Saturday, September 25, 2010

Cell tower application already drawing fire

Cell tower application already drawing fire
Variance sought to erect tower on church property
BY KENNY WALTER Staff Writer

TINTON FALLS — For the first time since 2007, the borough Zoning Board of Adjustment will hear an application for a proposed cell phone tower, an application that already has garnered a swell of opposition.

The testimony for the use variance that would allow the tower kicked off at the July 15 Zoning Board meeting in the first of what will likely be several hearings.

The T-Mobile Northeast application is slated for development at the Church of Christ property at 312 Hance Ave.

The first expert witness was Daniel Collins, Pinnacle Telecom Group, Cedar Knolls, who testified that the proposed tower would meet all federal and state standards for emissions.

“The standard itself is very conservative; it allows only a very low amount of radio energy,” he said. “We are even more conservative than the FCC [Federal Communications Commission] recommends.

“Our numbers are exceedingly conservative. We plug in all forms of conservative figures in order to get the absolute worst possible case.”

Collins explained that the FCC subjects all cell phone towers to reviews.

“The FCC requires that an assessment of compliance be made for new antenna sites and for existing antenna sites where modifications or additions are made,” he said. “The FCC at any time can request proof of compliance and the carrier must produce them.”

Collins also said that the radio frequency levels attributed to cell phone towers are less than various kitchen appliances, including the refrigerator.

Collins also said that while the cell phone tower is going to be erected for TMobile, other area carriers could lease antennas on the tower.

“You could put all five carriers that are licensed to operate in this market, and it still would not cause the [radiation level] you would find in your kitchen,” he said.

Collins made a hypothetical guess that there could be as many as 42 antennas on the proposed tower.

He also said that because the system is constantly monitored, the tower emission levels would remain constant over time.

“This is an electrical system and device like any other,” he said. “If you put a light bulb in your house, over the course of time it deteriorates and eventually stops working.

“It never gets higher at any time,” he said. “They won’t increase or decrease; they will pretty much stay the same.

“As the system ages, it is monitored 24 hours a day; so if they sense something, they replace the part that is causing it to operate at lower efficiency.”

The room was filled with residents opposing the tower, who will likely testify against the proposal at a later meeting.

Resident Allison DeVito wrote in an email about her opposition to the cell tower.

“The church actually houses a preschool and there is a pre-school at the synagogue next to it,” she wrote. “In addition, the property is in a residential neighborhood and is a block from the Swimming River School.”

Opposition to the tower spilled over into the July 20 Borough Council meeting when Councilwoman NancyAnn Fama came armed with a petition.

“I would encourage anybody to get involved with this issue,” she said. “Cell phone towers are needed and important, but surely they do not need to be placed in residential areas and at schools near children.

“This is how democracy works; if you don’t like something, you need to have your voice heard.”

Also expected to testify on the behalf of T-Mobile are a site engineer, a radio frequency engineer and a professional planner.

A 2007 application by the Board of Education to build a cell tower at Mahala F. Atchison School drew widespread opposition and was never built.

The next Zoning Board meeting is scheduled for Aug. 5, but there is no indication at present whether the T-Mobile application will be on the agenda.

Contact Kenny Walter at

kwalter@gmnews.com.





Click here to enlarge



No Flash Detected
Please download the latest version by clicking below:

Get

Click for www.tomsford.com

No comments: