News
Hundreds Pay Respects to King

Three Trails in 30 Years

Around the Area

Briefs

Range of Projects Displayed at Expo

Estancia Teen Gets Worldwide Education

CNM To Offer Courses in Edgewood

DWI Memorial Needs Help To Stay Open

Bidding Process To Start on Arts Center

Mother of 5 Arrested in Fatal Stabbing

More
News

HOME	CLASSIFIEDS	OBITUARIES	SPORTS	OPINION

Thursday, April 28, 2005

No New Antennas on Tower

By Stacey Boyne
Mountain View Telegraph
    The Edgewood Town Council refused to budge during a four-hour public hearing on April 20, voting unanimously to deny a permit for Nextel to add an antenna array on an existing Telecom cell phone tower.
    In 2003, Nextel applied for a special use permit, as requested by the council, to co-locate a cell phone array onto Telecom's legal but nonconforming 185-foot tower. Because of a tower ordinance approved by the town in 2003, the tower that was legally constructed in 2001 is now out of compliance with the new ordinance.
    Edgewood Planning and Zoning Administrator Karen Mahalick said the tower is out of compliance with setback, visual buffer and safety requirements, which means modifications cannot be made to the existing structure. Additional arrays are considered modifications.
    In October, councilors requested a public hearing regarding the applicant in order to gain more information before making a final decision.
    Telecom's legal representative, Karl Sommer, however, suggested something else was motivating the delayed decision.
    Through a series of questions aimed at Mahalick, Sommer showed that Telecom believed she was behind resistance to the application.
    "We want to rule out any bias against Nextel and its employees by Mahalick," said Sommer.
    Councilors jumped to Mahalick's defense.
    "I respect your desire to get answers, Mr. Sommer, but I'm uncertain of the pointed questions being made at Mrs. Mahalick," said Councilor Paul Hoffman.
   
A $140,000 cost
    According to Richard Comie of the Center for Municipal Solutions, the only way to bring the tower into compliance would be to tear down the old one and put up a new one, costing the tower owner somewhere in the range of $140,000 on top of the $130,000 already invested in the existing tower.
    Sommer claimed the council was obligated to approve the permit according to the state-permitted and town-approved tower designs from 2001.
    "My client went through the correct legal process of obtaining the appropriate permits to build the structure and had the town approve and sign off on the tower— the tower was built and the next day an ordinance was written that put it out of compliance," said Sommers.
    However, the ordinance was actually written two years later, and town attorney David Henderson said two sets of designs were approved at that time by former Mayor Howard Calkins and the planning and zoning administrator at the time, Kelly Moe. One set was merely a bare tower and the other a tower with the possibility of several types of antennas on it.
    "Even though the tower was built to hold five arrays and some microwave (equipment), none of the approved plans actually state that up to five arrays would actually be on the tower," explained Henderson, recommending that the council's decision should be one of fairness and not of obligation.
    Currently, Alltel and T-Mobile both have arrays on the tower and are generating income for Telecom through customer usage and leasing fees. But Sommers argued it is ridiculous for the council to imply that his client would build a tower without intent to put anything on it.
    In the meantime, Nextel simply wants to know where it stands with the town.
    "We have done everything council has requested of us," explained Nextel representative Douglas Kofford. "We have financially strained ourselves to do extra research and analysis to satisfy this council— and all we want is a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer."
   
Ruining a view
    Kofford informed councilors that no matter what their decision was, the next day Nextel would take the project back and what would happen from there he had no idea.
    Local residents, patient but tired, finally gave their testimony three hours after the hearing began.
    "I got to pick, out of 300 acres, where I wanted to put my house— I chose the location I did because I wanted to picture frame the mountain from my window view," explained Los Cerritos Home Owners Association board member Tim Oden. "Now, all I see is that cell tower from every window from every story of my house and it's right in front of that mountain.
    "If I had put that cell tower up, I would be ashamed to show my face in town," he added.
    Dave Elledge, vice president of Los Cerritos Home Owners Association, said he was told by an appraiser that the value of his property was reduced significantly because of the location of the cell tower.
    After four hours of testimony, deliberations and reviewing evidence, Nextel finally got its answer. A motion was made to accept the addition of the array to the tower, provided Telecom would conduct and pay for a required safety inspection. The motion also implied the understanding that future antenna applications would now be allowed to co-locate on the tower under a special use permit.
    In the end, the council said "no" on a 4-0 vote.
    "The application couldn't be approved with a variance," explained Councilor Chuck Ring. "My feeling is a variance could still be granted only if the existing tower could be made more stealth (less of an eyesore)."