Virginia Beach Planning Commission Public Hearing Minutes November 14Th, 2018
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Virginia Beach Planning Commission Public Hearing Minutes November 14th, 2018 Item #1 PI Tower Development Conditional Use Permit 5238 Challedon Drive District – Kempsville November 14, 2018 APPROVED Mr. Fisher: The first item being heard today is agenda item number one, PI Tower Development, LLC. This is an application for a Conditional Use Permit for Communication Tower on property located at 5238 Challedon Drive. Is there an applicant here to speak? Please state your name for the record. Ms. Murphy: Good afternoon chairman, vice chair, members of the Planning Commission, for the record my name is Lisa Murphy. I am a local attorney and I am here today on behalf of the applicant. I would like to thank Jonathan Sanders for working with us on this diligently. As most of you all know the recession greatly increased the number of wireless only homes. Back years ago when I started doing this, there was 10% or fewer of homes were wireless only. When the recession hit, folks start to getting rid of their landlines most of us either have it and don’t use it or don’t have a landline. In fact, 52% of Americans are wireless only at home that number is 70% for millennials, so they don’t even know what a wire line phone is. So you have the number of users especially in residential areas increasing dramatically but you also have the number of users increasing dramatically. You have people using their phones as their basically their laptop. They are downloading, they are streaming, they are videotaping today’s session. I don’t know if they are streaming it live, but all of these things take data and capacity and additional antennas which is why we are here today. The proposed tower, the initial user on this tower will be T-Mobile as it indicates in the staff report. T-Mobile's existing network has a hole in it. They have got existing towers to the north, tower that they are collocated on the ground communications owns to the east about a mile. They are on an SBA towers at the Baxter Road, to the south. There is a tower at the Fairfield Shopping Center that T-Mobile is already on and that’s just under a mile away. So as you can see, towers are starting to get closer and closer together. These are within a mile. The closest site to the west is about 2 miles away. I will show you the propagation maps although I think you got these in your packet. This just 1 2 shows you the existing coverage, the dark green being the excellent coverage, the tower that at the north at Witchduck to the east at Baxter Road and then you got the existing hole here. The proposed communication tower, which is at the hole itself is a 170-foot monopole with a 5-foot lightening rod, and that would enable T-Mobile to be able to plug that hole with the nice start green good solid coverage both in the residential areas and in the commercial areas. It is difficult to cover residential areas so as the staff report indicates, we really worked to locate a tower site that would be out of the right-of-way and away from residential structures. So we are trying to get antennas to homes without putting in a place that’s too obtrusive. The photo simulations you have in your application or in the packets shows and as the staff report indicates there is a small portion that would be visible above the tree line. This will be built for T Mobile as I said the initial user and three additional users, so other carriers would be able to enhance their networks by utilizing this pole. The applicant submitted, I think Kay went over this with you all but as part of the city’s requirement, the applicant is required to submit a proof that it complies with federal law with regard to emissions and the applicant has submitted that report and it shows the emissions are 1000s of times below with the federal maximum level is and we are fully compliant in that regard from a federal standpoint. This shows you the photo sims, this is the location of the structure, so we worked with the owner of the property to place the tower behind the existing building. One of the conditions, condition number seven addresses some of the cleanup that will happen in the front of the property. There is a shipping container, there are some additional bulk storage that’s in the front of that property that the applicant will be working with the property owner to remove and that will happen within two months of the commencement and construction. We, as the staff report indicates, comply with the zoning ordinance and the requirements. I am happy to answer any questions that you have as Commissioner Weiner indicated at the informal session, we did reach out to the Fairfield Civic League as well as through Commissioner Weiner the Carolanne Farm Civic League and I made myself available and accessible. So I am happy to answer any questions that you have and we would respectfully request that you recommend approval of this application. Thank you. Mr. Thornton: Does anyone have any questions to Ms. Murphy, thank you. Mr. Fisher: We do also have one speaker in opposition with Mr. Donald Barrigar, come forward please. You can state your name for the record sir. Mr. Thornton: State your name for the record please, state your name for the record please. Mr. Barrigar: Oh okay, my name is Donald Barrigar and I live in that house that was just shown few minutes ago about 300 feet from where this proposed tower is going to be. At 9 o’clock meeting this morning I realized that the government has agreed that communications towers are safe, but other governments have more concern for its citizens. In China, the law is that pregnant woman have to wear protective clothing to protect the unborn child and in Beijing, pregnant woman are stopped 2 3 in the street by policeman and checked for protective clothing over the pregnant womb. The countries that have the strictest limiting EMF and telephones are Russia and Iran. Putin said we don’t need to go to war with America, America is committing collective suicide by the way it’s using electricity. All we have to do is wait, until they are all in the psychiatric hospital and an EMF study in Sweden that found strong correlation between location with high EMF level and Alzheimer’s disease. The examples to the risk to health goes on and on and research shows the government’s evaluation of EMF hazard is completely wrong. EMF from communication towers have caused headaches, insomnia, sleep disturbance, ear ringing, fatigue, cognitive disturbance, irritability, tumors, cancer, infertility, autism, and DNA damage. A friend of mine once told me that where there is big money, there is big greed. I suspect there is lot of corruption going on in the communication business. Recently, the federal government appointed the head lobbyist for the telecommunication industry to be the head of the federal communications commission perhaps a conflict the interest. Remember when the government did not stop tobacco interest from causing very serious health hazards to people, now the communication interests are causing very serious health hazards to people and how about man becoming infertile. One researcher believes that within two generations, we will no longer to be able to father children. I know that because the government saying communications are safe, you will approve the tower in Kempsville but I asked why it cannot be built away from people. Does the city of Virginia Beach have control over what and where has been it will be built? Mr. Thornton: Excuse me sir, you have reached your five minutes, so summarize quickly. Mr. Barrigar: Okay one final thought, would any of you within this council want a tower built within 300 feet of your house if you had done the research on the hazards of EMF, thank you? Mr. Fisher: We also have one more speaker, Ms. Barbara Mesner. Come to the podium please. You can state your name for the record ma’am. Ms. Mesner: Barbara Mesner. I have spoken before city council opposing the cell towers and I have sent correspondence to the city manager. I am used to seeing the city manager over there and all the dangers, it’s supposed to be one mile for safety, at least one mile for many residents not 300 feet. So I definitely oppose it, I understand the lobby issues but you know in other countries, they don’t allow the towers to be built close to homes. Since I am speaking on public safety, the LED lights, the research on that to the city manager and to different people at the city those who are extremely dangerous. It’s horrible, poor lighting, and it’s very bad for your retina if anyone does the research, thank you. Mr. Thornton: Thank you. Mr. Fisher: That is all. 3 4 Mr. Thornton: That is all. Okay would you have any comments, rebuttal comments Ms. Murphy? Ms. Murphy: Quickly, as I mentioned the applicant is required by the ordinance submitted a near report which is a report that estimates with the emissions at ground level will be and in this case, it will be 1000s of times as I indicated below the maximum level that the government sets.