SANTA CRUZ — In an effort to curtail “significant visual blight”caused by the proliferation of cell phone towers throughout the county, the Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday agreed to a series of additions to existing ordinances that will limit where the towers can be built, and put a cap on the numbers of antennas that can be clustered on one tower.

In its report to the supervisors, the county Planning Department referred to “numerous examples of significant visual blight” caused by cell towers, particularly at sites where more than one cellular company put its antennas.

Santa Cruz County has 172 cell towers, a number expected to grow as more communication devices use the technology. The new rules do not stop more from being built. Instead, they restrict where they can be placed.

Currently, no cell towers may be placed on school sites, but the new additions prohibit them from being placed within 300 feet of any campus or residential area. The new rules also limit cell sites to nine antennas and three equipment shelters. Existing sites that already exceed those numbers will be exempt from the new rules. In addition, cell towers that are sufficiently camouflaged or cannot easily be seen will receive waivers from the new rules.

The new rules cover roof-mounted antennas, while only cell towers were covered previously.

Gordon Diamond, a spokesperson for AT&T, said that communities often prefer putting several antennas in one location, as opposed to placing single cell towers at multiple sites.

“There’s no question that we work collaboratively with communities to address issues of visual impact,” he said.

The new rules, which focused primarily on the visual impact of the towers, pleased some at the meeting, but others said the county is focusing its efforts in the wrong direction.

Marilyn Garrett, who has for years been addressing board meetings throughout the county about the suspected dangers of cell tower radiation, was not impressed with the board’s decision.

“There’s so much evidence of harm as to be overwhelming,” she said. “This only conceals cell towers. It does not reduce them.”

Several people addressed the board over their concerns about radiation from cell towers, but there is no official scientific consensus, and federal law prohibits governing agencies from restricting cell towers based on health concerns.

“(We) believe that scientific data to date does not demonstrate that (radio frequency) fields emitted from wireless phones cause adverse health effects,” Diamond said in an e-mail.

Others at the meeting were less concerned about the health effects and visual blight. Some expressed concern that limiting construction of cell towers could restrict communications in rural areas of the county, where a lack of cell towers makes cell phone reception patchy at best.

“If we don’t have a land line, we’re stuck,” Boulder Creek resident Janet Laidlaw said. “The thing that matters to me is that we have a way to call out in an emergency.”

Tom Burns, Santa Cruz County planning director, assured the board that the rules would not limit phone service, but merely where towers could be placed.

•••••••••••••••••••••••

(Published in 10/22/08 edition)



Share on Facebook