Laserfiche WebLink
' . • <br /> . <br /> Mr. Clevenger stated that there are very few denials for cell towers and asked what is different <br /> about this request. Mr. Krieger stated that possibly the difference was the proper utility letters <br /> and adjacent property owner letters were obtained. It is reasonable to believe that the purpose for <br /> moving the tower at Sims Lumber was to increase the fall zone. In this instance, Mr.Flynn was <br /> asked if the tower could be moved and he stated that there are circumstances that would be <br /> affected all over the site. Mrs. Peck stated that the tower at North Oakland would have been <br /> denied if it had not been moved. <br /> Mr. Krieger stated that the petition has been amended and the amendment was received two days <br /> prior. Staff cannot defend the aggravation of a deficient situation. It is believed that staff can <br /> work with petitioner and Mr.Flynn also works with the owner of the shopping center. If the <br /> petition was tabled or denied it could be heard again at the next Plan Commission meeting. <br /> Mr. Flynn stated that he also represents the owner of the shopping center. He requested that time <br /> be used efficiently as tabling the petition and requesting that all technical requiranents of the <br /> Planned Unit Development be ful�lled is one thing if the requests for letters from Illinois Power <br /> and the Railroad are overlooked. Mr.Flynn stated that petitioner does not have and cannot get <br /> those letters of approval. <br /> There were no objectors present. <br /> Mr. Van Steenhuyse stated that if the fall zone issue is not resolved the staff recommendation <br /> will not change. <br /> Mr. Anderson stated that he appreciated staff's recommendation but he has also worked with the <br /> Railroad and it can be difficult. He requested that petitioner make another attempt. Mr. <br /> Anderson asked if the tower can be moved. <br /> Mr. Flynn stated that if the tower were moved around the corner it would still be in the Railroad <br /> fall zone, as well as the Illinois Power fall zone and the cemetery caretaker fall zone. He stated <br /> that the proposed site is the best one and the only reason the Planned Unit Development was <br /> amended was to recover the 13 parking spaces previously removed. Mr.Flynn said that he was <br /> hired to recover the 13 parking spaces and now there is a technical issue with the Planned Unit <br /> Development. <br /> Mrs. Peck recommended that petitioner go back and deal with the Railroad and Illinois Power <br /> regarding the fall zones. The tower on Oakland received objections from the Railroad and <br /> Hazelriggs and the tower was then relocated. Mr.Flynn stated that the request regarding the <br /> Railroad and Illinois Power is insurmountable. <br /> Mr. John stated that he would like to see staff research this issue if utilities are going to <br /> continually decline approvals as it would become impossible to locate the towers. He stated that <br /> staff needs to analyze the feasibility of siting towers. Mr.Krieger stated that the Plan <br /> Commission just recommended approval of the new Zoning Ordinance and once the ordinance is <br /> adopted, a tower will not be allowed if the fall zone interacts with private property. As far as <br /> staff's analysis, the Plan Commission just approved an ordinance that removes the question <br /> completely. Mr. John stated that if it plays out that the decision to adopt a very strict fall zone <br />