Court Case Over Verizon Wireless Tower is January 25
Ouray County, Colo., Residents Up in Arms Over Tower
Andrew Fisher, property owner in the subdivision where the tower is planned, is leading the charge for Ouray County residents against the Dallas Creek Water Co. for violations of the subdivision's covenants that the Verizon Wireless tower will affect.
The Dallas Creek Water Co. is owned by James Willey, who had a tract of land in the residentially zoned Log Hill area changed to commercial zoning to allow for the construction of this tower. Willey approached the Ouray county commissioners with his appeal in 2008 and a permit was granted. Since then, Ouray County residents have been up in arms over the decision by the commissioners and the proposed tower that has more than doubled in size since the original permit.
In a recent article that ran in The Watch, The Ridgway Sun and The Plaindealer, a guest commentary was submitted by the commissioners outlining their decision on this matter. The commissioners have repeatedly had to explain and defend their decision on the proposed Verizon Wireless tower since they granted a special use permit to the Dallas Creek Water Co. in 2008.
Meetings have been held publicly by Ouray County residents with the Commissioners on this topic. In one lopsided meeting that took place on April 27, 2009, residents were given only two minutes to state their position and their reasons for opposition to the Verizon Wireless tower while advocates for the tower were able to speak for 30 minutes or more.
The court date is scheduled for Jan. 25 at the Ouray County courthouse at 9 a.m. All concerned residents and Ouray County property owners are asked to attend this very important trial that will impact the community.
Sources: Ouray County Website
The Watch , January 6, 2011, "Fact and Fiction Regarding the Verizon Tower"
Published by Sandy James
I'm a retired Human Resource professional that writes for several websites on several topics. I enjoy helping others through my articles. View profile
Migo Cell Phone from Verizon WirelessMigo is a cell phone designed especially for kids, and the Migo cell phone from Verizon Wireless is the perfect way to keep your kids safe and connected. Parents can choose up t...- Verizon Wireless Protests "Google Block" Concept in Auction of New Wireless SpectrumVerizon Wireless has issued a statement in opposition to perceived FCC leanings that would favor a new kind of spectrum auction for wireless use, with Google a likely beneficiary.
Verizon Wireless USB720 Modem Broadband Access ReviewThe Verizon Wireless Broadband Access USB720 is a wireless USB Modem that can be connected to any computer with a Type A USB port. This is truly wireless internet access. - Verizon Wireless - Charging Customers for Literally No ReasonVerizon Wireless is hijacking customers wallets for a fee for non use. Basic telephone customers are not being penalized for not making long distance phone calls.
The Benefits of Working for Property OwnersBy working for property owners, you can have the satisfaction of saving money while helping others.
- Proposed Verizon Wireless Tower Still Controversial in Ridgway, Colorado
- Mountain Jam in Ouray, Colorado
- The Ridgway Community Garden in Ridgway, Colorado
- Holiday Events in Ridgway, Colorado
- The Best Verizon Wireless Retailer in New York
- Verizon Wireless Touch Screen Blackberry Storm is Now the Hottest Blackberry
- Verizon Wireless Finally Gets Apple IPhone and Bonus IPad
26 Comments
Post a CommentI could understand the residents concern.
Well done.
Fantastic reporting!
good reporting
To the Actual Resident: If you check the County's website and read the minutes, you'll see that the actual proposal was for a 35 ft tower that orignally was going to be on a different location with the Log Hill firebarn. There are many residents opposed to the tower at this location because it is residential and will be an eyesore. That's why the Commissioners keep sending out articles defending their position. Would you like to sign the petition?
Man is this report full of false information! The proposed tower was 100', not 35, and was reduced to 80', not increased to 90. The property is ALREADY "commercial" in nature, with THREE cell towers and TWO water tanks, all there on property that was designated from the start to be a tower site: it's even CALLED Tower Rd. For ONE landowner to object and make such a fuss is *ridiculous*, holding everyone else in the county for ransom when court hearing after court hearing (seriously: MANY hearings held by the county commissioners and a judge) have gone against him. This is a bogus report as the VAST majority of residents SUPPORT the tower, even the ones living in the area of the tower!
thanks for the info and update, should be very interesting
Superb reporting on this. Well done!
Thank you for sharing. Catching up on pvs.
Your article is very interesting, thanks for sharing.
..........................
<a href="http://www.noosachocolate.com.au" ref= "do follow">chocolate wholesalers</a>