1 / 51

CANYON AREA RESIDENTS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

Canyon Area Residents for the Environment Deb Carney Attorney for C.A.R.E. 21789 Cabrini Blvd July 1, 2003. Umbrella group for Jeffco HOAs in Jeffco Central Mountains 9,000 people 25 HOA speaker authorizations Each signed by 2 Board members of HOAs for CARE speakers.

ophira
Download Presentation

CANYON AREA RESIDENTS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Canyon Area Residents for the Environment Deb Carney Attorney for C.A.R.E. 21789 Cabrini Blvd July 1, 2003

  2. Umbrella group for Jeffco HOAs in Jeffco Central Mountains 9,000 people 25 HOA speaker authorizations Each signed by 2 Board members of HOAs for CARE speakers CANYON AREA RESIDENTS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

  3. “We oppose the rezoning application for a broadcast tower on Lookout Mountain filed by Lake Cedar Group Corporation and petition Jefferson County to deny the proposal.” Over 3,300 Signatures to Date 2002-2003 Petition 3,300 Signatures on Petition

  4. CARE Facts vs LCG Illusions

  5. VISUAL REALITY Much Different than LCG simulation

  6. Current Channel 4 Tower 5 ft Wide

  7. New Proposed SUPER Tower 10 ft Wide Heavier Guy Wires 3 to 4.5” Thick 5 ft Wide

  8. . New SUPER Tower at Full Limits 27ft 10ft 5ft 13 ft Total width can be ~27.3 feet,

  9. LCG Must Carry Burden of Proof 100% Burden of Proof on Lake Cedar Group • Changed circumstances since original zoning • must show proposal in best interest of Health, Safety and Welfare • Compliance with zoning resolution

  10. 50 YEAR HISTORY residential and agricultural zoning LCG CAN’T PROVE CIRCUMSTANCES NOW WARRANT CHANGE FROM PRESENT ZONING

  11. INCOMPATIBLITYZoning Resolution Requires Compatiblity17.C.3.c.17 F.2.a (1)with existing and allowable land uses in the surrounding area

  12. 1983 “not compatible with allowable or existing land uses.” Ex. 56 1985 “not compatible with allowable and existing land uses in the surrounding area.” Ex. 57 1990 “not compatible with allowable land uses in the surrounding area in all directions” Ex. 59 1999 “incompatible with residential uses in the surrounding area.” LCG rezoning denial Ex. 63 LOOKOUT TOWERS INCOMPATIBLE IN 4 BCC ZONING DENIALS

  13. 1. Mountain Contours KTVJ 1983 Proposed tower denied Exhibit 56 2. Mountain Contours KTVJ 1985 Proposed tower denied Exhibit 57 3. Mountain Contours KTVJ 1990 Proposed tower denied Exhibit 58 4. Lake Cedar Group 1999 Proposed tower deniedExhibit 63 FOUR PREVIOUS DENIALS For Tower at this site!

  14. 6 th Attempt by Mountain Contours/Ch. 20 Owner

  15. MORE INCOMPATIBLE THAN EVER BEFORE More Residents/Businesses Now Ex. 24 & Jeffco Assessor Data Greater adverse effects (interference/health) Ex. 7-11, 25-47, 53,70-79, 87-89,90,92,107-126 Zoned Residential/Agricultural for 5 decades 20 Year History of Tower Denials on Lookout

  16. Incompatible with residential uses Central Mountains Community Plan (CMCP) - Violates visual resources, public services and mountain site design criteria (aesthetics) Does not contain sufficient set backs (tower fall issue) Violates Telecommunications Land Use Plan (TLUP) policies on tower siting No showing that an alternative site is unavailable Not in the best interests of the health, safety, and welfare Exhibit 63 1999 Denial of LCG-Still Valid

  17. LCG Cannot Use Nonconforming Towers for Digital Obsolete Analog Antennas Cannot Be Replaced with Digital Antennas

  18. All LCG Lookout towers/buildings Channel 4-nonconforming in residential Channel 7-nonconforming in residential Channel 9-nonconforming in residential Plus illegal radar tower in residential Ex. 65 45 out of 47 Lookout towers nonconforming Ex. 54 NONCONFORMINGLCG Towers/Buildings in MR1

  19. 1977-Citizens rely on Jeffco promise that these towers were temporary Ex. 52 1985-TLUP Details Burdens of Interference, Visual & Health Ex. 23 1990-Jeffco Plan -phase out all nonconforming Ex. 54 1999-LCG to FCC & Jeffco “Lookout towers being phased out” Ex. 64, 65 Nonconforming Broadcast Towers,Antennas & Facilities Jeffco Phase Out

  20. "due to restrictions imposed by the County through its legal nonconforming use provisions in the Zoning Resolution, the Lake Cedar members were essentially prohibited from attempting to add an additional DTV antenna to their existing towers.” LCG v Jeffco-Dist Ct. Case No. 99CV2007 Ex. 64 LCG to Judge ‘LCG Cannot Add Digital’

  21. “…provisions of Section 6….prohibit Broadcasters from adding a digital television antenna to their respective existing broadcast towers in the Lookout Mountain Antenna Farm….” 1999 LCG Preemption Petition to FCC Exhibit 65 LCG to FCC ‘Zoning Prohibits Addition of Digital to Existing Towers’

  22. Channel 4 – January 27, 2000 application add digital antenna to nonconforming South Microwave tower Channel 9-attempt to add digital to Channel 9 radar tower Tower illegal-Channel 9 agrees to remove radar LCG lost all attempts to add digital to Lookout towers

  23. "the law in Colorado strongly disfavors legal nonconforming uses and encourages their elimination at the earliest possible time." Tim Cox, Assistant Jefferson County Attorney Answer Brief Oct. 2001 in Channel 4 lawsuit over denial of digital permitGroup W/CBS Television Stations Partners v BOA 01-CV-0898

  24. Colorado Supreme Court 2001 Nonconforming uses must be brought into conformity with the underlying zoning uses as rapidly as possible. Fire House Car Wash v Board of Adjustment and City of Denver30 P. 3d 762, 766 (2001); Hartley v. City of Colorado Springs, 764 P.2d 1216 (Colo. 1988).

  25. Nonconforming uses hurt Residents: 1. Effectiveness of zoning ordinances reduced 2. Property values depressed 3. Contribute to urban blight. Fire House Car Wash v Board of Adjustment and City of Denver 30 P. 3d 762, 766 (2001); Hartley v. City of Colorado Springs, 764 P.2d 1216 (Colo. 1988).

  26. “Digital TV and analog TV are not the same. Allowing a digital TV antenna to replace a nonconforming analog TV antenna would potentially extend the life of the nonconforming use in violation of criteria set forth in Section 6.” Tim Carl Testimony, June 26, 02 02-102616VC Zoning Administrator

  27. LCG NONCOMPLIANCE ZONING RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS

  28. Already 1 of Most Radiated Communities in U.S. 9,000 residents “behind” Towers West of Denver same altitude as high powered TV/FM and radar power beams with decades of cumulative radiation from continuous exposure

  29. LCG ADMITSWidespread RF Increases RF Increase Section LCG Ex. 17 CARE Ex. 80

  30. Light Simulation of Radiation Pattern Large Map Base Map –Jeffco County Assessor Data TLUP Finding on Effect of Towers on Property values Clear Overlay-LCG directional antenna pattern Can be rotated-Quite Zone Example Radiation increase Specific examples shown with factor of increase Visualizing the Radiation

  31. ALTERNATIVE SITES EXIST

  32. Minimum standard of Rezoning Resolution Section 17 2b. (1) & Tower Siting & Review Policy 1b. TLUP The applicant must show that their proposed equipment cannot be accommodated and function….on any other existing facility. No Rezoning if Alternative Sites Exist

  33. JEFFCO RF CONSULTANT ALTERNATIVE SITES WORK Lake Cedar Group cannot meet its 100% Burden of Proving that no alternative sites exist.

  34. INTERFERENCE INCREASE

  35. ECONOMIC HARM

  36. TLUP FINDINGS ON PROPERTY VALUES The specific characteristics of Telecom facilities that seem to negatively impact property values are: a. Visual Impact b. Interference c. Concern over possible health effects • TLUP Property Value Finding # 3 Ex. 23

  37. 10% Loss of Property Value Ex. 20-22 Mitigation Costs Ex. 53 Imposition of Nuisance Interference, noise Health Concerns Loss of Legal Rights of Quiet Enjoyment & Peaceable Possession-Radiation without consent Violation of Property Rights of Thousands of Residents

  38. HEALTH RISKS

  39. FCC & Engineers-Not qualified to practice medicine or give opinions on health effects

  40. Physicians, Scientists, & EPA Ex. 9, 70-79, 107,116,120,121,128,129 Dr. Hoffman -Colo. Dept of Health FCC Limit only protects against short-term exposure Community experiences long-term exposure recommended ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable rather than FCC standard Ex. 8 ,9 & 71 FCC Radiation Limits Not Protective for Long-term Exposure

  41. University of Colorado Health Sciences Department of Radiation OncologyPublic Testimony in Jefferson County Hearings We know of no other instance where a device, chemical or drug . . . would be imposed on the public without proof of its safety. “Without proper scientific data, we consider it unconscionable to expose the people of Jefferson County to these levels of radiation.”

  42. Biological Effects to Humans Near TV/FM Towersat 5% MPE or Lower SAGE REPORT- Broadcast RF Studies Reporting Biological Effects & Adverse Health Effects at levels below FCC Standards Ex. 107 Changesin Immune Function Infertility in men Inability to reproduce-mice

  43. $700,000 National Institute of Health Study June 03 Letter from Dr. Reif Ex.90 1999-LCG opposed Rep. Witwer 99 Research Bill Study on Effect of Broadcast Radiation on Lookout Mountain Residents

  44. Health Threats Physicians & Scientists Video • Dr. Ross Wilkins, M.D. • Orthopeadic Oncologist • Dr. Goldsmith, M.D. • Epidemiologist • Dr. Litovitz • Physicist • Bioelectromagnetics

  45. President of Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Medical Director Donor Alliance Institute for Limb Preservation Published papers molecular/cellular/developmental biology Book chapters re: cancer diagnosis/ treatment Ex. 105 Dr. Ross Wilkins-Orthopaedic Oncologist

  46. TV Broadcast Towers and Cancer: The End of Innocence for Radiofrequency Exposures American Journal of Industrial Medicine Ex. 112 Epidemiological Evidence of Radiofrequency Radiation (Microwave) Effects on Health in Military, Broadcasting, and Occupational Studies International Journal of Occupational & Environmental Health Ex. 111 Dr. Goldsmith, M.D. M.P.H. Epidemiologist

  47. Director of BioElectromagnetics Laboratory Catholic University of America Chronic Electromagnetic Field Exposure Decreases HSP70 Levels and Lowers Cytoprotection- Ex. 118 Journal of Cellular Biochemistry 84:447-454 (2002) Presentation at Congressional Staff Briefing Ex. 117 Dr. Litovitz-Physicist

More Related