of their house going, “What’s this???”
– Gay Outlaw, resident, 100 block of 27th Avenue
You may or may not have noticed the new wireless antennas that are being attached to utility poles all over the Richmond District and other city neighborhoods. They’re part of an effort by cell phone carriers to improve wireless reception for their customers.
Back in December 2010, residents on the 100 block of 27th Avenue looked on curiously as trucks arrived and began attaching large metal boxes containing electronic equipment to streetlight and utility poles. Crews were sometimes on site until 10pm or working through driving rain.
Jeff and Nicole Cooper were particularly distressed by it. The new boxes were right outside their living room window and from their upstairs bedroom windows, another piece of equipment was suddenly impeding their view of the ocean. During quiet moments, they could hear the hum of the equipment’s fans from their living room.
Wondering why he had not been notified of the installation, Cooper began to dig through city records. He discovered that a permit had been submitted against his address at 156 27th Avenue in September, and that it had been approved by the city.
The approved permit enabled NextG Wireless to install equipment as part of their Distributed Antenna System (“DAS”). NextG’s services are utilized by major cell phone carriers like AT&T, Sprint and Verizon to help provide coverage in “dead spots” in their network.
Since the equipment was so large, it required two poles to house it. So another permit was approved for a location across the street at 161 27th Avenue; that homeowner was also not notified. “There was no outreach,” Cooper said.
Plenty of antennas, not enough oversight
The NextG wireless antennas are being installed all over the city. Since 2008, the city of San Francisco has approved 342 wireless permits (interactive map), many of them by one DPW employee named Rassendyll Dennis. In 2010 he alone approved 152 permits. Since September 2010, 28 have been approved just for locations in the Richmond District.
The installations could hardly be called quality craftsmanship. In the case of 27th Avenue and many sites around the city, a large 4×4 wood extender was bolted onto the top of an existing pole, upon which the antenna sits. It looks like something a high school student would have cobbled together in carpentry class.
Further down the pole, about 7 feet above the sidewalk, is a series of brown, metal boxes whose fans hum occasionally. All of this is on a pole that was originally designed to hold one street lamp.
Follow a heavy, overhead black wire across the street and you’ll run into another pole in front of 161 27th Avenue where there’s a large white box and more brown boxes packed onto an already crowded pole. The equipment on 27th Avenue are antennas for AT&T; on other blocks you may find multiple antennas for several different carriers.
There are also no physical inspections required for the installation jobs. NextG’s contractors are only required to submit photos of the finished job to DPW. Considering one man is approving all the permits, it’s safe to say the city is probably under-resourced to effectively inspect the actual work.
The equipment on the utility pole outside 161 27th Avenue.
Residents find it hard to complain; the Board of Supervisors respond
The Coopers and their 27th Avenue neighbors are not the first to complain about the visual blight that the antennas present, but they’re one of only two groups to file an appeal. This is largely due to a 15 day complaint period that is allowed by law after a permit has been approved. Since neighbors are never notified of the permit applications, they don’t know to complain and miss their opportunity.
The Board of Supervisors did act on the complaints. In reaction to the wireless antenna installation frenzy, Supervisor John Avalos introduced and passed legislation in late 2010 that puts tighter restrictions on the placement of the antennas and the permit approval process. Many believe that is why NextG was in such a hurry at the end of 2010, applying for as many permits as possible before the more stringent guidelines took effect in early 2011.
Richmond District Supervisor Eric Mar also commented on the issue last year. “The lack of public notice and lack of community input into the process is outrageous,” Mar said. “We need stronger protections, not only [to] raise issue of safety, but also aesthetics and whether these boxes on utility poles are necessary and desirable…it is a process that should be a community one from the local level, in my opinion.”
In addition to requiring that advance notice be made to residents during the permit process, the Avalos legislation provides guidance with respect to the wireless equipment by creating a tier system from I to III, with tier III being the largest installations. The law specifically states that permits for Tier III-B equipment – which is what was installed on 27th Avenue – cannot be approved without Planning Department review.
The brown equipment boxes are right outside the Cooper’s living room windows.
Other cities have also wrestled with this issue. In Massapequa, Long Island, the village board negotiated with NextG to get them to install a smaller, slimmed down version of the wireless antennas in their township. Hempstead, New York also fought back against the installations but was less successful – their suit against NextG was dismissed in federal court.
27th Avenue residents will appeal, claiming permits should not have been approved
Permit submission and approval by the DPW is routine. Maybe too routine because in the case of the antenna permits for 27th Avenue, the DPW made an error.
According to the San Francisco General Plan, that block of 27th Avenue has a street view rating of “Good”. This means it’s a protected street and as a result, DPW does not have the authority to approve permits for work that may impede on that view without Planning Department review.
Between the error made in overlooking the block’s protected status and the new guidelines put in place by Avalos’ legislation, the permits for the DAS installations most likely would not have been approved in the first place. Even more likely is that NextG would not have selected their block for a DAS installation.
It’s under these claims that Jeff Cooper and his 27th Avenue neighbors will make their appeal to the Planning Department on March 16th (5PM at City Hall Room 416), where they’ll request that the permits be revoked and the installations removed. Helping their efforts is the fact that the Avalos legislation is also retroactive, which means that some boxes that were installed prior to its passing – like the 27th Avenue antennas – may have to be removed if they did not meet guidelines.
As Cooper points out in his appeal, NextG could install smaller, slimmer boxes instead of the large ones that were placed on 27th Avenue. NextG features many of them on their own website.
Since they gained their right to appeal, 27th Avenue residents have prevented NextG contractors from coming back to work on the equipment. Neighbors were told by NextG that the AT&T antenna is not yet operational, though this writer was seeing a strong 5 bars on her AT&T-powered iPhone while visiting with the Coopers. That’s a rarity in the Richmond District.
“It’s not that we’re against better cell phone coverage but we need better guidelines than this,” Nicole Cooper said. “They should have to go through the approval process again.”
Neighbor Gay Outlaw adds, “It isn’t that we think cell coverage should be invisibly provided or not in our front yard. But why isn’t the city making sure they’re sharing equipment so it’s minimized and that they’re putting in more aesthetically pleasing equipment?”
Sarah B.
Jeff Cooper stands under the antenna equipment on the pole outside his house. Courtesy of Jeff Cooper. More photos
A contractor installs the antenna atop a pole outside 156 27th Avenue.
Taken from a neighbor’s home across the street. Courtesy of Jeff Cooper.
Another wireless antenna at 23rd Avenue and California.
‘Neighbor Gay Outlaw adds, “It isn’t that we think cell coverage should be invisibly provided or not in our front yard. But why isn’t the city making sure they’re sharing equipment so it’s minimized and that they’re putting in more aesthetically pleasing equipment?”’
Unfortunately, this is something that really needs to be done at the national level, not the city level. Wireless carriers aren’t going to share equipment for just one city, and there’s been no effort to force this kind of sharing on a national level, as exists everywhere else in the world – it’s part of the reason that we only have 4-6 cell providers in most areas, and much, MUCH higher prices for cell service compared to every other developed country in the world. I’ve got a friend living in Denmark that recently had to choose from more than 100 wireless providers, yet you rarely see any wireless infrastructure in cities there, because sharing of infrastructure is forced.
Forcing shared infrastructure is an excellent idea. Meanwhile, I encourage everyone who can make it to the March 16 meeting to show up and support our neighbors and protect our neighborhood. Also, contact Supervisor Mar’s office. The more people he hears from the more likely it is he’ll help us.
Thank you for publishing this piece. It is great to create awareness. We are trying to challenge organizations like NextG to engage with the community and better streamline their equipment. Otherwise, they won’t and we will all need to live with the results for years to come. Currently, it has been a free for all and the city does not have the resources to ensure that these corporations are acting in our best interests. Many thanks for helping to create awareness.
It is very distressing that they are not required to do neighborhood outreach. Thanks for sharing this with us!
Don’t ADA clearance rules apply to these boxes? Anything under 80″ cannot protrude from a wall or pole by more than 4″. Maybe some ammo for Mr. Cooper….or maybe he’s just super tall?
This is just the beginning of uncontrolled, deregulated, competitive wireless transmission and is part of the corporate frenzy to profit by cutting-the-cable on every device to feed consumers’ alleged hunger to be untethered.
The FCC was evidently taken by storm and apparently approve every corporate wireless permit. There’s little or no public input on wireless matters and companies install wireless devices and antennas en masse unannounced while people are at work. The so-called Smart Meters is part of this effort and PGE is installing wireless meters and antennas in the Richmond as you read this with no objections. Go outside and see the Wellington trucks parked in front on your home. http://stopsmartmeters.org/
Wireless has gone insane and it is tough to stop this madness once devices and antennas are installed. Companies such as PGE like to focus on sleepy neighborhoods such as the Marina and Richmond because people and Mar do not complain. Try doing that in the Mission or Bernal and the masses will raise a fuss.
Too much uncontrolled autonomous wireless configurations are bad. Frequencies need to be shared and scrutinized. Useless wireless devices such as Smart Meters so dazzled geeks can see realtime electricity usage on their iPhone is trite. Few residents care to watch their electricity usage….it’s just another dumb, unnecessary gimmick that will result in PGE hikes and gives the company more control, e.g., turn off your power remotely.
If this wireless frenzy continues, we’ll see more devices and antennas everywhere. What’s next? Wireless dog collars? Wireless implants? Wireless parking meters? Wireless transmission of 110v AC? We already have Bluetooth, TV remotes, cell phones, GPS, HDTV, wifi, satellite radio, and the pre-internet radio, tv, wireless mics, CB, two-way, etc. Soon there will not be enough frequencies. If we could see wireless waves, we would always be in the dark and getting darker. Constant bombardment of increased radio waves poses a health hazard.
The major snafu is that the public does not protest or object to these installations. By being sneaky and evasive (such as PGE’s Smart Meter “outreach” at the YMCA instead of outside Safeway), the public is not just uninformed and misinformed, but feel these issues are unimportant. Change doesn’t transpire through complacency. Being informed, diligent and vigilant is key.
Hello all –
We own a home on 26th Avenue and had one installed right in front of our house. We live on a block with 2 daycares and a preschool and it still got approved. We’d very much like like to join the efforts in having these removed. How can I get in touch with someone? Sarah – help us connect. When I asked Mar’s office they gave me a very lame response and no info whatsoever.
Hi Cindy,
DPW approved 3 antennas on 26th Ave in the Richmond during September and October last year. That is almost one every other block…
http://www.batchgeo.com/map/569ba07186373cf94ee548ddcb22a0c0
I would be happy to talk to you and give you more info on our appeal and provide some thoughts on options available to you. I will reach out to Sarah offline. You can also contact Rassendyll Dennis at DPW (554-4683).
Take care,
Jeff
I certainly hope someone who has the desire to serve on the board of supervisors is watching all these opportunities that Mr. Mar is missing to connect with & serve the voters of his district…. and who will be voting for another choice when his term is up. I’m impressed by the Coopers who are working to make a difference. We all want decent cell coverage, but don’t need it to be so darned ugly!
The new cell towers are ugly, but if you take a step back for a minute, so too is the morass of overhead utility wires that infest the Richmond (except in some connected & astute areas, including Lake St. & Sutro Heights) which have may have benefited from private & PUBLIC ‘undergrounding’ funds. Why aren’t our Richmond supervisors, past & present, hounded the hell out of PG&E/Comcast/PUC to put all SF wires below ground in our lifetimes?
It reminds me of when I asked Newsom about his plan to deal with the Richmond’s overhead wire problem at a community meeting. He gave me some BS answer that he was preparing a plan to address the problem. I never heard another word about the issue in public or private. Shocking that a politician likely lied to me to get my vote.
While I don’t care for the wires, I would say the the cell phone towers are much more oppressive. It is smack dab outside my window and feels very close to my home. It is a very strange feeling.
There was an installation of the NextG boxes directly in front of my house at 758 48th Avenue. Both the white and brown boxes are directly outside my living room windows. I called Eric Mar’s office and complained to someone there who took the information and said he’d look into it. But I’ve heard nothing more.
I am happy to learn of the appeal by the Coopers and the residents of 27th Avenue. These boxes are larger than any of the older boxes on poles throughout the city and are really obtrusive. And obviously they are not necesary since there were none there before. Like Cindy, I would like very much to support the effort to get these things removed. I will call the DPW number tomorrow.
There has got to be a less obtrusive way to have boxes for cellular signals. However, we live in a city that has the worst reception I’ve ever seen so there definitely does need to be more done to address the signals in the area.
To the person asking how the boxes were approved on a street with two daycares and a preschool I’m not sure that that has to do with anything unless the children find the boxes to be an eye sore as well.
Jim L, it won’t help much to call your supervisor, although I guess the legislative assistant can help you with suggestions of who to call with your questions. I think unfortunately the burden falls on those of us who would like to speak out and try to get the individual permits revoked. There is a very helpful website– go to http://www.antennafreeunion.org/ and send an email to them. You’ll get some help. Perhaps new ways of challenging these things will emerge. Otherwise, you are stuck with it for two years, until NextG has to renew their permit.
“Meanwhile, I encourage everyone who can make it to the March 16 meeting to show up and support our neighbors and protect our neighborhood.”
Does anyone know where and what time this meeting will be held? I don’t see any helpful information on the Planning Department website.
Thanks so much.
The hearing is on March 16 at 5PM at City Hall Room 416.
Just posting a reminder on the hearing tomorrow before the Board of Appeals. All warm bodies welcome! If you want to educate yourself on this issue, it will be a great opportunity. Room 416, City Hall, starts at 5pm, but we aren’t likely to come up in the first half hour, perhaps even more. So if you can’t make it by 5, it will probably still be okay.
I, too, am a Richmond resident and am very concerned about the brown boxes that have recently been installed on our block and right in front of our house. I am glad to know that there are others are just as concerned about this issue, as I and would like to support the efforts in getting these boxes removed.
Jeff Cooper and neighbors: I hope to be there for the hearing and hope that it will be productive.
Unanswered question: Who owns the poles? Is it the City or the utilities?? Great job Jeff Cooper!
Please keep this in the news.
~Fay~
Richmond District Resident
Hi Jeff,
Thanks so much for starting the discussion on this and sharing your experiences. About 4 months ago one went up directly outside of my house, like yours, it’s visible from my front window & daughter’s bedroom. It’s ugly as heck but my concern lies in the unknowns regarding radiofrequency radiation and other bad side effects from living within 300-400 yards of these phone masts. When I questioned the workers they told me they were subcontracted by NexG who’s subcontracted by AT&T/Verizon. I worried because I’d never seen these antennas before, there was no permit, no communication with the neighbors and seemed to be zero oversight and the people dealing with installation were 3rd a party outfit! After they put the box up, the 3 party contractors came back and jack hammered our sidewalk with no warning, not even a knock on the door and tell me what they were doing. I’m like, this is my sidewalk, my husband poured this sidewalk, with a permit by the way, who the heck are you? I asked for identification & a contact number and was given some name of a NexG person who’s job it is to defray fears by saying there’s that these things do no harm. Says who? The PR person for NexG, not very scientific. So I’ve been looking to find out what I can do?
Based upon my experience, I’m pretty sure they didn’t have a permit from the city and it was put up illegally. Do you have a contact number or link to find out if a permit was pulled? I’m on the 400 block of 28th Ave in the Richmond District. Another scary thought is when the contractors were here they said that the poles work for a 3 mile radius, but you’re only 2 blocks and a few avenues away from me, why are there so many going up if the claim is they need less antennas because they’ve got better reach?
Any and all advise is greatly appreciated.
Best regards,
Delia
I encourage everone to read the attached article regarding cell phone radiation.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/new-health/andre-picard/the-big-cancer-risk-is-the-sun-not-the-cellphone/article2061908/
Hi,
Thank-you everyone for taking the time to consider wireless and wireless power in our city. Reasonable levels for healthy living must be maintained. This will take effort.
I have meters and measure the power in apartments and other areas and explain the levels and how to help protect from the RF power and what levels are of concern and how to minimize the exposure. You can email me at laurenpalm@earthlink.net
WHY ISN’T ANYONE BOTHERED BY THE HEALTH ISSUES OF WIRELESS ANTENNAS???
Many people are worried about it, but the wireless antennas cannot be rejected based on health concerns until the federal government determines that they are harmful. So far, they are not deemed harmful, and so no community can say they don’t want them just because they are worried about exposure to radiation or whatever. (That’s when they get sued.) They can, however, say that they don’t want them because they are ugly.
Good morning,
my name is Andrea, I am working as Industrial Designer for future wireless devices.
I am very much oriented to a humanistic approach towards technology, this is why I write to you.
I understand most of you in your neighbourhood and city are unhappy with the current situation.
This is why I´d be glad if you all would help me in my research: your comments have been very inspiring to me this morning and I´d be glad if you would provide me some further insights.
It seems to me that you are well aware of your connectivity needs and in some way recognize the need of wireless technology around you, which is good as gives us the possibility of a constructive dialogue here.
So what does look so wrong in these devices? Is it just about aesthetics or are you concerned about having them around? How do you feel about size, dimensions, colours?
what are your concerns related to these?
I have seen the picture of the brown box mounted on a tree? how do you react to that mimic attempt? what about how this boxes are mounted or connected to your neighbour furnishing?
what about cables?
It very much seems you feel at these things as intruders into your neighbourhood (totally agree).
So what´s around your neighbourhood that instead you like?
what other pieces of urban furniture you feel characteristic, you feel yours? you accept and like or simply tolerate better than these antennas?
Wow that´s a looot of questions!! just to inspire your thinking, free discussion here! 😀
I like to thank you very much in advance! Any contribution here will be very much appreciated!
Kind regards,
Andrea