Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Telecom Tower topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Davidson County approves Tillman Infrastructure tower in Arcadia with removal-bond conditions

Davidson County Board of Commissioners · November 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After a quasi-judicial hearing, the Davidson County Board of Commissioners approved a special-use permit for a 160-foot Tillman Infrastructure monopole near NC Highway 150, imposing conditions including a removal/decommissioning bond and legal review of bond language.

The Davidson County Board of Commissioners on Nov. 24 approved a special-use permit for Tillman Infrastructure LLC to build a 160-foot monopole telecommunications tower (170 feet including a lightning rod) on a 7.05-acre parcel near NC Highway 150 in Arcadia, subject to conditions requiring a removal/decommissioning bond and legal review of bond language.

Applicant John Birchfield, representing Tillman Infrastructure and LCC Telecom Services, described the project as a 160-foot monopole designed to carry antennas for up to three carriers, initially occupied by Verizon. Birchfield said the site meets ordinance submittal requirements — site plan, balloon test photos, fall-zone letter and documentation claiming no suitable colocation option at a market rate on a nearby American Tower Company lattice tower. He said Tillman would agree to a removal timeline if the facility were taken out of service.

Andrew Baker, an appraiser with Valbridge Property Advisors hired by the applicant, presented a market review of five sales and several commercial-land comparables across the region and told commissioners that, in his professional opinion, the evidence did not show a consistent property-value decrease attributable to towers. Several nearby landowners and residents, including Will Warwick and Foker Stever, disputed that conclusion and described practical site concerns — access and right-of-way confusion, proximity to homes and decks, noise from on-site generators, and fears about a tower collapse.

Residents raised requests and objections including: negotiating access easements for nearby property owners, requiring a removal/decommissioning bond large enough to cover future demolition costs, posting an operations phone number on-site, and clarifying whether the access road would be gated. Birchfield and planning staff answered questions about setbacks (the site meets ordinance setback computations), FAA lighting obligations, and whether Verizon’s array would be moved from the existing lattice tower to the new monopole.

Planning staff told the board the application met the county’s filing and technical requirements and framed the decision as weighing four standards: (1) promotion of public health, safety and welfare; (2) compliance with required regulations; (3) maintenance or enhancement of contiguous property value or demonstration of public necessity; and (4) consistency with the county’s development plans. Counsel and staff reminded the board that federal and state law limit what the county may consider (for example, radio-frequency emissions are regulated by federal authorities).

After sworn testimony and deliberation, commissioners voted on the four standards (standard 1: approved 5–1; standard 2: approved 6–0; standards 3 and 4 approved by majority voice). The board then voted to approve the special-use permit and asked staff and legal counsel to work with the applicant to specify a removal/decommissioning bond (the board discussed using a percentage of removal cost and periodic bond review) and review final bond language before issuing the order. The motion to approve carried.

What happens next: Staff and the county attorney will draft specific bond language and decommissioning conditions for legal review and inclusion in the final order before a building permit is issued.

Why it matters: The decision sets a precedent about how the county treats economic arguments for new towers (applicant argued colocation was commercially impracticable) and demonstrates the board’s use of permit conditions — notably a removal bond — to manage long-term decommissioning risk.