Op-Ed: Cellphone Worries? Microcells Could Be the Answer

I am writing to support Peggy McQuaid’s suggestion in Albany Patch that we contact our members about Albany’s . 

Focusing on the ugly Verizon pole near San Pablo is an example of not being able see the forest for the trees (err, poles). The issue here is Albany’s absurd cell tower ordinance, not the ugliness or stability of one particular pole.

I have discussed this before on Albany Patch, see these following links and the comments for details:

I would like to suggest an interpretation of the existing cell tower ordinance that would allow the City Council to move forward in a practical way. You can find the ordinance on the city’s website. It is 20.20.100 Wireless Communication Facilities (attached here as a PDF). 

I would encourage the City Council to place special emphasis on section A.5, which allows antennas to be located according to “demonstrated need,” and encourages the use of smaller, less-obtrusive facilities such as “repeaters and microcell facilities.” 

Microcells and repeaters are low-power devices that allow you to use your cell phones in places like BART stations. They can be placed on existing utility poles in our neighborhoods. I think they would be perfect for Albany’s residential districts, where foliage and hills can block line-of-sight to remote base stations.

In addition, section D.1 of the cell tower ordinance states that no wireless facilities shall be permitted in any residential zone unless “substantial technical evidence” is submitted showing a “clear need” for this facility, and the infeasibility of locating it elsewhere. 

I think all these requirements are met by the amount of technical evolution and public health knowledge that has emerged since the cell tower ordinance was passed.

Public health officials in San Francisco and at UC Berkeley now warn us that there may be a link between cell phones and tumors of the brain, ear and salivary glands. They warn us that poor cell reception is not only an inconvenience, it is also a public health risk because cell phones are forced to put out more power when base stations are remote.

If a microcell is nearby in your neighborhood, your cell phone scales down its power, making it safer. This was not a feature of the older analogue and early digital phones that were common when the cell tower ordinance was passed.

Together, these facts meet the criteria for “substantial technical evidence” and “clear need.” The technical evidence shows that microcells are a good option for our neighborhoods, while there is a clear need for reducing the risks of using cell phones, especially for young people. 

It turns out the cell tower ordinance, bad as it is, is no impediment to moving forward. The City Council cannot hide behind it. A reasonable interpretation of the ordinance allows us to install microcells in our neighborhoods.

I am willing to support City Council candidates who take this reasonable solution to improving cell phone reception and making our cell phones safer to use.

Read more about mobile issues in Albany at http://albany.patch.com/topics/mobile.

Click the green "Keep me posted!" button below for an alert when we write about cellphone issues in Albany.