Is there anyone concerned that a 54'
tower is planned for the nursery site
that was saved from being a U-Store-it
site a few years ago?

Why is it that the owners of this site
insist on asking for variances to allow
them to erect buildings/towers that are
controversial at best.

This site is the main entrance to Belmont Heights/Shore. If you are
instructing anyone off the 405 frwy
to BH, you undoubtedly have them take
the EASY route. OFF on 7th, left at
Ximeno!

I'd rather have this tower in MY
backyard, where I can take in the $1000s
in lease fees, and I wouldn't have it's
antennae directed into MY 2nd story windows (I'm on the Hill above site).

Why do we need another tower here?
Does ANYONE have a problem getting
service in the BH/BS area? NO!
It can only be to allow even more
providers? Do we need this? I can
get cell service for $15/month now!
Why should this variance (height) be
allowed?

Here's a site that explains that we
don't HAVE TO allow a tower unless
the area presently doesn't have
service (it does) AND that there are
no ALTERNATIVE SITES either:
http://www.emfguru.com/Law/town-reject.html

Council meeting on tower Tuesday

I think the meeting on this matter
is at the council meeting on May 22nd?

Anyone know if that is right?

Why hasn't Gazette printed anything on
this?

TODAY May17, 1:30 1st floor

The meeting on the TOWER at 4350 7th
(abandoned nursery site) is at 1:30
the 17th of MAy in the 1st floor
council chamber.

54' TOWER with 14 antennae
-12 panel type
- 2 GPS type
AND
ASSIOCIATED EQUIPMENT (I believe this
'associated equipment' goes into a
building next to this behemoth).