pf09-032 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

�' 3'- g.� "35 ,86 PUBLIC HEARING The duly noticed public hearing for the cotvD�T[oNa,L tisE application was concluded by the Planning Commission on January 6, 2010. �� 8.1 Several members of the public addressed the Planning Commission during the public 3� hearing. All of the residents who spoke live near Acorn Park and most of them were ° 3� opposed to the tower; the primary concern appeared to be aesthetic, but some were also �c apprehensive about the facility interfering with park activities. One resident spoke in ' 3 � favor of the proposal because the tower would tend to be overlooked over time but the ��2 amenity of increased wireless services would remain. �i y3 8.2 Individual members of the Planning Commission had definite opinions, but there was � 9a more ambivalence in the body as a whole. For the most part, 1�4embers were sensitive to ?�5 the visual impacts of the proposed monopole structure and they were reluctant to '�n recommend approving such a facility before the Parks Master Planning effort had yielded �� its conclusions for this park. ':�3 8.3 Despite their objections, Commissioners seemed to recognize the value of the services �� provided by the sort of facility being discussed, and most of the discussion revolved 20o around relocating the tower to someplace where the impacts might be diminished. Some 20� locations suggested by the Commission included the commercial properties in the 202 southwest corner of Rice Street and County Road C, or in the easternmost finger of Acorn 203 Park adjacent to Rice Street; these locations were viewed as being no more visually 2oa obtrusive and more out-of-the-way with respect to the park. In addition to being zo5 significantly closer to individual residences in one of these suggested locations, Planning 2os Division staff is given to understand that these locations are not apt substitutes for the 20� proposed location in terms of the intent of providing the wireless service coverage. 20f3 9.O RECOMMENDATION z�� 9.1 In its review of the CoND[T[otv.a[, usE application, the Planning Commission found that a z�� telecommunication tower in the proposed location could have adverse impacts on the 2�^� public park, which is to be considered with such requests, and consequently voted (4-1) to :� i z recommend denial of the proposed CoND[T[otvAL USE. �� 3 9.2 Based the general consensus of City staff in support of the proposed location of the �' a telecommunication tower indicated in Sections 5-6 of this report and the findings outlined 2,5 in Section 7 of this report, the Planning Division continues to recommend approval of the � � n proposed CONDITIONAL USE, subject to the following conditions: 2�� a. 218 21;� 22o b. 221 222 c. '>>:3 �2= The applicant shall provide documentation demonstrating that Clearwire's equipment will operate within the technical requirements of the Federal Communications Commission; The tower and ground-mounted equipment shall be located as shown on the site plan included with this report as part of Attachment D; The top of the proposed monopole tower shall not be higher than 125 feet above the grade at the base of the structure and the color of the tower structure shall be selected so as to blend into the park setting as much as possible; PF09-032 RCA 011110 Page 6 of 7 • •