1 canyon area residents for the environment deb carney attorney for c.a.r.e. 21789 cabrini blvd july...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Canyon Area Residents for the Environment
Deb CarneyAttorney for C.A.R.E. 21789 Cabrini BlvdJuly 1, 2003
2
CANYON AREA RESIDENTS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
Umbrella group forJeffco HOAs in Jeffco Central Mountains
• 9,000 people• 25 HOA speaker authorizations
– Each signed by 2 Board members of HOAs for CARE speakers
3
3,300 Signatures on Petition
“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
4
CARE Facts vs LCG IllusionsMassive Proposal Visual Improvement
Nonconforming must be eliminated
Can use towers for digital
Incompatible Compatible
Widespread radiation increased
Overall radiation reduced
Health Risk No Health Risk
Alternative Sites Work No Alternative Sites
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
LCG CAN’T PROVE CIRCUMSTANCES NOW
WARRANT CHANGE FROM PRESENT ZONING
50 YEAR HISTORY
residential and agricultural zoning
11
INCOMPATIBLITY
Zoning Resolution Requires Compatiblity
17.C.3.c.17 F.2.a (1)
with existing and allowable land uses in the
surrounding area
12
LOOKOUT TOWERS INCOMPATIBLE IN 4 BCC ZONING DENIALS
• 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
13
FOUR PREVIOUS DENIALS For Tower at this site!
1. Mountain Contours KTVJ 1983Proposed tower denied Exhibit 56
2. Mountain Contours KTVJ 1985Proposed tower denied Exhibit 57
3. Mountain Contours KTVJ 1990Proposed tower denied Exhibit 58
4. Lake Cedar Group 1999 Proposed tower denied Exhibit 63
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 decades20 Year History of Tower Denials on Lookout
16
1999 Denial of LCG-Still Valid
• 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
17
LCG Cannot Use Nonconforming Towers for Digital
Obsolete Analog Antennas Cannot Be Replaced with Digital Antennas
18
NONCONFORMINGLCG Towers/Buildings in MR1
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 residentialEx. 65
45 out of 47 Lookout towers nonconforming Ex. 54
19
Nonconforming Broadcast Towers,Antennas & Facilities
Jeffco Phase Out • 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
20
LCG to Judge ‘LCG Cannot Add Digital’
"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
21
LCG to FCC ‘Zoning Prohibits Addition of
Digital to Existing Towers’
“…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
22
LCG lost all attempts to add digital to Lookout towers
• 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
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 permit
Group 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 Denver 30 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
Zoning Administrator
“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
28
LCG NONCOMPLIANCE ZONING RESOLUTION
REQUIREMENTSTYPE Z.R. SECTION
ALTERNATIVE SITES
17 F.2.b.(1)
COMPATIBILITY 17 F.2.a (1) &
17 C.3.c
RADIATION
SAFETY
2 L. 2. a &
17 F.1.c.(4)
TOWER FALL
SET BACK
17 F.2.b.(2)
29
Already 1 of Most Radiated Communities in U.S.
9,000 residents “behind” Towers West of Denversame altitude as high powered TV/FM and radar power
beams with decades of cumulative radiation from continuous exposure
32
Visualizing the Radiation
• 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
34
No Rezoning if Alternative Sites Exist
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.
35
JEFFCO RF CONSULTANT ALTERNATIVE SITES WORK
Lake Cedar Group cannot meet its 100% Burden of Proving that no alternative sites exist.
38
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
39
Violation of Property Rights of Thousands of Residents
• 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
42
FCC Radiation Limits Not Protective for
Long-term Exposure
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
43
University of Colorado Health Sciences Department of Radiation Oncology
Public Testimony in Jefferson County Hearings
“Without proper scientific data, we consider it unconscionable to expose the people of Jefferson County to these levels of radiation.”
We know of no other instance where a device, chemical or drug . . . would be imposed on the public without proof of its safety.
44
Biological Effects to Humans Near TV/FM Towers
at 5% MPE or Lower
Future Radiation Microwatts Per Centimeter Squared
0-20
SAGE REPORT-Broadcast RF Studies Reporting
Biological Effects & AdverseHealth Effects at levels below
FCC StandardsEx. 107
Changes in Immune Function
Infertility in men
Inability to reproduce-mice
45
Study on Effect of Broadcast Radiation on Lookout Mountain
Residents$700,000 National Institute of Health Study
June 03 Letter from Dr. Reif Ex.90
• 1999-LCG opposed Rep. Witwer 99 Research Bill
46
Health Threats Physicians & Scientists Video
• Dr. Ross Wilkins, M.D.– Orthopeadic Oncologist
• Dr. Goldsmith, M.D.– Epidemiologist
• Dr. Litovitz– Physicist– Bioelectromagnetics
47
Dr. Ross Wilkins-Orthopaedic Oncologist
– 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
48
Dr. Goldsmith, M.D. M.P.H. Epidemiologist
• 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
49
Dr. Litovitz-Physicist
• 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