Any time a cell phone tower is proposed in or around Sedona, it draws various concerns regarding aesthetics to property value, to view shed to health concerns or all of the above.

So it should come as no surprise that many turned out to speak against a proposed 80-foot tower being sought on property owned by Sedona Pines, just west of Sedona city limits. 

On Dec. 20, the Yavapai County Planning and Zoning Commission approved recommendation of the tower by a vote of 8-1 with Commissioner Kevin Osterman being the lone dissenting vote. The Yavapai County Board of Supervisors will be hearing the issue on Wednesday, Jan. 16. 

The meeting begins at 9 a.m. at the county facilities in Cottonwood, located at 10 S. Sixth St. 

The commission was being asked to consider a Wireless Use Permit request from AT&T to allow for a co-locatable broadleaf tree with supporting equipment. 

The applicant is also requesting a waiver from setbacks with a proof of collapse and a waiver of new wireless facilities being built within 1,000 feet of residences. AT&T had originally sought a 100-foot tower but after push back from the public and after seeking input from engineers, the company felt an 80-foot tower would be adequate.

 According to a county report, the commission’s recommendations to the supervisors include the following: 

• Wireless Use Permit shall be approved to allow the construction and operation of an 80-foot cellular tower and leased area with support equipment on a 10-year basis, with staff review after five years and staff notification prior to transfer of ownership. 
• Property to be developed in conformance with the site plan dated Oct. 2, submitted with the Use Permit application and in accordance with all applicable codes, regulations and ordinance requirements.
• The maximum height of the tower, including base, platform and antennae, not to exceed 80 feet above grade level. 
• Waiver of screening requirements to allow for a chain link fence. 
• Waiver from setbacks with a proof of collapse.
• Waiver of new wireless facilities being built within 1,000 feet of residences. 
• Applicant to provide staff with a fully-executed lease agreement from the property owner with building permit submittal.
• Certificate of Compliance within two years of Board of Supervisors approval. 
• In the event the owner of the subject property files a claim under state law regarding this Use Permit, this Use Permit shall be null and void.

If approved, this will be the second cell tower on the property. The other is owned by Sprint and is concealed as a flagpole. 

Commissioner Mike Ellegood asked the applicants to confirm that co-location with the existing Sprint site was not an alternative and to explain why. 

Consultant Steven Kennedy said due to the lower height of the existing tower and the distance between the antennas it did not meet the requirements from the Federal Communications Commission for First Net and they could not co-locate on the existing Sprint tower. 

During the Dec. 20 meeting, AT&T consultant Mike Campbell said that this was part of AT&T’s First Net project that was a federally-backed program to provide a frequency limited to first responders. He said this would allow first responders the ability to communicate with each other on the same frequency when they respond to any emergency and pointed out the lack of coverage in that area. Campbell said they had support from Sedona Fire District.  

Kennedy said that First Net was created after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. Prior to that, often the frequencies used by different agencies such as fire and police departments were different, thus preventing them from communicating with one another. He said the federal government decided there must be a single nationwide network for data and voice that all first responders could attach to and use. 

Several residents spoke in opposition of the tower with many like Trish Jahnke, Dianne Hodges and Heather Baker stating that the commission should not waive the 1,000-foot rule. 

Yavapai County Development Services Director David Williams said the 1,000-foot limit was put in as a visual setback for the height of the antennas. He referred to a previous case where a waiver was asked for on a 150-foot tower. He went on to say this was still in the ordinance and removal of this had been discussed at a recent county meeting. 

Willaims said that county staff was currently looking at revising that provision and it would be coming forward at a later date for consideration.