Antennae concerns dismissed, site at 10th Ave. and Geary OK'd

By Peter Sciacca

A plan by AT&T to install cellular phone antennae at 378 10th Ave. won approval by the SF Planning Commission despite opposition from neighborhood groups, including a petition signed by 2,500 Richmond District residents.

The 5-1 vote in late July came 15 months after the communication provider submitted the plan to the commission. "We originally wanted 12 antennae at the site but decided to go with six in the draft that passed," said Bill Stevens, an independent zoning and planning contractor who assisted AT&T with the plan. "One of the conditions we agreed on to gain approval was to remove another (cellular antennae) site about two blocks away from where the new one will be."

The four-foot antennae will not be visible from the street or nearby residences.

"They are completely screened from view as the Planning Commission requested," Stevens said.

One of the groups that opposed the plan is the San Francisco Neighborhood Antenna-Free Union (SNAFU), which has fought the placement of antennae throughout the City. Doug Loranger, the group's founder, said companies that install antennae must make environmental and health issues a greater priority.

"Biophysicists believe the microwave radiation emitted from cellular antennae may cause sleep disorders, weaken immune systems and lead to long-term effects, such as various forms of cancer," he said. "This may be true even with lower levels of radiation. Caution should be used when planning such sites."

Stevens dismissed the charges.

"I don't believe any of those problems are caused by wireless antennae," he said. "I am just as concerned about health as anyone else."

In a video produced by SNAFU, the group says communication companies do not give neighborhoods proper notification when they want to install more antennae.

"There have been problems with firms not distributing bilingual materials or putting up proper notices about community meetings, even though they are required to meet with the community," said Enid Lim, a San Francisco community activist who appears in the video. "As a result of poor notification, not too many people know about or attend these meetings."

Stevens said AT&T informed the neighborhood in advance about two community meetings it held.

"We also made our plans completely clear at those meetings," he said.

The video also charges that installing more antennae does not improve reception or service range. It says the only motivation for adding antennae is to increase company profits.

"There are already several antennae sites in the Richmond District and more than 2,300 in all of San Francisco," Loranger said. "These companies are not explaining why more antennae need to be put up. We want them to be held accountable."

Stevens disputed SNAFU's claim that adding antennae does not improve service.

"AT&T would not be spending thousand of dollars on new technologies and expanding its operations if there wasn't a need," he said.

Stevens is pleased by the ruling, but not surprised.

"It is consistent with all of the Wireless Telecommunications Systems' guidelines," he said. "As required, we chose a building that is already in use for public service. There is already a telephone switching facility at the site. "We also did everything the City asked of us."

Among the intersections where cellular antennae are operating in the Richmond District are 31st Avenue and Clement Street, Seventh Avenue and Geary Boulevard and Funston Avenue and California Street.