This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Community Corner

Cell Phone Antennas on Albany's 1st Green restaurant: Conflict of Interest Involved?

 

There has been new controversy regarding AT&T’s recent cell antenna applications and approvals and hopefully Albany’s city council will review the recent approval by Planning and Zoning commission of antennas at the Sunnyside Café before that decision becomes final.

AT&T has recently obtained approval to put up cell antennas on 1035 San Pablo, and on top of the Sunnyside Café (Albany’s first green restaurant, http://www.thesunnysidecafe.com) and the Oaks Theater on Solano Ave. in Berkeley, a few blocks from the Sunnyside. In addition, AT&T is planning to request 5 sites in Albany even though the conflicting coverage map data they have submitted do not show why so many sites are needed.
Verizon by contrast, covers the small town of Albany (1 square mile) with 1 one site. Why would AT&T need so many more to do the same job?

Many questions were posed about the Sunnyside antennas by the city’s chosen cell technology expert, Mr. Gruchawka, a wireless siting consultant and site manager with 40 years experience. Unfortunately these questions have been unanswered so far. These included several missing attachments in AT&T’s application, and data regarding the antennas and coverage assumptions. AT&T refused to release the data to Mr. Gruchawka and insisted that the city instead retain a Licensed professional engineer (PE) to whom AT&T would release the data under a non-disclosure agreement (NDA).  The city hired RCC consulting for this purpose, and an RCC consultant, Mr. Preiser wrote the resulting report. 
However, there are two problems:

1.    There appears to be a conflict of interest in hiring RCC as a 3rd party consultant  because RCC also works for AT&T
2.    Mr. Preiser is not a licensed professional engineer, as AT&T required.

Find out what's happening in Albanywith free, real-time updates from Patch.


RCC has performed work for AT&T, including assisting in obtaining permits for cellular antennas and providing site design software:  http://www.rcc.com/resources/casestudies/CS-ATT-ElkoTower.shtml; http://www.rcc.com/comsite/comsitedesign.shtml

If AT&T is RCC’s client, it seems likely that would discourage RCC consultants from issuing a contrary opinion to AT&T, which could jeopardize their ongoing business relationship with AT&T.  This makes RCC not an independent 3rd party review as required by city code; 20.20.100E2f “ the community development director may require an independent, third-party review, at the expense of the project sponsor, to identify potential impacts on the surrounding area, to confirm the radio frequency needs of the project sponsor and to identify potential alternative solutions”.

Furthermore, Mr. Preiser is not a professional engineer as demanded by AT&T.  When Mr. Preiser’s credentials were questioned, the response was that Mr. Preiser worked with a licensed PE in preparing his report.  However, AT&T insisted that the data for the report be provided to an engineer under an NDA. Either the NDA was violated, or Mr. Preiser wrote a report without having been disclosed the info. Either way, the report is insufficient because it does not answer the questions Mr. Gruchawka had raised.

Mr. Preiser and RCC also provided the so called ”independent” reviews for the 1035 San Pablo AT&T and the Oaks Theatre site, All this information raises questions about the city’s decision on 1035 San Pablo as well.

Of course there are other concerns regarding long term exposure to cell antenna radiation.  Several studies are ongoing to prove, that long term cell antenna radiation can cause higher occurrence of cancer in the surrounding areas.  However federal regulations prohibit cities from considering health impacts when approving or denying cell antenna permits. 

This new information and the Planning Commission taking a final vote on the site despite all the information provided above is very disturbing.  As an Albany resident I have a right to expect that the city will abide by its code and complete their independent reviews appropriately.  I want the city to get its legitimate questions answered and to make proper decisions without being influenced by unreasonable demands or threat of lawsuits from AT&T.  I expect the city to obtain a proper independent review, which should answer the myriad of questions posed by Mr. Gruchawka, the city’s chosen consultant.

 

Find out what's happening in Albanywith free, real-time updates from Patch.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?