My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
8A Public Hearings
CityHall
>
City Clerk
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2025
>
Packet 20250121
>
8A Public Hearings
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/22/2025 2:03:11 PM
Creation date
9/8/2025 3:58:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CM City Clerk-City Council
Document Date (6)
1/21/2025
Retention
Perm
Document Relationships
Reso 2025-008 Rejecting Appeal (PLN24-0040)
(Amended)
Path:
\City Clerk\City Council\Resolutions\2025
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
228
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
8 <br /> <br />Planning Commission resolution requirements number 57 and 58 purport to address <br />concern about future RF exceedances affecting residents of Mr. Russo’s property. However, this <br />not sufficient in practice. Under SB 330, Mr. Russo has a ministerial right to build a residential <br />development on his property up to the property line and up to 65-feet.13 By allowing AT&T to <br />invade Mr. Russo’s buildable airspace with FCC-exceeding levels of RF, the City is authorizing a <br />de facto trespass that is devaluing the property. This is a form of regulatory taking and setting up <br />the City for a lawsuit and a conflict between the property rights of the neighbor and AT&T. <br />Authorizing this tower is like allowing a factory or oil refinery to be built with condition that the <br />smoke and noise will be reduced if neighbors move next door. This is not a reasonable thing to do, <br />particularly when the zoning and General Plan intend to prioritize the infill, not cell towers. <br />As legal counsel for lenders and borrowers closing loans on hundreds of multifamily <br />residential developments, I know that lenders, especially the Department of Housing and Urban <br />Development’s Federal Housing Administration (FHA) that insures many multifamily loans, <br />particularly subsidized loans for affordable housing, are risk adverse and would be wary of <br />committing to finance construction of a site with this type of environmental condition. Any <br />developer would need to negotiate the design of the building with the tower owner and then <br />establish a sufficient RF monitoring regimen. This is very burdensome and will make development <br />much more costly. AT&T’s ability to remotely, mechanically adjust the power setting and angle <br />of the antennas, as discussed in Mr. Ross’ report, would make a lender, liability insurer a developer <br />very hesitant to go forward with this project. <br /> <br />13 See San Leandro Municipal Code §§ 2.08.312 (DA-2 maximum height limit is 65 feet or seven stories); <br />2.08.308 (no yard setback requirement in DA-2 zone). <br />Att B - Page 28 of 46
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.