SPRINGFIELD — A representative from the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation, Bob Kuhn, spoke at a meeting of the Springfield planning board last Thursday night to tell citizens that the creation of a historic district would not affect landowners' rights to make changes to their property.

"We're not in the business of trying to freeze time or stop projects," said Kuhn. "We're trying to make sure the impacts of a project are taken into account."

He also said his organization does not have much power. Several in the audience questioned this because cell tower companies beat a hasty retreat from Springfield after receiving word from the FCC that the Preservation Office found that the towers would have overlooked historic sites.

"Here's how it works," said planning board chairman Jim Willsey after the meeting, "when a cell tower company wants to put a tower in, they apply to the FCC, who then turns around and gets in touch with the [Preservation Office]."

The erection of cell towers in the town was a hot subject after the Springfield site plan review law was adopted in December of 2000 and three companies, American Towers, Crown Atlantic and SBA came before the planning board with project proposals.

American Towers planned to put one of their towers on the Richard Daley's Texas Road property, but the Preservation Office turned the project down because the tower would have overlooked "historic Springfield Center," Willsey said. The company had another tower slated for Briar Hill Road, but that one would have overlooked historic Hyde Hall and was also turned down.

The SBA tower, similarly overlooking Hyde Hall, met with the same rejection.

Crown Atlantic proposed a tower for Doc McShane Road, and after several planning board meetings at which discussions sometimes grew heated between company attorney Scott Olson and the Springfield planning board, the project was passed. Willsey said the company hasn't since shown much enthusiasm about following through.

Olson said his client is still interested in the site.

"They come in selling snake oil and we're the ones who get left behind holding the bag, with bad feelings," Daley said. He said he had planned to send one of his children to private school with the profits he hoped to reap from the arrangement. "You say that you have no power, that you're just an advisory, you have more power than you're letting on. Nobody came to me. You don't care. You might personally care. You've got too much power and you're not even admitting it."

Planning board member Dan Rosen said that the findings of the Preservation Office were based largely on an "improper topographic map." Rosen said the planning board attempted to contact Kuhn's office, but were met with no response. Planning board member Ann Murphy said Springfield needs towers and this need overrides the value of some of the of the historic properties towers might overlook.

Kuhn said his office would revisit rejections stemming from the use of erroneous maps, but was told by members of the audience and planning board that the cell tower companies had stopped exhibiting interest.

"Practically any place around here would overlook a scenic or historic site," said Willsey, "yet we need towers."

Those letters, Kuhn said, were not meant to "flat out deny those projects."

The FCC is one of many federal and state organizations that must appeal first to the Preservation Office before passing a project, Kuhn said, but still, "the law doesn't really have teeth because we can't dictate to other agencies, we can only make recommendations."

Olson said that when he was preparing the paperwork for the FCC, separate paperwork was required for the Preservation Office.

"Construction of a new tower requires contact," Olson said. "They have power."

There are very few circumstances under which the FCC will grant permission when the Preservation Office has a problem with the project, Olson said.

Kuhn, who pledged to be more communicative with the Springfield planning board in the future when making decisions, was introduced by George Rutler, president of the Springfield Historical Association. Rutler has been instrumental in trying to create support for a historic district in Springfield. Rutler said he had invited Kuhn to correct some of the misperceptions about the Preservation Office's restrictions for homes and businesses on the historic register.

Kuhn ran down the merits of inclusion, such as eligibility for state grants if a property is included in the register. While state support has been strong in the past, he said that September 11 has resulted in a complete depletion of funds. Kuhn said that since the application process is lengthy and the support could be reinstated at any time, that shouldn't concern applicants.

Additionally, he said that the Preservation Office would contact all property owners if public enthusiasm indicated that the time was right to look into creating a historic district.

"We're not going to proceed until we're pretty sure most people support it," Kuhn said.

Kuhn said that unless a federal or state permit is required for changes to a property, there are no restrictions.

"You can paint, decorate or demolish your property," Kuhn said. "It's not the designation that comes with restrictions. It's the government involvement that creates restrictions."