RespectPDX

Did you know that the City allows wireless carriers such as cell-phone companies and wireless Internet providers to replace any existing utility pole in a residential neighborhood with a cell tower? Take a look out your window, if you can see a utility pole then read on!

RespectPDX advocates for respectful and responsible regulation of wireless facilities across Portland. We are working to ensure that the current regulations, weak as they may be, are being enforced by the City. We are also working toward improving to the regulations at both the City and State level. This site is a resource for Portlanders to learn about this issue, connect with others in their neighborhood, and to give us all a stronger voice.

The World Health Organization recently issued a press release stating that it is possible that environmental and personal exposures associated with the transmission of radio frequency signals may be carcinogenic to humans. Read the full press release here.

World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) Director Christopher Wild said "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands-free devices or texting."

Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act specifically blocks local governments taking any potential health effects into account when regulating the placement of towers and other personal wireless services facilities. It is time to repeal this section and allow our local government to regulate the placement of these facilities in a responsible manner. Please contact your representatives in congress and request that section 704 of the Federal Telecommunications Act be repealed, or sign the CLOUT petition.

We have some great news regarding some planned cell towers in our neighborhoods! Recently, Commissioner Amanda Fritz posted this on her blog:

"Clearwire has formally notified the Office of Cable Communications & Franchise Management (OCC/FM) of the withdrawal of already-filed wireless applications for the following sites:"

• NE 37th and NE Fremont
• SE Yamhill and SE 32nd
• SE 65th and SE Reedway
• N Greeley & Holman (Rosa Parks)
• SE 70th and Flavel

You can read more on the Commissioner's blog.

This is good news for the hundreds of Portlanders who spoke out at public meetings, wrote to officials, put signs in their yards and more to make it clear that they oppose siting cell towers in-front of people's homes and near schools. While Clearwire was ultimately hampered by business issues, the strong reaction of Portlanders definitely resulted in a number of cell towers not being built in front of peoples homes as planned. We have heard from City Attorney's office that any provider who wants to use a site previously approved "will have to go through the whole City siting process." Thank you all for your hard work to date!

While many neighborhoods may have dodged a bullet, the story doesn't end here. Clearwire will likely be back soon. Both AT&T and Verizon have recently announced that they will begin building new networks in Portland this year.

RespectPDX will continue to advocate for regulation that respects people's investments in their homes and character of our communities. In November last year, RespectPDX and Southeast Uplift co-sponsored a workshop. There we presented a comparison of Portland's ordinance with those of Glendale, CA, Hempstead, NY, and Bend's proposed ordinance. All these cities strike a better balance in regulating wireless companies in a more responsible manner than the current Portland ordinance.

The powerful community response to date has helped make the City aware that we expect them to do everything possible to stop cell towers being built in front of our homes and our schools. Let's continue to make ourselves heard and demand a better system so that what we have been through for the last year and a half doesn't happen to others!

RespectPDX is discussed in this Neighborhood Notes article:

What to Do if a Cell Tower is Proposed in Your Neighborhood

Are you concerned about cell towers going up in your neighborhood near homes, schools and parks? Find out what you can do about cell towers in Portland's residential neighborhoods.

• Learn about Federal, state, and local regulations governing cell towers and what we can do to change them.
• Network with other Portland neighbors dealing with cell towers in residential areas.
• Learn what you can do when a cell tower installation is proposed in your neighborhood.

When: Monday November 15, 2010, 6:30-8:30pm
Where: Southeast Uplift, 3534 SE Main, Portland

Co-sponsored by Southeast Uplift and RespectPDX

For more information:
Email: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Phone: Leah Hyman, SEUL 503-232-0010

Clearwire's second Woodstock/ Eastmoreland neighborhood meeting took place Tuesday November 2nd at Duniway Elementary School.  This most recent meeting took place because the first meeting in September was deemed invalid by the OCCFM when Clearwire representative Steve Topp chose only to invite property owners, not residents.  Approximately 60 neighbors attended the 11/2 meeting and emotions ran high.  The meeting was billed by Clear as a chance for neighbors to choose between four different pole locations along SE Cesar Chavez Blvd.  During the meeting Topp provided information that showed properties adjacent to installations have increased in value; he insisted his data proved that there were no health risks; and he stated that the opinions of the meeting attendees and both the Woodstock and Eastmoreland Neighborhood Associations held absolutely no weight.   After an hour of heated discussion Topp asked neighbors to vote for the location that they favored.  Residents immediately stood and began leaving the auditorium.  

On Monday 11/8 Topp notified the residents for whom he had email addresses that Clear was now planning to place the pole in front of Vu's Car Care at SE Cesar Chavez Blvd. and Knapp.  This is a change from the original location in front of a home at 3924 SE Ogden St.  The new proposed location is directly across the street from Holy Family School. 

Citizens continue to work toward their goal of keeping Clearwire entirely out of their neighborhoods.  Meetings are scheduled with Commissioner Amanda Fritz's office and Mayor Sam Adam's office.  A demonstration at City Hall is in the planning stages.

Clearwire will be meeting with the Pearl District Neighborhood Association's Planning and Transportation Committee meeting on November 16th to pursue a right-of-way permit with the intention of mounting a cell tower on a power pole in the middle of the Pearl District. You are invited to attend that meeting and speak out about ClearWire's proposal. Your voice could make a difference.

The meeting will be at the PREM Group Offices (NW Flanders & 12th Ave) from 6 to 7pm. If you have any questions, please contact committee member Michael Hall at 503.853.5718.

TO: Amanda Fritz, Commission of Public Utilities, Portland City Council;
David Soloos, Office of Cable and Franchise Management;
Anthony Barber, Oregon Operations Office for Region 10 Environmental Protection Agency.

FR: Mount Tabor Middle School, PTA
Mt. Tabor Middle School
5800 SE Ash St.
Portland, OR 97215

RE: Letter of Concern regarding Clearwire's request to site a Cell Tower adjacent to Mt. Tabor Middle School, 5800 SE Ash St. Portland, OR 97215

CC: Oregon's Congressional Delegation; Clearwire; PGE; Portland Public School Board; PPS Superintendent Carol Smith; Mt. Tabor Neighborhood Association; South Tabor Neighborhood Association (see detailed list at end of letter)

September 28, 2010

The Mt. Tabor Middle School PTA is writing to express concern over Clearwire's plan to replace an existing PGE power pole with a new cellular antenna tower on the right-of-way at SE 60th and Ash -- immediately adjacent to Mt. Tabor Middle School, academic home to 580 students ages 11 through 14 years. Clearwire failed to adequately inform neighbors (including residents and a preschool), as set forth in the City's ordinance, and the site is located on a Priority 4 street (low traffic volumes; residential streets) rather than the City recommended Priority 1 streets (freeways, highways, and streets in industrial areas).

Please see the attached resolution opposing siting of that cell tower passed by a vote of the PTA general membership on September 13, 2010.

There continues to be considerable debate and uncertainty within the scientific community as to the potential health effects to individuals, especially children, from exposure to extremely low frequency electromagnetic and radio-frequency radiation. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences/National Institutes of Health recently concluded that enough evidence exists to support the classification of electromagnetic fields as a possible human carcinogen. In California, the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors passed a resolution calling for a 1500 ft. distance between a cell tower and a school or day care center.

Therefore, we request the Portland City Council and the Office of Cable Communications & Franchise Management to reject Clearwire's cellular tower application. And, we petition the City Council to revise city policy to explicitly prevent the location of cellular telecommunication towers within 1500 ft. of sensitive communities such as schools, day care centers, and residential neighborhoods.

September 14, 2010

Dear Commissioner Fritz,

There seems to be uncertainty, both within your office and within OCCFM, as to how far a city government can go in regulating cell tower siting.

So that you are clear on the accomplishments another city has already achieved in this arena, I would like to draw your attention to the ordinance passed by the City of Glendale, California. I am optimistic that this bold ordinance can serve both as an inspiration and as a model for our fair city.

The full ordinance, passed in April of this year, is available here, and I have included highlights below for your convenience.

Regards,
Ric Bernat

• Ordinance includes both monopoles and old-style lattice towers - any "high visibility" placement.
• On Utility poles allows for "whip" antennas no more than 3 inches wide, 6 foot long.
• If selected site it within 1000 feet of a residential zone, applicants must submit an alternate site analysis. That include sites at preferred locations.
• Applicants also must submit alternate configuration analysis showing how coverage could be delivered using differing antenna configurations.
• Applicants must submit "A projection of the applicant's anticipated future wireless telecommunications facility siting needs within the city, which information may be used by the city as part of a master planning effort designed to ensure a more planned, integrated and organized approach to wireless telecommunications facility siting."
• Public Notice by Certified mail and a 3' x 4' sign at the proposed location.
• For all PROW applications in non-preferred area there is a Public hearing with the Director of Public Works (paid for by the applicant) that considers the time, place and manner of the proposal.
• Applicant must also fund an independent site-specific technical review if deemed necessary by the City.
• City allows for reconsideration of the permit after construction to take into account how it is being operated.
• Strict Visual Impact Minimization and Screening standards: "to make the installation, operation and appearance of the facility as visually inconspicuous as possible, to prevent the facility from visually dominating the surrounding area, and to hide the installation from predominant views from surrounding properties."
• In residential zones "Camouflage design techniques shall be employed to... disguise the facility so it appears to be a decorative or attractive architectural feature. If camouflage design techniques for monopoles do not substantially hide or prevent direct viewing of the facility, then the permit may be denied."
• All accessory wireless equipment shall be placed and mounted in the least visually obtrusive feasible location.
• Wireless telecommunications facility right-of-way setbacks shall be equal to the same number of feet as those set forth in the development standards and setback requirements of the underlying zoning district, except for temporary emergency facilities, facilities on private property where a single utility line runs from the right-of-way, existing facilities, co-located facilities, and facilities where compliance with said setback requirements are not reasonably feasible as determined by an analysis of alternative sites and the need to close a significant gap in coverage.
• An approval may be appealed to the City board of appeals.
• Annual Safety monitoring and upon any proposed increase in effective radiated energy of 10% or more.

To:

David Soloos
Michael Mills
Amanda Frtiz
David McAllister

The following is a summary of what has transpired regarding the proposed cell phone/wimax tower to be located between 23rd and 24th street on NE Stanton Street indicating that the city has not been following its own procedures regarding placement of a cell phone/wimax tower in a residential neighborhood.

The neighbors were initially informed of the incorrect date for the required community meeting. A second notice was sent out with a misleading reference to the pole location, leaving some neighbors with the impression that the pole was going to be installed on the much busier 24th street.

Sometime in June, a meeting was held at which time the neighbors were informed that Clearwire intended to utilize a large underground vault rather than an above ground box. No information was provided as to exact location or design of the proposed vault.

On about August 13, 2010, soil samples were taken not far from the proposed antenna location. I called the OCFM and was told by Melvin Riddick that the pole application had been approved on August 5th. When I asked how that could have occurred since we had received no plans or pictures of the proposed vault, Mr. Riddick informed me that OCFM had received plans for the vault and had approved them along with the pole. He then sent me an email attachment with the vault plans, but no photorealism pictures. There was no photo simulation so that the neighbors could see what the proposed vault would look like, what materials would be used, or how it would operate.