WirelessAdvisor.com

Rich · 04-28-2002, 9:49 PM

Three telecommunications firms are suing the city of Redmond over a requirement to disguise a cellular tower as an evergreen tree.

Cingular Wireless, VoiceStream and Nextel say the tree camouflage could add $150,000 to the cost of the tower. Their lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, claims the requirement is extreme and violates federal law.

Redmond disputes the claims.

The dispute started two years ago when the cellular phone-service carriers applied to install a 100-foot tower in the Ardmore Park neighborhood.

The city approved the tower, located on Puget Sound Energy property, and initially required the companies only to paint it green and replant trees cut down.

After neighbors complained that the tower would be too close to homes, the City Council asked city staff to find a better camouflage.

Redmond city staff have been in contact with the Larson Co. of Tucson, Ariz., which has built camouflage for cell towers ranging from the phony trees to cacti and even church crosses.

Larson CEO Andrew Messing said yesterday his company has built about 300 tree towers nationwide. He said many cities have ordinances like Redmond's requiring some form of tower camouflage, but he was unaware of any cities that required tree towers.

Larson uses epoxy to mimic bark and PVC pipe wrapped in fiberglass, along with artificial foliage similar to that of fake Christmas trees, to create branches.

"They look pretty darn good," said Jim Roberts, Redmond assistant planning director. "We've talked to cities in other states who are really pleased with the outcome

IdiOTeQnoLogY · 04-28-2002, 10:05 PM

i understand the point of the city to a degree(being a strong environmentalist myself) but I dont understand this hardcore camouflaging every single damn cell site mentality.

whenever possible i agree it would be nice; but i mean there are how many utility poles that arent camo'd and nobody is raising some brew haha over it.

KevinJames · 04-28-2002, 10:12 PM

I totally agree with Id. Where is the reasonableness in this? Pretty soon they will want to disguise light polls, flag polls, signals and anything over 8 feet high. Pretty soon basketball players will be walking shrubs. "Mommy, mommy! Look at that walking plant!" Dogs will have nervous breakdowns when the plant they pee on all of a sudden kicks them.

~~ILUVSOCAL~~ · 04-28-2002, 10:26 PM

LOL kevin is the man!

larry · 04-29-2002, 12:58 AM

I also agree with Id. But here in So. Calif. most cities now require that each new site be disguised in some way. Either by artificial trees, flagpoles, clock towers, church steeples, etc. This of course adds much $$ to the cost of each new site but the carriers here seem to be willing to go along with it. No lawsuits have been filed over this that I know of. Maybe this is a more lucrative area in their eyes and so they can make up the cost difference a lot faster.

~~ILUVSOCAL~~ · 04-29-2002, 1:10 AM

While they want to know how cell towers will look in the area, I haven't heard of any requirement up here that require them to be disguised in some way. I know Edge has mounted one site in Ukiah and one in Willits on existing communications towers though. In fact, Edge paid half the cost to the city(the other half was from grants and other sources) of putting up a new police/fire communication tower that would let Edge put up cell panels on. They seem more willing to work with the communities then Verizon or US Cellular do, and this area can be a bear to put up towers in(along with houses and jobs [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img] ). Edge has put up several sites, 3 within a couple of miles of me, within the space of a year. They must be doing something the other guys haven't, as the other carriers seem to take years to do the same thing.

larry · 04-29-2002, 1:17 AM

Yes I forgot to mention co-location on existing structures has also become a preferred method in many cities.

ComicalMoodyDan · 04-29-2002, 8:51 AM

I guess it just depends on where you live, I myself have never heard a story of companies having a problem putting up a tower around here infact there is one right on the hill up from where I live and when it came in none of the neighbors said a thing. I guess we are just more relaxed them some other people [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-cool.gif[/img]

bassman · 04-29-2002, 10:42 AM

Just a bunch of friggin' fools these people who always want to disguise cell towers as foliage of some sort. I suppose many conferences pertaining to these issues were conducted on their cell phones LOL. I'm sure all of these people wouldn't be the least concerned about more and more wires originating from a pole spreading out everywhere! They're all just a bunch of fools who either don't understand or don't want to see technology advance.

bassman

Jack · 04-29-2002, 8:14 PM

want to hide them any way that they can

Jack

aiwapro · 04-30-2002, 6:12 PM

I agree with you all. Where I am, I haven't noticed any kind of disquise. Their are cell sites and poles everywhere. I don't think noone here in high places (mayor & stuff) really care about cell phone towers, just as long as their cell phones work.

larry · 04-30-2002, 11:38 PM

It's usally the smaller rural communties that cause the chaos when a new tower proposal comes up.

~~ILUVSOCAL~~ · 05-01-2002, 12:27 AM

I think it has more to do with the area of the country than size of the town. Travelling to Redding from Ukiah, I see a lot of towers everywhere in the valley, in plain site, and no apparent problems with them being there. It's a different story over here in Ukiah, you put up a 50 foot pole and people go nuts, though I can assure you there are many of us here that want towers!. To me, most of the anti-tower feelings seem to occur either in the Pacific states(CA, OR, WA) or in the Northeastern states(ie.NH, VT) You go to the midwest, and there are towers allover, with no effort seen to disguise them. It seems wealthy areas are also a big protester or towers, though they could care less if they put them in poor areas, it's the "we need them, but don't you dare put it in my neighborhood" attitude. And guess who complains first when they can't use their phone?

larry · 05-01-2002, 12:49 AM

Mike,
I agree. It does vary by region and wealthy areas are also a big problem. Riverside County here in So. CA seems to have the worst NIMBY'S.

bassman · 05-03-2002, 9:30 AM

Well Larry, we all know that Riverside County doesn't have enough space! LOL!

bassman

UnseenPower · 05-13-2002, 9:06 PM

Redmond is not that savy on business, Boeing left them high and dry after being tired of the BS the city commisioners emposed on them. I forsee these fat cats sitting there like lion tamers chasing every lucrative business from the area untill they realize their pockest are no longer as full as they were some time ago. The problem with disguising this tower, is that they ok was already given, now they are adding strings to the agreement, because they can. I would sue if I was given a building permit and purchased land and was told......... "Oh by the way, make it look like a 400ft wooden Jesus"

I say if they want the aesthetics done, hire your sisters cousin's friend's brother.

Rich · 05-13-2002, 9:52 PM

Hey Unseen Power, how's that wonderful little town of Sequim doing..??
I haven't been there for quite sometime now...since I opened that Hollywood Video store there, that town was so hard to put a store in. I wonder if its the same for cell phone towers...???

UnseenPower · 05-14-2002, 1:23 AM

Rich, it's beautiful, but lousy for econ....
Cell Towers are not that hard to drop in here.
Funny you mention puting that store in, what made it hard?

I have recently tried to put a cell store here....... LOL.
The old people are great, but you have to have patience to deal with all the questions.

Rich · 05-29-2002, 11:35 PM

Redmond, Wash., Officials Say Cell Tower Need Not Be Disguised as Tree

Tuesday May 28 12:00am
Seattle Times

The city of Redmond has backed down on demands that three telecommunications firms disguise a cellular tower as an evergreen tree.

Cingular Wireless, VoiceStream and Nextel had filed suit in U.S. District Court in Seattle, claiming Redmond's requirement was extreme and violated federal law.

Last week the city and the firms negotiated an agreement that ended the dispute.

The controversy began two years ago when the cellular-phone companies applied to install a 100-foot tower in the 17200 block of Northeast 24th Street in the Ardmore Park neighborhood.

The city approved the tower but two weeks later asked for the camouflage after neighbors complained. The city contacted Larson Co. of Tucson, Ariz., which uses PVC pipe wrapped in fiberglass, epoxy and fake foliage to mimic trees.

The cellphone companies estimated that the disguise could add $ 150,000 to the project's cost.

The city is aware that asking for the camouflage late in the game was a weakness in its case, said Jim Roberts, the city's assistant planning director. In the future, the city will require all new cell towers to be disguised as trees, he said.

The city gained some concessions under the agreement, Roberts said. The phone companies will pay Redmond $ 12,500 -- the cost of painting the tower -- and will complete more landscaping than they initially agreed to, he said.

The companies have agreed to plant more than a dozen 20-foot-tall trees to help screen the tower, Roberts said, and to place all the antenna equipment inside the pole.

The tower initially will be green, Roberts said. The $ 12,500 will allow the city to repaint it another color if it wishes.

aiwapro · 05-30-2002, 1:39 PM

That really sucks, $12,500 dollars to paint one pole huh.

Do they not think that the trees will grow. Well of course it's not going to grow the height of the tower, but they will eventually interfere with the antennas. I mean come on, all of these companies operate on 1900 MHz, at least I know that Cingular and Voicestream do, it is easy to block these signals.

04-28-2002, 9:49 PM	#1
Rich Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Pennsauken,NJ Posts: 762 Phone(s): Instinct Provider(s): Sprint Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts My Auctions	Suit is filed over turning cellular tower into evergreen Three telecommunications firms are suing the city of Redmond over a requirement to disguise a cellular tower as an evergreen tree. Cingular Wireless, VoiceStream and Nextel say the tree camouflage could add $150,000 to the cost of the tower. Their lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Seattle, claims the requirement is extreme and violates federal law. Redmond disputes the claims. The dispute started two years ago when the cellular phone-service carriers applied to install a 100-foot tower in the Ardmore Park neighborhood. The city approved the tower, located on Puget Sound Energy property, and initially required the companies only to paint it green and replant trees cut down. After neighbors complained that the tower would be too close to homes, the City Council asked city staff to find a better camouflage. Redmond city staff have been in contact with the Larson Co. of Tucson, Ariz., which has built camouflage for cell towers ranging from the phony trees to cacti and even church crosses. Larson CEO Andrew Messing said yesterday his company has built about 300 tree towers nationwide. He said many cities have ordinances like Redmond's requiring some form of tower camouflage, but he was unaware of any cities that required tree towers. Larson uses epoxy to mimic bark and PVC pipe wrapped in fiberglass, along with artificial foliage similar to that of fake Christmas trees, to create branches. "They look pretty darn good," said Jim Roberts, Redmond assistant planning director. "We've talked to cities in other states who are really pleased with the outcome __________________ "Make something fool-proof and someone will make a better fool."

04-29-2002, 8:14 PM	#10
Jack Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Ohio Posts: 2,475 Phone(s): Motorola T720 Provider(s): Alltel Devices: Sirius Satellite radio, ipod, laptop, pda Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	want to hide them any way that they can Jack __________________ Current Plan with alltel 3000 anytime minutes w/nationwide LD $74.95 a month---Waiting not so patiently for the Alltel version of the V710

05-13-2002, 9:52 PM	Original Poster #17
Rich Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Pennsauken,NJ Posts: 762 Phone(s): Instinct Provider(s): Sprint Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts My Auctions	Hey Unseen Power, how's that wonderful little town of Sequim doing..?? I haven't been there for quite sometime now...since I opened that Hollywood Video store there, that town was so hard to put a store in. I wonder if its the same for cell phone towers...??? __________________ "Make something fool-proof and someone will make a better fool."

05-29-2002, 11:35 PM	Original Poster #19
Rich Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Pennsauken,NJ Posts: 762 Phone(s): Instinct Provider(s): Sprint Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts My Auctions	Redmond, Wash., Officials Say Cell Tower Need Not Be Disguised as Tree Tuesday May 28 12:00am Seattle Times The city of Redmond has backed down on demands that three telecommunications firms disguise a cellular tower as an evergreen tree. Cingular Wireless, VoiceStream and Nextel had filed suit in U.S. District Court in Seattle, claiming Redmond's requirement was extreme and violated federal law. Last week the city and the firms negotiated an agreement that ended the dispute. The controversy began two years ago when the cellular-phone companies applied to install a 100-foot tower in the 17200 block of Northeast 24th Street in the Ardmore Park neighborhood. The city approved the tower but two weeks later asked for the camouflage after neighbors complained. The city contacted Larson Co. of Tucson, Ariz., which uses PVC pipe wrapped in fiberglass, epoxy and fake foliage to mimic trees. The cellphone companies estimated that the disguise could add $ 150,000 to the project's cost. The city is aware that asking for the camouflage late in the game was a weakness in its case, said Jim Roberts, the city's assistant planning director. In the future, the city will require all new cell towers to be disguised as trees, he said. The city gained some concessions under the agreement, Roberts said. The phone companies will pay Redmond $ 12,500 -- the cost of painting the tower -- and will complete more landscaping than they initially agreed to, he said. The companies have agreed to plant more than a dozen 20-foot-tall trees to help screen the tower, Roberts said, and to place all the antenna equipment inside the pole. The tower initially will be green, Roberts said. The $ 12,500 will allow the city to repaint it another color if it wishes. __________________ "Make something fool-proof and someone will make a better fool."

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

WirelessAdvisor.com

Western US Wireless Forum

Suit is filed over turning cellular tower into evergreen in U.S. Wireless Forums [Archive]; "Three telecommunications firms are suing the city of Redmond over ..."

WirelessAdvisor.com

04-28-2002, 10:05 PM	#2
IdiOTeQnoLogY Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 1,567 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	i understand the point of the city to a degree(being a strong environmentalist myself) but I dont understand this hardcore camouflaging every single damn cell site mentality. whenever possible i agree it would be nice; but i mean there are how many utility poles that arent camo'd and nobody is raising some brew haha over it.

04-28-2002, 10:12 PM	#3
KevinJames WA's 1st retired mod Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Central Valley NorCA Posts: 2,624 Phone(s): Samsung A877, Impression Provider(s): the new AT&T Devices: Plantronics Discovery925, Garmin Nuvi 660 Thanks: 0 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	I totally agree with Id. Where is the reasonableness in this? Pretty soon they will want to disguise light polls, flag polls, signals and anything over 8 feet high. Pretty soon basketball players will be walking shrubs. "Mommy, mommy! Look at that walking plant!" Dogs will have nervous breakdowns when the plant they pee on all of a sudden kicks them.

04-28-2002, 10:26 PM	#4
~~ILUVSOCAL~~ Banned Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Redwood Valley, CA Posts: 2,485 Phone(s): Nokia 3600(me), SE T616(me),T226(mom), Samsung SGH-x426(me), Nokia 7210(dad) Provider(s): AT&T(Me),Cingular(Me,Mom),Edge Wireless(Dad) Devices: BlueTrek G2 Bluetooth Headset Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts My Auctions	LOL kevin is the man!

04-29-2002, 12:58 AM	#5
larry Go Lakers! Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 13,466 Phone(s): LG Rumor 2, Sanyo Katana II Provider(s): Sprint Thanks: 29 Thanked 26 Times in 25 Posts Images: 156 My Auctions	I also agree with Id. But here in So. Calif. most cities now require that each new site be disguised in some way. Either by artificial trees, flagpoles, clock towers, church steeples, etc. This of course adds much $$ to the cost of each new site but the carriers here seem to be willing to go along with it. No lawsuits have been filed over this that I know of. Maybe this is a more lucrative area in their eyes and so they can make up the cost difference a lot faster.

04-29-2002, 1:10 AM	#6
~~ILUVSOCAL~~ Banned Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Redwood Valley, CA Posts: 2,485 Phone(s): Nokia 3600(me), SE T616(me),T226(mom), Samsung SGH-x426(me), Nokia 7210(dad) Provider(s): AT&T(Me),Cingular(Me,Mom),Edge Wireless(Dad) Devices: BlueTrek G2 Bluetooth Headset Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts My Auctions	While they want to know how cell towers will look in the area, I haven't heard of any requirement up here that require them to be disguised in some way. I know Edge has mounted one site in Ukiah and one in Willits on existing communications towers though. In fact, Edge paid half the cost to the city(the other half was from grants and other sources) of putting up a new police/fire communication tower that would let Edge put up cell panels on. They seem more willing to work with the communities then Verizon or US Cellular do, and this area can be a bear to put up towers in(along with houses and jobs [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-sad.gif[/img] ). Edge has put up several sites, 3 within a couple of miles of me, within the space of a year. They must be doing something the other guys haven't, as the other carriers seem to take years to do the same thing.

04-29-2002, 1:17 AM	#7
larry Go Lakers! Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 13,466 Phone(s): LG Rumor 2, Sanyo Katana II Provider(s): Sprint Thanks: 29 Thanked 26 Times in 25 Posts Images: 156 My Auctions	Yes I forgot to mention co-location on existing structures has also become a preferred method in many cities.

04-29-2002, 8:51 AM	#8
ComicalMoodyDan Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Kingsport, TN Posts: 6,084 Phone(s): Blackberry 8520 Provider(s): T-Mobile Devices: T-Mobile @Home Thanks: 0 Thanked 20 Times in 15 Posts	I guess it just depends on where you live, I myself have never heard a story of companies having a problem putting up a tower around here infact there is one right on the hill up from where I live and when it came in none of the neighbors said a thing. I guess we are just more relaxed them some other people [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-cool.gif[/img]

04-29-2002, 10:42 AM	#9
bassman Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 133 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Just a bunch of friggin' fools these people who always want to disguise cell towers as foliage of some sort. I suppose many conferences pertaining to these issues were conducted on their cell phones LOL. I'm sure all of these people wouldn't be the least concerned about more and more wires originating from a pole spreading out everywhere! They're all just a bunch of fools who either don't understand or don't want to see technology advance. bassman

04-30-2002, 6:12 PM	#11
aiwapro Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,455 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I agree with you all. Where I am, I haven't noticed any kind of disquise. Their are cell sites and poles everywhere. I don't think noone here in high places (mayor & stuff) really care about cell phone towers, just as long as their cell phones work.

04-30-2002, 11:38 PM	#12
larry Go Lakers! Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 13,466 Phone(s): LG Rumor 2, Sanyo Katana II Provider(s): Sprint Thanks: 29 Thanked 26 Times in 25 Posts Images: 156 My Auctions	It's usally the smaller rural communties that cause the chaos when a new tower proposal comes up.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads for: Suit is filed over turning cellular tower into evergreen
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
NOKIA 3589i Filed Test mode Question	HedsIc	NOKIA	0	06-13-2005 12:33 AM
Zoners reject cellular tower near homes	larry	Northeastern US Wireless Forum	10	01-22-2005 8:40 PM
How Can You Tell If Sprint is Turning On a Tower?	Gamer03	Sprint PCS Forum	19	11-08-2004 2:20 PM
North Smithfield gives green light to cellular tower (Providence, RI)	Rich	Northeastern US Wireless Forum	0	06-10-2002 7:02 PM

05-01-2002, 12:27 AM	#13
~~ILUVSOCAL~~ Banned Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Redwood Valley, CA Posts: 2,485 Phone(s): Nokia 3600(me), SE T616(me),T226(mom), Samsung SGH-x426(me), Nokia 7210(dad) Provider(s): AT&T(Me),Cingular(Me,Mom),Edge Wireless(Dad) Devices: BlueTrek G2 Bluetooth Headset Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts My Auctions	I think it has more to do with the area of the country than size of the town. Travelling to Redding from Ukiah, I see a lot of towers everywhere in the valley, in plain site, and no apparent problems with them being there. It's a different story over here in Ukiah, you put up a 50 foot pole and people go nuts, though I can assure you there are many of us here that want towers!. To me, most of the anti-tower feelings seem to occur either in the Pacific states(CA, OR, WA) or in the Northeastern states(ie.NH, VT) You go to the midwest, and there are towers allover, with no effort seen to disguise them. It seems wealthy areas are also a big protester or towers, though they could care less if they put them in poor areas, it's the "we need them, but don't you dare put it in my neighborhood" attitude. And guess who complains first when they can't use their phone?

05-01-2002, 12:49 AM	#14
larry Go Lakers! Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Orange County, CA Posts: 13,466 Phone(s): LG Rumor 2, Sanyo Katana II Provider(s): Sprint Thanks: 29 Thanked 26 Times in 25 Posts Images: 156 My Auctions	Mike, I agree. It does vary by region and wealthy areas are also a big problem. Riverside County here in So. CA seems to have the worst NIMBY'S.

05-03-2002, 9:30 AM	#15
bassman Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 133 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Well Larry, we all know that Riverside County doesn't have enough space! LOL! bassman

05-13-2002, 9:06 PM	#16
UnseenPower Junior Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 53 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Redmond is not that savy on business, Boeing left them high and dry after being tired of the BS the city commisioners emposed on them. I forsee these fat cats sitting there like lion tamers chasing every lucrative business from the area untill they realize their pockest are no longer as full as they were some time ago. The problem with disguising this tower, is that they ok was already given, now they are adding strings to the agreement, because they can. I would sue if I was given a building permit and purchased land and was told......... "Oh by the way, make it look like a 400ft wooden Jesus" I say if they want the aesthetics done, hire your sisters cousin's friend's brother.

05-14-2002, 1:23 AM	#18
UnseenPower Junior Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 53 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Rich, it's beautiful, but lousy for econ.... Cell Towers are not that hard to drop in here. Funny you mention puting that store in, what made it hard? I have recently tried to put a cell store here....... LOL. The old people are great, but you have to have patience to deal with all the questions.

05-30-2002, 1:39 PM	#20
aiwapro Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 2,455 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	That really sucks, $12,500 dollars to paint one pole huh. Do they not think that the trees will grow. Well of course it's not going to grow the height of the tower, but they will eventually interfere with the antennas. I mean come on, all of these companies operate on 1900 MHz, at least I know that Cingular and Voicestream do, it is easy to block these signals.