Laserfiche WebLink
ZOO June 3,1992 \(� <br /> David Tyler, Associate Planner, stated the City received an <br /> application from U.S. West NewVector Group, Inc.a P.O. Box <br /> 91211,Bellevue,MA 98008, for the construction of a 126 foot <br /> high, self supporting cellular communications tower with a 360 <br /> square foot equipment storage building. The location of the <br /> s <br /> tower i at the northwest corner of Evergreen Cemetery, south <br /> of 41st Street end west of Broadway. After review of an <br /> environmental checklist, a geotechnical report, and a document <br /> entitled ^Introduction to Cellular Technology,a and agency <br /> received, the city issued Mitigated Determination of <br /> Non-Significance(MONS)on April 2,1992. <br /> Tyler presented for Exhibit 1, the Council Packet, which <br /> included the staff report, letter of appeal, MINS,. <br /> vicinity/zoning map, Assessor's map, site plan a elevation, <br /> environmental checklist, comparison of RF energy -ANSI <br /> Standards and articles an <br /> file at City Council office. <br /> Mr.Tyler made three corrections in the staff report; 1) On <br /> page..two, last paragraph, 1992 should be changed to 1991. 2) <br /> 197-11-333EASection d D,3)FS <br /> 197 <br /> ge to paragraph that one <br /> delete the first three sentences T that paragraph. <br /> c <br /> Mr. Tyler stated ana ppeal of the MONS was received on April O <br /> 13, 1992, from Nark Stowe, attorney representing the Lowell <br /> Civic Association. <br /> Council has four alternatives for action: 1) Affirm the <br /> Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance; 2) Remand the <br /> project to staff to generate specific additional information; <br /> 3) Recommend preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement; <br /> or A) Make additional findings and based on those findings, <br /> revise the Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance. Staff <br /> ends upholding the responsible official's decision to <br /> issuema Mitigated Determination of Non-Significance. <br /> The issues appealed were as follows: 1) Lack of material <br /> disclosure by applicant; 2) MDNS not based upon sufficient <br /> information to evaluate environmental impacts; 3) MDNS failed <br /> to include a worst-case analysis; 4) Lead agency failed to <br /> consider the precedent for future actions; S) Probable <br /> significant adverse impacts warrant issuance of a Determination <br /> of Significances and 6) MONS defective due to lack of <br /> consideration of environmental factors. <br /> Mr. Tylerreviewed the six issues of ppeal and recommended <br /> that Council uphold <br /> the Responsible Official's Decision and <br /> deny the appeal. <br /> 0 <br />