Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> - - - <br /> Minutes of the Regular Planning Commission Meeting, September 2, 1987 . <br /> Page 2 <br /> CASE #87-28 (Cont'd) Miller further advised that there are a number of <br /> mature trees (40 to 50 ft. height) in the rear yard, . <br /> which will reduce the visibility of the antenna. Because of the slimness of the <br /> support post and relatively small mast, the visual impact should be no greater <br /> than that of a flagpole. <br /> The Planner noted that the applicant has stated that Federal court action has <br /> overruled the City's SUP requirements for amateur radio antenna. Miller <br /> suggested that such information has not been submitted to the City Attorney for <br /> his evaluation. <br /> Miller concluded that because of its size and placement, the proposed antenna <br /> satisfies public safety concerns and will have minimal visual impact on <br /> neighboring properties. <br /> Joseph Kahnke, 1541 Edgewater Avenue, stated that he had contacted the two <br /> neighbors adjacent to his property and they had no objections to the proposed <br /> antenna. He displayed a brochure which showed the design of the antenna for the <br /> Commission members. <br /> Comments from the Floor <br /> Elvera Sheehy, 1505 Edgewater Ave., questioned if the antenna would affect <br /> television reception in the neighborhood and if it could be placed closer to <br /> Kahnke's home; she also asked to see the design of the antenna. <br /> Kahnke advised that if the antenna were placed closer to his home it would <br /> distort the signal; he also stated that the antenna should not affect . <br /> television or radio reception and explained the FCC frequency regulations. <br /> Ray Conroy, 1528 Edgewater Ave., expressed concern with television interference <br /> and aesthetics; he preferred the antenna placement as described by the Planner. <br /> Chairman Curtis referred the Commission to a letter, dated 9-2-87, from Fred <br /> Berndt, Jr., 1575 Edgewater Ave., stating his opposition to the proposed <br /> antenna. Berndt advised the antenna would be an eyesore, decrease his property <br /> value and its use could interfere with delicate electronic equipment in his <br /> home. <br /> After determining there were no further comments from the floor, Chairman <br /> Curtis closed the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. <br /> Member Meury questioned if the SUP could restrict any additional apparatus from <br /> being placed on the antenna. <br /> Planner Miller advised that the SUP would have to be amended, which would <br /> require formal action and a public hearing, if the applicant wanted to place <br /> any additional apparatus on the antenna. <br /> Chairman Curtis questioned if there were any other antennas in the Village. <br /> Miller advised there were several others in Arden Hills; he reviewed the <br /> dimensions and locations of a few of these antennas. . <br /> Commission members discussed the location of the proposed antenna, provision in <br /> the SUP for restricting additional apparatus on the antenna, and safety issues. <br /> Member Zehm advised that she had two towers located in her neighborhood and was <br /> not aware of any television nor radio interference. <br />