Tag Archives: Cell Ordinance

Cell tower again raises neighbors’ ire | SanDiegoUnionTribune.com

Cell tower again raises neighbors’ ire More trees will go up around tower in San Elijo Hills By Teri Figueroa

 A cellular tower in the San Elijo neighborhood that has run afoul of city rules landed briefly in the spotlight again this week when the San Marcos City Council renewed its permit — but not before adding conditions and blasting the operator for past missteps.With the permit in hand, Crown Castle International Corp. can fix up a fading faux tree near the tower and continue operating there for another decade.But in strong language at Tuesday’s meeting, the council demanded some extras from the company, including an annual report regarding the amount of radio frequency emissions from the tower. The company also must add more real trees to help shield the fake tree from view, and city staffers must inspect the site each year.The finger-wagging highlighted tensions between cell tower providers and the people who live nearby.The San Elijo tower is on the same agriculturally zoned property where neighbors revolted in 2013 after learning a second tower was planned at the edge of the land that abutted their subdivision. That months-long battle made headlines and led the city to rewrite the rules for how many towers it would allow on a single property, eventually limiting the total to three. The City Council approved the second tower at the property in 2014, though the structure has yet to be built. Residents had unsuccessfully argued that cell towers be kept at least 100 feet from a property line. Many cited fears that the devices could emit harmful radiation, but — with little evidence to support those claims — federal law prohibits cities from considering such concerns. Cities can consider aesthetics, however, when deciding where the towers should be allowed.Fast forward to last fall, when a couple of neighbors who spearheaded that earlier battle asked San Marcos to refuse to renew the permit for the first tower, arguing the company had failed to meet previous conditions.They said a faux tree designed to mask the structure had deteriorated, and there were no other trees around to block their view of the tower.That cell tower was first approved in 2008 under five-year permit granted to T-Mobile. In fall 2012, Crown Castle spent $2.4 billion to acquire the rights to some 7,200 T-Mobile cell towers, including the San Elijo site.A few months later, in spring 2013, the San Elijo permit expired and Crown Castle failed to renew it — leading the city to eventually file civil litigation to get the company to comply. During that same time, the city also noticed that the fake tree hiding the cell tower had deteriorated, and demanded that it be fixed. After filing five incomplete applications for renewal, the company eventually provided the right information to the city, and the Planning Commission OK’d the new permit last fall. The city dismissed the suit, and Crown Castle paid the city $6,500 for its trouble. But neighboring homeowners appealed to the City Council, asking the panel to review the permit decision. The council heard that appeal on Tuesday. Councilman Chris Orlando made note of the legal clash before casting the sole vote against renewing the permit.“From my view, you haven’t been a good participant, and you haven’t followed your (permit provisions) that existed before,” Orlando said before his vote. He later added, “I am suspect that you will comply with them … or that we will be able to make you comply with them.”Councilwoman Kristal Jabara told the company representative that she understood that the company had acquired a large number of towers, but “this is what you do for a living, day in and day out.”“We do have a level of discomfort here,” she said, “and we are hearing a lot of excuses as to why it (permit renewal) wasn’t done properly.” John Dohm, a zoning manager for Crown Castle, told the council the company wasn’t making excuses, and had not shirked responsibility. He told the panel that no one was “sitting on their hands,” but rather the renewal process “just took a really long time.” teri.figueroa@sduniontribune.com

Source: Cell tower again raises neighbors’ ire | SanDiegoUnionTribune.com


San Marcos Cell Tower Ordinance – Guest Post

Here is a guest post from a concerned group of San Elijo Hills residents. Note some residents may have also received a door flyer that was pro tower and improved cell coverage. Please share your thoughts and ideas and mark your calendars for San Marcos City Cell Tower Ordinance Workshop- April 2, 2014, 6:00 at the San Marcos City Hall. San Elijo Life

Coming to a neighborhood near you (San Elijo Hills) Bigger, Badder MACRO CELL TOWERS?

The City of San Marcos has notified “some” San Elijo Hills residents of a Public Workshop on April 2 to present a proposed revised Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (Cell Tower) Ordinance.  This is not about your cell phone coverage but is about the City permitting additional “macro cell towers” in our community.

This revised Ordinance will control all cell towers in San Marcos and San Elijo Hills including distance to our homes and schools, size, height, number of cell towers per site, and number of carriers per tower.

Using the current Ordinance, the City has not rejected a single cell tower in the last five years.  Even Mayor Desmond, who recently voted to approve another macro tower in SEH, told the Union Tribune “We’ve got nothing right now” when asked about the current Ordinance.

San Elijo residents on Orion Way, Antilla Way and Hollobrook learned first-hand how weak the current Ordinance is when the City Council approved a “second” 35 foot tower just 350 ft. from their homes. These residents have now been left with no choice but to fight this AT&T cell tower through expensive litigation.

If San Elijo Hills residents insist on a responsible Cell Tower Ordinance, we may keep the City from renewing a T-Mobile macro cell tower and adding a third or fourth such tower to this site or other places around us.

Residents believe everyone should have cell service but it should be responsible and fit within our community character.  The technology exists, macro cell towers do not belong near residential neighborhood or schools –it is irresponsible.  Newer small cell technology can provide needed coverage without significantly impacting our families, homes, schools and destroying the beauty of our community.

This is important, just look at the macro cell tower AT&T placed in front of our new High School.

San Marcos High Cell Tower

Support your community and attend the April 2, 2014 Workshop, 6:00 at the San Marcos City Hall.

For more information, contact saycellno@gmail.com or https://www.facebook.Aom/sanmarcosnewcelltechnology

San Marcos Cell Tower Ordinance Update

Here is an update San Elijo Life received from a group of San Elijo Hills and Questhaven Hills Residents working with the City of San Marcos on a new cell tower ordinance. We share this update to keep you informed on this issue. San Elijo Life

The San Marcos City Council approved a watered down wireless communications Moratorium.

After San Elijo and Questhaven Hills residents objected to a twenty 24 antenna Cell Farm just 350 feet from homes in San Elijo Hills the City agreed to strengthen their ordinance to prevent even more micro wave antennas from being added to this site.

At the January 14 City Council Meeting, Mayor Desmond changed his position on Cell Farms by not allowing a vote on a Cell Ordinance that would cap the San Elijo Cell Farm at 24 micro wave antennas. The Mayor directed staff to develop a new ordinance “which he could approve” that included “clustering” and multiple towers on one property (aka larger Cell Farms).

Since the City recognizes their lack of a Cell Ordinance was the reason for the San Elijo Cell Farm, the Council discussed a temporary moratorium on cell tower permits to give them time to develop a second ordinance. At last Tuesdays meeting the Council voted to limit the moratorium to just residential/agricultural areas and with, no public notice, the City Attorney changed wording to allow the acceptance and processing of applications during the moratorium.

Over the last six months AT&T has consistently used the threat of litigation to the City, and misrepresentations to the public to get their way.

At this meeting John Osborne of AT&T overtly threatened the City saying “We have a whole host of telecom attorneys who look at these things. I don’t think that the Council should put something into place that could invite litigation…. If you cap at 45 days it would eliminate a lot of problems with the moratorium, if you go beyond 45 days, our telecom attorneys advise us…..”

San Elijo and Questhaven Hills residents met with two council members this past week to discuss the ordinance. Again, the threat of litigation was brought up. One Council member commented that funding for litigation is not a part of the annual budget and would require the Council allocate funds from the City’s general fund, something they certainly don’t want.

It is our understanding the City receives indemnification from AT&T so litigation brought by the residents against the City is paid by AT&T; however, if AT&T brings suit against the City, the City will have to pay for legal expenses and any resulting settlement. Under these circumstances who do you think the City will represent and appease?

AT&T again tied the need for the San Elijo Cell Tower Farm to public safety concerns, specifically 911 calls. The fact is “The FCC’s basic 911 rules require wireless service providers to transmit 911 calls to a Public Safety Answering Point, regardless of whether the caller subscribes to the provider’s service” (http://www.fcc.gov/guides/wireless-911-services).

The truth is the existing San Elijo Hills T-Mobile tower would pick up all 911 calls. This means adding this second AT&T tower at this San Elijo site is not needed for 911 coverage. The City Council has allowed AT&T to repeatedly make such misrepresentation as a rationale for this Cell Farm.

AT&T has also ignored repeated residents request to use less invasive, small cell technology at the San Elijo site. Yet, AT&T’s CEO, Randall Stephenson, states in their Annual Report:

“We plan to expand our … network… To deliver an even better experience, we plan to make this network more dense through extensive use of innovative small cells…..


“Our investment in a denser wireless grid through new cell sites and small-cell technology will… allow better…more consistent coverage as well as additional capacity…Through 2015, we plan to deploy more than 40,000 small cells and more than 1,000 additional distributed antenna systems across our network”.

AT&T never made the City Council aware less invasive technology was even a possibility for San Elijo–it took the San Elijo/Queshaven Hills Citizen group to bring this forward. The City of Delmar only allows small cell systems within their community.

AT&T has been bullying and deceiving the public rather than doing the right thing and being a community partner. Twenty 24 cell antennas just 350 feet from homes in San Elijo is not necessary or right.