2004-10-11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Session 1937 October 11,2004 Lynn Breakstone, 7220 Princeton, submitted a written statement to the Council as she was unable to attend, stating that her objection to a cell tower is focused upon their danger to the bird population, the vast number of bird carcasses resulting from mortality caused by the tower, habitat destruction, and the obliteration of green space. Elsie Beck Glickert, 6712 Etzel Avenue, who was not able to attend, submitted a written statement objecting to the large number of cell phone towers located in the six square miles of University City. If the City is forced to host an additional tower, she wants it located in the Cunningham Industrial Park on vacant land owned by the Land Clearance Authority, four blocks east of Heman Park. Kay Drey, 515 West Point Avenue, expressed her opinion that this issue centers on determining the extent to which citizens have the right to choose those qualities that enhance the livability of the City. She stressed the City Council's right to approve the location of a cell tower. Also, she submitted a petition from over one hundred citizens requesting establishment of a Cell Tower Task Force to study legal, health, economic and aesthetic impacts of such towers and asked the City Council to withhold action on the issuance of installation permits until the completion of its findings. She asked the City Council to issue an ordinance which includes the following issues: criteria for sitting of facilities, requirements for monitoring microwave activity emitted restrictions for requests to heighten towers and collocation of equipment of additional wireless service companies on the same towers, and requirements for a surety bond to cover decommissioning and removal costs of the tower. Requirements for design, operation and maintenace of the tower's electrical equipment shelter should also be included. She opposes this proposal. Barbara Chicherio, 720 Harvard Avenue, opposed the cell phone tower in Heman Park based upon environment and safety concerns. She fears long-term effects and favors a task force. Dorothy M. Doyle, 6334 Pershing Avenue, expressed concern about aesthetic and environmental issues related to the cell phone tower, and pointed out that the City Council has the right to deny particular placement. She opposes this proposal and favors a citizen's committee to study the proposal Saundra Lowes, 7425 Teasdale Avenue, is especially concerned about safety issues connected with the cell phone tower and their capacity to emit radiation, to cause cancer, genetic damage to children and a decreased sense of well-being. She favors a task force to study the matter. Arlene Sandier, 6947 Columbia Avenue, spoke about the importance of green space as an essential characteristic of a livable city. She posed a number of questions and made suggestions, stressing the need to inform citizens before they surrender public park space. She favors a committee studying the proposal carefully. Page 3