Meeting: City Council

Meeting Time: July 30, 2020 at 3:30pm MDT
The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

5:00 p.m. - Discuss Small Wireless Facilities in the City Right-of-Way (A) Public Input

  • Default_avatar
    Rebecca McHaas over 3 years ago

    I echo the sentiments of concerns for the health of all Park City residents - yourselves included - with regards to the 5G rollout. As a resident of over 12 years, I have always watched Parkites put our community first. And health and fitness have always been at the top. Our lifestyle is key to our happiness here. Anything that impacts our health and lifestyle will additionally impact our tourism. Needless to say, 2020 will be a year for the record books in economic terms. What if we were a safe haven from the EMF’s that are proven to cause headaches, fatigue, lack of focus and a host of diseases including cancer. Please take a moment and consider the ramifications of this mandatory rollout. There is much more here than meets the eye. Thank you for your time, public service, and consideration.

  • Default_avatar
    Bill Johnson over 3 years ago

    This appears to be a good start with Design Guidelines, but I have a few questions/comments:

    1. Section 2.4 references the poles shall not exceed 50'. 50' is too high for this community. The current Small Cell poles being installed in SLC are 35' for Residential zones and 45' for Commercial Zones. Park City should consider a maximum height of 25' in Residential and 35' in Commercial. The carriers do not need 50'.
    2. Section 6.4 - Figure 6-2 references 250' of spacing for standalone poles. 250' is quite close considering each carrier is going to want to install their own pole. Imagine 4 poles in a 1000' span.
    3. Section 5.0 - Figure 5-3 shows a meter housing pedestal. Are there any size specifications referenced for that application?

  • Default_avatar
    Heather Eddy over 3 years ago

    As a mother of three young children, I am extremely concerned about the 5G roll out. While I understand the council is denied to consider adverse health effects due to 5G, the council may not be fully aware of the impending detrimental consequences of turning a blind eye to the available power the council does have. I am concerned that there is not full comprehension of all the legalities within the situation and I would urge the council to meet with an attorney who specializes in helping cities clarify the power they do have in unique situations such as this.

  • Default_avatar
    Carlyn Kinn over 3 years ago

    Hello - I would like to voice concern for the potential health and safety risks associated with the widespread roll-out of 5G technology (particularly for the kids in our town). As I understand it, the city has been offered a free consultation with Andrew Campanelli, an attorney specializing in helping municipalities understand their rights and liabilities in this matter, and would like to urge consideration of learning more before making any decisions about this technology roll-out.Thank you for your time and service!

  • Default_avatar
    Marcela Mueller over 3 years ago

    Marcela Mueller at July 30, 2020 at 2:24pm MDT
    As a full time Park City resident and homeowner. Mother of two and full time worker at a local business. I am requesting that you please listen to Mr. Campanelli who is an attorney to help your staff to better understand all the legal factors at play with the roll out of 5G and the massive increase in electromagnetic fields (EMF) that Will affect children if these towers are placed near by schools. Doctors and pediatricians warn of potential hormone disruption, cancer risk, mental health problems, dizziness, tinnitus, rashes, trouble sleeping, and Moreover, Insurance companies will not insure these Telecom companies why would you allow it in our city?

  • Default_avatar
    Zoe Berg over 3 years ago

    Americans for Responsible Technology (ART) is a national science-based environmental health non-profit organization based in New York representing over 150 community organizations across 43 states. We work with municipalities to protect residents’ interests when dealing with the telecom industry’s deployment of wireless equipment in public rights-of-way.

    There are effective local measures that the Park City Council can take to protect constituents, particularly in residential areas, from 5G small cell antennas.

    While the council cannot limit telecoms from placing equipment that complies with FCC limits on health concerns alone, here are some provisions we’d encourage the council to include in its small cell ordinance and any master agreements being considered:

    • Requiring the telecom applicant to demonstrate a significant gap in personal wireless coverage at the desired installation site using dropped call data;
    • Implementing antenna installation setbacks from residences, schools, daycare facilities, and other sensitive areas due to historic preservation rules, aesthetics, and property devaluation risks;
    • Requiring randomized radiofrequency radiation emissions testing of all wireless sites on an annual basis at the expense of the applicant;
    •Instituting a compliance bond to ensure that the applicant is complying with all conditions of the city’s ordinance and all relevant federal regulations.

    I will be sending a copy of our organization’s carefully crafted sample small cell ordinance to each city council member for review, as well as a partial digest of independent, peer-reviewed scientific research documenting various disease endpoints associated with exposure to radiofrequency microwave radiation.

    I would be happy to discuss any of these issues with you at a later date and, again, very much appreciate your time and consideration of this urgent matter.

    Sincerely,

    Zoe Berg
    Project Director
    Americans for Responsible Technology
    516-883-0887

  • Default_avatar
    Jennifer Mulholland over 3 years ago

    Please immediately consider talking with the attorney that the Summit County Council has obtained to better understand the implications, options, and potential solutions regarding what appears to be a mandatory 5G installation. As a local Parkite and business owner, I am very concerned about 1) The potential health impacts to our children and citizens that other counties and countries are investigating and, 2) The aesthetics of where these towers will be placed. It seems prudent and practical to educate ourselves about all of our options to keep our beloved town healthy, thriving, and naturally beautiful. The installation and placement of the towers matters. I ask that the council and all those in powers of leadership please talk to the recommended attorney that Summit County is speaking with (I believe it is Andrew Campenelli), involve the public more proactively, and slow down so we can ensure our approach is a thoughtful, careful, and considerate one for us all. Thank you.

  • Default_avatar
    erica smith over 3 years ago

    As a mother of four and full time Park City resident, I am in favor of faster and better internet, it is our future! I am requesting that you please speak to and meet with Andrew Campanelli who is an expert 5G attorney. I have personally spoken to his office and they are willing to help our Park City community understand all the legal issues that WILL come up with the 5G roll out in Park City. He is already helping several other cities around the country. What happens after the towers are installed and our community cancer rates go up? What if the towers are put on schools and our children get cancer or suffer many of the other documented and studied health effects? Have you each personally reviewed the health effects of 5G on animals and what it will do to our environment? Have you each read the study done on 5G and plants and how it was shown to make crops more flammable? Do each of you know the fire risk and the fires that have been caused from 5G and the towers? I have spent a lot of time studying all these issues after a 5G site was placed across the street from our home and the dishes were pointed directly into my girls windows. No one notified us they were being installed. Why was it a secret? Why was the location not reviewed and why did no one from park city consider the health effects of pointing dishes and radiation into childrens windows? You have the opportunity right now to do the right thing and study these issues before it is too late. Does the counsel realize parents, grandparents and families will hold each of you personally responsible if people and pets get sick for not stopping this and waiting till the Technology is proven safe for all humans, animals and vegetation. I would encourage each of you to really think about the fact the NO insurance company in the world offers or will ever offer 5G insurance. Why is that? And if there is no 5G insurance who do you think will become liable if someone in our community gets sick from 5G?

  • Default_avatar
    Ryan Sternagel over 3 years ago

    Hi all,
    I’m writing in to say I’m extremely disappointed to see the small cell wireless facilities rollout on the agenda, given the fact I wrote a very detailed letter several weeks ago, trying to inform you there are many factors pertaining to this situation you aren’t aware of, and it was dismissed.
    In that letter I stated that an attorney specializing in these situations has offered to have an introductory conversation with you, free of charge, so you can be made aware of these factors by someone with the legal expertise to speak to them at a level you'd appreciate.
    Why would you not at least speak with him, given you’ve clearly got a highly concerned group of citizens within your community about this issue, before pressing forward?
    Just because you’re not officially allowed to consider the increase in everything from cancer to learning disabilities we know will ensue from these installations, doesn’t mean you can’t at least educate yourselves on all the pertinent issues and your options, especially when we’ve done the work and are handing you the resources.
    Some of these issues include, again for the record:
    1) Insurance the licensees are required to carry does not cover pollution nor health effects. This leaves the city open when someone is able to demonstrably prove a health condition started after a tower was installed near to them.
    2) Applicants for facilities may be required to prove a significant gap in 4G coverage, which there is none
    3) Applicants may also be required to prove the least obtrusive location possible.
    In that letter I also noted the following number of studies pertaining RF effects on children:
    119 on leukemia
    69 on pregnancy outcomes
    68 on other health effects
    62 on brain / CNS tumors
    31 on other types of cancer
    18 on cancer (unspecified)
    18 on lymphoma
    I will resend the letter with full detail.
    There are more and more municipalities pushing back on this and/or taking the time to make sure they get it right. Please, follow their lead.