Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Board denies proposed 125-foot cellphone tower near Wiley Post Park after resident opposition
Loading...
Summary
The Board of Adjustment voted to deny a special-exception request for a 125-foot telecommunications monopole at 241 Southwest 21st Street, citing proximity to residential zoning and the availability of alternative colocations; residents and neighborhood groups had urged denial over health, visual and property-value concerns.
The Board of Adjustment on Feb. 19 denied a proposal to build a 125-foot telecommunications monopole at 241 Southwest 21st Street after extensive public comment and attorney and staff legal analysis.
Troy Williams, representing Branch Communications and Verizon, told the board the site — located on industrially zoned property near Wiley Post Park — is intended to fill a coverage and capacity "hole" and provide in-building coverage and enhanced 9-1-1 service. "This site is needed because... this is a hole," Williams said, noting the Olympics and event-driven demand as one reason for capacity concerns.
Community members, business leaders and neighborhood groups opposed the proposal. Kendra Wilson Clements, treasurer of Calle De Cinco business district, urged the board to consider the park and district revitalization, citing both health and economic concerns: "Placing this structure at the entrance to a green space sends the wrong message about our priorities and stewardship of the environment," she said, and warned of potential property-value impacts. Regina McCurdy, a nearby resident who lives roughly 435 feet from the proposed tower site, noted prior opposition in 2023 and urged the board to oppose the installation near the park entrance.
Drew Kolbeau of Crown Castle said his company operates a tower about 0.4 miles away and that his structure has capacity for additional tenants; he encouraged co-location on existing infrastructure rather than building a new monopole. "We welcome the applicant to use our existing structure or modify our tower to potentially increase the height or whatever they need to do to make it work," Kolbeau said.
Board members questioned whether shorter "small cell" installations or co-location could address coverage gaps without erecting a new, taller tower. Legal limits were also discussed: planning staff and municipal counsel explained federal and local rules limit the board's ability to regulate radio-frequency environmental effects, but local code still requires evidence that a special exception is necessary and that alternatives have been exhausted.
Member (Speaker 7) moved to deny the request on statutory grounds, finding that the applicant had not demonstrated the minimum necessary hardship and that alternative solutions (co-location, shorter towers) were potentially viable. The motion to deny was seconded and carried; the board directed that any future proposals should demonstrate thorough exploration of co-location and other options and noted applicable federal and local permitting steps.
The denial preserves the park entrance visual character and addresses neighborhood concerns raised at the hearing; applicants were reminded they may pursue co-location or a special permit application that includes additional technical justification.
