Laserfiche WebLink
303 <br /> <br />on the Council Agenda may be slightly different but that it is the <br />same antenna considered by the Planning Commission. <br /> <br /> Ms. Murphy stated that there are numerous wide open spaces <br />away from homes. She added that at the Planning Commission <br />meeting, Mr. Sweeney had indicated that the tower could be <br />relocated a quarter of a mile away, without interference, and that <br />a relay toggle switch could be used. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sweeney replied that the tower could be moved but that he <br />did not own property a quarter of a mile away. He explained that <br />the monopole in Pleasanton will be connected directly to the switch <br />and will service a number of monopoles in the area. He added that <br />he did not see any reason to move the tower when its visual impact <br />is minimal. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired if GTE felt that it would have to move the <br />rest of its facility if the pole were relocated. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sweeney replied that the building, which is 25,000 square <br />feet and made of steel, is ideal for GTE. He indicated that there <br />is no other vacant building of the same size in the Business Park <br />and that moving to another building is not an option that would <br />work for GTE. <br /> <br /> Ms. Mohr inquired how the facility would be a back-up for <br />public safety, as indicated in the Planning Commission Minutes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sweeney replied that with the antenna in place, cellular <br />communication in Pleasanton would be possible even in the event <br />that a major catastrophe interrupts all regular communication. He <br />stated that this system was used extensively in the San Jose and <br />Bay Area during the Loma Prieta earthquake last October 1989. In <br />addition, the antenna will enhance the service of the cellular <br />operated call boxes along the freeways from Alcosta Boulevard to <br />Sunol and up the Dublin grade. <br /> <br /> There being no further testimony, Mr. Mercer declared the <br />public hearing closed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler commented that he did not see a discrepancy with <br />the uses of the Business Park or a significant visual impact on the <br />homes. He added that this visual impact would not be changed much <br />by moving the towers to another part of the Business Park. <br /> <br /> - 7 - <br /> 7-16-91 <br /> <br /> <br />