| Author |
Message |
    
Rick Rodgers
Citizen
Username: Cookbook_rick
Post Number: 1
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 3:26 pm: |     |
I recently moved to Maplewood and must use my cell phone for business calls. It was only after I moved here that I found out about the notorious problem with cell phone reception and the bickering about the cell phone tower.
I only want to know the present status of the situation. Wasn't there a board meeting in June to discuss this? |
filmboy
Citizen
Username: Filmboy
Post Number: 33
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 2:19 pm: | |
Rick:
There has been BOA meetings about this off and on for the past 10 months. Verizon has concluded (rested?) their case and the opposition is preparing to bring up their rebuttal witnesses. There were excellent articles about the latest meeting in the past weeks edition of both the News Record and the Millburn Item.
I suspect that this coming BOA meeting on September 8th may be the final before the board votes on this proposal.
The main issue...the cell tower would be in a residential zone. the towns ordinance re: wireless support structures doesn't allow it. Opposition wants to get it moved to a Commercial zone...for example, on the opposite side of Millburn ave by the DCH dealership.
The bottom line is that EVERYBODY on both sides is for improved cell service in town but it should not be at a cost of placing an atrocity in the middle of a residential zone. Maplewood needs to challenge Verizon to find a way to make there systems fit within the fabric of our community rather than the community tolerating something that only makes good business sense for Verizon. |
lseltzer
Citizen
Username: Lseltzer
Post Number: 1663
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 11:06 pm: | |
Beats me why the DCH property is any less residential. I guess the people in Golf Island don't care if the view of folks who live on the other side of Millburn Ave is tarnished. |
filmboy
Citizen
Username: Filmboy
Post Number: 34
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 9:58 am: | |
I am concerned about the view from every part of our community as I think everyone in town should be. Maplewood BOA should not allow this tower to be built at all....the tower may be the most efficient method from a technical and financial perspective for Verizon but it is not the best solution for our community.
The DCH property is less residential becuase according the zoning maps of Maplewood it is not in a residential zone.
|
bobk
Supporter
Username: Bobk
Post Number: 3296
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 11:02 am: | |
But, there are residential areas adjoining the property in Union and the tower would still be visible in Maplewood. Also, I believe, Verizon has testified that the DCH property isn't suitable.
This isn't to say I am in favor of putting the tower on the golf course. |
lseltzer
Citizen
Username: Lseltzer
Post Number: 1664
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 11:10 am: | |
There's a Maplewood neighborhood just across Valley street too. This alleged disctinction between residential and commercial areas in Maplewood is pure bunk. There are no commercial areas in Maplewood. |
newjerz
Citizen
Username: Newjerz
Post Number: 110
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 11:13 am: | |
Screw Verizon and screw all of you yuppy crybabies complaining about a dead zone in Maplewood. Does it really matter if you can't get cell phone coverage? If you need to make a call so damn badly, use a payphone. Do you remember what life was like 7 or 8 years ago before cell phones became popular? Everyone has just gotten so used to cell phones that they think it is a necessity of life. WAKE UP, its not that big a deal. Slow down you lives a little bit. The fact that we would even think about allowing a cell tower anywhere in town for the benefit of not having a dead zone is pathetic. Yes cell phones are convenient, but lets get our priorities straight here.
This whole debate is making me sick. |
hello
Citizen
Username: Hello
Post Number: 53
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 11:16 am: | |
what seems to me to be pure bunk is worrying about union. like they ever give a rat's a about maplewood. screw them- keep verizon from building it anywhere in maplewood. cell towers unambiguously decrease property values, and if anyone can show me verizon doing anything for maplewood i'd be interested. i'm looking at my verizon bill and they want almost $5/month for call waiting. in texas, this same service costs $1 per month. verizon is a republican scum machine. |
lseltzer
Citizen
Username: Lseltzer
Post Number: 1665
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 4:29 pm: | |
Who said anything about Union? That's Maplewood there behind Millburn Collision. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1745
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 8:27 am: | |
Am I the only one who thinks this subject is really getting so old?
Listen, no matter where we go in the world, there are cell towers, electrical towers, tall buildings, and other obstructions that some will consider an attack on their rights.
Personally, there are a lot of things right on the ground all around us that is much more offensive than a clean tall tower that only purpose is to bring us better communications!
I’m sorry, but I still see all of these cell towers as nothing more than a few more monuments to human technology... Come on guys, give it up and lets start going with the flow...
|
filmboy
Citizen
Username: Filmboy
Post Number: 35
Registered: 8-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 10:06 am: | |
The issue is this (or any) commerical entity shouldn't be in a residential zone. No one is denying the desire or need for improved telecommunication service in town...but it shouldn't be at the expense of our neighborhoods.
Am I the only one who thinks AJC's pontificating is really getting old?
|
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1759
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 11:55 am: | |
”Am I the only one who thinks AJC's pontificating is really getting old?”
So what’s the matter, your own opinion isn’t good enough? What, are you looking to start a petition or something to shut me up?
Why me anyway Filmboy? I should shut my mouth while you and everyone else just rants on and on about their own trials and tribulations? That sounds about right, huh?
What is your real problem today boy? Is it really that all commercial entities (including B&B’s) shouldn't be in a residential zone, or maybe they shouldn't be there at the expense of our neighbors, or is it just Ajc's pontificating?
Look film-boy, as I see it, the only thing that really gets old on MOL is when anonymous posters want to find any excuse to demean real name posters. So why don’t you come on out in the real world if you want to play with me… Come on, go ahead and expose your film, boy!
I don’t know who you are or what your problem is pal, but get off my ass, and in the future keep me out of your online rants.... Is that a clear enough picture for you?
|
lseltzer
Citizen
Username: Lseltzer
Post Number: 1669
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 2:50 pm: | |
You know there are houses right next to the village. How did we allow all those commercial entities to be built? |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1762
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 5:51 pm: | |
I think that’s relatively easy question Larry... It's called growth, expansion, convenience, and common sense. It requires an understanding about change, flexibility, and going with the flow.
Does anyone really want to drive miles just to shop, or eat? Businesses and families living together, working together, and perfect together.  |
Cookbook_rick
Citizen
Username: Cookbook_rick
Post Number: 2
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 8:16 am: | |
Hey, njerz, calm down!
Whenever people say "Do you remember when...,?" you know you are dealing with someone who isn't facing reality. And it's hardly worth addressing someone who uses rough language on a public message board.
Do you work, njerz? I do. And the fact that I can't use my company's phone when doing business (often) from home is wrong. Cell phones have become a way of life in the last 7 or 8 years, just like cable tv and internet and a few other things that most of us wouldn't like to be without. I never saw a pretty cell phone tower, but the overhead wires in my neighborhood are ugly, too. I wonder if this kind of debate went on 80 years ago when the town put in the service cables?
I find it interesting how many people in this village want to take advantage of the town's new visibility as a cool place to live and the increased real estate values, but they don't want to support the technology that is fueling our entire society and the money that makes it possible for buyers to pay for that real estate.
So, njerz, when was the last time you made a pay phone call? These calls can easily cost $10 each. My company won't let us make pay calls anymore because we are supposed to use our cell phones, which makes total sense. And I can't expense my phone calls from my home phone without waiting for the phone bill to come, then waiting 2 months for the accounting department to process the report.
The problem has nothing to do with crybabies. This head-in-the-sand attitude is costing Maplewood citizens who work at home money. Wait until someone can't use their cellphone during an emergency in Maplewood and there is a tragedy...then everyone will be singing a different tune. |
grw
Citizen
Username: Grw
Post Number: 160
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 9:46 am: | |
Cookbook rick
Unless you have attended the boa meetings since last December, as I have, people are not getting the right picture regarding the cell tower. If this tower goes up, it is not going to give you complete cell tower coverage in Maplewood. As I see it, Verizon claims there is a gap in certain areas, the tower will only improve the service like 1%, this is hard for me to accept the fact that they need to put up a 110 foot tower to improve service 1% while decreasing property values in that area as much as 5%, for me, that could be as much as a $25,000 hit, a year of college for one of my kids.
It also seems like this is a great opportunity for the town to make some money from Verizon if they rent space for this tower somewhere on municipal property. The Country Club has plenty of money, a two year waiting list, and doesn't seem to need the money, I heard Verizon will pay about $40,000 for rent. I would rather see the town get it.
Anyway, all the experts that have testified, have not convinced me that this will solve the poor cell phone service throughout the town. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1767
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 11:03 am: | |
Now that’s what you call a recipe for common sense, and just the way I like it served, well done…. Thank you Cookbook Rick…
Grw, I’m sure if Verizon is willing to pay $40,000 for rent, they really don’t care who they pay it to. And, sure we all would rather see the town get the additional income, but at least they will benefit by increasing the tax assessment on the improvement to the property. This is not to mention the obvious benefit to many residents and businesses in our community.
I don't know about anyone else, but I'm seriously thinking about dropping my home phone number in favor of my personal cell phone. Besides the substantial annual financial savings, the personal convenience makes more sense then running to a stationary phone that rings all hours of the day and night. I’m really looking forward to improved cell service in Maplewood.
BTW, I can’t speak for the experts that have testified, but I’m fairly well convinced that Verizon would not be making this multi-million dollar investment for another cell tower unless it was absolutely necessary.
I also can’t say whether the tower will solve the poor cell phone service throughout the town, but we can be sure it won’t make it any worst then it already is... |
Nohero
Citizen
Username: Nohero
Post Number: 1991
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 11:13 am: | |
Ajc - I think you've just proven Grw's point. The cell tower in the Country Club, is not for the purpose of improving service in the area where your home and business are located.
Some folks have apparently fallen into Verizon's trap - their claim that the choice is between lousy service and a big tower. That is not the choice. There are many ways to locate cell sites using existing buildings with higher elevations.
Why make the investment, you ask? Well, when they're done, they'll have the tower, and be the only game in town for other providers who want to reach from the southern border of Maplewood, across Millburn to Route 78. If they attach smaller facilities to existing buildings, then they won't have that.
In addition to providing a poor case in favor of a need for additional coverage, Verizon has done a poor job explaining whether it sought less obtrusive alternatives. |
Hank Zona
Citizen
Username: Hankzona
Post Number: 701
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 11:53 am: | |
Its pretty simple...the tower benefits Verizon and the country club first and foremost. It does not benefit the town all that much directly by adding revenue. It does not benefit the town indirectly by making it more attractive for businesses large and small and in between. It does not benefit the people living in the areas adjacent to it. I live in one of those neighborhoods affected but will not be in eyesight of it, but unless Ive misunderstood all the information provided, its not going to improve the signal in my home (which is fair to poor now for Verizon wireless), only improve the number of dropped calls (a nominal percentage..one or two per hundred, which doesnt matter since I cant use it much from my home anyhow). Where is the progress and improvement at the expense of lowered property values and an eyesore? Where does it say a town is not being business-friendly or people arent being forward thinking if it doesnt allow something that isnt a real step forward? Sorry, from all Ive read and heard so far, its just not worth it. If information has been provided to the contrary, please show me. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1770
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 2:18 pm: | |
Nohero and Hank… It would be nice if the solution was simple, I really wish it was, but it’s not. Unless someone can bring up some other reasons than what we heard so far, I still feel the cell tower issue is getting older by the minute.
I’m also beginning to think you guys may have proved my point. I attended a few B of A and TC meetings, but I haven’t really seen or heard of any compelling proof to support the statements opposing the tower. Let’s look at a few statements in this thread for openers, and ”If information has been provided to the contrary, please show it.”
Statements:
1. The cell tower is not for the purpose of improving service in the area?
2. Some folks have fallen into Verizon's trap. Who have they ever trapped?
3. The claim is the choice is between lousy service and a big tower?
4. There’s ways to locate cell sites using existing buildings with higher elevations?
5. It’s the only game in town for other providers to reach the borders of Maplewood?
6. If they attach smaller facilities to existing buildings, they won't benefit the same?
7. Verizon has a poor case in favor of a need for additional coverage?
8. Verizon has done a poor job explaining it sought less obtrusive alternatives?
9. The tower benefits Verizon and the country club first and foremost?
10. It does not benefit the town all that much directly by adding revenue?
11. It doesn’t benefit the town indirectly by making it more attractive for businesses?
12. It doesn’t benefit the people living in the areas adjacent to it?
13. It’s not going to improve the signal in my home?
14. It’s not going to improve fair to poor wireless only improve dropped calls?
15. The progress and improvement will really lower property values? |
grw
Citizen
Username: Grw
Post Number: 163
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 3:13 pm: | |
first of all ajc
I'm really sorry you feel that the cell tower issue is getting older by the minute, if you feel that way, just ignore the threads !! You are not obligated to respond to everything that is written, as you seem to do.
For many people in town, this will not be old until it's over, maybe that will be September's meeting.
It's obvious cell towers are coming, but when I hear from Verizon's expert witness (appraiser) that the property values will decrease by 5% in the neighborhood's effected. I can't help but oppose this, I work two jobs to live here, I love living here, and to lose maybe $25,000, would make me have to seriously consider moving. That is just alot of money for me.
I'm sure you can appreciate that |
mrmaplewood
Citizen
Username: Mrmaplewood
Post Number: 85
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 4:29 pm: | |
AJC:
You forgot one.
16) Whose stupid idea is it anyway to place the antenna in the absolute lowest part of Maplewood, then try to overcome this disadvantage by making it into a skyscraper? |
Hank Zona
Citizen
Username: Hankzona
Post Number: 703
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 4:30 pm: | |
Art,
I appreciate your involvement in the community and trying to come up with new ideas to make it a better place for business and for living, but I am going to disagree with you on this one. First, I agree, the solution is not simple. It most likely entails Verizon spending more money than they wish to instead of taking the simplest and least expensive path ...putting up a tower that they will be able to themselves generate revenue from. Second, you proved my point actually in your preceding thread when you said you dont know if the celltower will make the service better in town, but it wont make it worse. Why put up a tower if there is no demonstrable improvement in service just for the sake of putting up a tower? If someone says, you'll get a clear strong signal in your entire neighborhood and in your homes with this tower, then its a different situation. But the burden of proof needs to be with Verizon and they havent proved much of anything except their willingness to spend what it takes to win.
And Art, most folks, including me, havent said theyre tired of you exercising your rights and freedom to keep mentioning your legal battles. As grw said, skip over the celltower threads if you think they are getting old. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1771
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 4:45 pm: | |
"I'm sure you can appreciate that..."
Grw, I can, and you're right. If the loss can be proven, then any potential loss is more than any one resident should have to lose on their own.
I'm sorry that I also don't have the solution, but I'm fairly sure this 5% figure is subject to considerable speculation on both sides of the issue.
This is where some hard facts and statistics must come into play. I suspect by this time there should be some strong evidence nationally to show just how much and how far the devaluation extends away from the tower.
I see the primary issue here is whether the remuneration for the projected loss to residents is the responsibility of the community that benefits by the cell tower, local government, the cell tower provider, or very possibly the federal government that has mandated the process.
Here is a suggestion and it comes with my best wishes.
If you and the rest of the surrounding residents lose your appeal to stop the tower from being built, (selfishly for the sake of the town I hope you do) but on the other hand you can successfully provide the proof of your personal losses, (required in any litigation) then I believe it is time to form a national class action suit to recover the losses, (which I think you can win). Your fight has strong merit, it is fair and just to oppose this injustice, I see the pain and suffering, and I hope you win.
I’m sure there is a major law firm willing to take on the powers that be for a handsome share of the monies that might be won. Good luck! |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1773
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 5:00 pm: | |
Hank,
Good points, and thank you for your suggestion to skip over the cell tower threads. I think I will...
After my last post to Grw, there is little or nothing else I have to say. Again, I'll be willing to keep my home phone a little longer, and give you all my sincere best wishes to kick their a** if you can.... I'm off to the Pub!
(I suspect if it were me in your shoes, I'd be in there fighting to the end.) |
grw
Citizen
Username: Grw
Post Number: 165
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 5:06 pm: | |
Thanks ajc, I appreciate your input
I just really want people to understand that this tower is not the solution to poor cell phone service, it is merely (?), improving the number of dropped calls by 1%. I keep thinking that I'm missing something because I don't understand why Verizon would spend all this money to improve dropped calls, unless they can recoup it by subleasing space to other carriers.
|
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1778
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 7:53 am: | |
Grw,
"I don't understand why Verizon would spend all this money?"
One more thing that may or may not help answer your question...
Sprint built a tower on one of my properties, spent a ton to do it, pay me over $2,000 a month for it for the next 25 years, and so far in the past two years, with 2 to 4 additional spots to lease out, only Nextel has subleased space from them?
When they were building it, I had asked the engineers on the job how much this tower would improve service. The reply was, not much, but it was vital in their goal for blanket coverage of the metropolitan region, something about a federally mandated program. I was left with the impression it had something to do with our national security?
___________________________________________________________________
Waiting for an all-day Jitney, or a better way we all can get around our community...
|
hello
Citizen
Username: Hello
Post Number: 65
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 11:00 am: | |
the question about elevation is very interesting to me. do any of the verizon slappies in here have an answer as to wy it needs to be so far down? relatedly, why not permit cell towers on the periphery of the reservation? |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1781
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 12:23 pm: | |
I don't know why, but a good guess would be if we go to the reservation, we'll have the environmentalists and the Indians on the war path...
___________________________________________________________________
Waiting for an all-day Jitney, less traffic and more parking all around our community…
|
grw
Citizen
Username: Grw
Post Number: 166
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 1:38 pm: | |
hello-according to Verizon's Radio Frequency Engineer and his expert, under oath testimony, the only place this 110' tower can go is on the golf course, this is where it has to go to improve the dropped calls by 1%. |
ajc
Citizen
Username: Ajc
Post Number: 1785
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 2:12 pm: | |
Grw,
Has anyone bothered to go for another opinion from, lets say, another cell tower company? As I understand the new procedures at the Board of Adjustment, they are allowed expert witnesses, and the applicant is responsible to pay for the cost...
So, why not go for it if there's still time?
___________________________________________________________________
Waiting for an all-day Jitney, giving children, seniors, and non-drivers more mobility... |
grw
Citizen
Username: Grw
Post Number: 167
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 3:36 pm: | |
ajc
Verizon paid for an independent Radio Frequency Engineer at the request of the BOA, he submitted his report to the BOA, and I think he is going to speak at the next meeting. I'm not sure what his findings are, but I think people can ask him questions at the next meeting.
Filmboy, do you know what his findings were? |
OK, it's Tom Reingold
Citizen
Username: Noglider
Post Number: 391
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2003 - 12:41 pm: | |
When and where is the BOA meeting?
Some ramblings that are slightly off topic...
My cell service is with T-Mobile. Coverage in the area of my old home in Edison was fantastic. Coverage in Essex county is bad. It's good throughout most of Maplewood, but a small area surrounding my home, including my home, is a total black hole. I'm quite frustrated. I called them up and the woman said they're putting up two new towers near me, one in Cedar Knolls. I told her Cedar Knolls is not near me! The other is in Belleville, and I don't know if that's near enough to make a difference.
ajc's story about leasing out space on towers is puzzling. I hope that whatever Verizon Wireless does to improve service ends up improving service for other companies, too.
And for whatever it's worth, Verizon Wireless has the highest rating of customer satisfaction. I ask all my friends whom they use, and this seems to correlate. Whenever I don't have a signal and someone with me does, it's usually with Verizon. The exception is in my house. There, no company reaches, except for Sprint.
Tom Reingold
|
jgberkeley
Supporter
Username: Jgberkeley
Post Number: 3108
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 3, 2003 - 2:34 am: | |
Tom,
For what it is worth, I have a company T-Mobil phone. Works well most places in town, but my house is the other black hole.
I spent a lot of time on the phone with them trying to slove this. I learned that the nearest tower that they have leased access to is in South Orange just off South Orange Ave.
Given the location of my house that is just around the curve of the hill you climb from the train station up toward Ridgewood.
If I go up into my attic, near the back peak of the house, I pick up the cell.
My wife has an AT&T phone service and it seems to work ok in the house.
I asked T-Mobile about leasing space on some other tower and they got real talkative, with nothing to say.
Go figure. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page