Say No to Cell Towers near Our Homes

Dear Mayor Murray and Mr. Weis,

We the undersigned Seattle residents want to ask you to intervene in the rapid and unchecked roll out that is underway of massive amounts of additional cellular network capacity in our residential neighborhoods, specifically Master Use Permits #3023359, #3023360, #3023361, #3023362, #3023363 and #3023364.

We have raised approximately 180 letters as part of the comments period allowed by Seattle Dept. of Construction & Inspections from immediately effected residents expressing their opposition to this project, including from Councilmember Bagshaw, but still have great concern that the impacts to Magnolia and the undersigned residents will not be heard as part of this planning process. 

We have 7 primary concerns related to this project:

I. This proposal is in clear violation of city zoning codes

This proposed project is not consistent with city zoning codes (specifically SMC 15.32.300, SMC 23.57.010 C.2.a, SMC 23.57.010 C.2.d., SMC 23.57.010 E.2) because it will be significantly detrimental to the residential character of this historic Seattle neighborhood.

Residents entered into a Local Improvement District agreement with the City of Seattle (resolution number 21341) and paid the equivalent of c.$900 thousand dollars to Seattle City Light to remove above ground utilities.

This project violates that agreement and is against both the content and intent of that agreement and contrary to the explicitly stated interests of the 169 residents who sponsored it and paid for it. The fact that Crown Castle will be paying between $1,500 and $4,000 per month for each of these proposed sites should not absolve the City from respecting our agreement.

II. This proposal will damage property values

The placement of these proposed antenna risks potentially very material damage to the property values of surrounding homes according to realtors who specialize in Magnolia.

Magnolia is home to many families with young children and senior citizens for whom the value of their whom frequently represents their largest or sole long term investment. This is not a situation of Magnolia residents seeking to avoid our fiscal responsibilities, residents already pay among the highest rates of property tax in the City, but one of equity where the City should not be prioritizing an opportunity to generate revenue from City owned infrastructure (in this case SCL monopoles) over the reasonable interests and concerns of residents.

Should this project proceed as proposed significant value destruction is likely to occur leaving residents little choice but to seek damages against the City and petition to lower property taxes.

III. The permit applications submitted by Crown Castle are incomplete, inaccurate and misleading and as such should be rejected

Application documents and supporting detail provided by Crown Castle in support of Master Use Permits #3023359, #3023360, #3023361, #3023362, #3023363 and #3023364 clearly describe a total of 6 proposed installations of a design that only includes 6 antennae per installation, creating the need for a public exclusion zone of 8ft around these antennae.

Based upon multiple unequivocal statements by key Crown Castle personnel, Crown Castle in fact plans to install up to 12 antennae per location, potentially increasing the diameter of the public exclusion zone and encroaching across residents’ property lines.

Further we have been made aware by informed sources within Seattle DPD that the project in Magnolia is viewed as an initial test to evaluate whether this proposed antennae design and layout can be pushed through the planning process and, if successful, large scale roll outs in Magnolia, Laurelhurst and other areas of the City will quickly follow. Seattle DPD personnel have been instructed by their management not to comment on or discuss this project publicly.

As such the application details provided by Crown Castle, intended to inform residents of the likely impact of this proposal as part of the Master Use Permit approval process, are deliberately misleading. The permit application is incomplete, incorrect and disingenuous at best and on that basis should be rejected by Seattle City Light and Seattle DPD.

IV. This proposal will create a potentially significant health risk to residents due to out of date FCC guidelines based on the cellular technology of 20 years ago

The proposed project represents a poorly understood and under researched potential risk to the health and wellbeing of nearby residents. FCC guidelines on public maximum exposure levels are based on limited and out of date evidence due to a lack of long term epidemiological studies on the effects of prolonged exposure to cell antenna radiation.

The ’96 Telecommunications Act, which explicitly excludes consideration of health risks from the permitting of cell antennae, is based on the cellular technology of 20 years ago not today. In ’96 there were only 44M cellphone subscribers compared to today’s 355M, less than 2% of US households were “wireless-only” compared to today’s 47% and the prevalent forms of wireless technology were circuit switched GSM, analog and packet radio networks (to support pagers) vs. today’s high speed IP based 4G and 5G networks.

More recent studies in the US and Rest of World have pointed to a potentially significant risk of increased incidence of health disorders, particularly cancers of which leukemia shows the most pronounced uplift. The question of whether or not health risks exist is heavily contested, with on the one side the cellular industry and its bevy of lobbyists, paid experts and campaign dollars who deny categorically the existence of any associated health risk and on the other a growing body of scientists and health professionals who believe a significant longer term risk does exist.

In part this lack of evidence is due to how rapidly cellular networks have expanded in the last 10 years alone, resulting in a lack of historic data to conduct population based studies, and in part due to a lack of funding for focused studies on the part of the resource constrained FCC and an industry unwilling to dig deeper.

While these questions remain we should not be siting the proposed antennae within 15ft of where children live, play and sleep. Even the FCC’s outdated and questionable guidelines propose that all cellular antenna be placed between 50 and 200ft elevation, this proposal would site the very same antenna at 20ft above grade, due to steep street inclines, at eye level within 40ft. We should be using the most vulnerable members of our society as part of an experiment to quantify the risks of prolonged EMF radiation exposure while we have reasonable basis to believe that some risk exists.

V. Seattle should be leading on this key environmental issue, not following the interests of big money donors like Crown Castle

The US has the highest allowable public maximum exposure limit of any country globally, other countries have taken a more cautious approach, even China sets its public maximum exposure limit at just 6% of the US maximum.

Domestically here in the US however some municipalities have taken a stand for their residents and followed an approach designed to protect the interests of residents over those of commercial interests like Crown Castle.

For example, in September 2010 the Town of Hempstead, NY passed a “Wireless Telecommunications Ordnance”, Chapter 142 Hempstead Municipal Code which prohibits the placement of cellular antenna within 1,500 ft. of the nearest residences, house of worship, day care center or school.

Seattle should follow suit and place the interests and concerns of residents, taxpayers and voters above those of big corporate concerns like Crown Castle despite the power and influence they wield over local government due to the large financial contributions these organizations make during the course of the election cycle.

VI. The City planning process appears to be broken and no longer grants impacted local residents and taxpayers a voice

The process which both Crown Castle and Seattle City Light are following to review this proposed project appears designed to deny residents any guaranteed right to have their voices heard. This has not always been the case in the City of Seattle, however since the revocation of SDOT Directors Rule 2-2009 (DR 2-2009) in 2014, any protection for residents directly effected by schemes such as the one proposed have effectively been removed.

Under DR 2-2009 the specific locations proposed by Crown Castle as detailed in Master Use Permits #3023359, #3023360, #3023361, #3023362, #3023363 and #3023364 would be defined as the most obtrusive of all available options due both to Magnolia’s single-family and residential small lot zoning and the location of these proposed antenna on top of light poles.

The repeal of DR 2-2009 may have been intended to encourage the roll out of fiber broadband, but its unintended consequence has been to unleash flood of permit applications from companies like Crown Castle and as they rush to build out wireless capacity to compete with much needed broadband networks before even a yard of fiber has been laid. There are currently over 100 granted permits in the past few months and 300 pending permit applications to install cellular antenna in process in the City of Seattle today as a direct result.

VII. The proposed project is being positioned by Crown Castle as being required by the provisions of FCC e911 Rules and the Wireless Communications and Public Safety Act of 1999 (911 Act) though no evidence has been presented to support this assertion.

In the closing stages of the comments period Crown Castle and Seattle City Light have suddenly introduced the argument that the proposed is required in order to comply with FCC regulations concerning the availability of, and provision of local data to support a functioning 911 service. This is despite the fact that, according to Crown Castle, tenants for these proposed antennae have not yet been secured and that the proposed roll out is an activity that Crown Castle is undertaking “on spec” rather than driven by demands from their customers (the cellular operators) to deploy more capacity to comply with e911 regulations.

Further no evidence has been provided by Seattle City Light, Seattle DPD or Crown Castle as part of the planning process to support this last minute assertion that the project is required in order for the City to meet it’s e911 obligations. There is adequate cell coverage throughout Magnolia, albeit stronger for AT&T and T-Mobile than Verizon and Sprint based on local survey data, though none appear to be owned and operated by Crown Castle to date. As such this very much feels like a fall back argument that Crown Castle are relying on to quash any resistance on the part of residents.

If indeed additional capacity is required under FCC e911 rules and the WCPSA ’99 then other far more suitable locations for building this coverage exist in the immediate local area that would avoid placing these antennae at street level in extreme proximity to residences. No evidence has been presented that Crown Castle has conducted any feasibility study or assessment of alternative locations despite the fact that they are still required under the current permitting process post repeal of DR 2-2009 to demonstrate why the selected locations are the least intrusive.

We the undersigned beseech you Mayor Murray and Mr. Weis to reconsider this ill advised proposal and to take a stand against the aggressive roll out Crown Castle is proposing of a poorly understood and partially research potential risk to the health and wellbeing of our families and the likely damage to property values and the aesthetics of this historic Seattle neighborhood (enshrined in the Local Improvement District agreement, City Council resolution number 21341) that will result should it go ahead.

If this build out of capacity is required beyond meeting the corporate goals of Crown Castle to grow revenue and market share then other, far more suitable, locations exist in the immediate area which would not place these antennae next to our homes. Please don’t build these antennae next to our houses.

If nothing else please think of our children, don’t they deserve the right to grow up free from the potential threat of irreparable harm to their health?

Signed

Magnolians Against Invasive Cell Towers