CityView Portal
| We are sorry but no more comments are being taken for this case |
| Return to CityView Portal |
| Submitted comments will appear below after staff approval. | |
|---|---|
| Tom Livingston, FAIA | 9/13/2010 12:37:43 PM |
| The permit for an antenna at the proposed site should be denied. I have reviewed the design for this use and visited the proposed site and neighborhood. The proposed use is not compatible with an R-6 rural residential zone. There are other more appropriate sites available in this vicinity that would not violate Title 21 requirements. There is an airstrip nearby and placement of an antenna at the proposed location would jeopardize flight safety. | |
| Beverly Short | 9/10/2010 12:42:37 PM |
| As a resident of the area for which this communication facility is proposed, I urge you to postpone any decision at least until the disposition of the proposed Utility Substation located at the same address is determined. More appropriate locations for these facilities need to thoroughly evaluated before an R-6 property with high recreational, residential, and aesthetic value is made industrial. Please respect the work that has gone into the Hillside District Plan, Title 21, and Anchorage 20/20. Thank you. | |
| Jim & Susan Rainforth | 9/10/2010 11:19:33 AM |
| The proposed location for this communications tower is an issue that has had considerable public input with clear resistance from the community. Alternative sites are available. The efforts to approve this site for the communications tower on Sept 10 without a hearing prior to the ruling on the CUP application for a Chugach Electric Substation on the same site on Sept 13(CUP 2010-087)appears to be an effort to bypass public input on both matters. The site has served as residential property for some time and holds a unique location relative to the equestrian facilities, trails, and the neighboring residential neighborhood. There is considerable interest in continued use of the property for this use. Very little information regarding the impact that the tower will have on the community independent of the substation (CUP 2010-087)has been made available to the community. We urge you to reject this application for a communication tower at this location. We thank you for your postponement of CUP 2010-087 until 9/13/2010 and urge you to at the very least postpone the communication tower ruling until that date to consider the input for both matters. Thank you. | |
| Chris Rose | 9/10/2010 10:41:41 AM |
| I object to placing a cell tower on the proposed site. Such a use is not consistent with the Anchorage 20/20 plan and if it is allowed one must question the value of the plan that received so much public input. The area contains both residential and recreational structures and a cell tower, with its unknown long-term health impacts, is not an appropriate use of the site. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. | |
| Cynthia Monroe | 9/10/2010 9:32:46 AM |
| As an Anchorage resident whose family uses the area in question, I strongly object to the placement of a cell tower on the proposed site. It is both a residential and a recreational area, of great value to citizens all over town. *Public process has been inadequate. *Such a use is at odds with the Anchorage 2020 plan. *It has not been demonstrated that there is a compelling reason to contravene the zoning and the plan for that area. *Granting a permit at odds with an established plan that has had a high level of public participation, visibility, and buy-in--against the wishes of local residents and without clearly overwhelming reasons and extensive public process-- would undermine not only the values expressed in that plan, but also the spirit of public participation and collective community planning that is the hallmark of a healthy, vibrant town. | |
| Jim Anderson | 9/10/2010 9:03:43 AM |
| After visiting this site, the proposed CEA infrastructure is inappropriate for this neighborhood. Given that O'Malley has a number of commercial/industrial zones, this site should be located in one of those areas. In general, this type of planning/infrastructure sets a bad precedent in residential areas. | |
| Katie Nolan | 9/7/2010 11:56:03 AM |
| Please deny the CUP for this proposed communications tower. None of the standards set by the mandates of Title 21, the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, or the Hillside District Plan have been met. . . . . . Title 21 mandates that utilities must be in keeping with the underlying character of the existing area. It states that the underlying R-6 zoning must protect and enhance the physical and environmental features that add to the desirability of suburban residential living, and that public uses must keep in the character of the district. Also stated is that visual outlines of the nonresidential use must be camouflaged. . . . . Land use classifications exist to protect compatible land uses and separate incompatible uses, and Title 21 gives the hearing authority the responsibility to deny any CUP that will have a substantial negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. This tower will soar fifty feet above the adjacent property to the south and 100 feet above the property to the west. No method of visually obscuring this tower has been mentioned. . . . . Chugach representatives have stated that in all likelihood this tower will be used to hold numerous other communications equipment in the future, but that information is not disclosed in the CUP. . . . . . The 2020 Comprehensive Plan guides future development, and distinctly spells out the mandate for maintaining residential uses. This proposed tower instead eliminates a residential lot and creates an industrial lot in an established R-6 suburban residential area bordered on the north side by a park. . . . . . 2020 also addresses how public utilities are to be placed in areas where they will not create negative visual impacts. This planning document prevents allowing new incompatible uses in established areas, and mandates the conservation of residential lands for housing. This document gives high priority to reducing or eliminating visual impacts. It also states that utilities should be placed, wherever possible, on existing public lands. . . . . . The Hillside District Plan mandates the goal of maintaining the existing rural character of Hillside. Removing a piece of prime suburban residential property to a nonresidential use is at odds with this mandate. The placement of a huge, undisguised communications tower into an established neighborhood is totally inappropriate if any other possibility exists. . . . . . The sites that would be appropriate for this proposed installation were ignored. There are numerous other locations for this giant structure, most of which would meet the mandates of Title 21 and 2020 and are outside of the boundaries of the Hillside District Plan, and most that are not in established residential neighborhoods. As the standards of Title 21 and 2020 have not been met, the CUP must be denied. | |
| Christine Monette | 9/1/2010 5:51:15 PM |
| The Huffman O'Malley Community Council respectfully requests, that any decision being made with regard to the communications tower proposed for location at 2940 O'Malley Road be postponed until such time as the disposition of the proposed Utility Substation located at the same address is determined. Thank you | |