PC 112502 - Laserfiche WebLink

- Commissioner Sullivan questioned the procedure for someone wanting to challenge the ordinance. Mr. Iserson advised that the Planning Commission could request that the City Council initiate a review of the ordinance. In response to an inquiry from Commissioner Arkin, Mr. Cazinha advised that he might feel comfortable if the antennas were placed 1,000 feet from his home; however, he is not sure how strong the radio waves are. Misako Hill, 4420 Rosewood Drive, Building 2, Third Floor, Pleasanton, represented Cingular Wireless. Ms. Hill reported that the proposed antennas have met all of the requirements of the City's wireless telecommunications ordinance. She noted that Cingular has provided an alternate site analysis, a peer review report, and community outreach meetings. She advised that the proposed project will not change the physical appearance of the building and that the antennas would not be visible, as they would be screened behind the parapet. Discussion ensued regarding the potential alternate sites and the review of the site analysis. In response to an inquiry from Commission Arkin, Ms. Hill advised that the power output of the transceivers is about 400 watts. She noted that it is a low power system. In reply to a question from Commissioner Roberts, Mr. Iserson advised that the Federal government has limited jurisdiction for municipalities to regulate wireless antennas. He noted that municipalities are not allowed to consider health impacts and they cannot discriminate r- amongst carriers and the same rules must be applied to all carriers. He advised that they can regulate on the basis of aesthetics, visibility, and noise issues. He reported that the committee determined that a 300-foot distance would diminish a lot of the potential impacts that were found in the studies. In response to an inquiry from Commissioner Sullivan as to whether there has been any challenges to the Federal law, Ms. Nerland advised that the law was established in 1996 and challenges to the law have failed. Commissioner Sullivan asked if the Commission's decision could be based on property values. Mr. Iserson replied that this is a difficult issue, in that during the committee review it was determined that some people feel that a cell antenna is a positive influence on property values. Mr. Iserson noted that the ordinance does take into account property values and that is the basis for the 300-foot setback. Robyn Cazinha, 6150 Homer Court, stated that she feels the installation of the antennas will adversely affect their property value and that of their neighbors. She noted that a real estate broker in the Tri-Valley area has confirmed this and he has also advised that they would have to disclose this information to potential buyers. She commented that she does not believe the ability to use a cell phone in your home out-weights the loss of property value. She noted that it is not the visibility of the antennas to which they are opposed, but the possible health effects that make their home less valuable. -- PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES November 25, 2002 Page 3