PALO ALTO — In response to persistent neighborhood complaints, Palo Alto has approved a resolution that will force phone carriers to run through a gamut of hoops before plopping cell towers in the middle of residential areas.
The resolution, which the City Council approved Dec. 16 on a 6-1 vote with Adam Fine dissenting, aims to encourage cell phone carriers such as Verizon to place the towers in commercial and industrial districts instead. Although the measure tightens existing restrictions, carriers can appeal them to the Federal Communications Commission, which has ultimate say.
For more than a dozen years, the council has received numerous complaints from residents who don’t want the cell towers on their blocks, either because they consider them an eyesore or a potential electromagnetic radiation hazard, or both.
On the other side, the council also has heard from residents who clamor for better cell service and has received pushback from carriers who say the city’s restrictions already are onerous and potentially illegal. The city has received applications for more than 100 towers in the past several months.
Among other things, the resolution requires companies to erect the towers on corners instead of in front of houses, at least 600 feet from schools instead of the previous 300 feet, at least 600 feet from other cell towers and at least 20 feet from any building. It also demands that companies seriously consider putting their cell service equipment underground.
Fine said in an interview this week he voted against the measure because it reflects an attempt by Palo Alto to control what has proven to be a statewide and federal issue.
“The effect of what we did is we created a situation where the cell companies are going to ask for exceptions over and over and over,” Fine said. “The council are trying to finagle this more, but at some point it’s stupid. We are severely constrained in this space, and we’ve shown we’re not capable of doing much.”
Fine suggested the concerns expressed about the aesthetic impact of cell towers and their alleged health hazards are those of a vocal minority, not the majority of Palo Altans who expect better cell and data service from a city in Silicon Valley.
And while council members are restricted by federal law from taking into account the potential adverse health effects of cell towers, Fine said they seem to be trying to get around that by regulating aesthetics.
“There’s something broken there,” Fine said. “It’s unspoken that it’s really about pleasing people who don’t want those things near their homes.”
But Councilman Greg Tanaka said prioritizing underground services is nothing new, adding that these new regulations further encourage cell companies to do that.
“It’s something we’ve been trying to do for decades,” Tanaka said this week in an interview. “We accepted the staff recommendations to look into continuing to put equipment underground, and that’s not just cell phones. This is for everything. The idea is to have all our utilities underground in the future.”
Tanaka said he doesn’t have the best service in his neighborhood, so understands people’s concerns about connectivity, but there’s another side to the story.
“There’s the people who really really want better cell coverage and want faster speeds, and the other side is people who are concerned about health effects, aesthetics and noise,” Tanaka said. “I think our job is to strike a balance between the two.”
Mayor Eric Filseth said at last week’s meeting he saw the new regulations as a mix of carrots and sticks aimed at keeping cell companies from fighting the city.
He called city staff’s recommendations “an artful construction that encourages cellphone companies not to put these things in residential neighborhoods without strictly excluding the possibility that if they did a bunch of work, they might be able to.”
Council members are set to discuss cell towers again in April as part of an annual review. At that time, city staff is to present a report on possible adjustments to the new restrictions and the feasibility of pushing for statewide legislation.
Fine said he knows where the conversation is going, and that the city’s hands are tied.
“It’s going to be an ongoing fight, and there are currently two options in the Legislature,” Fine said. “One is to lessen the Federal Communications Commission’s ability to regulate these things, and the other is the status quo, business-friendly FCC. They’ll say there’s an overriding public and national imperative to have good cell service.”