Laserfiche WebLink
3O2 <br /> <br /> values, based on the visual impact of the towers and the public's <br /> perception of the effects of the transmissions. She requested that <br /> the towers be moved to a more central location in the Business Park <br /> to prevent any visual impacts from causing any property <br /> devaluation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Larry Kriegbaum, 3225 Clifford Circle, indicated that he <br /> wanted to go on public record that he would exercise his legal <br /> recourse against the applicants if the towers negatively affect the <br /> value of his property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bob Dickson, 5913 Arthur Drive, expressed concern about <br /> the towers being built close to a residential area when there are <br /> other locations in the Business Park where the towers could be <br /> placed. He stated that it was unfair to have the residents' <br /> property values reduced to allow a business from out of town to <br /> come into the Hacienda Business Park. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mark Sweeney, 4309 Hacienda Drive, owner of the buildings <br /> where the cellular switch and service equipment are proposed to be <br /> installed, showed aerial pictures Qf the Hacienda Business Park and <br /> Parkside Drive neighborhoods. He pointed out that the towers would <br /> be located about 1,600 to 3,000 feet away from the houses in <br /> question and would not be visible from those residences. He urged <br /> the Council to deny the appeal and approve the project. He then <br /> introduced Mr. John Thornton, GTE Mobilnet Radio Engineer, Ms. Mary <br /> O'Toole, GTE Mobilnet Project Engineer; Dr. Peter Polson, GTE <br /> Mobilnet Consultant who prepared the environmental assessment <br /> report on the microwave and radiowave transmission and reception to <br /> and from the building, to answer any questions on the project. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer inquired if the pole needed to be 65 feet tall. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sweeney replied that it could be lowered but that <br /> transmission and reception would be substantially enhanced by a <br /> 65-foot pole. He added that the business transaction and <br /> investment is conditioned on a 65-foot pole. <br /> <br /> Ms. Nancy Roach, 3290 Marilyn Court, commented that the <br /> application before the Council included items which were not <br /> brought out at the Planning Commission meeting. <br /> <br /> Mr. Mercer referred the matter to Mr. Swift. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift explained that the original photo montages depicted <br /> a two-arm antenna, which was later corrected by GTE to be <br /> three-armed. The Planning Commissioners were given a top-view <br /> cross-section picture of the three-armed antenna, which was then <br /> discussed at the meeting. He indicated that the actual description <br /> <br /> - 6 - <br /> 7-16-91 <br /> <br /> <br />