8/31/2006 9:39:00 AM  

By JOYELL NEVINS
Staff Writer

t-mobile wants to build a new high-rise cell phone tower on State Route 571 and Scarff roads and they are getting less than an enthusiastic response from some Bethel residents.

On Thursday night, concerned citizens met with Eric Engen, Regional Development Manager of t-mobile, Pat McLivenna, President of PBM Wireless, and Kit Nickel, Consultant for PBM Wireless at the Trustees' invitation to try to ease some of the concerns and tension between the two groups.

What service does the tower provide?

The 194 foot tower will serve a three mile radius. There are 500 customers in the zip code the tower will reside.

How long is the contract and what will happen to the tower?

The lease with Mr. Porter is for 30 years. After that it is t-mobile's responsibility to remove the tower.

Will the radiation affect pacemakers or cause other health-related issues?

A radiation wave with that much power would be a microwave, like the ones from the red tower where 75 meets 70. The power from the cell phone tower will be between 60-300 watts. Radios can give off to 1000 watts.

Was the Miami Conservancy District or Historic Preservation contacted? Is it possible to see the data taken - core samples, engineer reports, etc?

t-mobile is an FCC regulated company. They are required to go through certain processes, to meet DNR regulations, state historic legalities and other legal requirements. They obtained a building permit legally through Miami County, who surveyed the property and approved the plans and foundation.

Trustee Beth van Haaren pointed out that unlike government offices, t-mobile is a private corporation and is by no means required to disclose their company records.

Is the site within a flood plan for the Honeycreek Water Shed?

No, it is not within a flood plan. To obtain a copy of a flood plan map, go to the county offices and request a F.I.R.M. - flood insurance rate map, provided by FEMA.

Will the tower decrease our property value, and if so will we be compensated?

There is no study which shows that cell towers impact property value, for negative or positive. The example was used of homes in a nice area of Columbus (Snoffer Road off of 270) that continued to sell after a cell phone tower was built in the vicinity.

Have any other sites been looked at and considered?

t-mobile and PBM Wireless looked at four to five other sites prior to the one on Scarff. The grain elevator was not an option because of the height and interference with pre-existing antennas.

There were three other locations in Clark County, including existing buildings in all four compass directions. The engineers determined

the only direction that would work was west, and possibly northwest. Another concern was any tower over 200 feet is required to be lit. And if the proper coverage was not obtained, yet another tower would have to be built in the same area. The corner of Scarff and 571 had the proper zoning, the least amount of agricultural and residential, and adequate service coverage.

Why was the 'good faith moratorium' not honored?

The moratorium was from the Telecom Act in 1996, and was designed to give communities a six month base to get their ordinances to match up with federal guidelines. Nickel commended whoever found the law, saying they should be in legal research, but that after discussion with the assistant prosecutor of Miami County determined the moratorium did not apply.

Will there be landscaping, and will it be kept up?

At Trustee Cliff Wray's request to t-mobile that they do something visually appealing with the property, t-mobile agreed to landscape the area around the tower. They will maintain the landscape as long as the tower is there.