CCMIN100504 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Iserson did not feel it was possible to determine how many sites were available or needed at this point. Each wireless provider has its own network, technology and needs for antenna locations. It also depends on where leases can be obtained from private property owners. This ordinance makes it easier for providers to know where they would be allowed to have an antenna by looking at a map. Ms. Hosterman said she had not read anything that indicates there is a scientific way to say there is not certain harmful effects from these antennae. Mr. Iserson said there continue to be studies on both sides of the issue. Ms. Hosterman referred to the McKinley Park issue and felt that if Cingular is interested in continuing business with the City of Pleasanton, the City should have some bargaining position that would encourage the company to remove the antenna. Mr. Iserson felt that bargaining power was lost when the lease was signed. It may have been possible to remove the tower, but the facility would still be there for the term of the lease. Ms. Ayala had the same thought and asked if Cingular was looking for other sites in the City? Mr. Iserson said it was. Mr. Brozosky asked if a carrier requested a smaller set back or buffer than what is set forth in the ordinance, is there a process where it could get a variance? Mr. Iserson said an applicant can always apply for a variance, but the issue is whether findings can be made to justify it. Ms. Hosterman asked staff to explain the difference between the wireless facilities and microcells. She also asked why are microoells exempt from FCC regulations? Mr. Iserson did not know why they are exempt, but felt it could be because they are so Iow in voltage. There was discussion about the maps presented and Mr. Iserson explained the changes in locations where antenna would be allowed. Mayor Pice declared the public hearing open. Edith Callahan, 4418 Payne Road, strongly opposed changes to the buffers or the ordinance on health grounds and the possible decrease in property values. The residents trust the Council to protect their lifestyle, assets and security. It may be years before it is known if there is a health hazard from these antennae. Mark Smith, 4241 Cabernet Court, indicated he was part of the committee that helped draft the ordinance and he has been pleased with hew it has worked over the years. He was not happy with the park setback reduction and would prefer that it was less. Pleasanton City Council 7 10/05/04 Minutes