Cell Tower Becomes Lightning Rod For Neighbor Dispute

[larry]

Cell Tower Becomes Lightning Rod For Neighbor Dispute

By Kristi Geske

Construction began approximately one month ago on a monopine cell tower disguised as a eucalyptus tree in a residential neighborhood in Running Springs. It would be the first such tower in a residential area in Running Springs. The tower is owned by telecommunications giant Sprint PCS.

A conditional use permit to establish a 75-foot high telecommunications monopine - including six panel antennas and two cabinets, with a major variance to allow the project within 300 feet of residences with approval for the tower to exceed the maximum height by 15 feet on .24 acres - was approved and issued by the San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department, Planning Division on April 8, 2004.

Enchanted Forest Estates Architectural Committee President Taylor Sisco and Vice-President Jeff Gill said they were surprised the project was approved.

"We became aware of it only a few weeks ago and were informed that the Stehmeiers (owners of the property where the tower is to be located) have already signed a contract with Sprint PCS and the Stehmeiers will receive $1,300 from Sprint PCS monthly.

Chris Judd, secretary of the Enchanted Forest Estates Architectural Committee served a letter to Enchanted Forest Estates residents Russell and Laura Stehmeier on Wednesday, Nov. 24 stating the committee's position on the Sprint PCS' monopine cell tower being constructed on the Stehmeiers' property.

The letter provided by the committee to The Mountain-News stated the committee was "greatly surprised and disturbed by the news of this, as we were never afforded our right of approval for the structure, as spelled out in the Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC&R's), of which you should have been aware as you gave $100 to keep this committee enforcing said CC&R's, which have been in place and enforced since their initial recording on January 20, 1970."

"We are not against the Stehmeiers but we think it was a massive mistake," Gill stated.

Gill added even the workers who are constructing the cell tower were surprised that they are putting the cell tower in a residential area.

"The architectural committee has the right," Gill continued, "and it's specifically stated on Item No. 6 and 11 of the CC&R's of the committee. Sprint did not inform the architectural committee about this project."

The committee believes the cell tower construction is, at a minimum, in direct violation of the following portions of the said CC&R's in the "Declarations of Restrictions" recorded with the County of San Bernardino.

Item No. 6, which is the Architectural Controls says: "No improvements shall be erected, placed or altered on any lot until the construction plans and specifications and a plot showing the location of the improvements have been approved by the Architectural Committee as to quality of work and material, harmony of exterior design with existing structures, and as to location with respect to topography and finish grade elevations as provided in Paragraph 9."

While Item No. 11, which is the Derricks and Similar Structures covenant reads: "No derrick or other structure designed for use in boring, mining or quarrying for water, oil, natural gas or precious minerals shall be erected, maintained or permitted upon any lot by anyone other than declarant's without first obtaining the consent and approval of the Architectural Control Committee."

STEHMEIER'S POSITION

According to Russell Stehmeier, the proposal on the monopine cell tower was made 2 1/2 years ago. "The first proposal actually was to build the cell tower next to the water tank on Nob Hill. But the Running Springs Water Agency postponed the project for two years because they just built a new water tank on that area.

"I have talked to my neighbors several times and they did not complain. When Sprint began construction of the cell tower everybody screamed and hollered. Even Sprint contacted every property owner who will be affected by the [then] proposed project," Stehmeier said.

Stehmeier added when they signed the lease agreement with Sprint PCS about two years ago, "It didn't matter what the neighbors on Nob Hill would say when the first project was proposed because Sprint is going to do it anyway."

Stehmeier reported that he conducted a research on cell sites before signing the lease agreement.

On the claim that he violated portions of the CC&R's, Stehmeier stated, "That time when we signed a lease agreement with Sprint, there was no functioning architectural committee. There were 10 to 12 structures built during that time and when I actually built my garage a year ago, there was no functioning committee. I told Sprint there was a committee but it was not functioning at that time.

"Sprint picked my property as the cell site because there's already an existing 35-foot antenna built here several years ago by the developer."

Stehmeier also reported they will receive $1,000 from Sprint monthly "and not $1,300, which is what they are saying."

RESIDENTS OPPOSE THE PROJECT

Several nearby residents are opposing the project, citing concerns about property values and health hazards.

According to Chris and Gina Walters, residents of Leprechaun Court, "We moved up here for simple life and safe health. This cell tower poses a lot of serious health risks."

Gina, whose mother has a pacemaker and lives down the hill, was told her mother cannot visit them anymore because of the risk of surrounding microwaves and RF signals adversely affecting her pacemaker.

The Walters were surprised when Sprint PCS started the construction of the tower and even more surprised when they learned the county issued a conditional use permit for the construction. According to them, "The county said they issued letters informing the 'nearby' residents of the cell tower but we do not remember receiving any letter from the county."

COUNTY RESPONDS

A call placed to Julie Rynerson from the San Bernardino County Land Use Services Department, Planning Division revealed, "We informed the residents through letters of the proposed cell tower. Each property owner who will be affected by the tower was sent a Notice of Determination and the same notice was published in San Bernardino's The Sun.

"Chris and Gina Walters even signed the Notice of Determination and they agreed and supported the proposed project."

A copy of the Notice of Determination signed by Gina Walters stated "I am/we are aware of the proposed "monopine" cell site to be constructed adjacent to the water tank on Leprechaun Court. I/we have no objection to the proposed "monopine" cell site. I/we feel the availability of reliable cellular phone service in this area would be beneficial."

The notice was signed by Walters on Nov. 19, 2003.

Gina Walters admitted to signing the notice. "After reading the letter, I asked the gentleman from Sprint to e-mail us more information about, which he never did. He said that they were still conducting a research on it and they will provide us further details.

"I didn't think it was a notice to finalize everything. We were waiting for a letter from the county and they didn't tell us that the letter was the Notice of Determination. I wish I knew more about it," Walters said.

According to Rynerson the project was not controversial therefore a public hearing was not required.

WATER BOARD POSITION

Running Springs Water Agency's General Manager Ed Brittain was contacted upon learning the water agency was once declined a permit to construct a cell tower.

According to Brittain, "Three or four years ago, we proposed to put a cell tower up on the Nob Hill tank and the county ordinance didn't allow us to do it."

Brittain added it was difficult to get a county approval on a certain project because of the ordinances.

"We put two pipes 2-3 feet above the tank, put the infrastructure and attached it to the tank so that residents could see it. We had public meetings with the residents who live adjacent to the property but they got upset and were unhappy about it so we finally gave up the project," Brittain stated.

Brittain reported, "The pipes are still there but there's no electricity and no 'insides' to the cell tower. We wanted people to see what it was going to look like. We didn't push it through because the residents were angry."

When asked about the conditional use permit issued by the county, Brittain replied, "We were surprised that this tower got through the county. We had to go through hoops when we had that proposal three or four years ago; at that time the county was developing the ordinance."

On the issue of the Sprint PCS' monopine cell tower, Brittain stated "The Running Springs Water Agency and board of directors didn't take and is probably not going to take any position on it (cell tower) because it is not on our property. It is close to our water tank lot (adjacent to it), about 100 feet, but it is not going to affect any type of service that we provide our consumers."

Heidi Duron, planner for Sprint's cell tower planning department did not return phone calls. A voicemail message was left for Loretta Mathieu, planner for Sprint PCS, and as of press time no official statements from Sprint PCS were provided The Mountain-News.




http://www.mountain-news.com/article...news/news6.txt

[Andy]

What a mess, really
Lol, Funny how they called Sprint PCS a telecomunications 'giant'
I'm sure we'll see more stories pop up as time progresses.

[larry]

You have to wonder about people sometimes. They sign a form stating they don't have a problem with the tower then try to deny they received anything from the County. Then the County responds with proof that they did sign a consent form. LMAO

[ZaphodB]

Too bad it's illegal to deny a cell phone tower variance based on health concerns. Surely the Walters' mother lives someplace near a cell tower?

NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY.

My Sprint service doesn't work, fix it or let me out of my contract for free! But don't you dare build the tower near MY house!

fers.

[larry]

I believe Sprint will win this one easily. It would take a miracle for those NIMBY's to convince the County to take away that permit, especially since construction is already under way.

[Caiman1900]

I just feel sorry for the homeowners who are getting the tower, they will have to deal with their homeowners association trying to put a lein against their house for not following the community rules.

[ZaphodB]

Thank God I live in a neighbourhood with no HOA, CC&Rs or Mello-Roos.

[Andy]

I mean I like good cell service and everything but I'm actually glad that cellsites are not right in my neighborhood. The closest cellsite is at least one mile away and most carriers are either weak or have no service. I live in a valley surrounded by hills.

[larry]

I wouldn't mind a cell site in my neighborhood. The closest one is about 1/2 mile away where both Sprint and Cingular have a site. Cell sites don't always look bad. Sometimes they disguise them so that the average person would never even know one exsists.

[Andy]

I actually don't have anything against seeing them; that's just something we have to take since we want good cell service. But what I ment was that (I'm definitely not a NIMBY), but I don't mind not having celltowers close to my house, you never know how bad they really are

[larry]

Please Andy, we all know that the phone itself is more dangerous than the broadcasting tower. What we should be thinking is how bad are these phones we're using? But yet most NIMBY's don't think that way.

[Andy]

That's true. But coming from Europe, there's a lot of talk over there as well about how bad cell towers are, etc. maybe that's just it
I just hope cellphones don't damage our brains too much since I'm on the phone a lot. But studies have not really shown any proven damaging effects of cellphone use, correct?

[larry]

Yes that's true. No solid evidence that cell tower emissions have ever caused any health problems for anyone. It's all speculation which is why the FCC has laws that health matters cannot be considered in the placement of towers.

[Andy]

...Good

[larry]

-Update-

I was up in Running Springs/Fredalba area today on Hwy 330 and decided to stop and check the progress on this tower. They have most of the ground work done and the equipment cabinets have been installed. The pole itself it also up now and the fake branches to make it resemble a tree were being installed today. I spoke with a couple of residents who live near the tower as well as a couple of contractors working at the site. The contractor in charge of construction said it's too late for the tower to be stopped. It will be compeleted as scheduled probably within 2-3 weeks. The resident I talked to lived 3 houses away from the tower and was outside watching construction. He said he didn't buy into the other residents claims about the health issues but he didn't like the fact that the tower would stand out so much.

You've got to hand it to Sprint on this one. They sure pulled of a miracle as I've never seen a tower (75 footer) built right in someone's front yard with a number of other houses all around it. I'd like to see the other carriers try and top the odds on this one. LOL

[Andy]

Larry, a picture of this would have been nice to see...can't really imagine a tower that tall in someone's front yard...I wonder how this guy's yard is going to look
But it is good money from Sprint every month, no questions asked. Here in S.L. I know of one house that has panels on it(don't know for what carrier, maybe AT&T).

[larry]

Oddly I forgot to take pictures while I was there which is very unusual for me. Must have been the extremely cold wind chill in the mountains yesterday. But I'll be going up again soon so next time I will take pics.

[Andy]

Yay, thanks Larry.
Lol, you complain about coldness over there?? Why don't you visit me?

[Scrumhalf]

Originally Posted by Andy84094

...
I just hope cellphones don't damage our brains too much since I'm on the phone a lot. But studies have not really shown any proven damaging effects of cellphone use, correct?

If you are concerned about it, just use a headset/earbud and keep the phone in your pocket and that should reduce any potential radiation issues significantly.

[Andy]

Sc, yes, true, but some studies suggest that the radiation travels through the headset and that this isn't really a way to lessen your exposure. I don't really care/worry, I made it sound worse than I think it is in my post. The only thing I really think helps is, for example, using an outdoor antenna; say an antenna mounted to your car-roof and using that. I just use my cell way to much, and if it really posesses a risk I'm in trouble