01/19/2000 Meeting Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Public Heariag, Ord. 98-131 Jaeuary 19, 2000 where towers can be located. This legislation is strictly an overlay district for privately owned properties. Mr. Nestoff said he understands the city cannat legally do anything about it, but he is concerned about the electromagnetic emissions that might come from the towers. Jay Hadsell, 2S 1 S 1 Brookpazk Road • Wanted to know why the overlay district was so specific as he noted that some pazcels aze in the azea and other parcels just a few feet away aze not. Mr. Limpert said he believed it was drawn by parcel lines. John Thomas • Asked Mr. Hunt if the Telecommunications Act restricts the number of uses in any district and did it provide for any kind of restrictions of the number of companies that could use a specific district. Mr. Hunt said not at all. Mr. Thomas wondered whether the overlay zoning regulations supercede the existing zoning regulations if there was a conflict. Mr. Gazeau said yes. Law Director Gazeau noted that the tower zoning has its own regulations. Mr. Thomas said he thinks it is of prime importance to establish other areas in the city. His proposal to Council (phase one) was that they consider the least invasive, the least impact on residents, by restricting the area to azound the CEI easement and west of that. Should technology and the community needs change down the road, then they could consider expanding that area to accommodate for the technology or industry needs. Mr. Thomas expressed his belief that the city needs to improve notil`ication processes. Mark Michael, 6083 Wild Oak • Thanked Mr. Thomas for doing a great job. He feels very strongly about allowing the azea to border up as close as it does to residential properties. Mr. Michael has the feeling that something is going to happen as soon as this legislation is approved. He wondered what the economic impact on the residential homes would be. Mr. Hunt said he has reseazched this issue in the past for a piece of legislation done in eastern Ohio, and he knows of only two appraisal studies that have been done. One was done by a local appraiser in the Cleveland area at the request of AT&T and there was no detriment to property value found. The second was done in Illinois and it was found the that Board of Revision in the county had reduced property values in a subdivision where a tower was erected. There is real tangible evidence that there is some negative effect. That is why we are concerned about trying to pull away from the homes. Law Director Gazeau reiterated that Council must make reasonable accommodations for these towers. It is dictated by federal law that you cannot restrict and cannot fail to provide reasonable accommodations. Mr. Hunt said that, if the overlay district is restricted to the area west of the CEI easements and other areas of the city aze not added, then there is a potential problem. We still need to look at areas in the east end of the city. Mr. Nashaz commented that the BZD Committee would be looking at other areas. Mr. O'Grady said he felt that it had been inferred that there is a project online and the city was scrambling to put things together. That is not so. He noted that Council and the administration are working to protect the interests of the residents. To do that, the city has hued an expert, Mr. Hunt, to look S -. . smnee _ AmY3d3~~a na,,.,.v,~. ,-..:nra..a~ .. ~. ... _..