rz,�. y� - i �•.3L,y t ..si..f Szti'n-.-- '.,'?- fhi"T- - - f _._.....�:m�aa�7,� . . 125 rr' ; Y 127 128 129 0 M '--� 'y.: .. .. '� it 131 132 �- /�� ------------\ � s � . . - \?.\j��� �- /�� ------------\ � s � . . ,2 ��%1'' �i to - �h� - _ �c � � , 7i ��� a� y... ,� ' , ,� �����) ii i . a �� � X �A Y►. :r��.�`f � - �. � � �t�lfr � Sa - ? J�� j i ;�t . �, .. _. �� V� 7 7 i- '�'�. � � ;t�h} ��t r- ��r ..Y i - � -I 1' - I4 `` %, _',+� (j �.I j�.�. ��� ;:� t rk: �wgti: �' ix _ , .. .A 1 � Y�l.�.. � 1 aY - 1 t� 4 - � 'I:- ''f f i1 ` �( i e M a f .y� .'�'�. I�t �C ~ - "; z �' ,f. N��'� � tji � � ;� , ,� ��,� � � t . _ .... _ . =� �� �,•4� � �; � �� c iv '� � °"" � r t� w.. � c ,, .��`a �j., ? >� ���r � �.� �� ;�' _� _ r�`�rt�-. _ _ '''s�, �, y� �} r �t5' vr�t..'+l� p t��lrY �.I �� 1yj4' ,� �� ,�. y„�b lV _ .i.. I, !. '� I4 �- ' Ap /I_ t � i' �1 ,,. f f:', � r �,- ,�., _ �, r: 'WA � x [T ''�`' 'i ..� }. . � i ,r'. r�; �` ,� �: �� � y� ��fr �7 l�. z- t ��i 6 4 T7� "�. - 1� =[ i _ -' ., a, ,�,. S __ '� z _ � r.� ��'�� (i 1i s'_ 2 .c �� i' , `�u�- . �- 136 March 30, 2006 Dear Orange County Property Owner: This letter is to notify you that Piedmont Electric Membership Corp. is planning on replacing its existing 200' (ft) communication tower with a new 350' (ft) communication tower on its headquarters property located at 2500 Hwy 86 South. Piedmont Electric Membership Corp. -will make application to the Orange County Planning and Inspections Department for ari amendment to the Planned Development -Special Use Permit to include the new tower. You are being notified as one of the nearby property owners that must be notified according to the Orange County planning regulations. According to the regulations, Piedmont Electric Membership Corp. must provide a balloon test to determine what visual impacts might be created by this new tower. Therefore, this letter is notifying you that on Saturday, April 22, 2006, from gam to 12pm, a balloon will be floated at the elevation of the new tower. In case of inclement weather, a back -up date of Monday, April 24, 2006 from Sam to 12pm will be set for the test. A balloon test notification sign will be posted at the front of the subject property with directional arrows posted at intersections and nearby roads. Piedmont is required to fly a brightly colored balloon at the height of the proposed tower as well as notifying all landowners within 1,000' (ft) of their property no less than fourteen (14) days in advance of the test date. As a property owner you will have the opportunity to observe this test. The new tower is being constructed by Piedmont Electric Membership Corp. to improve the two -way radio coverage in our service area. The radio system will be part of the Homeland Security services required by the fleet of "First Responders" who are called upon in emergencies or disasters. Your cooperation and assistance on this critical matter will be appreciated. Sincerely yours, Robin Blanton, P.E. Manager of Engineering Piedmont EMC ,e ,�yy� ' Y �'� l'�, rye . ►y�� >t .ice i 41 MV jIVA 14 1 r � 2�a.`yS�L�,.,�•y !.; �.,r� r � *"�311,,�s¢�it``i r "I � ptf ��"+th�y. 't %1'^' -i,�;v -'Ci,� +fy "�.'�, � ��jct' "'i' ��' •'(`�,'� =G� -a�: >� � �t.- `�td��l�� ors{ r.F v; F :i'f -�cw �.1� �'/'���• �'t' '��� /} �p�b�,.}c� ss }�f��i�e? r�i�'e F� �i�a4w� }L,��IL� y�te. -.' *"+a: hltt t�A,Pft � t��Lr� lit }A a� a` ��'�`,t, �' §'� \ I ♦J " ,�� y.j�� r. .+ e Sty- :fs ff tt�i� Lh kryifty s %- a it>? RV �i yp �:��i 1Ri. t�� `�itit , '' h s ` ,� t- / •'� , •! � f� 4 ?�{fr7pt -+ '�' � ��� - -;� � s�L�`l+fT t l_r d�� 'R `�'.cr�j�;�:}•.,� s'ir !� { i� 1`��lilr:gf. i �,�s r >,'S':`- j��r }t��. Q )� e �� rei 'T'j 1 cZ� a i {i s, +r •• a a.'J * '� � ♦�. 'p�1s�i�tj -, y ;`� f^'�. �'>A`JOl a ba -r= �,a ,'L ?i3r'*. 4F � {'�. ,"a5 S °r. {'r�i �p?r�� 1 —1 °� 7•�' t S ��Frt � g'I',r I �is. s �1I, �N � � {. � r C'_t: , , .� � Yap• t ti. t O7�.?T - �I I r lv _ A i oU_'?J Jl 13 f [.�, J f � I {0 ➢ � J � ��� � � f y !" e'" � .Y 'f Y ; _ _ __ � .._. P 4 c1 jk ''r a w P6:' t� +�} � ` [ - r�i.I'.;�Y a L l t r mf � �IVt ilnf��'Fij� + �� 1 � t �� �t '+.� �� � � 5 �� ���I � � I p ✓•' ,� I��-t •�' �- cl T �, \) ro � / {/I S� 1 l° S5j A' ����1 � � s� " +''1 � 5{� '...�a ro etbrP a c � t ) � L t�1 4 _ s• �� Sly Pe � f Y 1 � I - _ - ..... 5f T a'y u 5 .. I u s �- � �. j � � t ,�F y+ _ ✓ J ` } a ,t n _j ORANuE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS 140 A RESOLUTION DIRECTING PLANNING STAFF TO PREPARE A RESPONSE TO REQUEST BY PIEDMONT ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION WHEREAS, Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation located at 2500 NC Highway 86 South, Hillsborough, North Carolina, has made application for construction of a new 350 foot telecommunications tower to, replace an existing 220 foot tower; and WHEREAS, construction of said tower requires a rezoning and issuance of Class A Special Use Permit by the Orange County Board of Commissioners; and WHEREAS; issuance of Class A Special Use Permits must be preceded by a quasi-judicial public hearing conducted by the Orange County Board of Commissioners and Orange County Planning Board: and WHEREAS, Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation has requested a special public hearing and expedited review process, citing such issues as homeland security, Federal Aviation Administration permit expiration, potential co- location of emergency services communications equipment, and a desire to complete construction prior to the onset of winter weather; and WHEREAS, public hearings on special use and zoning petitions are generally held on a quarterly schedule. due to the logistics of adjoining property owner notification, newspaper legal advertisements, agenda preparation,. Planning Board attendance, and allowing ample time for public comment; and WHEREAS, the next scheduled quarterly public hearing date'is November 20, 2006; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners desires to give full consideration to the Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation request; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Orange County Board of Commissioners directs the Orange County Planning Staff to prepare a proposed process and timeline for an expedited public hearing to occur at a regular Board meeting prior to November 20, 2006; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Staff in its proposal, also address the .pros and cons of the request, flight patterns of migratory birds, the number and distribution of similar towers in the County, and such other issues as may be added by the Orange County Board of Commissioners in its consideration of this resolution. Upon motion of Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner ral the foregoing resolutio was adopted this the 12th day of September, 200 I, Donna Baker, Clerk to the Board of Commissioners for the County of Orange, North Carolina, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of so much of the proceedings of said Board at a meeting held on September 12, 2006, as relates in any way to the adoption of the foregoing and that said proceedings are recorded in the minutes of said Board. WITNESS my hand and tl `county, thiVYd Clerk to the Board of Commissioners PIEDMONT ELECTRIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER REZONING AND CLASS "A" SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL PROCESS TIME LINE Application Filed August 11 Application found to be complete August 23 BOCC decision on the Piedmont Electric request September 12 For an Expedited Review BOCC Abstract to request a Public Hearing date September 12 And to approve public notice (Staff prepares the legal advertisement.) Rezoning and SUP to DRC August 31 and Sept. 14 Property Posted September 15 Property owner's Mail Out September 15 Legal Ad to Newspaper September 15 BOCC Abstract due September 19 Legal Ad Publish Dates September 20 and 27 BOCC Packet distribution September 29 Lamk E. psi ,$i,� �,-yi 5K 101-1 R-lanning Board Abstract due October 23 Planning Board Packet distribution Planning Board Recommendation BOCC Abstract due BOCC Decision Fl:tmtp =.triedmr,M electric:'limelim kdrx- October 25 November 1 October 31 November 14 141 .' . bg Comer for muniawswNas 142 For over a 1 A Decades Specializing in Placing Municinalttles In Control Local Government's Bridge to the 21 st Century Web Site: www.telecomsol.com E -Mail: Imonroelftycan.rr.com 202 KELLY GREEN CT, ROLESVUIE NORTH CAROLINA 27501 ��a: l414156P -395 es l41416�' -5448 Specializing in "Regulating Towers 4 Wireless Facilities Sent as Attachment to E -Mai I September 20, 2006 Re: Application of Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation to construct. a 350' self- supporting lattice replacement tower at 2500 Highway 86 South in Hillsborough, North Carolina Mr. Glen Bowles Orange County Planning Department 306 Revere Rd PO Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Mr. Bowles: Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation (PEMC) has submitted an application to construct a three hundred & fifty foot (350') self- supporting lattice replacement tower located at 2500 Highway 86 South in Hillsborough, North Carolina. NEED: The technical need for the requested three hundred & fifty foot (359) self - supporting (i.e. non - guyed) tower to replace the existing two hundred & twenty foot (220') tower located on PEMC's property has been proven, given the intended use of the facility in conjunction with its location, including the need for the 350' height. This has been proven through the provision of RF Propagation Studies and related narratives, as well as an RF coverage analysis of the effects of using four (4) exiting towers in lieu of erecting a replacement tower. The need relates to the ability to create a secure communications network under the guidelines of the North American Electric Reliability Council in compliance with Homeland Security Guidelines which were issued in response to the events of 9/11, to enable seeniless, reliable and secure radio communications 143 using a trunked two -way VHFcommunicotionssystem. The system would include microwave-technology 1) to interconnect the three (3) facilities; as well as to 2) provide the backbone of a system to control major functions of the electrical distribution system through the use of telemetric technology; and 3) enable the rapid restoration of service in the event of a disaster. Specifically, the Applicant is seeking to finish the last of a 3- component (i.e. tower) project to enable a trunked two -way VHF communications system, the other two components of which have already been approved by neighboring Person and Caswell Counties, this proposed facility being the single remaining component needed for the system to be complete and function as needed and to bring Piedmont Electric Cooperative into compliance with the Homeland Security Guidelines.. SITING vis -a -vis ALTERNATIVES TO ERECTING A (Replacement) TOWER The Applicant investigated four (4) possible alternatives to erecting the Proposed replacement tower (i.e. existing towers). However, these have been found and shown not to meet the needs of a secure and reliable communications system as needed, for the reasons previously stated, including: 1) not providing the best coverage to assure the efficient and reliable provision of electrical service, as well as assuring the most expeditious restoration of service in the event of an emergency; and 2) not providing the best security, especially when dealing with something as critical as the electrical distribution network; The facility would be erected nearby to the existing 220' tower, it is intended to replace and is sited so as to be in the middle of a large tract of woods to help mitigate the visual impact of the base and the related on- tower- mounted facilities. RECOMMENDATION For the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that the County approve the request for a Special Use permit for this facility in the most expeditious time frame reasonably possible with the following conditions: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS 1) Removal Bond. The provision of a $75;000 Performance and Removal Bond prior to the issuance of the Building Permit. 2) Height: The lattice tower shall be limited to 350' above pre - disturbance or pre- construction ground level, i.e. no berm shall be permitted. 144 3) Lighting: Since it will be more than 199' in height, the tower will require lighting. To minimize the effects of the otherwise unnecessary and preventable "ground . scatter" effect of lighting, Piedmont Electric Cooperative shall use technology that either shields the light from being able to be seen from the ground or that will prevent it from being seen at 12 degrees vertical height for a distance of 1 mile. 4) Once Piedmont has met all the conditions of the permit and any other requirements of the'County and a building permit has been issued, they must notify the County's consultant if an inspection is required which is not performed by the County. 5) At the completion of construction the Applicant must notif the County's consultant and provide proof that all inspections have been satisfactorily completed and the project. is ready for a final on -site inspection. Upon passing the final inspection by the County's consultant a recommendation regarding the issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall be made. 6) After the County's receipt of CMS's final invoice, all moneys owed the County must have been paid before the facility shall be allowed to be used to transmit or receive. 7) Piedmont shall not be permitted to actually use the facility to transmit or receive data until the Certificate of Occupancy or its functional equivalent has been issued or risk forfeiting its Permit. This constitutes our recommendation to the County as regards the issuance of a Special Use Permit, including conditions, to Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation for this proposed site. If you have questions, please contact Jackie Hicks at (919) 622 -5448 or me at (919) 562 -3945. Sincerely, P-S. (J mt*) .tone (Electronic Signature) L.S. Monroe cc: Ms. Jackie Hicks, Director; ,Mid- Atlantic Region 145 . Notes from the Thursday, January 26, 2006 Annual Telecommunications Meeting Meeting started at 2:00 p.m. in the Planning and Agricultural Center Food Lab. Those in attendance include: Glenn Bowles, Eddie Kirk, and Robert Davis — Orange County Planning and Inspections Department Rusty Monroe and Jackie Hicks — The Center for Municipal Solutions Todd Jones — Orange County Information Technology Stephon J. Bowens and Saju Kallolickal — Cingular Wireless Robin Blanton and Wes Smith Piedmont EMC Bryce Pickens, Tony. Queen, and Daryl Teed — Crown Castle David Newton — Faulk & Foster — Clear Wire After a short introduction, Robin Blanton discussed Piedmont's desire to construct a 350' replacement tower on their property on NC 86 South. They want to improve radio coverage as fall south as Chatham County. The tower is part of a service area improvement, which includes new towers in Caswell and Person Counties. They want to be able to triangulate with the new towers for better telemetry and communication services and data sharing between their various offices and field personnel. They have been approach by the State Highway Patrol to co- locate on the new tower. In addition, their old tower in the Hurdle Mills areas, just south of the Person County line, will be available for co- locating public and private wireless antennas. Cingular Wireless is presently looking at two sites. One, in the Buckhorn Road area for co- location ( #368 -457), and the other for a new, 199' tower site ( #368 -400B in the Whitfield Road area. There are other areas in Orange County where Cingular has poor coverage. Financial and budgetary constraints limit their ability to construct in those areas during 2006. Clear Wire would like to co- locate on a county -owned tower on Eno Mountain. They will provide Orange County with a proposed lease document. The site is within the Town of Hillsborough's Extra Territorial Zoning Jurisdiction. They will apply to the Town for an Electrical permit and to Orange County for a lease arrangement. Crown Castle is looking at up to eight sites in Orange County to build monopole towers from 175' to 199' high. They have no secured land leases at this time. They suppied us with a map and other documents locating their general search radii. Todd Jones discussed Orange County's interest in point -to -point microwave communication opportunities, which could be leveraged as part of the permitting process. There will be many considerations, particularly line of sight capabilities with other receiving county microwave stations. We current pay around $18,000 a year for a single run of leased fiber, and we looking at over $100K per year in interconneting our major compuses with lease fiber. Any microwave opportunities would reduce or eliminate recurring charges, which would help stretch the County's budgets considerably. The proposed Piedmont Electric Tower is particularly intriguing. 146 �iasi[�r�•�i� September 26, 2006 Mr. Glen Bowles Orange County Planning . P.O.Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Dear Glen, This letter is to confirm the receipt of your email notification of the pending tower deconstruction and replacement at the Piedmont Electric Co -op office on NC 86 within the transition area. The information you sent, along with a map detailing the 1000' notification area was sent to the Town Board and Planning Board members. At this time the town has no formal continents. Thank you for sharing this information. Sincerely, Margaret A. Hauth, AICP Planning Director WARD & MISENHEIMER December 3, 2006 Orange County Planning Department Mr. Glenn Bowles, Planner II 306 F Revere Road Hillsborough, NC 27278 Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation Mr. Robin Blanton, PE Manager of Engineering 2500 NC 86 South Hillsborough, NC 27278 Mr. Bowles & Mr. Blanton, /q7 6224 FAYETTEVILLE ROAD, SUITE 101 DURHAM, NC 27713 BUS. (919) 544 -7171 TOLL FREE (877) 668 -0800 FAX (919) 361 -9960 In accordance with your request I narrowed the scope of the original assignment to determining the effect that the proposed tower height increase will have on the adjacent and surrounding home values. This report is subject to the proposed improvements being completed as set forth in the attached report. At the time of site inspection, I observed the existing 150' tower located on a 34 acre site owned by Piedmont Electric. The proposed 350' tower will also be located on the subject's 34 acre site. The closest adjacent home site is approximately 550' from the tower location. Note: This report is not an appraisal of the proposed tower. To appraise the tower would involve establishing an opinion of value for the proposed tower. My assignment was to evaluate and report my opinion as a State Certified General Appraiser of the tower's height increase on the adjacent & surrounding properties. What Impact would increasing the existing tower height to the proposed 350' have on surrounding property values? Issue Number 1 Existing Tower — At the time of my inspection, I found that Piedmont Electric has an existing 150' tower on site. This makes the impact analysis difficult due to the fact that Piedmont Electric is not adding a tower where there had not been a tower but has proposed increasing the tower height. If there was a tower impact on adjacent property values, the impact has been on going from the time the original tower was installed. Issue Number 2 External Commercial Nuances — The majority of homes adjacent to the Piedmont Electrics 34 acre campus are located in Joppa Oaks. On the North border of Joppa Oaks neighborhood is an active railroad. The rail line is located approximately .4 miles north of the Piedmont Electric tower. It has been my experience that an active railroad will have a profound impact on surround property value. Thus extracting the future impact of a taller tower from the ongoing active railroad's impact on surrounding property values is difficult if not impossible. Each Office Is Independently Owned And Operated. /Yf Page 2 Piedmont Electric Issue Number 3 Changing Traffic Pattern — As you are keenly aware, the traffic pattern on HWY 86 has changed a great deal in the last four years. This is due in large part to the newly developed commercial complex which is now home to Super Walmart & Home Depot. Joppa Oaks Neighborhood: From 1/1/2000 to 12/1/2002, the average price per SF for Joppa Oaks was $52 per SF. The sales data review from 1/1/2005 to 11/24/2006 for Joppa Oaks indicated an average price per SF of $49. Ones first conclusion is the increased traffic patterns have had a negative impact on the Joppa Oaks property values. That conclusion would not tell the whole story of Joppa Oaks. Sixteen of the twenty homes sold in Joppa Oaks from 1 /1/2005 to 11/24/2006 were manufactured single or double wide mobile homes. This ratio of manufactured homes to stick build homes is approximately 90 percent manufactured homes to 10 percent stick built. Unfortunately manufactured homes do not appreciate similarly to their stick built counterparts. My conclusion: the lot the manufactured homes sit upon has continued to appreciate while the manufactured homes have depreciated at a rate greater than the real properties appreciation rate. This market drive phenomenon further complicates the extraction of the higher towers impact on the adjacent property values. (see attached sales data) Wildwood Neighborhood: From 1/l /2000 to 12/1/2002, the average price per SF for Wildwood was $93 per SF. The sales data reviewed from 1/1/2005 to 11/24/2006 for Wildwood indicated an average price per SF of $111: Beckett's Ridge Neighborhood: In 1/1/2000 to 12/1/2002 the average price per SF for Beckett's Ridge was $95 per SF. The sales data reviewed from 1/1/2005 to 11/24/2006 for Beckett's Ridge indicated an average price per SF of $103. I have also reviewed the property appreciation for the areas identified by the Triangle Multiple Listing as areas 213 & 214. MLS map areas 213 &. 214 incorporated both the Piedmont Electric campus and the neighborhoods noted above. (See attached MLS Location Map) From 1/1/2000 to 12/31/2001, there were 78 properties sold at an average price of $192,545. From 1/1/2006 to 12/1/2006 there were 50 properties sold at an average price of $285,961. The property appreciation for these areas has been approximately 48.5 percent. Issue Number 4 Visibility Study - The attached balloon tether report. I have relied upon the attached report to conclude at what point the balloon at a height of 350 feet was visible. The page of the report labeled "Area of Visibility Map Piedmont EMC" notes the area where the balloon was not visible (noted NV on the attached map). The majority of reference points within residential neighborhoods were Non Visible. It goes without saying that if a homeowner can not see the tower, then it is my conclusion that the tower does not negatively affect them. Conclusions: After my review and - analysis of attached reports, the attached Triangle Multiple Listing Data and my personal inspection of the proposed tower site, it is my conclusion if a property owner can not see or has a limited view of the tower, can not hear the tower or establish a direct external impact ( i.e. increased traffic patterns /railroad noise) from the towers increased height to 350 feet, there will not be a direct impact on adjacent or surrounding property values. l�9 Page 3 Piedmont Electric Please refer to the enclosed report for more detailed information. All of the attachments are considered a part of this report, especially the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. If you need additional information, let me know. C MIS Luther Misenheimer �►� CERTiF�'>r,• State Certified General R.E. Appraiser y� #0 rtr4 �O North Carolina Certification No. 4487 A4437 =,Y CP Q '! C4ROLO' A 150 LUTHER MISENHEIMER EXPERIENCE COLDWELL BANKER WARD & NHSENHEI1%1ER REALTORS Real Estate Broker & Appraiser, Co -Owner — Oct. 2000 to Present WARD & NUSENHEEVIER REALTORS Real Estate Broker & Appraiser, Co -Owner — Oct. 1999 to Oct. 2000 FRANK WARD REALTORS Real Estate Broker & Appraiser —1993 to Oct. 1999 PROFESSIONAL NORTH CAROLINA REAL ESTATE —1994 to Present LICENSES Licensed by North Carolina Real Estate Commission - #147304 STATE CERTIFIED GENNERAL REAL ESTATE APPRAISER - 1998 to Present - Licensed by North Carolina Appraisal Board - #A4487 GRADUATE, REALTORS INSTITUTE (GRI) — Dec. 1996 to Present This is a nationally recognized professional designation. On a national level only 10% REALTORS hold this prestigious designation. EDUCATION LENOIR -RHYNE COLLEGE, Hickory, NC — 1989 to 1993 BA in Business Administration NORTH CAROLINA REALTOR INSTITUTE GRI 101 Residential Financing GRI 102 Creative Listing Strategies GRI 103 Form Contract to Close GRI 104 Real Estate Selling Skills GRI 201 Residential Construction GRI 202 Legal Issues in Real Estate GRI 203 Tax Planning for the Real Estate Professional GRI'204 New Home Sales and Marketing GRI 301 Pricing Residential Properties — The Valuation Process GRI 302 Residential Real Estate as an Investment GRI 303 Property Management GRI 304 Professional and Personal Development REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL RESIDENTIAL COURSES APPRAISAL 170 Introduction to Real Estate Appraisal (R -1) APPRAISAL 171 Valuation Principles and Procedures (R -2) APPRAISAL 172 Applied Residential Property Valuation (R -3) REAL ESTATE CONEUERCIAL COURSES APPRAISAL 175 Introduction to Income Property Appraisal (G -1) A PPR A iS A r . 3 6 .dvauce14 -ic,4m®- EapMizatien Procedures ('&-2 - APPRAISAL 177 Applied Income Property Valuation (G -3) 1ST PROFESSIONAL, SERVICE & VOLUNTEER AFFILIATIONS 2002 Leadership NCAR — Participant North Carolina Association of Realtors — 2002 -04 Vice President Region IV Durham Association of Realtors — 2002 Chairman of the Board Durham Association of Realtors — 2001 President Durham Association of Realtors -- 2000 President Elect Chairman of the Realtors Political Action Committee (RPAC) — 2000 Member of DAR Strategic Planning Committee North Carolina Association of Realtors North Carolina Association of the Realtors State Director 2000 Triangle Commercial Association of Realtors Triangle Multiple Listing Service Durham Chamber of Commerce —1996 Who's Who Durham Jaycees — President 1999 Chairman of the Board — Durham Jaycees 2000 Durham Jaycees — 1997!1998 Officer of the Year 1997 Leadership Durham Graduate/Durham Chamber of Commerce 1997 & 1998 Distinguished Sales Award — Sales & Marketing of Durham REFERENCES Available Upon Request Misenheimer Page 2 /ya Limiting Conditions and Assumptions Acceptance of and/or use of this report constitutes acceptance of the following limiting conditions and assumptions; these can only be modified by written documents executed by both parties. This appraisal is to be used only for the purpose stated herein. While distribution of this appraisal in its entirety is at the discretion of the client, individual sections shall not be distributed; this report is intended to be used in whole and not in part. No part of this appraisal, its value estimates or the identity of the firm or the appraiser(s) may be communicated to the public through advertising, public relations, media sales, or other media. All files, work papers and documents developed in connection with this assignment are the property of Ward & Misenheimer. Information, estimates and opinions are verified where possible, but cannot be guaranteed. Plans provided are intended to assist the client in visualizing the property; no other use of these plans is intended or permitted. No hidden or unapparent conditions of the property, subsoil or structure, which would make the property more or less valuable, were discovered by the appraiser(s) or made known to the appraiser(s). No responsibility is assumed for such conditions or engineering necessary to discover them. Unless otherwise stated, this appraisal assumes there is no existence of hazardous materials or conditions, in any form, on or near the subject property. Unless stated herein, the property is assumed to be outside of areas where flood hazard insurance is mandatory. Maps used by public and private agencies to determine these areas are limited with respect to accuracy. Due diligence has been exercised in interpreting these maps, but no responsibility is assumed for misinterpretation. Good title, free of liens, encumbrances and special assessments is assumed. No responsibility is assumed for matters of a legal nature. Necessary licenses, permits, consents, legislative or administrative authority from any local, state or Federal government or private entity are assumed to be in place or reasonably obtainable. It is assumed there are no zoning violations, encroachments, easements or other restrictions which would affect the subject property, unless otherwise stated. The appraiser(s) are not required to give testimony in Court in connection with this appraisal. If the appraisers are subpoenaed pursuant to a court order, the client agrees to pay the appraiser(s) our regular per diem rate plus expenses. Appraisals are based on the data available at the time the assignment is completed. Amendments /modifications to appraisals based on new information made available after the appraisal was completed will be made, as soon as reasonably possible, for an additional fee. I5:;�G CERTIFICATION - I certify that, to the best of my knowledge and belief. The statements of fact contained in this report are correct and.true. The following analysis, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the assumptions and limiting conditions contained in the report, and is my unbiased professional analysis, opinions and conclusions. My compensation is not contingent upon the reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the desires of the client, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event: I have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report, and have no. personal interest or bias with respect to the parties involved. My analysis, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared, in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. No one provided significant professional assistance to the person(s) signing this report. The reported analysis, opinions and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity with the requirements of the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute. I have made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report. The use of this.report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. As of the date of this report, I have completed the requirements of the continuing education program of the North Carolina Appraisal. Board: This appraisal assignment was not made nor was the appraisal rendered on the basis of a requested minimum valuation, specific valuation,•nor an amount that would result in approval of a credit transaction. Luther Misenheimer NC State Certified General R E. Appraiser A4487 Comparative Market Analysis 153 Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property N MLSA Closed Address Areal Sub Subdivision Type/ Desc LivSgFt SR FB HB GAR YrBlt LP SP SF IS P% DOM 1 579712 4/18/2001 2336 LUTHER 214- JOPPA MANDB/ 1340 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1974 $49,500 $37,000 $28 75% 63 DRIVE Hilsborough/ OAKS 1STOR 2 639680 8/0312002 2459 Lonnie 214- Joppa Oaks MANDB/ 1324 4 2 0 Parking - DW/Gravel, 1979 $49,900 $42,000 $32 84% 76 Cirde HifisborougtV 1STOR Parking - Entry/Side 3 583369 5/09/2001 2505 LONNIE 214- JOPPA DTACH/ 1390 3 2 0 1 Garage, Garage, 1985 $81,500 $80,000 $58 96% 12 CIR Hlllsboroughl OAKS 1STOR Parking - DW/Gravel 4 542740. 7/31200D 2508 LONNIE 214- JOPPA DTACH! 1250 3 2 0 Parking - DW/Gravel 1985 $86,900 $87,000 $70 100% 127 CIRCLE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR 5 607332 4/122002 2417 LONNIE 215- JOPPA DTACH/ 1456 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1995 $95,500 $89,000 $61 93% 210 CIRCLE Hillsborough) OAKS 1STOR 6 607658 101302001 12DB 214- JOPPA MANDB/ 1530 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Concrete, 1995 $97,900 $97,900 $64 100% 4 WORKMAN Hillsboroughl OAKS 1STOR Parking - Entry/Front ROAD 7 590910 81212001 2340 LUTHER 214 - JOPPA DTACW 0 3 2 0 Parking - DWlGravel 1997 $98,500 195,000 $O 96% 63 j LANE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR Avenge 1362 3 2 10 $79,957 $75,414 $52 92% T9 Number of Properties: 7 Information deemed RELIABLE but not GUARANTEED Copyright: 2001.2006 by Triangle MLS, Inc. �J 7 Comparative Market Analysis Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property MLSN Closed Address Area/ Sub Subdivision Type/ Dese LivSgFt SR FB HB GAR YrSIt LP SP SP/ SP/LP% DOM SF 1 1 452845 924/1997 2437 LONNIE 213- JOPPA MANSN/ 900 2 1 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1971 $24,900 $22.000 $24 88% 0 CIRCLE Hills borough/ OAKS 1STOR 201607 10111/1995 2537 LONNIE 214- JOPPA MANDB/ 924 2 2 0 Parking - DW/Gravel 1979 $35,000 $33,000 $36 94% 0 DRIVE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR 3 832389 2212006 2501 Lonnie 213. Joppa Oaks MANSN/ 790 3 1 1 Parking - DW /Asphault 1972 $37,000 $31,500 $40 85% 85 Circle Hlllsborough/N /A 1STOR 1 4 683441 6M5/2003 2437 Lonnie 213- Joppa Oaks MANSN/ 1008 2 1 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1971 $45,900 $40,000 $40 87% 59 Cdcle Hillsborough/ 1STOR 5 648093 3/072003 2437 Lonnie 214- Joppa Oaks MANSN/ 1008 2 1 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1970 347,900 $42,900 $43 90% 221 Hillsborough/ 1STOR 6 579712 41182001 2336 LUTHER 214- JOPPA MANDB/ 1340 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1974 $49,500 $37,000 $28 75% 63 DRIVE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR 7 451863 12/1211997 2309 LONNIE 214- JOPPA DTACH/ 1316 3 2 0 1 Carport, Parking - Detached, 1976 $49,800 $46,900 $37 98% 71 CIRCLE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR Parking - DW /Gravel 8 639680 8/032002 2459 Lonnie 214- Joppa Oaks MANDB/ 1324 4 2 0 Parking - DW /Gravel, Parking - 1979 $49,900 542,000 $32 84% 76 Circle Hillsborough/ 1STOR Entry/Side 9 401230 11/18/1998 2505 LONNIE 213- JOPPA MODLR/ 1410 4 2 0 1Garage, Garage, Parking - 1980 $59,500 $48,000 $34 81% 296 CIRCLE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR DW/Gravel 10 875462 101102006 1C 2511 LONNIE 214- JOPPA MANSN/ 980 2 1 1 Parking - DW /Gravel, Parking- 1985 $65,000 $55,000 $58 85% 47 Hillsborough/ N/A OAKS 1STOR Entry/Rear 1 1 /55 Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property N MILS# Closed Address Areal Sub Subdivision Type/ Desc LIvSgFt OR FS HB GAR YrBlt LP SP SPI SP/LP% DOM SF 11 583369 510912001 2505 LONNIE CIR 214- JOPPA DTACH/ 1390 3 2' 0 1 Garage, Garage, Parking 1985 $81,500 $80,000 $58 98% 12 Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR DW/Gravel 12 542740 7/31/2000 2508 LONNIE 214 - JOPPA DTACH/ 1250 3 2 D Parking - OW /Gravel 1985 $86,900 $87,000 $70 100% 127 CIRCLE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR 1 1 13 475189 8/17/1996 1236 WORKMAN 214- JOPPA DTACH/ 1500 3 1 0 1 Garage 1978 $89,878 $85,200 $57 95% 71 ROAD VRM Hillsborough/ OAKS 2STOR 14 607332 4/12/2002 2417 LONNIE 215- JOPPA DTACHI 1456 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1995 $95,500 $89,000 $81 93% 210 CIRCLE Hillsboroughl OAKS 1STOR 15 607656 10!302001 1208 WORKMAN 214- JOPPA MANDB/ 1530 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Concrete, 1995 $97,900 $97,900 $64 100% 4 ROAD Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR Parking - Entry/Front j 16 590910 8212001 2340 LUTHER 214- JOPPA DTACH/ 0 3 2 0 Parking - DW/Gravel 1997 $98,500 $95,000 s0 96% 63 LANE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR 17 698631 3/112004 2417 LONNIE 214- JOPPA DTACH/ 1528 3 2 0 Parking - DW/Gravel 2002 $99,01)() $96,800 $63 98% 176 CIRCLE Hillsborough/ OAKS 1STOR N/A 18 740975 6/072D04 Lonnie Circle 214- Joppe Oaks MANDB/ 1836 3 2 0 Parking - DW/Gravel 1975 $99,900 $99,900 $54 100% 2 12439 Hillsborough/ 1STOR N/A 19 445854 8101/1997 2328 HIGHWAY 86 213- JOPPA DTACH/ 1512 1 1 1 1 Carport, Parking- 1977 $108,000 $105,000 $69 97% 11 S Hillsborough/ OAKS 15STO Detached 20 700891 1 D/312003 2420 Lonnie Circle 214- Joppa Oaks DTACH/ 1613 4 3 0 2 Carport 1989 $117,500 $115,000 $71 98% 77 Hillsborough/ 1STOR Average 1296 3 u 1 $71,948 s67,666 s49 92% 93 Number of Properties: 20 Information deemed RELIABLE but not GUARANTEED Copyright: 2001 -2006 by Triangle MLS, Inc. Comparative Market Analysis 1ST Property Type: Residential Status: Sold SubjeM Property # MLSM Closed Address Area/ Sub Subdivision Type/ LIvSgFt BR FB HB GAR YrBlt LP 5P SP/ SP /LP% UOM Desc SF 1 603103 11/30/2001 1202BRAXTON 213- WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1178' 3 1 0 Parking- 1983 $101,000 $100,000 S85 99% 77 BRAGG COURT Hillsborough/ 15ST0 DW /Asphault 2 575353 4/26/2001 2615 WADE 213- WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1200 2 1 0 1 Carport 1983 $105,D00 $108.240 $90 103% 104 HAMPTON Hillsborough/ 15STO 3 605225 12/052001 1102 JOHN 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1002 3 1 0 Parking - See 1983 $109,9DD $100,000 91% 93 BRECKINRIDGE Hillsborough/ 1STOR Remarks .$100 7 /072D00 2502 WADE 213- WNLDWOOD DTACH/ 1002 3 1 1 Parking- 1984 $109,900 $102,500 $102 93% 78 HAMPTON Hillsborough/ 1STOR DW/Gravel 6202002 901 Alexander Stewart 213 - Wlldwood DTACH/ 1208 3 2 0 Parking - 1993 5109,900 8116,547 $96 106% 159 Hillsborough/ 1STOR DW/Gravel 428/2000 1D03WALTERCLARK 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1234 3 2 0 Parking- 1985 $11D,000 5110,000 $89 100% 15 DRIVE Hillsborough/ 2STOR DW/Gravel [547775 6272001 2502 WADE 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1002 3 1 1 Parking- 1984 $112,000 $111,000 $111 99% 56 HAMPTON Hillsborough/ 1STOR DW/Grevel 6/30/2000 2308 WADE 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1252 3 2 0 Perking - 1985 $112,800 5714,800 $92 102% 17 HAMPTON Hillsborough/ 15STO DWK� ravel 62612000 2611 WADE 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1200 2 1 0 1 Carport, Parking 1983 $112,900 $111,900 $93 99% 57 HAMPTON ROAD Hillsborought 15ST0 DW /Gravel ea32D00 907 ALEXANDER 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1336 3 2 0 Parking- 1987 $113,500 $112,500 $84 99% 15 STEWART DRIVE Hillsboro uglW 1STOR DW/Graval `J 7 Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property 9 MLSl1 Closed Address Area/ Sub Subdivision Type/ LIvSgFt BR FS HB GAR I YrBit LP SP SP/ SP /LP% DOM Desc SF 11 640413 829/2002 1105 Walter Clark 213 - Wildwood SITEB/ 1092 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1985 $114,000 $114,000 $104 100% 73 Dr. Hillsborough( 1STOR 12 568004 52112001 2406 GEORGE 213- WLDWOOD DTACH/ 1161 3 2 0 Parking- 13W/Earth 1985 $114,590 $113,000 $97 99% 26 ANDERSON Hillsborough/ 1STOR 13 561655 31142002 1000 WALTER 213- WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1380 3 2 0 Parking - DW/Gravel 1986 $115,000 $114,000 $83 99% 12 CLARK DR. Hillsborough/ 15STO 14 810651 12/102001 2419 GEORGE 213 - VNLDWOOD DTACH/ 1124 3 2 0 Parking - 1986 $117,500 $117,500 $105 100% 38 ANDERSON DRIVE HillsborougtV 1STOR OWlConcrete 15 801061 9202001 2503 GEORGE .213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1092 3 2 0 Parking - 1984 $117,9DO $116,000 $106 98% 26 ANDERSON DRIVE HillsborougN 1STOR DW/Concrete 16 582609 91122000 2314 GEORGE 213 - WILDWOOD DTACW 1340 3 2 0 Parking - 1986 $119,900 $120,000 $90 100% 46 ANDERSON Hillsborough/ 15STO OW/Concrete 17 545819 5/302000. 1107JOHN 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1148 3 2 0 1 Carport, Parking- 1984 $119,900 $118,000 $103 96% 63 BRECKINRIDGE Hillsborough/ 15STO DW /Asphoult, Parking ROAD DW/Concrete 18 590520 5252001 2400 CHARLIE TEW 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1267 3 2 0 1 Carport, Parking - 1984 $121,900 $121,900 $96 100% 15 COURT HiUsborougN 15STO Attached, Parking - DW/Gravel 19 561160 10/122000 1101 JOSEPH 213- WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1466 3 2 0 Parking- 1985 $124,90D $122,750 $84 98% 59 JOHNSTON CT. Hillsborough 15STO DW/Concrete 20 562997 9272000 2300 GEORGE 214- WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1634 3 2 D Parking - 1988 t125,900 $125,900 $77 100% 40 ANDERSON Hillsborough/ 15STO DW/Concrete `,5,6; Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property 0 MLSN Closed Address Areal Sub Subdivision Typal Desc UvSgFt BR FB HB GAR YrBlt LP SP SP/ SPlLP% DOM SF 21 624386 3/0712002 2301 Wade Hampton 213- WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1413 3 2 0 Parking= 1986 $129,900 $124,500 $88 06% 73 'Hillsborough/ 15STO DW/Gravel 22 638123 6282002 2201 GEORGE 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1475 3 2 0 Parking- 1987 $130,000 $131,500 $89 101% 28 ANDERSON DR. Hillsborough 1STOR DW/Concrete 23 585654 71022001 1024ALEXANDER 213 - WILDWOOD , DTACH/ 1509 3 2 1 Parking - 1987 $134,900 $135,000 $89 1DD% 86 STEWART Hi0sborough/ 2STOR DWlGravel 24 615888 8/06/2002 2309JUDAH 213- WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1800 3 2 0 Parking- 1985 $135,9D0 $135,900 $76 100% 241 BENJAMIN COURT Hillsborough! 15STO DW/Concrete 25 636258 71252002 2402 WADE 213- WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1400 3 2 0 Parking - 1985 $138,000 $138,000 $99 100% 101 HAMPTON ROAD Hillsborough/ 2STOR DW/Gravat 4/122002 1024 Alexander 213 - Widwood DTACH/ 1510 3 2 1 Parking- 1987 $140,000 $140,000 $93 100% 93 M64281D Stewart Hillsborough 2STOR DWlAsphauk 8/092002 2405 Wade Hampton 213 - Wildwood DTACH/ 1617 3 3 0 Parking - 1985 $143,9W $138,000 $85 96% 58 Rd. Hillsborough/ 15ST0 DW/Gravel Average 1298 3 2 1 $120,033 $119,016 $93 99% 65 Number of Properties; Z7 information deemed REUASLE but not GUARANTEED Copyright: 2001 -2006 by Triangle MLS, Inc. Comparative Market Analysis /y9 Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property I MLSO Closed Address Area/ Sub Subdivision Type/ LIvSgFt BR FB HB GAR YrBlt LP SP SPI SP/LP% DOM Desc SF 1 618456 10/112005 2610 Wade 213- W Idwood DTACH/ 1006 2 1 0 Parking - DW /Asphoult 1983 $115,000 $110,000 $109 96% 31 Hampton Road Hillsborough/ 1STOR N!A 2 833199 4/072006 2308 GEORGE 212 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1326 3 2 0 Parking - 1986 $118,000 $115,750 $87 98% 122 ANDERSON Hillsborough/ 16STO DW/Concrete, Parking See Remarks 3 788409 61072005 2402 CHARLIE 213 - WILDWOOD DTACH/ 1026 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Asphault 1984 $121,900 $121,000 $118 99% 24 TEW Court Hillsborough/ 1STOR NIA 4 852663 6/122006 2406 Charles 213- Wiidwocd DTACH/ 1003 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Graval 1984 $124,000 $123,000 $123 99% 65 Tow Court Hillsborough/ 1STOR WA 5 871127 7/122006 2403 George 213 - Wildwood DTACH/ 1064 3 2 0 Parking - OW/Gravel 1985 $124,900 5116,000 $109 93% 11 Anderson Dr, "Itsboroughl 1STOR NIA 8 792448 8222005 2408 Wade 213 - Wildwood DTACH/ 1060 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1984 $124,900 $124,000 $117 99% 17 Hampton Road Hillsborough/ 1STOR N/A 7 670513 9292006 2502 Wade 213 - Wildwood DTACH/ 1000 3 1 1 Parking - DW /Gravel 1984 $126,000 $126,009 $126 101% 32 Hampton Rd Hilsborough/ 1STOR N/A a 767720 2212005 1107 John .213 - WIdwood SITES/ 1146 3 2 0 1Carport 1984 $126,000 $124,500 $108 99% 174 Breckenridge Hillsborough/ 15STO WA 9 797138 8/112005 2313 Judah Benjamin 213. Wiidwood SITEB/ •' 1066 3 2 Parking - DW /Gravel 1985 $128,000 $126,000 $117 98% 93 Court Hillsborough/ 1STOR 10, N/A 10 800872 6/06 /2005 2315 George Anderson Or 201 -Chapel Wlldwood I SITEB/ 1321 3 2 0 Parking - DW /Gravel 1989 $129,000 $127,500 897 99% 6 Hill/ N/A 15STO l �o Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property 0 MLSO Closed Address Areal Sub Subdivision Type/ Desc UvSgFt BR FS HB GAR YrBIt LP SP SP/ SP /LP% DOM SF 11 869339 71202006 1004 Alexander 213- Wiidwood DTACH/ 1019 3 1 1 Parking - 1989 $129,900 $130,000 $128 100% 12 Stewart Dr Hillsborough! WA 1STOR DW/Concrete 12 825925 1125/2005 I105 Walter Clark 213 - Wildwood DTACH/ 1108 3 2 0 Perking- 1985 $130,000 $126,000 $114 97% 15 Dr. • Hillsborough/ WA 1STOR OWn avel 13 832127 12292005 2304 George 213- Wildwood SITED/ 1144 3 2 0 Parking - 1986 $130,000 $128,500 $112 99% 33 Anderson Hillsborough/ NIA 1STOR DW/Gravel 14 833967 5222006 2401 Wade 213- Widwood DTACH/ 1084 3 2 0 Parking- 1985 $133,500 $130,000 $120 97% 173 Hampton Road Hillsborough/ N/A 1STOR OW/Gravel 15 811340 8/19/2005 2305 Wade 213 - Wiidwood DTACH/ 1112 3 2 0 Parking- 1966 $136,900 $136,000 $122 99% 7 Hampton Road Hillsborough/ N/A 1STOR OW/Gravel 16 117 814779. 10/142005 1017 Alexander 213- Wildwood SITEB/ 1504 3 2 0 Parking- 1987 $138,500 $134,000 $89 97% 14 Stewart Hillsborough N/A 15STO DWGravet 794276 9106/2005 1111 Walter Dark 213- VAldwood DTACH/ 1278 3 2 0 Parking - 1985 $139,900 $136,000 $106 97% 37 Hi6sbor6ughl NIA 15STO DW /Asphault 18 794255 8/032005 2309 George 213- Wildwood DTACH/ 1613 3 2 0 Parking- 1988 $145,000 $140,000 $87 97% 86 Anderson Hillsborough/ N/A 15STO DW/Gravel Average 1160 3 2 1 $126,911 $126,291 $111 98% 53 Number of Properties: 16 Information deemed RELIABLE but not GUARANTEED Copyright: 2001 -2006 by Triangle MLS, Inc. Comparative Market Analysis /V Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Pro perty # MLS# Closed Address Area/ Sub Subdivision Type/ I LIvSgFt BR FB HB GAR YrBlt LP SP SPI SP/LP% DOM Desc SF 1 649080 9/122002 2303 Oakhurst 213- Becketts OTACH/ 1670 3 2 1 1Garage 2001 $176,500 $176,000 $105 100% 4 Tra9 Hinsboroughl Ridge 2STOR 2 645388 11/012002 2322 Woodbury 213- - Becketts DTACW 1956 3 2 1 2Garage 2000 $192,900 $191,000 $98 99% 15 Hillsborough Ridge 2STOR 3 563862 12272000 2113 BAYCOURT 213- BECKETTS DTACH/ 2170 3 2 1 Parking - DW /Concrete 2000 $204,729 $204,729 $94 100% 73 TRAIL Hillsborough/ RIDGE 2STOR 4 522198 2/03200D 2803 BECKETT'S 213- BECKETTS DTACH/ 2578 4 2 1 2 Garage 1999 $228,980 $226,980 $88 100% 165 RIDGE DR. Hilsborough/ RIDGE 2STOR 5 628906 4/3012002 2505 Becketts 213- Becketts DTACH/ 2388 4 2 1 2 Garage 2000 $228,500 $225,25D $94 99% 22 Ridge Hillaborough/ Ridge 2STOR 6 601098 9262001 905 KENNESAW 213 - BECKETTS DTACH/ 2350 4 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 1999 $229,900 $227,000 $97 99% 79 COURT Hillsborough/ RIDGE 2STOR Attached, Parking - DW/Concrete 7 802869 8/31/2001 2601 BECKETTS 213- BECKETTS DTACH/ 2580 4 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2000 $237,000 $230,000 $89 97% 34 RIDGE DRIVE Hillsborough RIDGE MULTI DW/Concrete Average 2242 4 2 1 1 1 $213,787 1 $211,565 295 99% 56 Number of Properties: 7 Information deemed RELIABLE but not GUARANTEED Copyright: 2001 -2006 by Triangle MILS, Inc. Comparative Market Analysis /0 Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property # MLS# Closed Address Areal Sub' Subdivision Type/ LivSgFt SR FB HB GAR WEIR LP SP SP/ SP/LP% DOM Desc SF 1 787322 4/06/2005 2202 Woodbury 213- Sacketts DTACH/, 1705 3 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2000 $189,900 $187,000 $110 98% 13 Drive Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR DW/Conorete WA 2 826730 121012005 2703 Beckett's 213- Becketts DTACH/ 2223 3 2 1 2 Garage 2000 $219,500 $99 101% 43 Ridge Or Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR 1 1 1$216,900 N/A 3 824264 3/162008 1011 Sootsburg 213- Becketts SITEB/ 2062 3 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2001 $219,000 00 $105 99% 143 Trall Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR DW/Concrete 1$217,0 ' NIA 4 831208 1/032005 2210 Woodbury 213 - Becketts DTACH/ 2036 3 2 1 2 Garage 2000 $219.900 $215,000 $106 98% 40 Drive Hilsborough/ Ridge 2STOR WA 5 7844B1 3252005 1006 Scotsburg 213- Becketts DTACH/ 1950 3 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2001 $222,000 $220,000 $113 99% 23 Trail Hiftborough/ Ridge 2STOR DW/Concrete N/A 6 784708 410912005 2212 Woodbury 213- Becketts DTACH! 2036 3 2 1 2Garage 2000 $223,900 $216,500 $106 97% 7 Drive Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR NIA 7 781910 3/182005 2208 Oakhurst 213- Becketts DTACH/ 2012 3 2 1 2 Garage 2001 $224,000 $217,000 $108 97% 10 Trag Hiltsboroughl Ridge 2STOR WA 8 789084 41302005 2204 Woodbury 213- Becketts DTACH/ 2036 3 2 1 2 Garage 2000 $224,900 $213,500 $105 95% 27 Drive Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR N/A 9 787308 5/312005 2119 213- BECKETTS DTACH/ 2145 3 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2002 $229,900 $229,900 $107 100% 4 BAYCOURT . Hillsborough/ RIDGE 2STOR Attached, Parking - TRAIL WA DW/Concrete, Parking - Entry/Front 10 867153 811020D6 1001 213- BECKETTS DTACH/ 2158 3 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2001 $234,900 $108 99% 59 SCOTSBURG Hillsborough/ RIDGE 2STOR Ow/Conuete J$232,900 TRAIL WA /G3 Property Type: Residential Status: Sold Subject Property a MLSB Closed Address Areal Sub Subdivision Type/ uvSgFt BR FB MB GAR YrBlt LP SP SP/ SP /LP% DOM Desc SF 11 829807 12/122005 2113 Baycourt 213 - Becketts DTACH/ 2297 4 2 1 2 Garage 2000 $237,900 $234,500 $102 99% 30 Trail Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR N/A 12 8461W 41182008 2113Saycourt 213 - Becketts DTACH/ 2197 4 2 1 2.Garege, Parking - 2D00 $239,850 $237,500 $108 99% 20 Trail Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR DW/Concrete, Parking - WA Entry/Front 13 866633 728/2006 2310 Oakhurst 213- Becketts DTACH/ 2172 • 3 2 1 2 Garage 2001 $239,900 $236,000 $109 98% 35 Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR N/A 14 886099' 101142006 2204Beokeds 213- Becketts DTACH/ 2429 4 2 1 2Garage 2001 $244,900 $248,500 $102 101% 5 Ridge Drive HMsbomugh/ Ridge 2STOR N/A 15 780310 3/01/2005 2115 213- BECKETTS DTACW 2420 4 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2001 $244,900 $240,000 $99 98% 11 BAYCOURT Hillsborough/ RIDGE 2STOR Attached, Parking - TRAIL WA DW/Concrete, Parking - Entry/Front 18 860992 13212008 902 Chandler 213- Becketts DTACW 2500 4 2 1 2 Garage 2000 $249,900 $249,000 $100 100% 25 Court Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR N/A 17 646059 6/302008 903 Chandler 213- Becketts DTACH/ 2547 4 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2000 $254,900 $251,000 $99 98% 81 Court Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR DW/Concrete, Parking - N/A EntrylFront 18 846158 5202006 2107 Becketts 213- Becketts DTACH/ 2747 4 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2001 $264,900 $262,000 $95 99% 78 Ridge Hillsborough/ Ridge 2STOR DW/Concrete, Parking - N/A Entry/Side 19 825013 1272008 2209 213- BECKETTS DTACH/ 2958 4 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 2002 $269,900 $260,000 $88 96% 72 BAYCOURT Hillsborough/ RIDGE 2STOR DW/Concrete, Parking - TRAIL WA Entry/Front 20 881141 9222006 2807 Becketts 213 - Becketts DTACH/ 3085 4 2 1 2 Garage, Parking - 1999 $269,900 $266,000 $87 99% 18 Ridge Drive Hillsborough/ Ridge 25STO DW/Corraete NIA Average 2285 3 1 2 1 $236,112 $232,640 $103 89% 37 Number of Properties: 20 Information deemed RELIABLE but not GUARANTEED Copyright: 2001 -2006 by Triangle MLS, Inc. Residential Statistics J �Zs Z1 4- — 1� ►�Zaoo - 1Z( 3)1 z000 - 78 Properties Found Heated Bedrooms Full Baths Half Baths List Price Sale Price Days on Marketli 10996SOftware Copyright ® First American hCS Solutions, Inc. 1997 -2006 All Rights Reserved V3.0 All Information contained herein is for the exclusive use of authorized NMS Subscribers Copyright ® DaS 2001 -2006 North Carolina Triangle MLS, Inc. All Rights Reserved Support:ErajLHjdp Desk or Call 919- 654 -5419 Residential Statistics MLj /ni/l(' /1Rvlts - 2tS4 -'_I`i 11 -2Ub6 — IZ (I Zoo/. Closed - 50 Properties Found n Heated Bedrooms Full Baths Half Baths List Price Sale Price Days on Market -- Software Copyright O First American MLS Solutions, Inc. 1997 -2006 All Rights Reserved V3.0 All Information contained herein is for the exclusive use of authorized MSS Subscribes Copyright O TMLS 2001 -2006 North Carolina Triangle MLS, Inc. All Rights Reserved Support:Fd1 afl-HrJpD -e, G or Call 919 - 654 -5419 201 -228 Orange Efland Cedar- 1` 220 Grove Rd Lee's Chapedl L RR�Carr Store Rd 219 210 218 Rd Frazier Rd 222 Walnut Grove ,Church Rd 221 223 'ov Burke Rd Miller Rd 70 Rd ,avash 215 217 St 216 Lawrence Rd 211 old CH 6 HBGH R la 212 �' 213 rya 214 ° �d Borland Rd Mt Sine Minnis Rd 4 CL 208 207 C 209 a 4 201 Fayetteville Rd a 204 224 `206 -Road Name Change Designator �° *Area Boundary Follows No Specific Feature � THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK i c�,8 TOWER/STRUCTURE REMOVAL BOND Bond Number: 32 BD 017 -01 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that we Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation, Inc. as Principal, and Federated Rural Electric Insurance Exchange, a corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Kansas, as Surety are held and firmly bound unto Orange County, NC as Obligee, in the sum of Sixteen Thousand Five Hundred and 00 /100 Dollars ($16,500) lawful money of the United States, for payment of which, well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly as these presents, the liability of the Surety being limited to the penal sum of this bond regardless of the number of years the bond is in effect. WHEREAS, the Orange County permit and/or ordinance requires the submission of a bond guaranteeing the maintenance replacement, removal or relocation of said tower or structure located at 2500 NC 86 South, Orange County, NC. NOW, THEREFORE, the condition of this obligation is such that if the above bounden Principal shall perform in accordance with the aforesaid permit/ordinance or agreement and shall indemnify the Obligee against all loss caused by Principal's breach of such ordinance /permit or agreement relating to maintenance, replacement, removal or relocations of a tower or structure, then this obligation shall be void, otherwise to remain in full force and effect unless cancelled as set forth below. "THIS BOND may be cancelled by Surety by giving thirty (30) days written notice to the Obligee by certified mail. Such cancellation shall not affect any liability the Surety may have incurred under this bond prior to the effective date of the termination. THIS BOND signed, sealed, dated on the 10th day of October, 2006. Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation, Inc. By: Federated Rural Electric Insurance Exchange By: Thomas Gitsc 'er, Attorney -In -Fact This bond is continuous and remains in full force and effect until cancelled according to the terms herein stated above; however, for verification purposes you may contact the insurance broker: Federated Rural Electric Insurance Exchange, 11875 W. 85th Street, Lenexa, KS 66214. Changes required in the bond can be accomplished by a change rider issued by the surety. rredera�d. A reciprocal exchange managed by Federated Rural Electric Management Corporation RURAL ELECTRIC INSURANCE EXCHANGE POWER OF ATTORNEY KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That this Power -of- Attorney is not valid unless attached to the bond which it authorizes executed. FEDERATED RURAL ELECTRIC INSURANCE EXCHANGE, a Kansas corporation, having its office in the City of Lenexa, State of Kansas, does hereby make, constitute and appoint Thomas Gitschier, Vice President of Underwriting in the City of Lenexa, County of Johnson, State of Kansas, its true and lawful attorney -in -fact, at Lenexa,in the State of Kansas, to make, execute, seal and deliver for-and on its behalf, and as its act and deed, bonds, and license and permit bonds; tax, lien, and miscellaneous bonds; required by Federal, State, County, Municipal Authority, or other obligees. This power void if altered or erased. The. acknowledgment and execution of any such document by the said Attorney -in -Fact shall be as binding upon the Company as if such bond had been executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of this Company. This Power of Attorney is granted, signed and sealed by original or facsimile under and by the authority of the following bylaw as adopted by the Board of Directors and stockholders of Federated Rural Electric Insurance Exchange at a meeting duly called and held on the 12th day of April, 1984. 'The president shall be the chief executive officer of the corporation. He shall have authority, subject to such rules as may be.prescribed by the Board of Directors, to sign, execute and acknowledge, on behalf of the corporation, all deeds, mortgages, bonds, stock certificates, contracts, leases, and other documents or instruments necessary or proper to be executed in the course of the corporation's regular business, or which shall be authorized by resolution of the Board of Directors; and, except as otherwise provided by law or the . Board of Directors, he may authorize any'Vice- President or other officer or agent of the corporation to sign, execute and acknowledge such documents or instruments in his place and stead." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Federated Rural.Electric Insurance Exchange has caused these presents to be signed by its duly authorized officers this 5h day of. July , 2006. Assistant Secretary STATE OF KANSAS ) ) ss: COUNTY OF JOHNSON) On this day of Philip Irwin, who being by me du PATRICIA J.' Mx ! ppt FEDERATED RURAL ELECTRIC INSURANCE EXCHANGE BY Presi C i , 2006, before me, a Notary Publi acknowledged said instrument to be thel P.O. Box 15147, Lenexa, KS 66285 -5147 11875 W. 85th Street, Lenexa, KS 66214 -151 Tel: (800) 356 -8360 / (913) 541 -0150 Fax: (913) 541 -9004 Web site: www.federatedrural.com 00 APPROVED 11114/2006 MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF CONMUSSIONERS REGULAR MEETING October 3, 2006 7:00 p.m. The Orange County Board of Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, October 3, 2006 at 7:00 p.m. in the F. Gordon Battle Courtroom in Hillsborough, North Carolina. COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Chair Barry Jacobs and Commissioners Moses Carey, Jr., Valerie P. Foushee, Alice M. Gordon, and Stephen Halkiotis COUNTY ATTORNEYS PRESENT: Geoffrey Gledhill COUNTY STAFF PRESENT: Interim County Manager Rod Visser, Assistant County Manager Gwen Harvey, and Clerk to the-Board Donna S. Baker (All other staff-members will be identified appropriately below) 8. Public Hearings a Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation (PEMC) Planned Development (PD- 01) and Special Use Permit. Class A The Board held'a public hearing to hear public testimony regarding the PEMC request to amend its Planned Development — Office /institution (PD -01) zoning district and its Class A Special Use Permit to. permit the principal use of a 350 -foot replacement tower at its administrative and operations. center located at 2500 NC Highway 86 South; Hillsborough. Planning Director Craig Benedict introduced this item. This is a 34 -acre site that is home to Piedmont Electric and the request is to replace the present tower with a 320= foot tower with a 30 -foot extension antenna. The process is a two -part process. The first is a planned development rezoning modification, which is a legislative process. The second part is a special use permit, which is a quasi judicial process. This will include swearing in people that will be providing testimony. These meetings are not usually held at regular County Commissioners' meetings, but since this will serve some public safety purposes, the process will be expedited. The higher amount of the tower would permit for co- location opportunities by other providers. He made reference to page 65 of the abstract and bird migration patterns. The staff certifies that the material has been advertised appropriately in accordance with Article 20, Section 6.3, and notices to property owners that are adjacent and within a radius of the site have been sent out. Over 200 notices have been sent out and there have been approximately five inquiries. There is also technical data supporting this application. The process is for the Chair of the Planning Board to jointly chair this part of the meeting. The remainder of this item was transcribed verbatim. Jay Bryan: Thank you, Mr. Benedict, I appreciate that. I'm Jay Bryan, I'm Chair of the Planning Board, and we have members of the Planning Board sitting here to my left, to your right. I welcome all of you tonight for this public hearing. Who is here on behalf of the applicant? State your name please for the record. Robin Blanton: Good evening, I'm Robin Blanton with Piedmont EMC, and as you are aware, we have submitted an application to construct a 350 -foot tower, and that would be the top of the antenna height on the tower. Geof Gledhill: Excuse me. I think that the testimony that this witness is likely to be next as to the legislative and the special use permit. I think you have to swear in and let him start over again. At this time, the Clerk swore in all speakers to this item. ilc Robin Blanton: Again, I'm Robin Blanton with Piedmont EMC, and we have submitted an application to construct a 350 -foot tower at our property on 2500 Highway 86 South. The reason we want to construct a taller tower is to improve our radio communication in our service territory. We have certain areas with our present radio system that we don't have good coverage, and this tower is part of the three towers within our service territory. There is one here in Hillsborough, we also have a tower that we are wanting to construct in Caswell County along Highway 62, and then another tower in Person County on Highway 158: This will greatly improve our radio communications in our entire service territory. What it will also allow us to do is to have three towers, and we have to have a trump system, so we have to have all three towers tied together. When we are in one area of the system, I can talk to someone in another area of the system just like we're side by side. What it does also is allow us to do data transfer between our three offices that we have-in our service territory. At this point, if you have any questions, I'm willing to answer them, or.if you want me to talk more about the technology, I'll go into that. Jay Bryan: Are there any questions frorri the Commissioners? None. Are there any questions from the Planning Board? Robin Blanton: The tower is 320 feet and then there will be a 30 -foot high antenna on top of the tower so that it brings up to a 350 -foot height. Judith Wegner: Could you speak to the issue of the migratory birds, and if this is appropriate, and also about any adverse affects on people living nearby. Robin Blanton: We have looked at migratory birds patterns in this area, and from what we have found and also from the County staff, we haven't found any migratory bird patterns that would be affected by this. With our current tower, we have not seen any amount of birds under that existing tower. It is another 200 feet high. Judith Wegner: From. what I understand from the materials, that by having a white rather than a red light, that makes a difference in terms of the birds. Robin Blanton:.The prevailing philosophy right now is with the white lights on top of the towers, birds are less mesmerized by the flashing white light than they are the red light. We are trying to do that. One thing that would help with this tower is, it is a self - supporting tower, so there will be no guide wires coming down from it, which are much more difficult to see. This should also help with the migratory bird patterns. Judith Wegner: Are there'any adverse affects on the people living within the radius. Your - materials talk about trying to shield visibility and things of that sort, but are there any other ways in which the emissions or the electronic transactions will make a difference. Robin Blanton: We will continue.... what we are doing is we are using basically the same frequencies that we have for our current radio system, which is the 150 megahertz range. There have been no studies suggesting that there are adverse health affects in those frequencies. Judith Wegner: And people who live further away, since it's a larger height, will this affect them? Robin Blanton: One of the things that we are able to do by having three towers up is to minimize.the.adverse health affect, because it is a weaker signal. But because we have three towers, we get better coverage instead of running off one tower. Jay Bryan: Any other questions by the Planning Board? Thank you sir. Commissioner Carey: I was looking at the balloon tether report, and I was looking for some substance in it, but I saw one of these pictures. Tell me.did you hear anything from anybody about the balloon tether test and what is the objective of the balloon tether test. Robin Blanton: The reason for the balloon test is to allow people to see how tall the tower is supposed to be. We sent out letters to the public, I want to say it's within a 500 - foot radius of our property, announcing the date of the test, so that people would be aware of when the test was done: Piedmont did not get any adverse comments on the -7 a balloon test. We had, I want to say either two or three calls just asking what we were doing, but no one that I'm aware of called up and was opposed to the tower. Commissioner Halldotis: For future reference, the pictures were basically useless in my opinion. And that's coming from a grumpy, old County Commissioner. We had some clear pictures when we had this same balloon test done at the Inn at Bingham years ago. I would suggest in the future we spend a little more money and get some color photographs. I happened to be driving the_ morning of the test, and the different I saw was the fact that if you're coming down 86 South heading towards the Piedmont office building, you're actually going to see a tower, where now you don't. For a minute there, I. thought that it was a used car dealership that had opened up and I didn't know about it, because they're the ones that usually fly these balloons. But I didn't see it as being onerous. The issue was that the pictures, if you have to put an arrow on a black and white picture showing a black speck as being a balloon amidst a bunch of other specks, that's not a good pictorial representation of the issue. I just wanted to say once again about Piedmont, unlike some other utility companies I have had to serve with some in the past, Piedmont repairs their lights when the weather is still rather nasty and foul, as evidenced out in my neck of the woods awhile back, a storm hadn't abated, and your people were already out there getting the service back on. So I appreciate that. I would find it difficult to vote against you guys because you're almost like an apple a day. I have no difficulty voting against Progress Energy. You, I respect, they, I don't. Michelle Kempinsld: I heard Craig Benedict mention that there was the potential for co- location for other service providers. Is that a possibility for this tower, or this completely a private tower? Robin Blanton: No ma'am, the tower was constructed to allow co- location, because that's one of the things that Piedmont was hoping to do and if a cell phone company wants to locate on the tower, that's a source of revenue for Piedmont. So, it will be allowed and encouraged. Michelle Kempinsld: So the only known co- location is this location- now? Robin Blanton: The Highway Patrol is actively pursuing co- locations on local towers throughout the State for their 800 megahertz radio system to improve radio communication of emergency personnel. Jay Bryan:7hank you, sir. Is there anyone else on behalf of Piedmont Electric that wants to speak? None. Is there a further presentation from the staff? Craig Benedict: If there's anybody that has signed up in agreement or against it, they can speak at this time. Jay Bryan: Is there anyone from the public who wishes to address this item, the tower for Piedmont Electric? Commissioner Gordon: I just want to reinforce the comment about the balloon test. It isn't really just the report that I am concerned with, which for me is hard to fathom,-but the time of day of the test. I'm not saying that. Piedmont Electric didn't comply, but our rules should be amended so that there's more publicity, in order for people to know that this is going to happen 1-13 so that they can be aware of it and look at it. My recollection is that this was the middle of the day; as Commissioner Halkiotis said, he thought it was something else, 'a car dealership. How is the public supposed to know any different? We need to look at our rules and regulations for those and figure out a better way so people are alert to what's going on. I predict that when this tower is built that people will say, "Wow, that's really tall, and why didn't l know about this, "'and all that. I'm not saying that Piedmont didn't comply, I am just saying that we need to revisit our regulations to make sure that people are aware of what's happening. I remember when we were talking about the Board of Adjustment having to deal with these issues, we were talking at time about providing a consultant or somebody else who could look into these issues before going to the public. And I seem to think that that would be true of the Commissioners too. We need to assist the public a little bit more in trying to understand what's happening, and somebody knowledgeable that they can go to that will inform them of these technical aspects. Commissioner Carey: I thought we would increase the pace if we could hire a consultant to represent and ask questions. Craig Benedict: We have a representative of the County here tonight, the Center for Municipal Solutions, Mr. Rusty Monroe, is part of thatprocess that the Board suggested a few years ago. The fees from the Piedmont tower were partially given to pay for the consultant and one of the criteria we have is that this is one of the only engineering solutions to locating the tower. We have used the expertise of the Center for Municipal Solutions and their memo is in the file here, on page 142 -144 that says that it meets the standards of our land development code. So we do have that type of expertise. We are further in the Telecommunications Master Plan effort and we may use the same consultant with other monies that have been budgeted this year to create our telecommunication network for other public safety purposes. I will pursue that with the Interim County Manager. Commissioner Carey: Will the consultant be available to our Planning Board as they deliberate on this. Craig Benedict: Yes. Commissioner Gordon: Is the consultant going to be available to the Board? He should be sworn in and we should be able to ask questions. Chair Jacobs: I agree with Commissioner Gordon. I think that the consultant should have been introduced at the very beginning, and we do not have any problem with Piedmont Electric, but.if we're doing the process, I think we need to know that our expert is here and that he's available for questions. He or she may have.comments aboutthe application and can be here as a resource and be identified as a resource to the Planning Board and to the Board of Commissioners, not to discover it in the discussion. And also, I agree with Commissioner Gordon that the fact that there are no citizens here may mean that nobody has any problems, or it may mean that our notification policies are inadequate. And my guess is that it is probably a combination of both., and that one small period of a balloon that was notified to people within 500 feet, especially for a tower of this height, may not be adequate notice to the public. Renee Price: I had a question with regards to the applicant proposing a tower for public safety. Does the Planning Board or does the County Commissioners have the responsibility of deciding what is a public need, or is that the responsibility of the applicant. Is that something that should be assumed? Geof Gledhill: It is the burden of the applicant to prove that it is a public necessity if that's their intention, and if they do not prove that, and that finding can't be made, then it's the burden of the applicant to prove the maintenance of property values in.the absence of a public necessity. 1 -14 Renee Price: Is it the County Commissioners who determine whether or not they have met the definition of a public need? Because it's going -to be referred to the Planning Board. Geof Gledhill: The County Commissioners in a Class A Special Use Permits will make all of the findings. The Planning Board will make recommendations as to the findings. Renee Price: I was just wondering, because it seems like it is a public .meeting, but this is the wrong process. Craig Benedict: I. can explain the process. The open verbal forum is tonight. Written testimony can still occur between tonight's meeting and be submitted to the. Planning Board as further testimony to address the issues that the County Attorney brought up concerning issues of testimony regarding public necessity, or if not, maintenance of property values. So all of that information is still open to be submitted in writing, though, prior to the Planning Board hearing it, or any other testimony that may come forward. The Administration recommendation here is for the Commissioners to refer this back to the Planning Board to be returned back to the Board of County Commissioners no sooner than December 4 -which means the timeline we had put in this package was to have it on the agenda for the December 4, 2006 meeting. Commissioner Gordon: I would like to have our consultant come up and be sworn in and would like to ask him a couple of questions. Lawrence Monroe (Rusty) was sworn in. Commissioner Gordon: I just wanted to retake up some of the questions that Planning Board member Wagner asked about the effects on migratory birds and also the effects on the community population in the vicinity of such a tower. Rusty Monroe: One of.the recommendations that our company made as a recommended condition was for the lighting that will be on this tower to be shielded. People are aware Of the fact that the lighting only has to be seen from above or by airplanes, and there are a couple of different ways of doing it. We've recommended that all lighting on this tower be shielded, in large part because of that issue to reduce the attractiveness as well as, very candidly, to reduce the nuisance factor of what is called .ground scatter effect of the lighting. The report that was submitted on the effects of aviary wildlife is negative or negligible. We have no concerns, and the report had raised no'concems. We've been able to find no experts in the field who know evidence of any concern. It would be much more of a concern if there were guide wires attached. That's primarily where the biggest danger to aviary wildlife comes from are the guide wires on guide towers. Commissioner Gordon: What about the effect on the population, the question of the emissions and the effects on the human population with this proposal? Rusty Monroe: We have to be very careful when it comes to radio frequency emissions. The FCC has effectively preempted that entire area and said that no one may enforce those other than the FCC, nor may anyone establish any different standards than the FCC has. We could argue all day long whether those are adequate or not, but they are the law at this point. However, local government has been charged with the authority, if you will, to verify compliance with those regulations prior to the establishment at any time during the operation of it. One of the recommended conditions in this is that it be regularly tested for emissions. That having been said, I will tell you that the FCC also has a policy that any facility such as this, or a cellular facility, or a paging facility, or any of the other services that use radio frequency, if it is located on a tower and it is more than 10 meters above the ground, it is deemed what is called categorically excluded. We may or may not agree with that, but they're saying, by definition that it is safe and - . presents no danger to the public. The numbers are such that the RF emissions for something such as this facility at the height that Piedmont Electric is proposing to attach, 16D and in all probability the 800 MHz safety facilities would be attached, are so negligible that you would have several times more exposure to RF emissions standing within 10 or 15 feet of your microwave oven or sitting in front of your television: Craufurd Goodwin: Is it clear that the tower can withstand a category three or four hurricanes we're likely to see in the next few years? If it went down, how does it fall? Rusty Monroe: That's one of the things that we looked at very carefully- the structural integrity of the tower. That starts with the soils, what's called a geo -tech survey and analysis, and you work up from there. A lot of times the tower industry will like to tell you, "We've designed what's called a breakpoint," which means they over designed the bottom two- thirds, for example, and then. standard designed the top third so that there is a weak point at which it will break and supposedly fall within itself. That's just not the way towers fail, quite simply; especially if there's a fault, if you will, in the calculations based upon the soils or the foundation, or the foundation doesn't match the types of soil. There are about 400 towers a year that fail in this country on average. Most people are not aware of it. This.tower we feel.very confident was over designed. The bottom line is it was over designed. There is a breakpoint built in, but in reality, I don't see that as being an issue here. It would be a different design, for example, if it were to be built down on the Gulf Coast. And they have a PE signed off on it, our PE has verified their PE's calculations. Jay Bryan: When is the Planning Board expected to review this? s Craig Benedict: November 1 meeting. Jay Bryan: If the .Planning Board would like his and your appearance, would you be willing to come? Rusty Monroe: We're at your disposal. Geof Gledhill: Let me make the point that if there are questions that come up during the Planning Board's meeting, that those questions and the answers be brought back to the Board of County Commissioners' public hearing process so that they are in the record. They won't be in the record if the Planning Board has a conversation with the expert. Jay Bryan: Would that be presented in the minutes? Geof GIedhilI: I presume so, it may be necessary to have this man come back and confirm. Rusty Monroe: I would like to introduce one person, Jackie Hicks is with me, Jackie is our Director of the Mid - Atlantic region, she basically runs everything from Maryland down to Florida. So she may be the one that you're speaking with as opposed to me the next time. Someone asked if Ms. Hicks should be sworn in. Geof Gledhill: She could be sworn in at your next meeting and present that her statements were true at the Planning Board meeting. Jay Bryan: With regard to referring this to the Planning Board, could you instruct us? Geof Gledhill: What I would recommend is .that, when the matter is referred to the Planning Board, that the County Commissioners hold open this public hearing until the recommendation comes back to the Planning Board, and the only way to do that is to keep this public hearing alive, and that means that rather than the recommendation being that it be brought back no sooner than or later than, that in fact that it be brought back at a specific Board of County Commissioners' meeting. So the County Commissioners will keep this public hearing open for receipt of the Planning Board's recommendation along with any other evidence that may be pertinent or desirable on the part of the developer, including, for example, introduction of color photographs of the balloon test, if the applicant has those and wants to present those, so that they're meaningful. it S th Chair Jacobs: Is the date December 4 ? A motion was made by Commissioner Halkiotis, seconded by Commissioner Gordon that the Zoning Atlas petition and the Special Use Permit, Class A application be referred to the Planning Board for recommendations on both the Zoning Atlas amendment and the Special Use Permit, to be' returned to the BOCC no sooner than December 4, 2006. Also, the public hearing will be kept open as suggested by the County Attorney. VOTE: UNANIMOUS I -7(v MINUTES ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD NOVEMBER 1, 2006 REGULAR MEETING 7:30 -9:30 MEMBERS PRESENT: Jay Bryan, Chapel Hill Representative (Chair); Brian Crawford, Eno Township At- Large; Crauf ird Goodwin, Hillsborough Representative; Michelle Kempinski, Cedar Grove Township at Large; Joel Knight, Little River Representative; Sam Lasris, Cedar Grove Township At Large; Bingham Township; Renee Price- Saunders, Hillsborough Township At Large (Vice- Chair), Jeffrey Schmitt, Cedar Grove Township at Large MEMBERS ABSENT: Bernadette Pelissier, Bingham Township; Brian Dobyns, Cheeks Township Representative; Judith Wegner, Bingham Township At- Large;, Sandra Johnson Quinn, Eno Township STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Tom Altieri, Comprehensive Planning Supervisor; Robert Davis, Current Planning Supervisor; Sherri Ingersoll, Administrative Assistant II; Eddie Kirk, Planner Il, Michael Harvey, Planner II, Glenn Bowles, Planner II OTHERS PRESENT: Bruce Ballentine, Mike Parker, Rusty Monroe, Robin Blanton, Geoff Gledhill, Luther Misenhimer, Brian Ferrell, Steve Yuhasz AGENDA ITEM ##10: PIEDMONT ELECTRICAL MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT, CLASS A (Voting Item) PRESENTER: Glenn Bowles, Planner II Planning Board will consider making a recommendation to the BOCC on the Piedmont EMC Planned Development and Special Use Permit, Class A. Glenn Bowles: The Public Hearing was held on October 3, 2006, I wasn't sworn in at that time so I need to do that now. The purpose is to consider a request from Piedmont EMC to replace their 150 foot tower with a new 350 foot tower. This requires a Special Use Permit because when it was rezoned back in the early 80s, the legal description contained 33 or so acres, and the parcel now contains 34 acres. We also want to make clear that the tower is now a permitted principal use of the property. At the Joint Public Hearing, there were a number of issues discussed. One was the issue of migratory bird patterns. Staff had consulted with some local bird organizations, and there are no discemable bird patterns close to this site. There was design criteria requested of the applicant and they complied using the type of lighting proposed. There was also discussion about the balloon test. We did follow up with the regulations at the time and we will be considering possibly discussing that at a later date as to future changes. There was a co- location question. It can accommodate up to four or five co- locations. There was a question. about the tower being a public safety necessity. There will be testimony given later about that. Also, can the tower sustain hurricane strength winds? It is designed to have footings and foundation that are more than adequate. There were a number of conditions on the original plan, and we decided they were still in force. There was discussion about why we thought we needed a Planned Development part of this application as well as the Special Use Permit which is also on page 4a. I would like to introduce Rusty Monroe, Piedmont's consultant from the Center for Municipal Solutions. He gave testimony at the Joint Public Hearing. I-7 � Jay Bryan: In terms of the Resolution in the packet, it consists of Conditions of Approval and Findings of Fact. Are we being asked to make both recommendations? Glenn Bowles: That is correct. Craufurd Goodwin: It looks like there are no structures within 350 feet. Is that correct? Robin Blanton (Piedmont EMC): There is an existing garage. Craufurd Goodwin: Does this constitute any danger to the people there? Robin Blanton: There is no danger to them. They are not there all the time. Rusty Monroe: We made a positive recommendation. This particular applicant has gone through more hoops than usual. We have been overly stringent but we wanted to err on the side of safety. The need for the tower has been proven. There is no need to co- locate on other towers. The purpose of the facility is to provide a trunked two -way communication system for Piedmont Electric to connect three facilities. It also provides rapid restoration of services if there is a natural disaster. Renee Price - Saunders: Is there more need for the emergency services? Rusty Monroe: They have agreed to allow any emergency services to attach to this tower. Renee Price - Saunders: Is that part of this package? Are we trying to facilitate this use? Rusty Monroe: Yes. It would reduce the number of local towers. Craufurd Goodwin: Is there traditionally an area within a certain radius related to the size that is kept free for safety purposes in the event the tower falls over? Rusty Monroe: That is called a fall zone for habitable structures. Craufurd Goodwin: The fall zone does not include the building? Rusty Monroe: Yes. That building is within the fall zone. Glenn Bowles: They have already relocated two fuel tanks to dwell off [outside] the fall zone. Craufurd Goodwin: Is it is okay to have people work in that building within the fall zone? Rusty Monroe: We have never had that issue of an ad hoc use. Robin Blanton: The facility is occupied maybe four or five hours a day. Glenn Bowles: It complies with our setback requirements for the fall zone. Rusty Monroe: Piedmont over - designed this facility, for which they should be complimented. Michelle Kempinski: If there is a need for other towers within 2 '/2 miles maximum, what kind would they be? M• Rusty Monroe: Primarily commercial use. Michelle Kempinski: If they were'to co- locate, the other towers wouldn't be needed. Rusty Monroe: The shortest range would be PCS service, which is about a two mile range. Cellular can go three miles. Michelle Kempinski: There are other towers today within that range. Rusty Monroe: Piedmont looked at the other local structures, and they won't work for what Piedmont is trying to do. Jeffrey Schmitt: I recall that this is one of three towers for Piedmont as an integrated part of an entire system. Do they all need to be done? Robin Blanton: Yes, an integrated approach is necessary. If this were not done, the system would not work. Brian Crawford: There was a breakpoint built into the design, what is that? Rusty Monroe: That is an example of over - design. The bottom is over - designed so that if the tower is going to break, it will break at that point to get it to fall at a shorter range. Brian Crawford: That would be within the range. Rusty Monroe: Usually the facility will break and hang down. That is why we were concerned about the design. Jay Bryan: In terms of Homeland Security guidelines, is this in compliance for the County? Rusty Monroe: It does meet the guidelines so that in the event of a disaster, service would be uninterrupted or restored as rapidly as possible. Jay Bryan: My main concern is if we will have to build another 350 foot tower. The height does concern me. Rusty Monroe: It concerned us too. A majority of the towers are usually not this tall. There should be no need for another tower unless technology changes. Michelle Kempinski: With regards to the County services, and not Piedmont's? Rusty Monroe: Piedmont should not need any more. Renee Price - Saunders: What percentage would be public versus private use? Rusty Monroe: That is unknown, and that would be up to the providers. Renee. Price - Saunders: Has the State Police expressed an interest to use the tower? i-1q Rusty Monroe: No one has expressed the desire to at this point. I would speculate the County would use it. Glenn Bowles: In the report, Jack Ball and Todd Jones expressed the desire but no action has been taken. I would expect this in the future. There are few changes. There is tower structure removal bond for $75,000 to replace the bond documents on pages 147 and 148 for $16,500, which was the actual replacement cost. There is a document that is an extension of their FAA license. There is an analysis from a licensed real estate appraiser regarding the potential impact on real estate values in the area on page 149. Jay Bryan: (to Luther Misenhimer) Your letter states that the supply of homes for sale in the subject's market area is considered low in comparison to other parts of the Triangle, thus demand is high. I am not clear how you actually reached that opinion. Luther Misenheimer: It was actually difficult. Typically we look at the direct impact associated with a specific area. I looked at the surrounding properties as a whole and at the tether study that was done and at the horizon lines associated with the houses, and found that within most of the subdivisions, it was not visible. I didn't find there would be an overall effect on the property based on the tower. Jay Bryan: Based on the lack of visibility of the tower itself? Have you done these for other towers? Luther Misenheimer: No. I have not. Glenn Bowles: Both in the rezoning for the Planned Development and the SUP, the same question is asked, on page 13, under Article 8.2.1 and 8.2.2 where the staff did not make a recommendation regarding the finding which leads to the discussion of the public necessity. Jay Bryan: We need to make those specific. Is there a motion that we approve the Planning Staff's recommendation? MOTION made by Joel Knight to approve the Staff's findings of fact. Brian Crawford seconded. VOTE: Unanimous MOTION made by Brian Crawford to approve Article 8.2.2 and 8.2.3 regarding public necessity. Jeffrey Schmitt seconded. VOTE: Unanimous MOTION made by Jeffrey Schmitt to approve Article 8.2.1.2. Brian Crawford seconded. VOTE: Unanimous MOTION made by Brian Crawford to approve Article 8.2.1.3. [Article 8.2.1 Item 3 states that "The location and character of the use, if developed according to the plan submitted, will be in harmony with the area in which it is to be located and the use is in compliance with the general plan for the physical development of the County as embodied in these regulations or in the Comprehensive Plan, or portion thereof, adopted by the Board of County Commissioners "] Sam Lasris seconded. VOTE: Unanimous A Jay Bryan: We need to make a motion with regard to resolving that the Board of County Commissioners approve the ordinance for a Class A Special Use Permit. Glenn Bowles: We need two motions, one regarding the modification to the Planned Development and the second should be specific to the Class A Special Use Permit. MOTION made by Craufurd Goodwin to approve the Resolution for the Planned Development on page 5. Brian Crawford seconded. VOTE: Unanimous MOTION made by Sam Lasris to approve the Class A Special Use Permit on pages 6 -10. Michelle Kempinski seconded. VOTE: Unanimous Jay Bryan: For the record, I would ask that staff review the issue of what requirements should be used in terms of appraisers speaking on that issue in the future. AT FUTURE FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS • Further Solidify Debt Issuance Plans • Review Of Financial Impacts of "Best Practices" • GASB 45 Implementation (OPEB) • Carrboro High School Start up • Continue to Improve Fund Balance Position Finance Director, Post Audit Colin Hill, Audit Manager with Cherry, Beckart and Holland, said that they gave a clean opinion and the audit went smoothly. He thanked the Finance and Budget Departments. He said that they have also issued a management letter and a SAS 61 letter. The management letter contains recommendations concerning the internal control structure and policies in place at the County. The SAS 61 letter is required by professional standards and details the duties as the auditors. He described some of the changes of statistics and GASB statements. Commissioner Nelson asked if the internal audit could be done in-house and Ken Chavious said that at this time there is no internal audit function. The Revenue Department does "internal audits" of those departments that collect money. He said that internal audit goes way beyond that. He said that his recommendation is to start an internal audit function by bringing in additional resources. Commissioner Nelson asked about the undesignated fund balance and if there is a goal for this. He also asked about the average of undesignated fund balances for North Carolina. Ken Chavious said that the average for counties the size of Orange County is 17% of expenditures. His experience has been that there has been flexibility in the 12-15% range. Commissioner Foushee asked about the internal audit function and if this type of department were established, how many people would comprise this department. Ken Chavious said that it should be housed under the Manager's Office. It could start out very slowly. Commissioner Gordon said that she supports the internal audit function. Commissioner Gordon said that the computer controls sound like a good idea. She was also pleased to see that the Sportsplex had a favorable audit. Chair Jacobs said that the Board would be discussing best practices for financials later in the year. He wants everyone to know that Orange County pays strict attention to its financial position and how it affects the ability and capacity in the future. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 4 and the listing of debt issued in 2005- 2006. He said that on his calculation, the County spent 67% of its debt towards schools, which is almost exactly the same as the policy of 68.32%. 8. a. The Board considered the Planning Board recommendations regarding the PEMC request to amend its Planned Development — Office/institution (PD-01) zoning district and its Class A Special Use Permit to permit the principal use of a 350-foot replacement tower at its administrative and operations center located at 2500 NC Highway 86 South, Hillsborough. This item was transcribed verbatim per the Clerk to the Board. Geof Gledhill Before Craig Benedict goes any farther, I want to remind the Board that this is a quasi- judicial public hearing, in part. Mr. Benedict was sworn the last time he presented evidence, and he is still under oath. The same would be true with any other witnesses that testified. If there is anybody who is going to speak tonight who has not already been sworn in, they will need to be sworn in part of this public hearing,. Chair Carey: We'll recognize that fact when we get to the audience for speakers. Craig Benedict: Good evening, Craig Benedict, Orange County Planning Director. I have been sworn. This item is a two- part -item. First, it is the Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation Planned Development rezoning or atlas amendment That is the legislative part of the hearing as was referenced by the attorney. The second part of it is a special use permit, Class A, where there are special use conditions attached to the item. That is the quasi-judicial part of the hearing where sworn testimony can be taken. The original public hearing on this item was a joint public hearing with our Planning Board on October 3r . That was somewhat of a special public hearing in order to hear this item for Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation. This item was referred to our Planning Board, and on November 1St, the Planning Board heard this item and took additional written testimony from Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation. I also want to announce tonight that we have our County's consultant, Rusty Monroe, who represents the County for applications for telecommunication towers. He is here in the back row, and he's available also to answer any questions as the Board may have. He also was available to our Planning Board during that meeting and did provide some additional testimony. We have the applicant here tonight, Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation, and their appraiser, Mr. Misenheimer, may provide additional testimony tonight. The Planning Board deliberated on the information provided at the public hearing, the information within the application, and found that the rezoning, the atlas amendment, was in order and recommended approval. They reviewed the findings of fact within the special use permit and found that they did generally meet the conditions, the general conditions of health, safety, and welfare; maintenance of property values; and specific conditions. Based on the testimony that has been provided to date in both verbal and written form, we submit to you tonight the complete application with a recommendation that the application be approved to include first a decision on the atlas amendment to rezone to Planned Development Office Institutional, and if so 'inclined to approve that part of the application process, to proceed to special use permit Class A and include the resolution of various conditions for the Class A special use permit shown on pages 7 -17. Those are the items that we would expect if you do proceed to the special use permit part of the process included in the resolution of approval. What staff also recommends is that, given no more additional testimony tonight, the public hearing remains open to this meeting, and that after public comment is made that the Board close the hearing and deliberate upon the findings. That is all of my testimony and presentation for tonight. Chair Carey: Are there questions from members of the Board for Mr. Benedict? Hearing none, I will call on the only person who has signed up to speak on this item, and that is Mr. Mike Parker. Were you sworn at the last meeting? Mike Parker: I was. Chair Carey: Then you can proceed to speak. Mike Parker: I'm Mike Parker, I'm general counsel for Piedmont Electric, and I signed' up to speak only to make one point, which Mr. Benedict has already touched on. On agenda action item abstract that you have on the second page, one of the things, if you'll look at the third page, number six one of the issues that was raised at the joint meeting on October 3rd was that the tower was a public safety necessity, public need necessity. As l understand it, this is an either /or standard. Either it needs to be a public safety or public need necessity, or you have to have a finding that it will maintain or enhance the value of contiguous property. We 1 have presented at the Planning Board meeting, the written testimony that Craig Benedict referred to, which is the opinion of Mr. Misenheimer that it does not adversely affect the adjoining property values. He is here if you need to ask any questions. With that being said, we just make ourselves available. Chair Carey: Are there any questions from members of the Board? Is there anyone else in the audience who would like: to speak on this matter tonight? There was none. Seeing; none, would it be appropriate to close the public hearing and consider any action the Board wants to take tonight? Geof Gledhill Yes, Mr. Chair. A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to close the public; hearing. VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to approve the Zoning Atlas amendment in accordance with the attached resolution, which is incorporated by reference (page 7). VOTE: UNANIMOUS A motion was made by Commissioner Jacobs, seconded by Commissioner Foushee to approve the Special Use Permit; Class A application, in accordance with the attached resolution, which is incorporated by reference (page 13). VOTE:_ UNANIMOUS Commissioner Jacobs: One point that was made by this 'Board 'I believe had to do with the balloon test. It was item #4 on page 2. Some dissatisfaction was expressed, and although: this applicant met the standards, I hope we're going to revisit this, or at least have some further analysis of whether a five -hour period on a Monday morning is sufficient to let neighbors know through a balloon test what is going on. I think we just want to make sure people know. Chair Carey: We'll ask the Planning Director to make a note of that and bring it back for our consideration at the appropriate time, the standard, that is. Craig Benedict: So noted. b. Public Hearina on PrODOsed County and School - Capital Proiects and Related Debt Issuance Plans The Board considered conducting a public hearing on matters related to proposed County and school capital projects and related debt issuance plans. Budget Director Donna Coffey made a PowerPoint presentation. Debt Issuance Plans Orange County, NC Public Hearing December 12, 2006 Purpose of Public Hearing To receive public comment regarding the Board of County Commissioners' decision to move forward with debt issuance plans totaling; $95.9 million between fiscal years 2006 -07 and 2009 10 - $6.9 million 2001 Voter Approved Bonds - $85.3 million alternative financing for County (non- enterprise fund) projects