LOWER SAUCON TWP., Pa. — A Lower Saucon Township Council hearing on a proposed Verizon cell phone tower and facility in the Steel City neighborhood turned contentious Wednesday, but ended without a vote.
The issue was among a number of topics discussed at the meeting, which lasted until the midnight hour.
The hearing on the cell tower's conditional use is set to continue Feb. 7.
“The proposed location has been determined by Applicant’s radio frequency engineers to be necessary to provide efficient wireless service to the public, the neighborhood, Lower Saucon Township and to individuals traveling in the area, including emergency, police, and fire users.”Verizon Wireless planning application
The unmanned telecommunications facility is planned to include a 125-foot tower — with another 5 feet to the top of its lightning rod — panel antennas, equipment cabinets and a diesel, standby generator on a ground-level concrete pad — all contained within a 25 foot by 30 foot area with a 7-foot fence.
Allentown SMSA, doing business as Verizon Wireless, has preliminary approval from the current landowners to make use of the 10.93-acre property at 4235 Lewis Ave. in Lower Saucon, for the project if the township ultimately agrees.
The property is in the Rural Agricultural Zoning District.
Some tower and equipment design specifics include:
- Tower at least 195 feet from all property lines
- No radio frequency interference to come from the tower’s installation
- No fumes, smoke, odors or noise involved — except in maintenance situations requiring the backup generator
- Deer-resistant evergreen screen to go up around the fencing of the facility
- 17,415 square feet of disturbance, which amounts to more than a third of an acre
- One vehicle trip to the site for maintenance every four to six weeks
Applicant touts approval
The township Planning Commission back in December gave the project its recommendation to pass along to council, pending compliance with the township engineer’s review letter.
“The antennas will comply with all FCC standards governing human electromagnetic radiation,” the project application reads.
“In fact, the antennas will operate well below the permitted levels.”
Tower-based commercial communication facilities are considered a conditional service use under the respective section of township ordinance.
The project planning application states there’s currently no structures in the area high enough to which to attach antennas, and granting conditional approval “will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district.”
“The proposed location has been determined by Applicant’s radio frequency engineers to be necessary to provide efficient wireless service to the public, the neighborhood, Lower Saucon Township and to individuals traveling in the area, including emergency, police, and fire users,” the application reads.
Why this particular site?
Sue Manchel, site acquisition consultant with Verizon advisor Wireless Access Technologies, said she was part of the process in selecting the site.
“It was in an area where our radio frequency engineer wanted us to be,” Manchel said. “It’s located in the RA zone, it’s over 10 acres, large enough to make the setbacks.”
The radio frequency engineer involved will be set to testify at a future hearing, applicant attorney Catherine Durso said.
Manchel said the “dense vegetation” on site was taken into account since the company wanted to minimize the visual impact of the tower.
“It was in an area where our radio frequency engineer wanted us to be. It’s located in the RA zone, it’s over 10 acres, large enough to make the setbacks.”Sue Manchel, site acquisition consultant with Wireless Access Technologies
Attorney Michael Deschler — who represented the residents opposing the tower — asked if Manchel was aware that “significant logging had taken place” there in the last four months.
Manchel said she had only been on site in the past couple of months, but the engineering consultant had photo simulations to share that were shot a week ago.
The property owners, Rocco and Heather Viscito, have agreed to let Verizon go through with the project if ultimately approved by the township, Manchel said.
But her company also had consulted with other area property owners for the tower, she said. A couple of those included Bushkill Valley Motorcycle Club and area owned by the Bethlehem Landfill.
Visual aids
Peter Albano, senior project manager with Colliers Engineering and Design, said the included photos showing sightlines and current conditions from surrounding areas were shot on Jan. 8.
Those photos show the new tower would be visible from five of the six surrounding locations included in the study.
He said the process included sending two people to the site, one holding a 6-foot-diameter balloon filled with helium that’s released to the proposed height of the tower, while the other would take photos from the different surrounding areas.
Albano said a monopole is then imposed onto the photos used to present the case.
Other visual designs for the tower were considered but concluded to be “more intrusive,” Albano said. Those could include disguising the tower as a tree, flagpole or silo.
“But a naked monopole does blend with the character of the area?” attorney Deschler asked.
“That’s up for interpretation,” Albano said.
Steel City neighbor on the panel
Durso asked Council President Priscilla deLeon, who lives near the proposed tower site, if she’d show a general bias when deciding on the outcome of the case.
And if deLeon was going to mention the potential adverse effect of property values with the tower going up, Durso said that would mean the council president had a pecuniary interest in the situation.
“I have to preserve for the record the fact that Ms. deLeon lives across the street; she is an immediate property owner,” Durso said.
“And I would ask whether you are in a position to need to recuse yourself if you are going to be biased in rendering a decision on the conditional use request that is going to be ultimately decided on by this council.”
“On Jan. 2, I took an oath of office, and I swore to uphold the truth and whatever else … I look at each case, and I don’t have a bias."Lower Saucon Twp. Council President Priscilla deLeon
The State Ethics Commission offered advice to her on the situation, deLeon said. Those associated documents later will be submitted as exhibits in the case.
“On Jan. 2, I took an oath of office, and I swore to uphold the truth and whatever else … I look at each case, and I don’t have a bias,” deLeon said.
Carocci said deLeon spoke out as a citizen at December’s Planning Commission meeting, where he recalled her saying the project would, indeed, affect her property value.
After back-and-forth across the room, attorney Deschler referenced second-class township code, reading, “A member of the Board shall not be disqualified from voting on any issue before the Board solely because the member has previously expressed an opinion on the issue, either in official or unofficial capacity.”
During consultant Manchel’s previously mentioned statements regarding the potential tower site’s surrounding uses, she said, “there’s existing dense vegetation on the property.”
“Was,” a number of people around the room called out, including deLeon, in regard to the property owners having some logging work done on the property.
“A member of the Board shall not be disqualified from voting on any issue before the Board solely because the member has previously expressed an opinion on the issue, either in official or unofficial capacity.”Resident attorney Michael Deschler, reading second-class township code
“Ms. deLeon, you just said you were going to be able to not be biased,” Durso said.
“I’m listening, but I’m not going to sit here and listen to lies,” deLeon responded.
She later apologized for speaking out. Councilman Jason Banonis said the statement showed deLeon’s bias.
1.5-hour time limit
A 1.5-hour time limit for the tower’s conditional use hearing was discussed by the administration, deLeon said, including the township manager, but wasn’t placed in the original agenda posted on Friday.
Applicant attorney Durso said she and her team had been made aware of the time limit about a half-hour before the meeting.
“Why wasn’t it simply just put on the agenda on Friday, that this will be an hour-and-a-half hearing? Problem solved.”Lower Saucon Twp. councilman Thomas Carocci
Councilmen Jason Banonis and Thomas Carocci raised their concerns on this, saying it wasn't fair to the applicant and others involved in the case.
“From a transparency point of view, why were [the applicants and counsel] told — prior to what happened before the meeting — but why wasn’t the rest of council told?” councilman Thomas Carocci said.
“Why wasn’t it simply just put on the agenda on Friday, that this will be an hour-and-a-half hearing? Problem solved.”
