Mountain View Voice

News - November 26, 2010

Church neighbors appeal cell tower decision

Neighbors upset, say church's outreach was lacking

by Daniel DeBolt

The City Council will soon weigh in on a controversy involving a cell tower approved for the top of First Presbyterian Church, near a preschool and dozens of homes where many are concerned about potentially cancer-causing radiation.

Neighbors of the church at Cuesta Drive and Miramonte Avenue have pulled together $500 to appeal the zoning administrator's approval of the cell tower earlier this month, said neighbor Jared Waxman in an e-mail.

"Apparently, the Zoning Administrator takes the position that any owner of a residential parcel could build a commercial telecommunications facility on that parcel without obtaining a conditional use permit, a variance, or a rezoning," Waxman said. "That does not make a lot of sense to us, and we are eager to hear what the City Council has to say on the subject."

In an online petition opposing the tower, some neighbors say they are unhappy with the church, claiming it had a "moral obligation" to reach out to the neighborhood to discuss the cell tower before moving forward with it.

"This church chose cash over community," said neighbor W. Yee. "To me it's more of an issue of how the church has handled it. If their concern was with the community, they would have reached out to the community and said 'How many of you are customers of Sprint-Nextel? How many of you are interested in this service?'"

Pastor Tim Boyer told the Voice that a committee of church members approved of the cell tower, which would provide income for the church. Boyer would not disclose how much it is being paid. Another church representative said at the Nov. 10 zoning administrator meeting that tenants of the church, including Little Acorn Preschool and a group of Boy Scouts, were notified and no one complained about the idea.

Yee said that parents of the preschool, who did not find out about the cell tower until days before it was approved, are now being prevented from leaving notices for other parents at the church-run pre-school about the issue.

In his approval, Zoning Administrator Peter Gilli said federal law prevented him from rejecting the cell tower over concerns with radiation, which he said would be well below FCC limits.

The tower would be placed on top of a chapel on the southeast corner of the property, across the site from the church's main chapel.

E-mail Daniel DeBolt at ddebolt@mv-voice.com

Comments

Posted by Doctor Killjoy, a resident of another community
on Nov 24, 2010 at 10:13 pm

Christians have historically steam-rollered over the rights of others, whenever they felt like it, in the name of Holy Profit. Don't you remember a little thing called "The Crusades", or "The Spanish Inquisition?"

You know, little things like that. And you imagine that this is any different now? How soon we forget...*sigh*


Posted by John the Man, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Nov 26, 2010 at 11:23 am

Remind me again: how many of these church members themselves use cell phones?


Posted by A. Reader, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Nov 26, 2010 at 3:22 pm

What will happen to the children if they don't remove this "radiating" thing? I don't want to even thing about it!


Posted by A. Reader, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Nov 26, 2010 at 3:29 pm

"You know, little things like that. And you imagine that this is any different now? How soon we forget...*sigh*"

Yes, and now they are steam-rolling over the rights of the children to live a life free of myriad of disorders caused by radiation...


Posted by Badtux, a resident of Whisman Station
on Nov 28, 2010 at 11:05 pm

"Radiation", ROFL! As an engineer, I am rolling on my sides in laughter at the ignorance and stupidity of people who think a half-watt transmitter is going to hurt their darling little spawn. Folks, get a grip. Your *LIGHT BULBS* put out more RF energy in your home than a cell tower does -- 60 watts worth, for a typical incandescent. Or roughly 120 times the RF energy output of a cell phone tower. So what now, you're going to outlaw *light bulbs*?! As for the morons talking about "radiation", cell phone towers output RF waves, not radiation. Radiation is a term used for radioactive particles released as part of the process of nuclear fission, and last I checked, cell phone towers didn't have nuclear reactors in them, LOL!


Posted by @Badtux, a resident of another community
on Nov 29, 2010 at 8:44 am

"Radiation is a term used for radioactive particles released as part of the process of nuclear fission, and last I checked, cell phone towers didn't have nuclear reactors in them, LOL!"

TVs, smoke detectors, x-ray machines, etc all emit radiation. These do not have nuclear reactors in them either.

You are speaking of neutron radiation, that which is emitted through nuclear reactions. Cell phones and towers emit electromagnetic radiation.

Ignorance, stupidity, morons? Keep rolling on your sides laughing, you "engineer" you.


Posted by frumenty, a resident of The Crossings
on Nov 29, 2010 at 12:46 pm

frumenty is a registered user.

Luddites. Has any documented scientific study EVER shown danger from exposure to cell towers? No. Exposure to RF radiation is way, way greater from actually using a cell phone than it is from the tower, so you worriers had better keep away from anyone using a cell phone nearby. Oh wait--what about WiFi transmitters? They're everywhere! Quick! Break out the aluminum foil hats!


Posted by BvP, a resident of another community
on Nov 29, 2010 at 2:09 pm

BvP is a registered user.

Frumenty wrote: "Luddites. Has any documented scientific study EVER shown danger from exposure to cell towers? No."

Wrong answer (to your own question no less). The correct answer is...yes. Here are just two for you.

Web Link

Web Link

Some of you so-called experts are too easy.


Posted by frumenty, a resident of The Crossings
on Dec 13, 2010 at 12:51 pm

frumenty is a registered user.

BvP wrote: "Some of you so-called experts are too easy."

Yet, if he/she believes that the examples supplied are proof of cell tower radiation danger, then BvP is the one who is "too easy." These papers demonstrate no more than coincidence. There is no proof of causation. Furthermore, if proximity to cell tower antennas truly causes cancer at the rates claimed in these papers, then we should be overwhelmed by such cancer clusters near every cell installation in populous areas. But that does not seem to be happening.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

To post your comment, please click here to login

Remember me?
Forgot Password?
or register. This topic is only for those who have signed up to participate by providing their email address and establishing a screen name.