PVE Council Denies Installation of Telecommunications Pole

Residents in Palos Verdes Estates earned a small victory at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting after the Council voted to deny the installment of a wireless telecommunication pole 120 feet from a residential area on the basis of potentially damaging property values and seeing no true gap in cell phone coverage.

“The application that was also denied by the Planning Commission proposed an 11-foot high steel pole 22 feet from the edge of the pavement, within the city’s public right of way,” City Engineer Allan Rigg said. “The pole would be 120 feet south of the driveway located at 2827 Via Victoria.”

The application for installing a telecommunication pole originally came to the Planning Commission in June 2010 by NextG Networks, a telecommunication provider. After significant concern from the Homeowner’s Association and the city on the aesthetics of the installment, the project was reviewed by the city’s wireless consultant in January 2011 before the project came back to the planning commission on Feb. 15.

“Residents again raised significant aesthetic concerns about its visibility and had concerns about property values,” Rigg said.

The project came back for a third time to the Planning Commission, this time with a height of 11 feet instead of the original 23 feet, and 22 feet from the street as opposed to the original four feet. 

Finally, the Commission made an appeal to the Council to deny the installment of the pole. 

Joe Malone, NextG Networks public relations official, spoke Tuesday night before the Council on the gap in coverage, saying that the company was left with the impression that the aesthetics were not the major concern after the most recent Planning Commission meeting.

“The mockup is not an ideal representation. When it is ultimately built it will be surrounded by landscaping at the base,” Malone said. “We did provide significant data about the gap of coverage, and we feel the city’s wireless consultant didn’t take a look at it.”

Despite Malone’s claims about a gap in coverage, residents and city staff alike made no mention of a gap in coverage in the area.

“We have good coverage,” resident Harold Jesse said, “Citizens at every one of the Planning Commission meetings have said that we have good coverage.”

Rigg also said both his personal city staff as well as the city’s wireless consultant conducted tests to see if there was a lack of service in the area, but said there was nothing in the way of dropped calls or faulty service.

Malone countered the tests made by the city with his own data, citing that the tests taken by the city weren’t scientific. 

It was ultimately the aesthetics of the installment and chance of declining property values that Malone could not address.

“Related to the visual, we worked with the planning commission to come up with something that really minimized visual impact, and under the city’s code, we feel that we truly meet the city’s standard in terms of the visuals,” Malone said.

Residents disagreed.

“We residents want cell phone service, but we don’t want the unsightly cell phone towers,” resident Dwight Abbot said.

Others also cited the impact this would have on their neighborhoods.

"We bought into this area because of the rural environment," Jesse said. "This would destroy that."

All members of the Council in attendance voted to turn down the pole's installation.

“They were able to work with the aesthetics to minimize the impact as much as they could, but they still ended up with something that is really not aesthetically pleasing and keeping in consistency with the rural environment of the neighborhood,” Councilmember Ellen Perkins said. “I would be concerned with upholding the Planning Commission’s decision if doing so would yield a significant gap in coverage, but it is clear to me that such a significant gap in service would not result."