Proposed cell tower meets resistance

By Jeff O'Brien (contact)

Friday, Oct. 10, 2008 | midnight

A proposal for a new cellular reception antenna has encountered resistance from the Sun City Summerlin Community Association Board of Directors. The issue was addressed at the board's Sept. 29 meeting.

Under the current proposal from T-Mobile, a 70-foot-tall "faux palm tree" antenna would be located at the entrance to Sun City Summerlin near the intersection of Lake Mead and Sun City boulevards.

The proposal would involve a 10-year contract with T-Mobile that would pay the association approximately $22,000 each year.

But the tower would exceed the 60-foot-limit established by the Association's Architectural Review Committee, or ARC, said Richard Post, president of the Sun City Summerlin Community Association Board of Directors.

"I'm pretty sure we would not approve anything over 60 feet high," Post said. "Putting a faux palm tree in there would also be very obvious. It wouldn't be any kind of addition to the scenery in that area."

"I don't think it would be aesthetically pleasing," said board member Marilyn LeVasseur.

Initially, the tower would only improve cell phone reception for T-Mobile customers in the area, but it would have the ability to house additional equipment for up to two other carriers in the future. Any additional carriers on the tower would have to be approved by the board of directors.

Although a 70-foot-high tower would be ideal in order to maximize the signal enhancement, it's not a deal breaker, said Dan Vozenilek of T-Mobile. The tower will be able to enhance signals for T-Mobile cell phone users within a half-mile radius of the site.

"If necessary, we would agree to do a 60-foot-pole," Vozenilek said. "It wouldn't quite cover the area as well, but it would definitely enhance coverage."

T-Mobile mailed approximately 175 notices describing the proposal to residents living within a 1,000-foot radius of the site, resulting in three e-mails and four phone calls.

Two of the phone calls were against the project and the other two had questions regarding aesthetics that were discussed and clarified, Vozenilek said.

All three of the e-mail responses were in support of the project.

"That particular location has suffered from poor cell phone coverage and this would obviously help," Vozenilek said.

One possibility to improve aesthetics, Vozenilek said, would be to construct a "flagpole" tower. The antenna would function as a flagpole but with a slightly larger diameter and a cylinder at the top to hold reception equipment.

The board requested that T-Mobile return at a later date with visual renderings of a flagpole tower at the site and Vozenilek agreed.

Jeff O’Brien can be reached at 990-8957 or jeff.obrien@hbcpub.com.