According to reader Rob Geller:
“Just before the Planning Commission hearing on the St. Matthews Church cell antennas, T-Mobile withdrew its application due to ‘vigorous community opposition.'”
The blog Sunroom Desk has uploaded a PDF of T-Mobil’s letter of withdrawal. T-Mobil is very, very disappointed in the opposition. “We view this as a case of unfounded fear overshadowing thoughtful planning, science and reason. This withdrawal will not eliminate the need for improving wireless coverage in the area.”
It’s unclear what the planning commission could have done if it ultimately disagreed with the T-Mobil antenna location. Federal law currently prohibits making legislative decisions on cell-tower placement based on health risks, on the grounds that there’s no proof that the antennas cause physical damage.
Thanks, Heather.
T-Mobile may say it was a case of “unfounded fear,” but it was really a case of no need, so why even risk it with so many kids and seniors around.
T-Mobile never proved “an identifiable gap in coverage.” There is none. The neighbors’ field testing proved that service is already Good to Excellent everywhere in the ‘hood. Go to the T-Mobile website and compare what it shows about coverage in the area to the coverage maps submitted for the staff packet – more than a little contradictory.
Putting an industrial cell site in an all-wood, aged church steeple would have created a major fire and hazmat hazard, right in the middle of hundreds of kids and seniors.
Over 600 Mission residents, school parents and business owners signed petitions opposing the antennas for these types of reasons.
Fears about adverse health effects are not unfounded. There is enough scientific evidence to be concerned. Why else would the Board of Supervisors have passed Resolution 102-10 calling for more studies and the repeal of the federal law you mention?
http://www.sfbos.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/bdsupvrs/resolutions10/r0102-10.pdf
But never mind the health risks; the Planning Commission would have denied this ill-advised project because it was unnecessary, unsafe, undesirable to the community, and incompatible with the neighborhood. Federal law has nothing to say about that!