A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Board gives guidance to wireless‑tower applicant, questions faux‑tree camouflage

March 06, 2026 | New Hanover County, North Carolina


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Board gives guidance to wireless‑tower applicant, questions faux‑tree camouflage
The New Hanover County Planning Board provided feedback March 5 during a preliminary forum for a proposed 185‑foot wireless support structure on Angus Drive (special use permit S26), intended to serve T‑Mobile and up to three additional carriers.

Lead planner Zach explained that wireless support structures are allowed in R‑20 residential districts via a special use permit but must meet use‑specific standards including setbacks equal to tower height, landscaping, fencing and FAA/FCC compliance. Staff reminded the board that local governments may not regulate towers based on radio frequency emissions.

Scott Holmes, attorney for the applicant, introduced Jonathan Yates of Hellman & Yates and said the site — located in a densely wooded area with an existing high‑voltage transmission easement — fit the utility‑with‑utility approach the company prefers. The applicant reported FAA determinations of no hazard to air navigation and no required lighting.

“From a T‑Mobile standpoint, it was a perfect location,” the applicant said, noting the site’s ability to address significant local service gaps along Chair Road and nearby corridors.

Several board members urged the applicant to avoid faux‑tree (monopine) camouflage, describing those features as visually conspicuous in many contexts. Members recommended the applicant emphasize the technical necessity for the site and the wooded/utility easement context when presenting evidence at the quasi‑judicial commissioners’ hearing. Staff reminded the applicant that as a quasi‑judicial hearing, evidence should be factual and presented in person to the Board of County Commissioners.

This was a preliminary forum only; no recommendation to commissioners was made. The applicant will appear at the commissioners’ quasi‑judicial hearing on April 6, 2026, and staff will post the materials for public review prior to that meeting.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee