To the editor:
The purpose of this letter is to share some background information about the proposed cell tower at Woods Road Firehouse and the neighbors’ opposition, i.e. those yellow signs around town. The Board of Adjustment meets tonight, Wednesday, June 15, at 7:30 p.m. in the municipal courtroom to continue hearing this application.
Facts:
1. Verizon is seeking a variance to install a cell tower in a “use not permitted in the RA (residential-agriculture) zone.“
2. According to the Hillsborough zoning code, Section 188-146, cell towers are conditional use in very specific zoning districts — mainly light industrial and office districts — http://ecode360.com/10258631.
3. In those specific conditional use zoning districts, there are various setback requirements, including setbacks from property lines and distance from a public school. There are actually no setbacks called out for the RA zone, because cell towers “are prohibited in all other zoning districts“ (Section 188-146A). The proposed cell tower will be 1,428 feet from Woods Road School. In the conditional use zoning districts, the minimum distance from a public school would be 2000 feet.
4. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 considers cell towers to be a “public good.“ Therefore, the Board of adjustment can approve this application if Verizon can demonstrate that this site is particularly well suited for the proposed use and can satisfactorily address the negative impact on the surrounding properties.
Pros for a cell tower at Woods Road firehouse:
1. Firefighters/emergency services personnel do not get cell coverage inside homes in the Woods Road School coverage area (from Willow Road to Millstone River Road; Hillsborough Road to Township Line Road). This tower would fill the gap.
2. Firefighters’ perspective is this is a public safety issue.
3. Improves cell coverage of Verizon customers in the Woods Road School area.
Cons for a cell tower at Woods Road firehouse:
1. This is a 120-foot cell tower that, in its final configuration, will be only 68 feet from the property line (i.e., nearest neighbor).
2. Unknown perceived health risks to closest neighbors (although the Telecommunications Act of 1996 says one cannot use this as an argument against). Remember when lead in paint was considered to be a health benefit? Would you want a cell tower as your next-door neighbor?
3. Property value decrease of neighbors with a cell tower view, based on an appraisal report done for Montgomery residents in 2010 against a T-Mobile Green Avenue application.
Why should you care if you don’t live near the Woods Road Firehouse?
1. If you look at Verizon’s own coverage maps (Map 4 in report titled “Radio Frequency Analysis and Report“), even if the proposed cell tower is installed, the area by Millstone River Road is still a dead cell coverage zone. Verizon is actively seeking sites to fill that gap. Is there a property owner 1,000 feet from the Millstone River (historic district) who would agree to a cell tower on their property? Do you live next to that property?
2. In the same report, Verizon lists several existing cell towers reaching capacity in Q2 2016 and Q4 2016. If the proposed cell tower is installed, with the growing demand for data, how long until this site reaches capacity and a new tower is proposed? Will you live next to that property?
3. The area by Woods Road School has spotty cell coverage for a reason. It’s all residential, so any cell coverage is coming from towers located in the commercial areas of town. By the Hillsborough zoning code, cell towers, along with other commercial entities, aren’t intended to be built in residential areas. However, by the Municipal Land Use Law, any property owner has the right to seek a variance for their property. The outcome of this application will shape the next large-scale use variance request in a residential zone. Will you live next to that property?
4. To really provide cell coverage for the Woods Road School area, Verizon should have proposed a cell tower in the middle of the dead zone (Map 3 of the same report), which is somewhere around South Woods Road and Camden Road (for example, the soccer fields off South Woods Road). Or they should go further south to cover Montgomery, and proposed a location around South Woods Road and Township Line Road. Do you live near there?
5. My point is all these areas are residential zones and nobody should have to defend their property like the Woods Road firehouse’s nearest neighbors. If this application is approved, the next Board of Adjustment application may affect your property.
In conclusion, I support the volunteer firefighters of the Woods Road firehouse. They dedicate their time and their lives to our community. But I think this good work should not distract from the fact that cell towers are not permitted in a residential zone. There are other ways to improve cell coverage in the Woods Road School area. The Woods Road firehouse isn’t even the optimal location. It is on the north end of the coverage gap. If Verizon can propose a cell tower on the edges of the coverage gap, why not consider the Mattawang Golf Club? It was mentioned at the March Board of Adjustment meeting and is on the west end of the coverage gap. Verizon’s own radio frequency engineer could not explain why the golf club was not considered.
In my opinion, the reasons against outweigh the reasons for this project. In conclusion, I hope my neighbors will defend Hillsborough’s residential zoning code and oppose Verizon’s application to place a cell tower at the Woods Road Firehouse.
Jean Trujillo
Hillsborough
