| Cell phone tower going in Prairie Knoll Park despite neighborhood protest |
|
|
| Wednesday, 14 October 2009 | ||
|
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Staff writer If an Andover neighborhood had its way, a cell phone tower would not go in Prairie Knoll Park regardless if it is on the west side of the park or on the east side. “I don’t think a park is a place to put a cell phone tower,” said Lucille Sisson. “That park was built for recreation and fun for the children and the adults of the
However, the Andover City Council decided that with cell phone towers being a common sight and T-Mobile having coverage and capacity needs that it would be appropriate. “We do have a lot of cell phone towers already in the city,” said Councilmember Julie Trude. Cell phone towers hold lights or weather sirens or could be on top of a commercial building or a city water tower, she said. “This is just adding to what we have,” Trude said. The council Oct. 6 approved locating the cell phone tower somewhere on the east side of the park, close to Prairie Road and northeast of a football field. All four councilmembers agreed, but Mayor Mike Gamache did not because he sided with the neighborhood that a cell phone tower in a park would not be appropriate. “The more I hear from folks in the room it reminds me that I kind of agree that it’s not the best location to put a cell phone tower in a park. Not because it has radiation issues or anything else,” Gamache said. Cell phone towers mean lease payments, which city officials said would go back into Prairie Knoll Park. Councilmember Sherri Bukkila said the cell phone tower must go somewhere. Like other councilmembers, she believes the concern about radiation is not an issue. Bringing in additional revenue is her issue, she said. “What I do have to take into consideration is the budget and tax levy,” Bukkila said. “Every one of us on the council has huge hopes to be able to continue to fund the parks. “The parks are a great expense. They’re a wonderful amenity and everyone enjoys them, but weighing them into the budget is expensive and this is one of those opportunities that comes along rarely where this is a venture that is going to go to an individual property somewhere in the community whether we capitalize on it or not.” According to City Administrator Jim Dickinson, the city should get close to $15,000 annually from T-Mobile, but the exact amount has yet to be determined. Paving the rocky parking lot would likely be the first improvement that the new revenue would help pay for. Residents were not pleased that the city may be impacting their property values and their health to increase the city’s revenue. “I’m the first to say it would be great to invest more money in our parks to make them better for our users, but not if that money has to come at the expense of installing ugly cell phone towers and their equipment in my park with the possibility of causing minor to severe health problems to the people who live nearby,” Cindy Heilman said. From the research Heilman conducted, she believes there is a health risk. An organization called EMR Australia, LTD compiled information from a number of studies and posted short summaries on its Web site, she said. The studies that EMR Australia pulled from showed that sleep disorders, headaches, nervousness or distress, fatigue, concentration difficulties, depression, dizziness, irritability and loss of appetite are several of the symptoms study subjects living near cell phone towers showed in multiple studies. There are general concerns among the public that the radiation coming from cell phone towers can cause cancer. However, the American Cancer Society states there is no health risk. It explains that cellular phones operate at the radio frequency (RF) part of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is non-iodizing radiation. Other examples of non-iodizing radiation are AM and FM radio waves, microwaves and infrared waves from heat lamps. The RF of this frequency contains relatively low energy that does not enter tissues. The council said it could not base its decision on potential health hazards because there are studies that say there is an impact and other studies that say not enough is known. “It’s like the argument about global warming,” Councilmember Mike Knight said. “You have scientists on both sides saying the opposite of each other.” Residents are also concerned that a cell phone tower would greatly impact their residential value. Jim Linehan said this area is not a dead zone for cell phone coverage. “We were told this was a weak zone,” Linehan said. “Leave it a weak zone. Put it someplace else. Put it in Bunker Hills or someplace I’m not going to have to look at it.” Trude said the council realized years ago that cell phone towers would end up in residential areas of Andover because the commercial and industrial properties are only concentrated in a small area of the community. Trude said when the council looked at the issue of cell phone towers in parks, it did not want to see them in small tot lots, but only in larger regional parks, which cost more to keep up because there are playing fields. The city of Andover requires cell phone towers to be on public land or a church site if they are in a residentially-zoned district. Dickinson said when a cell phone company needs a location, it will give the city a map with a circle to show the vicinity it needs a tower. Dickinson first looks for city-owned property in that area. If there is already a tower in the area that another company put up, the new user is directed to negotiate with that company. When public property is not available in the cell phone company’s search area, the city works with a private property owner to obtain a public easement on their property, according to Dickinson. A weather siren just southeast of Prairie Knoll Park is a site that T-Mobile consultant Paul Harrington said he asked city staff about, but they found out that the weather siren is on a public easement on private land. The city would have had to negotiate with the property owner to allow a 100-foot cell phone tower to go on the site, which the weather siren could go on. Once Prairie Knoll Park was deemed a suitable site for T-Mobile’s cell phone tower, a location west of a ball field was identified. One of the 80-foot light poles would have been replaced with a 100-foot monopole that could include the cellular antenna and lighting for the field. T-Mobile’s thought was the existing pine trees could be a visual buffer between homes and a 12-foot by 10-foot equipment building next to the base of the monopole, but neighbors said the cell phone tower would be visually obtrusive. “Not all places are ideal,” Dickinson said. “I fully admit that, but at the same time we’re trying to find (sites) that can mean the less visual impact as possible.” The Andover Park Commission recommended moving the cell phone tower farther away from residents living on the west of the park and move it toward Prairie Road on the east side of the park. The council and T-Mobile agreed to this, but a specific spot has not been identified. The cell phone tower will be on the same side of the park where Northern Natural Gas structures are located, so the move to the east keeps the utility and more industrial uses together in one area of the park, Trude said. Dickinson said if the cell phone tower can be located by the Northern Natural Gas parking lot, it will be a new pole. If it must be located a little farther to the south, a light pole could be swapped with the new cell phone tower, which would hold the lights. Andover’s city code requires that monopoles of 100 feet or more must be designed to handle at least three additional users. This cuts down on the number of cell phone towers and the visual impact in the community. T-Mobile’s Prairie Knoll Park tower was designed to handle no more than one antenna as well potential security lights and a weather siren. Harrington said when he talked to the Andover Planning Department, it discussed not designing the site for co-location. This means no other companies would need to construct additional buildings to house their equipment and the monopole is not as thick because it does not have to handle the weight of more antennas, nor does it have to have the space inside for more cables. A shroud will also be placed over the antenna to give the monopole a more seamless look, according to Harrington. Neighborhood residents spoke about the Champlin City Council rejecting a cell phone tower from going in a city park and questioned why Andover could not similarly support its own citizens. According to its minutes, the Champlin City Council on May 30, 2007 did reject a conditional use permit for T-Mobile to put a cell phone tower in Andrews Park. The council did not want the cell phone tower in the park, but it had to give a reason besides just not wanting it there, the Champlin City Attorney said. The Champlin City Council’s reason for denying the conditional use permit was because it did not have the lease agreement documentation it wanted to review. Champlin Deputy City Administrator John Cox told the Anoka County Union that Champlin has no ban from placing cell phone towers in city parks. In fact, telecommunications companies are encouraged to look at public land first, which includes parks, he said. Marty Heilman implored the Andover City Council to remember that this decision on whether to allow a cell phone tower in Prairie Knoll Park could impact the whole community. Cell phone companies have been in contact with the city inquiring about locations for cell tower placement and other city parks could be impacted, according to Dickinson. At the Aug. 25 council workshop meeting, Dickinson told the council that Andover Lions Park and Shadowbrook East Park are potential locations for wireless Internet towers. Linehan asked the council if any one of them would want to see a cell phone tower in front of their house. “You guys don’t live in that neighborhood,” Linehan said. “If you don’t live in that neighborhood, you really don’t have a feel for what it would be like, and this does open up the opportunity for more cell phone companies to come in and put (towers) in different parks.” Councilmember Don Jacobson said he used to live near Prairie Knoll Park and he only had one bar of reception on his cell phone. He is a T-Mobile customer. Jacobson said some people work from home in their basement and are demanding improved cell phone service. “When I make a judgment, I’m going to have to make a judgment on what’s best for the whole city,” Jacobson said. Eric Hagen is at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it |
||
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|