TMCnet News
Tenafly grapples with two cell tower applications [The Record, Hackensack, N.J.](Record (Hackensack, NJ) Via Acquire Media NewsEdge) June 13--TENAFLY -- Two cell towers -- one proposed and the other erected -- have been topics of controversy with neighbors who have argued they obstruct views and devalue properties. Here's a look at the two plans: T-Mobile T-Mobile has appeared before the Zoning Board of Adjustment since October seeking variances to build a 120-foot pole on a commercial property on Franklin Street. The tower, which is designed to resemble a flagpole, would include six antennas and be constructed on a concrete slab within a fenced area. T-Mobile leases the northeast portion of a property that used by a plumbing supply company. T-Mobile proposed building the tower to address gaps in coverage. John Edwards, the attorney hired to present T-Mobile's application, declined to reveal details of the leasing arrangement. Given that it would be located in a mostly residential area, Police Chief Michael Bruno had proposed an alternative location on police headquarters property since an addition and renovation are under way there. "It would take it out of a residential neighborhood and we'd be able to put some communications equipment on top of it," he said. But Bruno received a response from T-Mobile last month declining the offer because it's too close to a tower on nearby Grove Street, he said. The Tenafly Historic Preservation Commission has also expressed concerns about the proposed tower's proximity to the Atwood's Highwood Park Historic District and that it would be visible from historic homes there as well as the nearby Westervelt House. One Huyler Avenue homeowner in the district said a December test in which a crane was raised at the tower's proposed location to simulate its height revealed that she could see it from her front porch, driveway, lawn and side windows of her early 1870s home. "It does not fit in with the character of this town," said Lisa Pribanic, adding that property values in the area will decrease if the tower is built. "And it's huge. It's not just that it's tall, it's very broad." Franklin Street homeowner Jeffrey Levitt, who lives next door to the proposed site, said he'll be looking at a "big pole" from his back yard deck if it goes up. "They're building this monstrosity as close as it could be to my house without hitting my house," he said. "The house is not going to appreciate [in value] because of it and there will be hundreds of homes and apartments within viewing distance of this." Commuters traveling along Dean Drive will also get a full view, he said. The Planning Board and the mayor and council should establish a plan of how many cell towers will be permitted in town rather than deciding on individual applications, residents have said. "There's no plan to have a limit as to how many or to figure out realistically how much coverage they will need," Levitt said. Martha Kerge, council liaison to the Board of Adjustment, said "I'm personally bothered that if we would have to accept it, we'd need a cellphone tower in a residential neighborhood. It's true that the property they're putting it on is not residential property, and it's true the zoning is mixed on that street, but there are residences right across the street and down the street and the residents have spoken out against it." Jane Builder, T-Mobile's Northeast senior manager of external affairs, said the company evaluated potential sites in the borough where residents would benefit from enhanced coverage. "T-Mobile is committed to providing first-class wireless service, while at the same time, being a good community partner, and we believe we've accomplished that here, she said in an e-mailed statement. "We know that reliable coverage improves safety and quality of life for everyone." Verizon For several years, Verizon has tried to get approval for a 127-foot tower in a wooded area of the Greek Orthodox Cathedral of St. John the Theologian on East Clinton Avenue. The company sought variances to build the tower with a fenced-in base to resolve a gap in coverage. The zoning board denied the application in 2007. Among the reasons were that Verizon failed to review other possible sites. Verizon appealed and neighbors opposed the appeal in state Superior Court. The trial court granted Verizon permission to build the tower in the East Hill section. It was immediately constructed -- made to resemble a tree with fake branches -- while the residents appealed. The state Appellate Division remanded the issue to the zoning board to determine if the Tenafly Nature Center was available as an alternative location. The board recently determined there was no other suitable site. That means the tower, which is operational, remains at its location. E-mail: [email protected] ___ To see more of The Record or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.northjersey.com. Copyright (c) 2011, The Record, Hackensack, N.J. Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services. For more information about the content services offered by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services (MCT), visit www.mctinfoservices.com, e-mail [email protected], or call 866-280-5210 (outside the United States, call +1 312-222-4544) |