U.S. District Court Judge Jon Levy ruled Wednesday that the town of Cape Elizabeth erred in March 2014 when it denied Verizon Wireless a permit to install wireless antennas on an existing water tower.

Levy also decided to uphold the town’s claim that Verizon’s permit application was not subject to the federal Spectrum Act, which requires municipalities to approve requests for installing equipment on existing structures.

Verizon Wireless filed a lawsuit against the town in U.S. District Court July 2014 after the town’s Zoning Board decided in May to uphold an earlier decision by the code enforcement officer to deny Verizon a permit to install antennas atop a decommissioned water tower on Avon Road.

Code Enforcement Officer Ben McDougal determined that the structure did not fit the town’s definition of an “alternative tower structure” or meet other requirements in the town’s zoning ordinance.

In its lawsuit Verizon claimed that the town’s Zoning Board violated the federal Spectrum Act and the town’s zoning ordinance when it did not approve the permit application.

Levy decided Wednesday that the 70-year-old water tower, which is owned by the Portland Water District and has not been used for water storage since 2007, is in fact an alternative tower structure, according to attorney Scott Anderson of Portland law firm Verrill Dana who represents Verizon Wireless.

In the judge’s motion, Levy said, “the Spectrum Act does not apply to the proposal because the proposal does not qualify as an ‘eligible facilities request.’ Therefore, the act does not mandate that the town approve Verizon’s permit request.”

Levy also concluded that the town’s zoning ordinance permits the installation of wireless antennas at the Avon Road site.

In an email to Town Manager Mike McGovern Thursday McDougal said after he spoke with the town’s attorney, John J. Wall of Portland law firm Monaghan Leahy, he learned that the town could either refer Verizon’s application to the Planning Board for site plan review and to issue a building permit or appeal the court’s decision.

Comments are no longer available on this story