City hangs up on cell tower

The Huntington Beach City Council denied a permit Monday night to allow a T-Mobile cell tower in a residential neighborhood after the proposal’s third appeal — getting a standing ovation from audience members.

The council, with Gil Coerper recusing himself, denied the project 6 to 0, upholding the Planning Commission’s Jan. 26 denial of the permit. The commission voted down the tower after determining it was detrimental to the general welfare of the residents’ property values and unnecessary to fill a coverage gap.

Resident Denise Davis broke into tears as her fellow residents stood up clapping, one man yelling to the council that he loved them. The tears, Davis said, were for joy.

“It’s just wonderful. We put so much into this,” Davis said. “A lot of us were really talking about moving — it’s just a relief.”

T-Mobile wanted to build a 55-foot cell tower disguised inside an existing 52-foot bell tower on the Community United Methodist Church’s property on Heil Avenue. T-Mobile needed to get a conditional use permit to go about the area’s maximum height allowances.

The proposal was originally approved by the Zoning Administrator on Nov. 4, but residents appealed it to the Planning Commission.

Residents wore neon yellow “No Cell Tower” signs safety-pinned on the front of their shirts to the council meeting. Residents were concerned the tower would adversely impact their health and property values and be an eyesore for the community.

“I consider the Community United Methodist Church an asset to my neighborhood,” said resident John Anderson. “ . . . However, the proposal to build the 55-foot cell tower will not improve my neighborhood.”

Residents were also suspicious of T-Mobile’s claims that the tower was needed to fill a coverage gap after conducting their own test, which found the coverage to be adequate, said resident Dianne Larson. The only way to really know if there is a gap is for a third party to perform a test, she said.

“The proposed cell tower is not needed and would be detrimental to the neighborhood,” Larson said.

Councilman Keith Bohr also wasn’t satisfied with T-Mobile’s coverage gap and said the project wasn’t compatible with the neighborhood.

“I just find that the data for the gap coverage was inconclusive and unpersuasive,” Bohr said.

T-Mobile representatives maintained the tower is needed to meet customer demand in the area. The company has received complaints and tracked a number of dropped calls and a weak signal, officials said.

“I wouldn’t be spending a substantial amount of money to put this up in this area if it wasn’t needed,” said T-Mobile representative Joe Thompson.

Thompson said the company has looked into alternative sites, but couldn’t find any other as compatible. The tower would have only increased the existing cell tower by three feet, and all equipment would be buried underground, he said.

A representative of the Community United Methodist Church spoke during public comment expressing the church’s support for the tower.

Residents have gotten nearly 350 signatures against the cell tower and picketed the church some Sundays.