Arroyo Grande seniors protest proposed cell tower 

For months, Sunrise Terrace Mobile Home Park residents in Arroyo Grande have argued against the construction of a 55-foot-tall Verizon Wireless cell tower.

In February, the Arroyo Grande Planning Commission heard Verizon's proposal to install a new "stealth wireless communications facility." The facility would be concealed within a 55-foot faux water tower, located at 789 Valley Road within a 540-square-foot lease area, and enclosed with a chain link fence, according to the staff report.

click to enlarge

• Photo From Sunrise Terrace Mobile Home Park's Website
• TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT Senior residents at the Sunrise Terrace Mobile Home Park said that adding a Verizon Wireless cellphone tower close to their properties will result in a loss of property value and is a case of discrimination.

"The location was selected with several considerations in mind, including technical requirements as defined by radio frequency engineers, topography, radio frequency propagation, elevation, height, access, aesthetics, feasibility of colocation and alternative sites, and amenability of the property owner regarding the negotiation of ground space," the staff report states.

The staff report also states that the water tower design was selected to minimize visual and negative impacts. However, many residents living at Sunrise Terrace—a mobile home park for those 55-and-older—claim that the proposed cellphone tower would be an eyesore and too close to their properties, and would result in irreversible effects.

"I just want to make one point and that is regarding the loss of value. I heard everything that was said and what can be taken into consideration and what can't, but you can't unhear information that you get," Sunrise Terrace resident Martin Lowy said during public comment on Feb. 6. "Most of us that live in Sunrise Terrace will not die there, most of us will move to some kind of long-term care facility or move in with relatives, which requires money."

Lowy added that building the tower so close to the community would result in a loss of property value for Sunrise Terrace residents, money they are hoping to make last for residential care later.

Resident Shirley Daniels agreed with Lowy and said that this could even be seen as a case of discrimination against the elderly.

"We probably won't be around for 10 or 15 years; the impact on us and maybe our whining and crying won't affect you," she said. "However, there's also a subdivision across the street from us that's low-income. So why is this site chosen for impact? Regardless of what minimal impact it is."

After 31 speakers took to the public comment mic on Feb. 6, the Planning Commission denied the project due to findings that the project was inconsistent with telecommunication requirements and the city's general plan.

"Specifically, the location of the proposed facility regarding unreasonable interference with views, incompatibility with surrounding architecture, failure to demonstrate the infeasibility of colocation, and the lack of substantial landscaping to obscure the facility," a staff report from the following Planning Commission meeting said.

At the July 23 City Council meeting, City Attorney Isaac Rosen told Sunset Terrace residents—who were present and wearing shirts that said "Old Lives Matter"—that Verizon Wireless had appealed the Planning Commission's February decision.

"The tolling agreement was meant to provide a good faith time period by which Verizon could evaluate a potential alternative site," he said. "At this time, I know city staff is working diligently with Verizon to follow up on the status of that application."

A tolling agreement, which is an extension of time for processing the application, was granted to Verizon to explore alternative sites such as St. John's Church. The church had previously written to Verizon to express interest in hosting the cell tower. The church also had a representative at the Feb. 6 Planning Commission meeting to reiterate that interest.

City Manager Matthew Downing told the public that city staff contacted Verizon on July 12 regarding what information it needs from the city in order to facilitate a new application, but the city had yet to hear back from the company. Δ