Planners oppose cell tower on residential property
Residents’ recent opposition to neighborhood cell towers is causing some on the Ramona Community Planning Group to look at them in a new light.
Planner Paul Stykel said he is realizing the cell towers are a commercial product that is being proposed for areas not zoned commercial or industrial.
“We need to take a look at these things,” he said at the group’s June 4 meeting. “They pop up here. They pop up there.”
“I really oppose one property owner profiting at the expense of the others,” said planner Donna Myers.
The latest proposal is one by Verizon for 615 state Route 78. As in the case of a tower proposed for 1808 Cedar St., the facilities would be built on residential property with the landowner receiving compensation from Verizon.
At the January planning group meeting, about 20 neighbors of the Cedar Street site spoke against the proposed Verizon cell tower, citing studies of adverse health effects caused by electromagnetic radiation for those in close proximity, as well as visual and property value impacts. The planning group did not approve a major use permit for the Cedar Street proposal, but the vote is advisory only to the county Planning Commission.
Regarding the Route 78 cell tower, near Amigos Road, planners heard opposition from a few neighbors. Don Kohorst said he lives across from the proposed site. His guesthouse would be about 435 feet from the tower and his main house about 800 feet “which we think is too close,” he said.
Although he cited health studies, Kohorst said he knew that such studies cannot be used to deny a permit because of the federal 1996 Telecommunications Act.
Planner Jim Cooper said the act, which prohibits state and local governments from denying permit applications for cell towers based on health concerns from radio frequency emissions, seems out of date. Cooper said he would challenge the veracity of the act as there have been “solid studies” on health impacts, such as cancer, attention deficit disorder and neurological diseases.
Ted Nofal Jr., who lives next to the property for the cell tower, said, “There’s a lot of families on Amigos Road that are going to be exposed to this.”
Tony Nofal presented a video showing measurements of electromagnetic fields of a cell tower in relation to people working nearby.
“It’s going to be an unsightly thing,” said Ted Nofal Sr. “It’s going to be an eyesore.”
The project calls for a 45-foot faux monopine with 12 antennas and one microwave dish, approximately 385 feet from the highway, plus a concrete block equipment shelter and concrete block enclosure for emergency generator. According to Verizon, there are dead spots for signals in that area.
Planning group chair Jim Piva suggested the neighbors gather as a group with one voice, as the county said it had only heard opposition from Kohorst.
Cooper made a motion to deny the cell tower for reasons that included it is a commercial, industrial application in a residential area, is along a scenic highway, exceeds the county height limit and has potential to decrease property values.
The motion passed 10-1 with Dan Scherer, chair of the East Subcommittee that first reviewed the project, voting no. Planners Barbara Jensen, Scotty Ensign, Torry Brean and Elio Noyas were absent.
In other business:
•Piva said that in addition to an application for a medical marijuana collective for 1210 Olive St., another one is proposed for Pine Street, and there may be more in the works.
•Helene Armand presented an informational item about park model units on private property. The units are 400-square-foot trailers registered as RVs, she said, and are popular in Arizona and Utah.
“They’re coming to California,” she said.
“These are already here,” said Cooper, noting he knows of five in Ramona.
Armand said she is in the process of setting one up as a health care residence on her property for her elderly mother. She said is working with the county and with the Ramona Municipal Water District, which is reviewing her equivalent dwelling unit fee for sewer.