Would you buy a house within sight of a cell tower?

[marions ghost]

If yes, would you try to negotiate the price down because of the tower?

OTOH If you would not buy a house within sight of a cell tower, why not?

Any links to relevant websites, especially those having to do with property values are appreciated.
It is difficult to find any consensus on this. Although the realtors associations do address the issue,
they obviously are caught in the middle. I have only the most basic layperson knowledge of real estate valuing, but I sense this is a question, as cell towers continue to proliferate everywhere. But I'm not sure how people in general think about the hardcore real estate realities. Help or tips are hard to come by. One site I looked at said a tower was as big a negative as a landfill...yoiks

So if you had an interest in, or a good deal on, a house near (within sight of) a tower, would you buy?

[RKP5637]

1. One thing to keep in mind is sometimes they grow in size. One near me was small and

then they kept adding and adding antennas, in fact so many, the perimeter of the tower was lined with cables down to a small building at the base that also grew in size, and also had a loud diesel engine in it that ran all night sometimes to keep the backup batteries at full charge, so they said.

[MADem]

2. Every fault's a fashion--I suppose someone crabbing about getting a signal would love to be near a

tower! OTOH, some say they are "bad" for you.

We have a small "cottage" (sounds jazzier than it is) near power lines--the shack went up before the power lines, it is a very old place built by an ancestor.

Good question--I don't know the answer but I'll be interested to hear the views of others!

[Hassin Bin Sober]

4. LOL. I just asked my partner and he said "I would! If it's a Sprint tower I would get better signal"

[MADem]

5. I have a travelling relative who relies heavily on the cellphone, who would agree! nt

[yeoman6987]

27. Great signal

That would be nice. I swear I have a hard time IN the house…..the minute I walk out the door and everywhere else it is perfect and no cut calls. I would consider having a tower for sure. I have two acres and would allow them to put in on my property (yep desperation. lol). However, if it adds various antennas on it, that would be bad. Not to worry though, my HOA would NEVER allow such a thing.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

3. I wouldn't.

I would try, going in, to minimize negative features I couldn't change later. Location, neighborhood and ugly neighbors like cell towers are things you can't change.

It would drive me bat-shit crazy when I went to sell and I would have to listen to the realtor feedback "They liked your house but don't want to live near a cell tower"

[ohheckyeah]

6. My husband's cousin

let one of the big companies, I don't know which, put a cell tower on her property. She gets a substantial monthly check for it. So, I might consider it if I was getting paid. Otherwise, no, not if it was cluttering up my view.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

7. Some of them are made to look like trees.

http://www.weather.com/travel/driving-scenic-drives/cell-towers-disguised-as-trees-20130506

[dembotoz]

8. in a small town can you see the water tower

cause that prob is a cell tower now too

when line of sight broad band was popular, being able to see the tower was a really good thing.
i remember business owners on the roof of their place looking to see if they could see the tower.

decent speeds for the time and lots cheaper than a t1

[lumberjack_jeff]

9. My bigger problem is that I don't have cell service at my home.

So yeah, so long as I don't have to look straight up to see the tower, then yes.

[One_Life_To_Give]

10. Yes

Yes I would buy the house and yes I would try and negotiate a lower price. If the Cell Tower allowed me to do that then so be it.

The RF from the Cell Tower is not as strong as that from the phone strapped to my belt. Which in turn is less than the RF strength I routinely work around in my Electromagnetic Compatibility Lab at the office. Where I routinely test my companies products to verify they will not malfunction due to RF and Electrical Transients at power levels your cell phone can never reach.

[KoKo]

11. It depends on how cheap you can get it because of the Tower...

how long you think you want to live there....the other places you could buy that don't have the tower...and if it's so intrusive that you might find looking at it bothers you. If the Tower is an "eyesore" (so close to the property that it's across the street...that might be a problem for you and for future resale)

If you are thinking of making a profit out of it...then that depends on how long you expect to live there (if you LOVE THE HOUSE) and if you might think that Cell Towers will get smaller as innovation allows that...but that the property the Cell Tower is on might still be sold as "commercial" to something that's even more offensive,or not?

If you Love the House..and the Tower doesn't bother you just make sure you can imagine your next buyer's thoughts on negotiating with you about the Tower if it's still there.

If you plan on Renting it out...then it might be a good deal if it's a nice house and the location is good an the TOWER is far enough off that the renters wouldn't care because they might be only planning to stay for a couple of years.

Just Search "Zillow" or "Trulia" for the Address and State the house is in to find what it sold for in the past and the info on all of it. I find "Trulia" easier to use ...but, both sites are good for info on the Address of any Property in US...for great info about the location and Past History of sales of the property.

BTW: If you enter the address of the Property in any "Search Engine" (Google, Duck Duck, Yahoo) it should immediately come up on Zillow or Trulia Real Estate Sites...(if you want easy)

I hope this helps.

[marions ghost]

13. Thanks Koko

for the good suggestions--and those websites for info about a specific location, which I didn't know about.

I'm not really thinking of making a profit--but I don't want to lose... (which happened to my sister for another reason, but I am sensitized...)

Re. "imagining the next buyer's thoughts"...this seems to be what happened in Atlanta:

http://www.getthecelloutatl.com/2012/08/yes-cell-tower-will-lower-property.html

[KoKo]

16. Having moved up and down East Coast ..."Imagining the Next Buyers Thoughts"

are in "Interesting Times" these days. The South has changed and those who came here "older" looking for something are dying off. And the South was an Engine for Growth under Clinton and through Bush.

There's some "stuff" going on...makes me wonder these days.

I'd just be cautious...which you seem to be or you wouldn't have asked for opinions.

[marions ghost]

21. Yes "interesting times" for sure...

Also the whole real estate situation< I've been told, has changed much since the crash especially.

I am trying to be cautious--yes.

[ScreamingMeemie]

12. I would rather buy in sight of a cell tower than in sight of a church/school/other bedroom community

type gathering place.

Appraiser checking in, and nothing killed values in my areas than those items.

[marions ghost]

14. Thanks appraiser

That does surprise me--that a church or school would be such a negative...just to be in sight of one wouldn't bother me...

[ScreamingMeemie]

25. It's the parking issues and the noise.

It's gets very congested when you have schools or churches in the middle of neighborhoods.

[Art_from_Ark]

38. Being close to schools was precisely why my folks bought our house

Three-minute walk to the elementary school, one-minute walk to the high school, 5-minute bicycle ride to the junior high. Perfect location for a family with school-age children.

[arely staircase]

15. they could put one in m y backyard nt

[etherealtruth]

17. What is "within site"?

The view shed of a telecommunications tower could be a mile ...?

It really depends what you mean by "within site"

[marions ghost]

19. I guess

it might depend on the buyer, and the views in question. If the view is across open natural landscape (in other words you are paying for the view) vs. in a built up environment, where the view is not as long.

Good point. The view and perception of the neighborhood environs could extend as far as a mile...

So, for the purpose of this, let's say if visible within a mile or less = "within sight"

Thanks

[KoKo]

23. Poster might be cautioning if the "Graveyard of Church" is within your view...

lol's. Truly most of us might find "view of the church graveyard" somewhat "offputting" even if it was beautifully landscaped.

School problems are the Traffic. People picking up the kids from school when young or the late teens with drivers licenses clogging up the road and the school bus traffic.

But...I'd have no problem with view of church from the direction that was "pleasant" and it might be a selling point in the South with the turn to the Right of the Religious here.

's (I was trying to be funnily cautious)

[Blue_In_AK]

18. I've lived here since 1990

and the cell tower came to me last year, not vice versa. It's on the corner; we live in the middle of the block so can't really see it from here unless we go out in the middle of the street. It doesn't bother me. They painted it green so it kind of blends in with the trees that surround it.

[XRubicon]

20. I have one on my building

Our association voted to allow AT&T put cell antennas on our roof. They painted them to match and most people don't notice them. We collect rent and it goes to reduced dues. I have a good signal at home...

In your case if it is not well disguised I would definitely deduct/negotiate it, always think of selling when you buy.

[mtnester]

22. If it was down the road, yes, if it was next door no.

Nor would I buy one anywhere near these:



Too many childhood friends that lived at, under or near a mega power transmission line that got cancers in their teens and early 20's...the lymphoma type cancers. WAY too many.

We have been actively house hunting since late summer, and I look online to see if a home is near one of these before we even consider calling for a showing.

I cannot prove or disprove property values, but it affects our decision on what we will,. and won't, buy now.

[KoKo]

24. Yeah...those are not good at all. Agree! (some experience with friend's child

with cancer and nobody else in family had history...but, they moved there when she was an infant close to those Power Lines...and at 4 years old she came down with leukemia.....

Who knows...but, I'd stay away from those big power lines.

[WinkyDink]

26. No, I wouldn't.

[GP6971]

28. Nope. n/t

[ileus]

29. Only if it belonged to my service provider.

[WCIL]

30. We have one across the street

We moved in in 1991, the tower arrived in 2010(?). It can be used as a flagpole, and the parochial school across the street uses it as such. I wouldn't know it was a cell tower if I hadn't attended the informational meetings about it.

[RKP5637]

31. At least it's not this!

Telephone wires over New York, 1887.

[flamingdem]

32. Some are disguised as trees

or otherwise hidden, best to consult maps but they may not be up to date.

I think the fall off is rapid so it depends on distance.

[pipi_k]

33. I guess it would depend

On what the tower looked like

Out here in the woods there are a couple of cell towers (one about 3/4of a mile down the hill from me) that are disguised to look like very tall pine trees

They are recent additions to the landscape, but I don't care because before they were put up there was no cell service to speak of out here

[840high]

34. I would not.

[snooper2]

35. Why not? I can see the tornado siren/speaker when the leaves are gone

people see water towers


I'd rather my house be backed up to a cell tower than bad neighbors It's like free land/space

[Historic NY]

36. No, not when the cell phone companies wrote the telecommunications bill...

for congress to approve.

[marions ghost]

39. I think you're right. Looked up this bill

--found this article-- I am thinking that homeowners have no rights in this...

http://www.law.berkeley.edu/journals/btlj/articles/vol12/Martin/html/text.html

"Congress clearly intended for the 1996 Act to limit state and local regulation of the telecommunications industry.90 The idea was to eliminate regulatory barriers to promote competition in the industry in order to encourage technological advancement and to give consumers choices.91 In its zeal to accomplish these goals, however, Congress neglected to sufficiently consider the interests of local residents, other than the interests they have as consumers of telecommunications services, and the advantages given to the industry vis-�-vis citizens.92 To rectify this oversight, Congress should amend the Telecommunications Act in four specific ways.

First, the Act should clarify the conditions of mobile communications services that state and local governments can regulate. These conditions should include the siting of facilities and the specific form that the facilities take, although the regulations should not result in the barring of service in the area. It is reasonable for people to be concerned about the effects of proximity to cellular phone towers on health, their property values, and the aesthetics of a home's landscape. It is unfair to dismiss these interests as merely symptoms of the "not-in-my-backyard" (NIMBY) syndrome and, therefore, interests to be ignored when the proliferation of cellular phone sites is at stake. In fact, there is nothing in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 that encourages telecommunications companies to take these interests into consideration in siting their facilities.

Second, Congress should require service providers to include substantial evidence that they are requesting siting permits for the least intrusive facilities available in the least intrusive locations under the circumstances. Such a requirement, in addition to addressing some of the concerns of local residents, would promote the congressional goals of advancing technology and encouraging competition. There are many ways of making communications facilities less intrusive-hiding antennas is one93-but they may be more expensive than the installation of a traditional 200 or 300-foot tower.94 For example, microcells do not have the same height and power requirements as macrocells, but a larger number of the microcells are needed to provide widespread coverage.95 Microcells do not have to be located on high towers; they can be installed in church steeples, on rooftops, and even inside offices where they would not be noticed.96 They can be attached to utility poles and lamp posts with cables running down to equipment located in underground shelters.97 There are also coverage enhancer systems that can reduce the number of necessary towers by one third to one half depending on the terrain.98

Third, the Act should allow state and local governments to rely on scientifically objective evidence of the health risks associated with electromagnetic fields when making decisions regarding the siting of communications towers and antennas. There are clear advantages to having a national policy on telecommunications. Nevertheless, because there are such wide disparities within the worldwide scientific community about the effects of electromagnetic fields (even at low levels) on human health, it should be up to local communities to decide how much risk they are willing to undertake.

Finally, the Act discourages study and planning with its "prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services" and "within a reasonable period of time" language.99 This language should be clarified to allow a realistic amount of time for communities to plan for the best use of their resources. For example, companies can be required by zoning boards to share sites (known as co-location)100 in an effort to reduce the number of towers, but for a local government to be able to create such requirements supported by substantial evidence, however, it would need the time to study and formulate an all-encompassing plan for the community and potential permit applicants. Current language does not, of course, prohibit planning, but it encourages service providers to commence court actions when a permitting agency does not expeditiously grant a permit application."

(more at link)

[Historic NY]

41. Exactly I am one person with a local position that can attack ..

a towers placement via form 620 because of historic or historical preservation impacts. I am fortune to have a partner in assessment issues hired by the cell phone companies. A historic district does not have to be on the nation register either...I've been successful due to "historic vista/vistas" and placement. One has to be one their A Game when dealing with this. I never let one go without some written opinion...I question them all. The companies get siting and easement by providing around 33k in blood money to a landowner/ One needs to know the specifications and tower size and lengths, set back must conform to height...Companies will give there BS about tilt and testing,,,my standard question when and if the tower comes donwn on an adjoining structure your covered for full replacement...I then ask the landowner if he is. Cell phone radiation testing is another BS thing companies spout...once a tower is approved no matter what else goes up of it the radiation increases only the initial testing counts.

[nilesobek]

37. The cell towers look like those towers used to spy on people

in the movie, "Fahrenheit 451."

[hobbit709]

40. If your cell phone works, you're in line of sight of a tower.