01/19/2000 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Public Hearing, Ord. ~-131 January 19, 2000 Councilman O'Grady thanked Mr. Thomas for his proposals. He noted that there is a reason for the 200 foot height towers as the city wants to encourage co-location. Law Director Gateau noted that, if the city does not have this district, then according to federal law, the towers could be built virtually anywhere. So, this is a protective measure. Ray Nied, Charles Road • Asked how many towers were being proposed for the area. Councilman Gateau said that the towers can be no closer than one-half mile and this area could probably support two or three towers. Mr. Limpert noted that this does not mean that towers are going to be built but rather, if they are going to be built at that end of town, they would be allowed in that area rather than close to residential properties. Frederick Crider, 31512 Lorain Road • Expressed concern about the number of towers in the area and the height of the towers. He said there are electronic emissions that are involved with the high tension wires and probably would be so for these towers. The people in the area would be subjected to a goad deal of electronic energy. Council Gateau said that one of the provisions of the 1996 telecommunications act is that the issue of emissions and their effect on health cannot be taken into consideration because of the conflicting studies regarding the effect of telecommunication emissions. Mr. Hum agreed that there are no conclusive studies one way or the other. Mr. Crider suggested that the 200 foot towers should have lights because of the close proximity of Hopkins Airport. Also, he is still concerned about the effect of emissions. Law Director Gateau reiterated that those issues, according to the federal government, cannot be considered. Councilman McKay noted that the antennas have been mounted on buildings in the city and there have been no complaints. John Kilnapp, 31061 Old Shore Drive • Is concerned about three issues, first the emissions problem. He doesn't want the city to create a problem similar to the "Love Canal" problem. Secondly, he does not feel the notice to residems was adequate. (It was explained to him that notices only go out for public hearings, and he did receive a notice of this public hearing.) He was confused as to where the towers could be placed in relation to the CEI towers that are already in the area. Mr. Limpert explained that the CEI towers are not the same as the telecommunications towers. Sandy Grasskemper, 30810 Old Shore Drive • Wanted to know who Mr. Hunt worked for. Councilman Gateau explained that Mr. Hunt is an attorney who is a consultant to the city. He is an expert in this field and works with municipalities to regulate telecommunication towers. She wanted to know who profits from the towers. Mr. Limpert explained that the tower on the east end of town in Clague Park was put on city property and the city receives the revenue. Whoever owns the property, receives the benefit, whether it's the city or a private owner. Mrs. Grasskemper expressed her concerns about health issues for residents. She would like to see the profits put aside for taking care of potential health 2 _ ~e,SVRiR~A,i~M+,iaM.ti. sm. ~. , .. -~.vw wirr~tt~x.+~nrr ~• ---..,,_. -,,,-~.~;,~..