AT&T wants a cell tower on city-owned land at 43 Cape Henlopen Drive, beside the Cape May-Lewes Ferry terminal, and it is selling the project as coverage for people crossing Delaware Bay rather than as a neighborhood amenity.
The Planning Commission recommended approval on Oct. 21. WHYY reported the recommendation and the company's case for the site.
A Monopole on City Land
The address sits next to the ferry terminal in an area CoastTV said city documents identify as a Marine Commercial district. The City of Lewes owns the parcel. It is leased to the Delaware River and Bay Authority, which runs the ferry that carries travelers across the bay and, by the account in WHYY's reporting, more than 250,000 people a year into Lewes.
WHYY described the proposal as a nearly 90-foot tower that would rise 86 feet out of a fenced compound measuring 35 by 45 feet. The structure would be a monopole with a lightning rod and nine panel-style antennas, plus a diesel generator meant as backup for emergency communications. CoastTV, covering the same proposal, called it a roughly 80-foot tower near the terminal entrance. Those height descriptions do not match, and neither outlet's figure should be treated as the other's.
The Lewes code includes an application process for small-cell facilities.
The Coverage Case, and the Towers Already Nearby
AT&T representative Christopher Shubert told the Planning Commission the goal is to fill gaps in coverage for people using the ferry. The application called the facility the least intrusive means of solving what it described as a significant gap. City documents cited by CoastTV framed the same problem as heavy demand for cellular service in the area.
Shubert also walked through why AT&T says the new pole is not optional. He identified three tall structures or towers within two miles. The Pilots' Association for the Bay and River Delaware station tower is more than 100 feet tall and already used by two competitors; Shubert said it could not take another antenna array without major reconstruction. He said the Delaware River and Bay Authority police tower could not support AT&T's array either. Antennas on the historic World War II watch tower across the street did not get approval from the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, he said.
Small cells and smaller antennas were considered, Shubert said, and rejected as inefficient for the annual visitor load.
A Clock That Started in August
The application went in during August. A site development plan was reviewed in September. On Oct. 21 the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that council approve it. Council reviewed and discussed the proposal on Nov. 9.
Federal law, as described in the reporting on the application, gives governing boards 150 days to act on a telecommunications application. Resident Ric Moore, in a four-page comment opposing the tower, said Lewes missed the 30-day window to ask for a pause in that schedule. He also said the city could still ask AT&T to voluntarily extend the timeline, or it could deny the project.
Moore said the city could ask AT&T for a voluntary extension or deny the project.
Floodplain Equipment and a Bond the Code Already Requires
Shubert said the equipment would sit about three feet off the ground because the property is in a floodplain zone. Moore said the submitted documents do not outline the flood-hazard mitigation protocols he contends city code requires for a coastal floodplain site. The ordinance itself says a wireless proposal in a floodplain, a historic district, or another regulated area may also face other review procedures. It does not, by itself, settle whether this packet meets them.
The applicant is expected to complete state and federal environmental assessments. Mayor Amy Marasco said she wants more of that environmental information, and she also wants to know where any tower revenue would go: the city that owns the land, or the authority that leases it and runs the ferry.
If a tower is approved, the code requires the operator to post a performance bond equal to 150 percent of the cost of removing the pole and equipment. That is a removal guarantee written into the ordinance, not a finding that this application has already satisfied it. Council member Trina Brown-Hicks put a plainer question on the table: how the tower would benefit the city, not only the boats and the passengers whose phones drop on the crossing.
Moore's objection goes to that split. He said the antennas would send signal across the bay toward the ferry boats and would not improve communications for Lewes Beach residents. AT&T's stated purpose and Moore's reading of who gets the signal are not the same claim.
Seventy Signatures Oppose the Tower
The Lewes Citizen Action Committee opposes the tower and is asking council to deny the application. Member Kerry Tripp said the group had about 70 petition signatures as of Tuesday, and that it has been in touch with homeowners associations and residents who do not want a waterfront tower. The objections she described are size, location, appearance, and possible effects on property values, plus a request for more information and public input before a decision.
