Neighbors oppose planned cell towers
About 25 neighbors of a proposed Verizon cell tower for Cedar Street voiced their opposition at a recent Ramona Community Planning Group meeting.
After listening to their concerns, planning group members voted unanimously to deny a major use permit for the telecommunications facility. The vote is advisory to the county.
The Ramona residents are not the only property owners in the region battling a Verizon cell tower in their neighborhood.
For about three years the Ranchita Community Group for Responsible Cell Tower Siting has been presenting multiple reasons and documents to the county why they believe a cell tower should not be constructed on property zoned limited agricultural at 27865 Old Mine Road, near Montezuma Valley Road. That cell tower proposal, for which a major use permit is required, is scheduled to go before county planning commissioners Feb. 20.
In both cases, health concerns such as cancer are a factor in the residents’ opposition to a cell tower in their neighborhood.
“Why does it have to be right in the center of a population area?” asked Stan Dvorak, who lives on Olive Street in Ramona, near the proposed cell tower site at 1808 Cedar St.
Dvorak was one of eight residents who spoke at the Ramona planning group meeting Jan. 15. Other concerns included property devaluation and visual impacts.
Verizon Telecommunications’ proposal is for a 40-foot-high faux water tank with 12 antennas and one microwave dish inside, a custom concrete block equipment shelter and a concrete block enclosure for an emergency generator.
Dvorak said neighbors were not consulted, and the cell tower would be 30 meters from his back door.
Veterinarian Carl Graner said when he sleeps the cell tower would be less than 100 feet from his head.
“This is microwave radiation,” he said.
He and two other neighbors presented scientific data showing possible health risks from close proximity to cell towers.
“I’ve got two grandchildren. They’re going to be zapped 24/7 with these microwaves,” said Richard Wright, who lives next to the site.
Some neighbors mentioned that the owner of the site will earn money from Verizon for allowing the cell tower on the property. Charles Foth said that would constitute commercial activity.
Planning group secretary Kristi Mansolf responded by saying Verizon has to apply for a major use permit to allow commercial use in that spot.
Jim Piva, planning group chair, advised the residents to focus on visual blight and affected property values rather than potential health issues when making their case to the county, and to stay organized.
Meanwhile, the Ranchita group is gearing up for the county commission hearing with the cell tower’s applicant, Vista Towers, LLC.
The commission will consider two recommendations from county staff: approve the major use permit and adopt the mitigated negative declaration, said Jarrett Ramaiya, planning manager with the county’s Planning and Development Services.
In addition to health concerns, visual impacts and property devaluation, the Ranchita group cites adverse environmental impacts in their fight against the cell tower. Barbara Schnier, the driving force behind the Ranchita group, points to two 1940s-era adobe houses on Old Mine Road and a letter from Save Our Heritage Organisation that says the buildings meet requirements for national historic registration and should be considered for environmental review. Schnier has requested the county respond to the remarks, and to provide other documentation and responses before the commission hearing.
“We know there’s concerns, fear,” said Ramaiya, adding that he appreciates hearing from the community.
The Ranchita project has been modified from its original submittal in December 2011, said Ramaiya. The initial proposed cell tower was a 58-foot-tall faux tree. The height has been changed to two 35-foot-tall faux monopine trees, he said.