Soon, a 129-foot-high cedar tree can be popped near Grass Valley-and this is not a type of tree that grows naturally (the Internet just told me that the pine tree grows between 25 and 100 years to grow in this height). Instead, this particular tree can connect people to other people, but this high -tech pine can only be erected after the legal battle. Verizon’s Sacramento Valley subsidiary has taken legal action against Nevada County, which has filed a federal lawsuit, alleging local officials that they have falsely blocked the proposed cell tower in the grass valley.
According to judicial documents, Sacramento Valley Limited Partnership (this is a VeraizonThe owned company that works Veraizon Wireless), on July 10, filed a complaint in Sacramento and requested a speedy review of the case.
Centers of conflict VeraizonPlanning to install 129 feet tower designed to look like a pine tree. The tower will be located on the side of the hill along the Dog Bar Road and was jumped with artificial leaves and branches. Veraizon It argues that the tower is essential to remove an important difference in coverage in the region, noting that in particular, in an emergency, better service is very important for consumers.
Photo by Verizon
The company said the selected site is a 14 -acre parcel, and the tower will stand several hundred feet from the nearest residence. County planning officials recommended the approval of the project, but the project opposed some residents who expressed concerns about natural ideas and fears regarding the potential health risks associated with radio frequency emissions.
In her legal fodder, Veraizon Controversial from these objections, saying that the tower will not show from the homes of those who have complained and will be emission in the limits set by federal law. The law is clear. If the tower meets the limits, it stands. City cannot say because of fear of AirViews. That’s it.
Nevada County’s lawyer Kit Elite confirmed that the supervisors heard the testimony of troubled residents about radio frequency during public hearings. However, they maintained that these concerns do not base the board’s decision. He cited the language from the resolution passed by the Board of Supervisors, which acknowledged that evidence was presented on the effects of potential health, but added that the decision was not based on this information.
Instead, the board focused on other factors when it rejected it VeraizonLast year’s request. The resolution indicates concerns that the appearance of the tower will have a negative impact on the rural role of the area and cite the fear of residents about the potential impact on property values. The dispute will now be transferred to court with a scheduled conference for November.
Read the latest from Sebastian Pierre
