Resident files appeal over cell tower approval in Buffalo Township
A Buffalo Township resident is taking township supervisors to court to keep a cell tower out of his neighborhood.
Lynn Shearer, who lives on Monroe Road, filed a land use appeal to overturn a recent decision by the board that gave Verizon Wireless approval to construct a 199-foot cell tower on the property across the street from his home.
Shearer argues the tower would greatly reduce property values in the neighborhood and subject residents to potentially dangerous amounts of radiation from cell signals. He has also argued cell reception in the area is adequate, making the tower unnecessary.
The suit was filed Jan. 10 with Butler County Common Pleas Court. Although Verizon Wireless was not named as a party in the appeal, on Feb. 7 it was permitted to participate in the case as a co-defendant.
Supervisors approved the construction of the tower during their monthly meeting Dec. 13. The application was initially submitted to the township at the end of May, and went before the planning commission on July 5.
According to court documents, the planning commission did not make a recommendation to approve or deny placement of the tower at its July meeting. A public hearing was held on the issue Oct. 11, with no action taken.
When they approved Verizon’s application in December, supervisors attached a series of conditions to the approval. This included requiring Verizon to provide a geotechnical and structural analysis, and to pave a road to the tower to provide dust-free access.
Shearer argues Verizon should have met these conditions before the township approved the application, not after, and the township chose to ignore its own ordinances in granting approval to Verizon.
“They didn’t follow what their zoning regulations are,” Shearer said. “Instead of (Verizon) meeting the criteria they have to meet to do that, they skipped all those. And what they’re supposed to do is do all those things at this level to get the conditional use.”
“The Board of Supervisors abused its discretion and committed errors of law in granting Conditional Use Approval to Verizon Wireless for the construction and operation of a communications tower,” the appeal reads. “Said Conditional Use Approval should be reversed.”
Representatives of Buffalo Township declined to comment on the matter.
The land use appeal made 13 arguments to support its case, arguing Verizon failed to provide a geotechnical analysis and failed to provide evidence it would comply with numerous state and federal regulations. In addition, the appeal argued the tower would be built too close to an existing gas well and Verizon failed to prove the tower could safely be built there.
According to the “findings of fact” for why Buffalo Township approved the tower, the township said Verizon’s application did not include a structural and geotechnical analysis.
“However, the Township finds that this requirement is, at the time of application, unduly burdensome and would be in violation of the Third Circuit’s recent decision in Cellco Partnership,” wrote the decision in two separate bullet points.
Cellco Partnership is the legal name for Verizon Wireless. The decision refers to “Cellco Partnership vs. White Deer Township Zoning Hearing Board,” in which Verizon filed suit against a township in Union County for denying an application to build a cell tower in mid-2023.
The Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals granted summary judgment to Verizon, citing the denial would have violated the Telecommunications Act by prohibiting personal wireless services.
During the December meeting, Buffalo solicitor Brian Farrington told Shearer the township’s hands were legally tied.
“The guidelines that the FCC are issuing make it very difficult for municipalities to impose conditions,” Farrington said at the December meeting.
He also said the township could have been dragged into a costly lawsuit by Verizon.
“If I would tell them no, then the township’s got to pay for me to go to court and litigate,” Farrington said. “I have an obligation as their solicitor to not put them in a situation where they’re defending something like this.”
Shearer is represented by attorney John Linkosky. Buffalo Township is being represented by the Charlton Law Firm, based in Buffalo Township.
