Citizens wishing to comment on a proposal to construct a cell tower in Seymour Lake Township Park will have their opportunity to do so during a 7 p.m. public hearing at the Thursday, Oct. 13 Oxford Township Planning Commission meeting.

The hearing will take place at the township hall, located at 300 Dunlap Rd., just north of Seymour Lake Rd.

“I hope people show up,” said Oxford resident Stephen Drouillard, who is adamantly opposed to the proposed tower as his property is approximately 110 feet from the site.

“It’s going to be in my backyard. I’m the one that’s the sacrificial lamb here.”

Tower proponents claim cell phone service ranges from unreliable to nonexistent in the area around Baldwin and Seymour Lake roads.

To fill that hole, Verizon Wireless is looking to place a 195-foot monopole in the northwest corner of the 132-acre park, near the outfield of a baseball diamond.

A monopole is a self-supporting, single tube tower with antennas mounted on it.

It order to make it happen, Verizon is seeking special land use approval from the planning commission along with both preliminary and final site plan approval.

The proposed tower would be located on a 2,475-square-foot space, for which, according to a proposed license agreement, the township would receive a fee of $15,600 annually for the initial term of five years.

Revenue from the license agreement would go into the parks and recreation budget, not the township’s general fund.

“Probably, the majority of it will be earmarked for maintenance,” explained Parks/Rec. Director Ron Davis, who noted the money could be used to buy everything from new lawn mowers and trucks to park benches. “I’d like to see it kept right in the park system.”

According to the proposed language, the license agreement would “automatically be extended” for four additional five-year terms unless Verizon is in default or terminates the agreement.

The annual license fee is proposed to increase by 5 percent per five-year term.

Davis does not believe erecting a cell tower would have any negative impact on Seymour Lake Park as the proposed lease site has “no recreation value to us whatsoever,” so it’s not like it would be taking away usable park land.

“If you look around (at) other municipalities statewide, (cell towers) are located in parks,” he noted. “It’s not out of the norm.”

A prime example is located east of Oxford over in Addison Township.

In 2012, Verizon erected a 190-foot monopole in Watershed Preserve Park, a 230-acre township park located approximately one mile north of Leonard on Rochester Rd. Revenue from the lease is dedicated to the development and maintenance of Addison’s park system. This year, it’s expected to generate $18,764 for the township’s three parks, which total 319 acres.

Drouillard is very concerned about how the proposed tower could impact his residential property.

He called it a “monstrosity” and believes it’s going to ruin the view from his deck, which looks out over the park.

“That now is going to be between us and the baseball field,” Drouillard said. “(Cell towers are) the ugliest things in the world.”

He’s also concerned the proposed tower is going to have a negative effect on his property values and those of surrounding properties.

“If we were to ever try to sell our home, it would be devastating to us,” Drouillard said.

A cell tower located there in the park would have put the kibosh on him buying his Seymour Lake Rd. home five years ago.

“If I had pulled in the driveway and saw that sitting there, I wouldn’t have even turned the car off,” he said.

As a community, he believes the goal should be “to keep our property values as high as possible.”

Aesthetics and money aside, Drouillard is worried about potential “adverse health effects” from living near a cell tower.

“It’s a justified concern,” he said.

He said he’s read a lot on the internet about everything from brain fog (a condition characterized by forgetfulness, difficulty concentrating and confusion) to “various kinds of cancers.”

“I can’t prove it. I can’t disprove it,” Drouillard said. “I think we’re at (the point) where proving it or disproving it is still at an early stage.”

According to the American Cancer Society (ACS) website, “At this time, there is very little evidence to support this idea” that “living, working, or going to school near a cell phone tower might increase the risk of cancer or other health problems.”

The energy level of radiofrequency (RF) waves is “relatively low” compared to the types of radiation known to increase the risk of cancer and the wavelengths are long, which makes it “unlikely” the energy “could be concentrated enough to affect individual cells in the body,” according to the ACS.

“Levels of energy from RF waves near cell phone towers are not significantly different from the background levels of RF radiation in urban areas from other sources, such as radio and television broadcast stations,” the ACS website states.

Drouillard noted the officials who are deciding this issue will not be directly affected by this proposed tower.

“This is something that (none of them) will experience because they don’t have it in their backyard,” he said.

Davis said he understands there are people opposed to this, but cell phone towers are just a fact of life these days.

“It’s not like it’s the first cell tower going up. They’re everywhere,” Davis noted. “People want to use their cell phones, but no one wants to look at a cell tower. Well, I don’t know where the happy medium is there.”

Davis believes it’s better to have the proposed tower placed here where the lease revenue could benefit residents than on the other side of Baldwin Rd. in Brandon Township, where it would still be visible to Oxford residents, but provide no additional income for a public service.

In his 12-page review of the cell tower plan, township Planner Matthew Lonnerstater, of the Ann Arbor-based Carlisle/Wortman Associates, Inc., raised some issues that need to be addressed.

“The proposed wireless communication facility is not in substantial compliance with the township zoning ordinance,” he wrote.

According to the zoning ordinance, cell tower applicants must demonstrate there are no existing structures in the area capable of meeting their service/coverage needs. If there are existing structures, applicants must explain why they’re not feasible alternatives to building new towers.

Lonnerstater wrote the applicant has provided coverage maps that appear to show the proposed tower “would fill a rather sizeable gap in Verizon cell service in this portion of the township.”

However, “it is unclear whether the coverage maps denote all wireless facilities or simply those operated by Verizon,” the planner wrote.

Lonnerstater indicated Verizon “should confirm” that using an existing structure is not possible in this area.

The township ordinance also requires cell towers must be of a “stealth,” or concealed, design, meaning they should be made to look like something else, such as a steeple, bell tower, tree, etc., in order to be compatible with the existing character of its surroundings.

In his review, Lonnerstater explained the proposed monopole “does not necessarily qualify as a ‘stealth’ design.”

“The planning commission shall determine whether a stealth monopole design or ‘other form’ is acceptable in this proposed location,” he wrote. “Alternative designs may need to be provided at the planning commission’s discretion.”

Lonnerstater noted “while the tower will be partially obscured by new and existing trees,” it “may be visually prominent as it will be located near the existing baseball diamonds.”

In the planner’s letter, it was also stated the proposed tower’s 195-foot height is not in compliance because it is set back approximately 110 feet from the north and west property lines. Township zoning ordinance requires towers must be set back from all property lines at least the height of the highest point of the tower, which is this case, is 195 feet.

“The tower must either be reduced in height or moved to ensure that the setback is no less than the height of the tower,” Lonnerstater wrote. “Alternatively, the applicant may apply for a dimensional variance from the ZBA (Zoning Board of Appeals) allowing the reduced setback.”

The planner noted the proposed tower “could be viewed as an improvement as it will provide additional cell phone service to residents and visitors” and it “will not change the essential character of the area.”

Verizon’s proposed cell tower is supported by public safety personnel.

At the township board’s August meeting, Oxford Fire Chief Pete Scholz indicated the lack of cell coverage in the area around the park concerns him because it could hinder the ability of people to call for help in a medical emergency.

“Anything we can do out in that area (to expand wireless coverage) would be huge to help the entire community,” he told the board.

Oakland County Undersheriff Mike McCabe said his office believes this proposed tower is necessary.

“We definitely support it,” he said. “If something were to happen – a heart attack or any kind of medical emergency – you want fire and police there as quickly as possible. And if you can’t get through (to the dispatch center) on a cell phone, that could mean somebody’s life. Seconds mean a lot.”

“It’s not just Oxford Township. This affects Brandon Township, too,” McCabe continued. “You have a large (number) of people near the park there that have limited or no cell phone coverage.”

One of those people is Brandon Township resident Virginia Guindon, a Verizon Wireless customer who lives “a short distance from the park.”

“Having a tower there would mean our dropped calls would cease,” she wrote on the Oxford Leader website. “We have had to call 9-1-1 several times due to my heart condition in the middle of the night. Some of (those calls were) dropped while speaking with the operator. That is scary.”

Guindon noted the proposed tower could be disguised “to look like a tree.”

“It’s been done before in other areas,” she wrote. “You don’t even know it’s there.”

McCabe, who lives in Oxford Township, experiences this lack of coverage on a daily basis as he drives to and from work.

“I’m always on the phone and every day, I’ve got to tell people, ‘Hey, I’m going to lose you’ and I do,” he explained. “Just north of Stanton Rd. is where I lose it and I don’t pick it back up again until I get east on Seymour Lake Rd. about a quarter-mile or so past the park. I get either zero bars or one bar. That’s it. There’s a huge area there with a huge hole. It’s a public safety issue. There’s no doubt about it.”

McCabe noted having reliable cell phone service is an absolute necessity these days as many folks have made them their sole communications device.

“There are a lot of people that do not have landlines. They rely on cell phones,” he said. “Landlines are going away. My daughter doesn’t have landline. Her cell phone is her home phone.”

The undersheriff is not unsympathetic to anyone opposed to this, but he believes there are other factors that must take precedence here.

“I know people don’t want a cell tower in their backyard. I get that,” he said. “But it’s all about saving lives and serving the public. That’s what our position is on it. If somebody needs to dial 9-1-1, we want to make sure they can get through.”