Controversy brews as Verizon plans 80-foot cell tower in Fresno’s Tower District

The Tower District is a community is known for rallying against projects it feels might undermine the vibe of the neighborhood.

In the late 1990s, it got no less than Starbucks to rethink how and where it would open in Fresno.

At one point, a developer got dosed with a bucket of water, such was the ire at the time.

More recently, the community vocally opposed the sale (and conversion) of the Tower Theatre (to Adventure Church) with a year’s worth of weekend protests that only ended when the city purchased the property.

It looks to have a new antagonist in Verizon wireless.

The company has plans for an 80-foot communications tower at Van Ness and Olive avenues — within sight line of the district’s namesake theater and its signature neon tower (which also stands at 80 feet). According to plans, the Verizon tower will go up at the southwest corner of the intersection, on .23 acres of empty lot adjacent to the Granville housing complex the District and Cuca’s restaurant.

Renderings presented to the Tower District Design Review Committee earlier this month show the tower as a clearly visible part of the skyline. On it, signage reads: ”Welcome to the Tower District.”

Earlier this month, Tower District community groups began circulating a neighborhood notice and soliciting comments against the plans. The notification, dated Dec. 3, was sent to anyone who owns or occupies property within 1,000 feet of the project, per the conditional use permit requirements.

The deadline for comment to the planning department was Dec. 15. According to the city, it received 35 responses; more than typical for such notices. Of those, 11 requested to receive a notice of action, alerting them to a final 15-day appeal period.

Still, news of the plans hasn’t been exactly widespread.

“I think a lot of people still don’t know about it,” says Tower District Business Association executive director Cami Cipolla. She was first alerted to the project early last week by the arts advocacy group the Fools Collaborative and was later briefed on it during an association meeting.

“We kind of got blindsided by this.”

The project was presented to the Tower District Design Review Committee in early December. After much debate, the committee recommended a retooling of the design of the tower and the lettering on the signage to better fit the art deco motif of the neighborhood.

The project should come back before the committee next month, according to City Councilmember Miguel Arias. It will then go before the District 3 Project Review Committee and the city’s Planning Committee. Ultimately, the planning director will either approve or deny the conditional use permit application, or refer the item to planning commission for a decision.

The plan will only come before the city council if it is appealed, either by the public, a council member or the mayor.

Even then, the city is limited on what it can do with these types of telecommunications projects, Arias says.

The city can, and has in the past, exerted some control over aesthetics. The original design of a Verizon tower just off Highway 41 had it disguised as a faux Ponderosa pine. The final design was changed to a red brick facade that officials felt would better blend into the area. But federal law dictates the city can’t halt or move a project based on location.

“It’s not like a billboard,” Arias says.

“The city doesn’t have the legal authority to simply say no.”

Improved cell service for the Tower District

And the tower is not without its benefits.

There is a dead zone in Tower District, Arias says. He often has to go outside to get service at his house, which is blocks away from the proposed tower site. According to planning documents, the new tower will improve service between existing towers at McKinley and Effie avenues, at Clinton and Fruit avenues and at Belmont and Van Ness avenues.

Maps show the expanded coverage area (marked in bright green) running from Olive Avenue south to Belmont and north to McKinley avenues, and from Van Ness Avenue east and west from Blackstone to Palm, respectively.

“It’s this weird context of modern infrastructure and how that fits with historic neighborhoods,” Kiel Lopez-Schmidt says of the tower and its controversy. A long-time community advocate and executive director of the South Tower Community Land Trust, he sees an opportunity to have the tower become a landmark thing.‘

“Aesthetically, I’d almost rather have a modern tower than a fake tree,” he says.

That’s what ended up on Belmont Avenue.

For Lopez-Schmidt, the reaction to Verizon’s plan actually begs larger questions about community engagement when it comes to things like the recently-adopted Tower District Specific Plan. “We missed the chance to have more impact there,” especially in terms of environment protections.

“There are very real things to get upset about in our neighborhood,” he says.

“Everyone has limited time in how they can engage with these kinds of things.”

While the community debates Verizon’s cell tower, he notes, it should also be asking why it’s being proposed on this particular empty lot. It sits on a highly desirable corner that should be ripe for mixed use or other development. But, “nobody is clamoring to build new buildings on these sites. Those things aren’t happening,” Lopez-Schmidt says.

“How can we influence the economy in our neighborhood to make that happen?”

This story was originally published December 17, 2025 at 12:56 PM.