The Star Ledger 10/25/2007

Impact of Cell Tower at Issue

Area's Historical Status Troubles State Panel

Thursday, October 25, 2007
BY ROBERT E. MISSECK
Star-Ledger Staff

State historic preservation officials said a planned 130-foot cell tower cannot be built on the grounds of a privately owned swim club in Cranford because the design would have a negative impact on the area's historical status.

Despite the findings by the state Department of Environmental Protection's Natural and Historic Resources, Historic Preservation Office, Verizon Wireless is continuing its effort to obtain the seven variances they will need to build the proposed tower at the Cranford Swimming Club on County Park Drive.

Verizon Wireless is the primary applicant for the tower, which would also be used by Sprint Mobile, AT&T and Omnipoint. The project would also include the construction of a 2,700-square-foot fenced-in equipment area.

However, Dorothy P. Guzzo, deputy state historic preservation officer, said the project "will have an adverse effect" on the Rahway River Park Historic District across the street from the swim club property.

Guzzo's statement was included in a letter dated June 1 to Alana K. Stops of Richard Grubb & Associates, a cultural resource management firm hired by Verizon for the tower project planned for the site adjacent to Union County's Lenape Park .

"When a new cell tower is going to be constructed the proposal re quires a regulatory review by the state historical preservation office," Stops said.

She said her company is hired to do a historic architectural and archaeological study of an area within a half-mile radius of a proposed cell tower site to "see what is going to be impacted."

Based on the firm's report that was submitted to the DEP, the proposed tower in Cranford would have a detrimental impact, according to Guzzo.

Noting that "setting is an integral part of the park experience,' Guzzo told Stops that is your client's obligation to avoid, reduce, or mitigate the effects of the project."

That finding effectively stops the construction of the cell tower for now, DEP Spokeswoman Elaine Makatura said yesterday.

"They need to find a way to negate any adverse impacts. But at this point they can't proceed," she said.

Verizon is currently working with the state Historic Preservation Office to remedy the situation, a company spokesman said yesterday.

"It is in everyone's best interest to work with the state and come to some agreement," the spokesman said.

She said the company will continue to pursue the local variances because even if the state rejects Verizon's plans, it can always appeal that decision to the Federal Communications Commission.

Residents from both Cranford and neighboring Westfield who live in the neighborhood around the swim club expressed their disdain for the tower at an Oct. 15 meeting of the township's zoning board.

Residents expressed concern the structure would ruin the ap pearance of their neighborhood, drive down property values and raise safety issues.

However, experts brought in by the applicant maintained the tower posed no risk to safety as it would be fenced in with wires running underground.

The club's board of governors sent out an e-mail to members shortly before the meeting urging them to attend the session in support of the cell tower. The message explained that revenues generated by the tower would be used to make much-needed repairs and renovations to the facility.

More recently, freeholder chairwoman Betty Jane Kowalski said the county is also against construction of the tower.

"The county is interested in this issue because the cell tower would be right next to Lenape Park, which is part of the county parks system and the freeholders have a responsibility to protect the safety of our residents and our parks," she said.

"Our park system is eligible for historical landmark status and the letter from the state Historical Preservation Office says this will have an adverse impact on the Rahway River Park Historic district," she said.

Kowalski said Lenape Park is extensively used by residents not only of Cranford, but also from Westfield, Mountainside and Kenilworth.

"I am sympathetic to the needs of the Cranford Swimming Club to generate fund to make improvements, but it can't be at the ex pense of the parks and the local residents," Kowalski said.

Robert E. Misseck may be reached at rmisseck@starledger.com or (908) 302-1507.

Cranford Chronicle 10/19/2007

Letter to the Editor:

Cell Tower Poses Threat to Neighborhood

To The Chronicle:

The first of several meetings was held Monday, Oct. 15 about the proposed cell phone tower that the Cranford Swim Club is trying to get variances for. Many citizens came out opposing this questionable display of citizenship. Please be aware that this private club, located in a residential area of Cranford, wants to put up a 130-foot cell phone tower. That is the equivalent of a 13-story building. The base of the tower and the station houses for four providers will be located only 14 feet from the nearest residential property line (Editor's Note -- This claim is in dispute and will be addressed at the next hearing). The amount of space required by Cranford Township for an application like this is approximately 390 feet from the property line. In fact, this proposal would need at least seven variances from municipal ordinances, but they had lawyers and expert witnesses to testify on their behalf.

At the meeting we heard that they also will be storing at least 250 gallons of diesel fuel for a backup generator and they don't need to have a fire hydrant nearby. Can we really trust the testimony of large cell phone companies and their paid representatives? No one really knows the long-term effects this would have on a neighborhood this close in proximity.

It is our understanding that the lawyers who represent the four cell companies (they then mentioned a fifth company Monday night) were turned down by six other Cranford sites. Dreyer Farms, Union County College and Nomahegan Park were just a few who felt that they would not sell out there neighbors for this disgusting piece of metal. They had the integrity to see that this would be a detriment to our community. But the members of the board of the Cranford Swim Club could not pass up the opportunity. They were willing to sell out our part of the town for a large payment every year to benefit their swimming pool.

We have collected over 300 signatures opposing this proposal. But we need everyone's help. The next board meeting is scheduled for Dec. 10. Please come out and help defeat this proposal -- or next time it could be in your backyard.

JOSEPH and AUDREY MURATORE

Cranford

Cranford Chronicle 10/19/2007

Swim club cell tower plan draws residents' ire

Friday, October 19, 2007
By LESLIE MURRAY

CRANFORD - More than 100 area residents turned out Monday night, as the Zoning Board of Adjustment began a hearing on an application by a cooperative of four cellular carriers for a 130-foot monopole and a 2,760 square foot equipment compound at the Cranford Swimming Club. A final decision on the proposal may be announced when the hearing is continued in December.

The application seeks a total of seven variances to construct the monopole tower on grounds owned by the private swim club on County Park Drive, near the Westfield border. The tower would host antennae for Verizon Wireless, Sprint Mobile, AT& T and Omnipoint, a branch of T-Mobile.

At Monday's meeting, residents from both Cranford and Westfield turned out to object to the project, though at least one person in the crowd spoke in favor of the proposal.

Greg Meese, attorney for the applicant, said that all four carriers had scoured the surrounding area for over a year, looking for a site to build a cell tower. "Because of the needs of the carriers, this really is an appropriate area," he told the board.

At the meeting, which lasted until almost midnight, a radio frequency compliance expert and the site engineer offered testimony in favor of the proposal and were peppered with questions by audience members.

At times the questions grew raucous, and board Chairman Robert Hellenbrecht at one point threatened to have an audience member removed after an outburst turned into a heated exchange over procedure with board Attorney David Weeks.

Daniel Collins of Pinnacle Telecom Group testified that the application was significantly below Federal Communication Commission guidelines for radio frequency exposure.
"The facility at this site will be in compliance with the federal standards by a factor of 140," Collins said.

Still, residents voiced concern. Jack Schubert of Westfield, who said his home is directly next to the swim club, asked how much protection he would be afforded to neighbors. "The other part of the question is how many times has the government been wrong?" he asked to a thunderous applause.

Collins answered that while the government is not infallible, radio technology was not new and the standards had been updated over time.

Anthony Suppa, the site plan engineer, said the proposal would place the tower in the northwest corner of the swim club's three-acre property. That would leave it 246 feet from the nearest home in Westfield and 378 feet from the nearest home in Cranford.

Board Vice Chairman Jeffrey Pistol asked Suppa what the risk be if someone scaled the fence and was able to actually touch the monopole. Suppa responded that there would be no risk, because all of the wires from equipment would be run underground and then fed through the monopole up to the antennae. He added that the tower and the equipment compound would be surrounded by an eight-foot chain link fence, and all of the components would be equipped with a silent alarm linked to the transmission station.

Pistol persisted, asking what kind of response time could be expected when the alarm is tripped, especially in cases of illicit activity. Suppa said the response would depend on each carrier, but could take anywhere from 10 minutes to an hour, a comment that drew gripes from the audience.

Questioning Suppa, Cranford resident Rita LaBrutto asked how much space would be required in a residential area for a monopole tower. "What if I want one?" she asked. However, Meese interjected, saying that Suppa would not be the witness to question on the matter.

In turn, LaBrutto said the swim club was in a residential area and allowing a cell tower could set a dangerous precedent. Hellenbrecht responded, saying that any such case would have to be presented to the board and would be considered on its own merits.

The site also sits near Lenape Park, a county park that includes a detention basin. Speaking about the proximity to the park, Meese said the applicant had received a letter from county officials saying they had no comment on the proposal.

However, on Wednesday Freeholder Chairwoman Bette Jane Kowalski said she had "not received information about this proposed cell tower."

"I am not in favor of permitting anything that obstructs the view from a Union County park," Kowalski said.

She added that the freeholders are "definitely going to weigh in on this." County spokesman Sebastian D'Elia said the freeholders are currently "exploring their legal options" with respect to the proposal.

The hearing will be continued on Dec. 10, when a professional planner and another radio frequency expert are expected to testify. At the conclusion of testimony, members of the public will be allowed to comment.

Leslie Murray is a staff writer for the Chronicle. She can be reached at (732) 396-4205 or lmurray@njnpublishing.com.

The Westfield Leader 10/18/2007

Applicants Propose Cell Tower In Cranford on WF Border

By CHRISTINA M. HINKE
Specially Written for The Scotch Plains-Fanwood Times

CRANFORD — A standing-room only crowd attended Monday night’s Cranford planning board meeting as Cranford and Westfield residents came out to protest a proposed 130-foot cell-phone tower at the Cranford Swim Club, a three-acre area bordering Westfield.

Property values, danger to wildlife, health issues and aesthetics were among the concerns residents voiced.

Engineer Daniel Collins, speaking on behalf of the applicants – Verizon Wireless, Omnipoint Communications, AT&T (formerly Cingular Wireless) and Sprint – gave testimony regarding radiofrequency compliance. According to his calculations, the worst-case scenario of radiofrequency emissions from the monopole is approximately seven-tenths of 1 percent of the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) limit. He said the proposed cell tower is 141 times below the FCC limit.

Board attorney David Weeks said since the applicants comply with FCC standards, the board could not turn down the application on that reason alone. Nevertheless, residents spoke after the testimony to ask questions.

Kurt Krause of 20 Pittsfield Street in Cranford asked about the potential hazard to migrating birds flying into the structure, considering the approximate 150-foot proximity of the wetlands and string of county parks. “There are towers that can cause problems with birds, but they are 300-foot towers,” said Mr. Collins. “There is no affect on animals.”

Verizon Wireless, Omnipoint Communications, AT&T and Sprint seek variances in their joint application for the tower. According to the application, the tower is 60 feet over allowable height restrictions. A 14-foot setback from the property line for the monopole and a 15-foot setback from the property line for the equipment compound, and a 13-foot setback for the side property line, are under the required 35 feet and 62.8 feet, respectively, in Cranford’s building codes. The equipment compound is 145 square feet greater than the maximum 200 square feet permissible under Cranford’s regulations.

Civil engineer Anthony Suppa presented site plans for the applicants that showed the tower at 246 feet from the nearest house in Westfield and 378 feet from the nearest residence in Cranford. However, he said, it is 30 feet from the first property line in Westfield, 13 feet from the parking lot of the Cranford Swim Club and 25 feet from the first property line in Cranford. He said Omnipoint would occupy the lowest point on the monopole at 100 feet.

The tree level in the area is about 75 to 85 feet, and cell towers must have clearance of trees in order for the signal to extend to its customers, Mr. Suppa said, adding that a tower on County Park Drive would service less than a one-mile radius. A fifth carrier, Metro PCS, recently expressed interest in affixing a cell to the tower. The board said Metro PCS would have to schedule a separate hearing, as the board was already hearing the current application.

In addition to the tower, an eightfoot- high, fenced-in area would contain equipment shelters for each carrier, totaling the project at 2,800 square feet. The applicants said a 12-foot-wide access road extending from the swim club’s parking lot would be necessary for maintenance trucks to pass through every four to six weeks per carrier.

Verizon Wireless also would maintain a 225-gallon diesel-fueled generator, which it would run once a week for a half hour during normal business hours. Mr. Suppa said the noise level is 65 decibels, likened to the sound of a clothes dryer running in the next room.

Tree removal would be necessary to build the equipment area; Mr. Suppa said planting new trees in other areas is an option.

Residents also inquired about the county beautification laws, which stipulate that homeowners along County Park Drive cannot have driveways or walkways to the front door. Mr. Suppa had no comment on this matter. The applicants’ attorney, Gregory Meese, said earlier during the hearing, “The county had no comments on the application.”

The board will continue the hearing on Monday, December 10.

The Star Ledger 10/12/2007

Cranford Gears Up For Cell Tower Fight

Proposal For Swim Club Site Goes Before Zoning Board

Friday, October 12, 2007
BY ROBERT E. MISSECK
Star-Ledger Staff

Concerned about the impact on property values and neighborhood aesthetics, a number of Cranford residents say they plan to attend Monday's zoning board meeting to voice their objections to the proposed construction of a cell phone tower at the Cranford Swimming Club.

Meanwhile, the privately owned club's board of governors is urging its members to turn out for the 8:15 p.m. session in the municipal building to show their support for the proposal, which they believe will generate sufficient funds to make needed improvements to the pool.

In an e-mail sent to club members and obtained by The Star-Ledger, the club's board of governors said it was "imperative to have as many pool members attend the hearing to speak out in favor of the tower to offset any resident complaints."

Verizon, Cingular, Sprint and T-Mobile have filed a joint application with the township's zoning board of adjustment for approval to build a wireless communications facility at the swim club on County Park Drive, according to the e-mail.

The installation would consist of a 130-foot monopole with an equipment compound located at the base of the pole.

The joint application seeks a use variance, a height variance to allow the tower to be 130 feet tall, and setback variances for the tower to be located within a residential zone. The application also seeks preliminary and final site plan approval.

Genevieve "Jenny" Schuvart, who lives on Manitou Circle in neighboring Westfield, is among the area residents opposed to the tower. Her yard abuts the pool property.

She said she and her husband received a certified letter Saturday about the proposal and the upcoming hearing.

"I almost had a heart attack," said Schuvart, who is in her 70s and who has lived in Cranford since 1965. She was also a member of the swim club until her children grew older and moved away.

"What quality of life would you have with that thing towering over you, and who would buy our home with that in our backyard?" Schuvart said. "I cannot even understand why they would allow a 130-foot structure in this neighborhood. It's a residential area."

"We moved into this area because we appreciate nature. We are all decent people, and to have this visited upon us is just unfair," she said.

Township Commissioner George McDonough said the cell tower could mean a sizable amount of revenue for the swim club.

"They could receive something like $25,000 per carrier using the tower, so it's worthwhile for them (the club) to have it," he said.

Several telephone calls to members of the swim club board were not immediately returned.

McDonough said building the tower in a residential area is not the ideal location and suggested using a site farther back in nearby Lenape Park.

"I think what is paramount is the opinion of the people who live in the neighborhood," he said.

A similar proposal was just shot down in Scotch Plains, where the local zoning board of adjustment voted 6-0 Oct. 4 to deny Omnipoint Communications' request to build a 120-foot cell phone tower, a 6-foot fence and other equipment on the privately owned property of the Willow Grove Swim Club, adjacent to Kramer Manor Park on Evelyn Street.

The problem in that community was that the proposed tower was too close to protected wetlands.

Robert E. Misseck covers Union County. He can be reached at rmisseck@starledger.com or (908) 302-1507.

The Westfield Leader 10/11/2007

Cell Carriers File App.
To Build 130-ft. Tower

CRANFORD – Westfield residents John and Jenny Schuvart of Manitou Circle notified The Scotch Plains-Fanwood Times on Monday morning that Verizon Wireless, Omnipoint Communications, New Cingular Wireless (AT&T) and Sprint have filed a joint application with the zoning board of the Township of Cranford for approval to construct a wirelesscommunications facility at the Cranford Swim Club, located at 201 County Park Drive.

The Schuvarts said they were concerned about the 130-foot “monopole” that the facility would feature, especially “after [successfully] fighting the one at Wychwood Gardens.”

The applicants have applied for use, height and setback variances.
The zoning board has scheduled a public hearing on the joint application for next Monday, October 15, at 8:15 p.m. at Cranford’s municipal building at 8 Springfield Avenue.

Cranford Environmental Commission 09/04/2007

Excerpt - Cranford Environmental Commission Meeting Minutes:

2. Planning Board & Board of Adjustment Reviews.

a. Discussed the Woodmont Properties application which is still before the Planning Board. The next installment of the Woodmont hearing is scheduled for September 19th. Apparently there is some concern about the EC’s position regarding Woodmont; the implication being that the EC has accepted the Woodmont proposal. Members of the EC agreed that we have not accepted the application but rather have tried to make constructive comments in the event that the application for a change in zoning is recommended by the Planning Board.

b. Nelson Dittmar advised that he has prepared 4 letters over the summer for applications before the Planning and Zoning Boards. They are as follows:

i. 9 Mitchell Place - subdivision scheduled for Oct. 3rd Planning Board
ii. 18 Elise Street – subdivision before the Zoning board
iii. 555 South Avenue East - Age Restricted Housing Redevelopment Plan scheduled for the Planning Board on October. 17th. Interestingly the site plan for this application does not show any evidence of LEEDs even though the developer was granted the right to an additional 18 units in exchange for LEED’s compliance at the silver level. This applicant is also looking for a waiver of the tree ordinance.
iv. 218 Holly Street – requesting variances for an addition before the Zoning Board

c. Nelson [Dittmar] also needs to respond by Sept. 5th on the Cranford Swim Club’s application to construct a cell tower and ancillary structures on their property. Several variances are needed to construct the proposed 130 ft tower on which 3 cell companies (Omnipoint, Cingular and Sprint) would co-locate with Verizon. The plans show the removal of 14 trees including some specimen trees but no evidence that any trees would be replanted; it is more likely that a tree fund contribution is being contemplated. Concerns include the visual impact to the park and the inconsistency of land use with that permitted in the Master Plan. It was agreed that Steve Jandoli would write the letter, since Nelson had to recuse himself.

Township Committee Meeting 9/10/2007

An excerpt from the Cranford Township Committee Meeting, September 10, 2007:

Public Comments

Barbara Krause, 20 Pittsfield Street, discussed a public notice recently published regarding the placement of a cell antenna on County Park Drive.

Mayor Plick stated that the notice refers to an application that has been filed regarding the placement of a cell antenna at the Cranford Swim Club.

Commissioner Jorn informed Mrs. Krause that this application would be reviewed by the Zoning Board on October 15, 2007.

Mrs. Krause discussed the potential defeat of the application.

Commissioner McDonough suggested that the Township consider asking the Cranford Swim Club not to pursue placement of an antenna on the property.

Township Attorney Woodward discussed the legal requirements pertaining to the construction of cell antennas and discussed the process in which residents would be able to voice their opinion on the matter.

For full meeting minutes, click here.

The BioInitiative Report 8/31/2007

BioInitiative Report:
A Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF)

August 31, 2007 - Serious Public Health Concerns Raised Over Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) from Powerlines and Cell Phones.

An international working group of scientists, researchers and public health policy professionals (The BioInitiative Working Group) has released its report on electromagnetic fields (EMF) and health. They document serious scientific concerns about current limits regulating how much EMF is allowable from power lines, cell phones, and many other sources of EMF exposure in daily life.

The report concludes the existing standards for public safety are inadequate to protect public health.

Read the Full Report