01/09/2001 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

a mobile sources. On the receiving end, they do not have to be 5stories as mobile phones are usually at Sfeet. This is a different form of technology at the descending side their main tower is above Sstories it is the receiving end that is not, but it will be a fixed antenna. Therefore, the applicant's request should be look more like the cell phone side of the ordinance then the tower side. Mr. Hrheha wanted it stated for the record that the Planning Commission is not paid to be present they are all North Olmsted residents and volunteer, because they are concern citizens. Mr. Tallon indicated that they could make the applicants put up a 20 foot pole and then put the antenna on that, but it is easier to buffer the residents from a 6foot 4inch pole that will be placed on the roof. Councilwoman Sarenger commented that she had been attending the meetings and listening to the comments and understood the residents concerns. Neither the FCC nor auy other government agency is infallible, it was pouited out earlier that the FCC has suggested that more studies need to be made to get a clearer understanduig of what the antennas do. She urged the board to support the residents and disapprove the request. Ms. Moffit commented that she was married on her porch and there are over 20 kids in the neighborhood that will be exposed to these antennas as well as parents and family pets which all should be taken into consideration. Mr. Kurlander indicate that they wanted the residents to be happy and tried to assure them that the antennas will not hurt them. He believed that they have shown that they are below the FCC nunimum requirements and are a point to point operation and there will be no pets or residents exposed to the beam. The houses are on higher ground and they would like to place the antenna towards the front of the building north farther away from the homes and at the edge allowing the parapet wall to block the anteiuia from view. The antenna is only 2foot and will not lower the value of asly of the hoines in the area. There are no alternatives to having the antenna's anywhere but on the roof for the customers. The buildings can not be made any taller then what they are and to serve our customers the antenna's have to be on the roof therefore, we do suffer practical difficulty. They will do the best to blend the antenna uito the building. Mr. Tallon suggested that the board would like the autenna shielded from the residents. Mr. Kurlander questioned what type of shieldulg the board wanted. Mr. Tallon suggested that the applicant should use some type of box that would look similar to the AC units. Mr. Hreha suggested using a three-sided box around the antenna's that would block the beam from the neighbors. Mr. Asseff believes the antenna needs to be placed as low as possible and blend into the building. Mr. Tallon indicated that the issue of the shielding will be brought up when and if the applicants retum. It is up to the applicant to come up with the design that will shield the antennas from the neighbors. R. Tallon motioned to recommend that the Board of Zoning Appeals grant the variance request by Teclulology Park I& II (Teligent, Inc.) of 25209-25249 Country Club Blvd. witli the exclusion of some type of screenuig be ulcluded to buffer the residents. The screening should use a material that caxi block the RF Waves. The inotion was seconded by R. Koeth, roll call on the motion; R. Tallon, T. Hreha, C. Allan, S. Asseff and R. Koeth, yes, K. O'Rourke; no. Motion approved. 3. Teclmologv Park II (Teligent, hic.) 25209-25249 Countrv Club Blvd.: Proposal consists of installing a 24-inch microwave antenna on a two-(2) story building for use with fiYed wireless telephone technology. Note: 1. Height variance will be required. 2. Planning Conunission tabled this proposal November 14 & 28, 2000. 4. Ed Schartman 6770 Industrial Parkwav: Proposal consists of deternunation of similar use of storing auto's, trucks and trailers under section 1145.03 (fl. Note: Section 1145.03 (c) allows for production of auto parts and (e) (3) permits material storage and therefore these parts may be warehoused in this area, however there are no provisions for storage of automobiles.