BIDDEFORD — On July 1, the city council approved a contract zone to allow for the construction of a 140-foot cellular tower at 384 Hill St., to provide improved wireless service for AT&T in that area of town.

But those who oppose the new tower have started a petition drive to rescind the council decision.

The contract zone was needed because without it, the tower would not be allowed in that area of the city.

Petitioners are collecting signatures to get a referendum question on the Nov. 4 ballot, which reads, “Should the citizens of Biddeford overturn the decision of the city council to authorize a contract zone for the erection of a cell tower?”

They have 30 calendar days to collect the necessary 2,035 signatures, and must file them with the city clerk’s office by Aug. 28.

Despite the possibility of this question being posed on the November ballot, Louis Vitali, president of Mariner Tower, the company which sought the contract zone, said, “We have all our approvals. We’re going to build the tower.”

He declined to comment on whether the company would seek legal action if the question were approved by voters. City attorney Keith Jacques was not available for comment as of press time; it is unclear whether the city would be vulnerable to such litigation if the ballot question were approved.

Frank and Nancy Nadeau Novotny wrote a letter to the editor of the Journal Tribune saying they are seeking the assistance of Biddeford voters to get signatures on the petition “to prevent a cell tower from being built near a residential area and three schools.”

Frank Novotny was one of several people who has spoken publicly before the planning board and city council about his opposition to the tower. Novotny, who lives near the tower site, has said his main concern is the health risks posed by radiation that would be emitted by the tower.

At a city council meeting in June, he said he was concerned about the health effects of radio frequency, or RF, energy that would be released by wireless carriers that would locate on the tower.

“This radiation is deadly to humans, animals and plants,” said Novotny.

At the June meeting, his wife, Nancy Nadeau Novotny, who is an elementary school teacher, raised a concern about the proposed tower site being only 2,500 feet from public schools. That’s too close, she said.

“I’m very concerned about the children,” she said. “A tower that close is really detrimental to health.”

The effect on residential property values was a concern raised by others.

In June, Rev. Derek White told the city council he isn’t against cellular towers in general, but he is concerned that the one to be built on Hill Street, which is near his home, will have a negative impact on his and his neighbors’ property values. Realtors have already taken notice, he said.

In June, Christopher Ciolfi, the chief development officer for Mariner Tower said, “The need for this facility is driven by consumer demand.”

He also referred to reports refuting some of the residents’ concerns. A report conducted by an independent third party, but paid for by the applicant, concluded that the RF energy that will be emitted by proposed placement on the tower would be below the maximum permissible exposure level, as set by the Federal Communications Commission.

One public benefit from allowing the contract zone includes the ability of the city to install whip antennae on top of the tower for use by the public safety and public works departments. Other public benefits include that the 14-acre lot purchased by the applicant was to be sold to the city for $1, and the applicant would build a road, compliant with city standards, and install underground utilities, except water and sewer, to the site.

The applicant would be granted an easement to a 100,000-square-foot area on the site for the placement of the tower; the remainder of the property could be used by the city for yet-to-be determined projects.

— Staff Writer Dina Mendros can be contacted at 282-1535, ext. 324 or dmendros@journaltribune.com.