Agenda - Council - 08/26/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

CITIZEN' INPUT Mr. }'obn Rambosek, 13887 Heather Street, Andover, stated that he owns the property adjacent to the proposed site, which he is in the process of selling. However, his prospective buyer is waiting to see if the monopole is approved. He noted receipt ora later from Edina Realty indicating that when this type of pole or transmitter is near residential areas, the residential property drops in value by 6% to 7%, and it takes longer to market these properties. The definition of a conditional use permit requires that the permit not result in reducing property values of neighboring properties. He stated that there axe other sites available ~n Patmsey Plaza that will not affect his property. Mr. R. ambosek stated that if the application is approved, he would request a better buffer than the one proposed of red cedar trees. He requested staggered rows of trees. Chairperson Bawden asked how long Mr. Rarnbosck property has been for sale.' Mr. Rambosek answered, two months. Motion by Commissioner Terry, seconded by Commissioner Deemer to enter the letter dated August 2, 1997, from Edina Realty, signed Marlys Hallberg, into the public hearing record. Motion carried. Voting yes: Chairperson Bawden, Commissioners Terry, Deemer, J'ensen, LaDue. Voting no: None. Absent: Commissioners Holland and Thomd. Mr. Peter Coyle, Applicant's Attorney, Larkin, Hoffman and Daly Law Firm, stated that he would respectfially disagree with those who say that ?CS towers have a detrimental effect on the value of residential property. Having tracked real estate sales directly adjacent to towers, it has been found that assessors cannot confirm or determine a negative impact. He does not doubt Mr. Rambosek opinion, but evidence indicates that there is no impact other than individual reaction. He offered to provide the City with analyses that show that eoncluslon. Mr. Coyle stated that the applicant would be open to discussing buffer landscaping options with staff. The applicant would also be willing to consider other possible locations that would be feasible on the property. Mr. Coyle requested that the reference to ionized radiation in No. 8 of the resolution be deleted because the Telecommunications Act of 1996 clearly prohibits cities from any authority in regulating the issue. Commissioner Deemer asked what mount of flexibility there is in the location of the monopole. Mr. Coyle responded that APT operates on a standard grid pattern encompassing the northern suburbs, including Ramsey. Each site is interdependent on the other sites, but there is flexibility of a few hundred feet in the location of the tower. Mr. IeffPeterson, APT, stated that in light of the City's new ordinance regulating monopoles, the proposed site is a compromise location that places the tower as close to the ideal place as possible and yet complies with the City ordinance. Public Rearing/Planning Commission/August 4, 1997 Page 2 of 3