PC 03/25/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

understands that health and safety concerns of the community are first and foremost. He feels that the proposed ordinance needs significant additional work. He requested an opportunity to work on it further before the Commission considers adopting it. Mr. Newman cited example of areas that he feel need to be improved. He also expressed concern with the information required under the lease provision, nothing that the economic dealings of companies should not have to be disclosed. He asked for the opportunity to discuss the intentions of the ordinance further with the City Attorney and also offered his assistance in continuing to work on the ordinance. In response to a question by Commissioner Kumazan as to what section of the ordinance requires economic information, Mr. Newman referred him to page 25, section 18110.260. He stated that that section requires a copy of the actual agreement. He suggested that only a summary of lease agreement be disclosed, i.e. commencement date, expiration date, and renewal terms. Commissioner Bazker took exception to Mr. Newton's offer to help change the ordinance "at the 11th hour". She feels it's unfair to the many people who have worked so hazd and for so long on this issue. Brad Hirst, 1811 Santa Rita Road, #128, represented Sprint PCS. He noted that the term "customer service" has never been mentioned this evening and that is what Sprint is trying to achieve. He also noted that the telecom industry employs more people in Pleasanton than any other industry, and it's unfortunate that Sprint's contribution to the community feels unwelcome. He further stated that he wants an ordinance to be adopted that has no referenced whatsoever to health effects. He also agreed that the ordinance is not totally in compliance with the Telecommunications Act. He also reported that Sprint has an application that has been pending since December, and they cannot move forwazd until this ordinance is acted upon. He also stated that the 300-foot setback is not a major issue for Sprint, but rather the aesthetics. He would like for the process to be concluded and soon as possible and wants the proposed ordinance to be modified that drops all references to EMF. Mr. Hirst pointed out to the Commission that the tower in Kottinger Park replaced acity-owned tower that had been there for over 30 yeazs. Brenda Weak, 5995 Corte Venado, feels that this situation is unique because businesses are trying to operate out of residential neighborhoods. She submitted a petition with over 400 signatures from people who do not want the antennas in their neighborhoods. She expressed concem of the impact they will have on home values. She also stated that it is unfair to everybody who has worked so hard and long on the ordinance, only to have somebody from the industry come in and want to change it now. She asked the Commission to adopt the ordinance as proposed. Ron Kane, 3679 Canelli Court, stated that he is in support of the ordinance as a resident who sees the benefits of wireless communications. He commented that when 400 signatures were collected on the petition, people just saw the antenna, but maybe did not really understand what it does. He gave examples of how he believes telecommunications enhance people's quality of life. He believes that new technology may be a problem with this ordinance in the future. Michael Kelch, reported that he is the epidemiologist hired by the City to prepare a report reviewing the - health effects research and RF frequency exposure. He noted that he participated in the meeting and in developing the ordinance. He stated that there is no conclusive evidence to date that RF frequency is Planning Commission Page 14 March 25, 1998