October 29–November 5, 1998

city beat

Tower Struggle

Roxborough residents are fighting a plan to build yet another broadcast tower in their neighborhood.

by Frank Lewis

One of the details not often mentioned in discussions of high-definition television is the need it will create—indeed, is already creating—for new transmission towers. Congress has established a schedule for the introduction of digital broadcasting, and over the next several years stations will begin airing their programming in both digital and the traditional analog format.

Analog is to be phased out by 2006. But, in the meantime, the new transmitters have to go somewhere, and in many cases stations' existing towers won't be able to handle the additional load. According to one estimate, nearly 30 percent of the nation's TV towers will have to be modified or replaced.

This is more than trivia, however, if you happen to live in an area like Roxborough. Blessed—or cursed, depending on your point of view—with lots of undeveloped land on high ground, Roxborough already is home to 14 or so towers, most of which carry transmitters for at least one TV or radio station.

So perhaps not surprisingly there is little enthusiasm for the plan being pitched by some local businessmen and a Boston company to build yet another tower, about as tall as the Empire State Building, on a wooded plot just northwest of the "tower farm." In fact, residents seem to have drawn a line; six of the area's seven community groups are on record as opposed to the project, and planned to tell the city's Zoning Board as much at the hearing held Wednesday.

The fight pits the community against not just the developers, but the television stations that also want the tower built and, indirectly, the millions of viewers in the region.

Organizers of the opposition cite the number of towers already standing over Roxborough, and express fears of falling property values. But mostly they speak of potential health risks, and the increasing evidence suggesting that long-standing dismissals of such concerns might have been premature.

It's a battle that's becoming increasingly common across the nation.

"If we need to we'll sue [the developers] for environmental discrimination," says David O'Neil, an area resident. "We're not going to go away on this, we're going to fight. And we'll win, because we're right."

According to the opponents, Roxborough businessmen the DelMonte brothers—known locally as the "D Boys," the name of their garden center on Ridge Avenue—plan to buy a 20-some-acre parcel between Shawmont and Port Royal avenues, then lease it to American Tower Corporation of Boston. ATC plans to construct a 1,289-foot tower there and lease space on it to WHYY (Channel 12) and WYBE (Channel 35). Channels 12 and 35 need the tower space for digital broadcasting equipment.

A call to the DelMonte brothers was not returned. Joe Walker, of Residents of Shawmont Valley Association, says the brothers "have acted in good faith" in dealing with the community. "I admire their involvement with the process."

Walker still opposes the tower, however. He also is involved in the Roxborough Greenspace Project, which has won state and private grants to establish a continuous stretch of undeveloped land from that corner of the city into Montgomery County.

The land in question is zoned for residential use, so a zoning variance is required. (The Department of Licenses and Inspections already rejected a building permit application—a routine move, given the zoning.) The first of what is likely to be a series of hearings before the Zoning Board was scheduled for Wednesday, after press time.

The petition of appeal outlines the DelMonte brothers' and ATC's basic argument: These stations are required by law to convert to digital broadcasting. New equipment means a new tower. Roxborough has suitable land and an adequate elevation for such a tower. And because said tower will accommodate multiple uses (such as wireless communication), it is, therefore, "in the public interest."

"We believe it's the cheapest option [for the stations]," says resident Jamie Wyper. "But we don't for a minute believe it's their only option."

ATC's presentation at a community meeting last week apparently did little to change anyone's mind. For starters, the expert the company had promised couldn't make it.

But Susan Clarke, a self-described "environmental health rights advocate" from Massachusetts, did. Her remarks, about the research suggesting links between electromagnetic fields and an array of health problems, apparently made an impression. Residents also seemed moved by a videotape showing Dr. Amar Bose, professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and founder of audio manufacturer Bose Corporation, testifying in favor of a moratorium on tower construction in Wayland, MA.

"I am now convinced that there is a real danger from electromagnetic radiation," Bose says on the tape. "I do not believe today that anybody with good grounding in science can refute the credibility of some of the research papers I have seen."

Clarke says research has suggested links between EMF radiation and an array of health problems—including headaches, nausea, sleep disturbances, memory and concentration lapses, high blood pressure and cancer.

Obviously, the type of EMF radiation, proximity to the source and length of exposure are important variables, and all can be difficult to nail down. No studies have proven conclusive, nor are any likely to in the near future. But the simple fact that doubts remain—particularly in people like Bose—is enough for the Roxborough residents to say no.

"What bugs me," says Tom Gordon, an area resident and Temple University professor of communications, "is that [the developers are] not telling the public about the growing body of literature on the negative health effects" of the radio frequency electromagnetic fields generated by such structures.

"They see [the land] as a resource for them. They don't see it as a place where people live," says O'Neil. "It's very hard to trust anything these people say."

Peter Stark, who represented ATC at the meeting, says he too would have been horrified at what he heard that night—if he didn't know the facts.

ATC's experts took readings in the Roxborough area, Stark says, and found that current radio frequency (RF) levels are about 3 percent of what is allowed by the FCC's guidelines. The new tower, he says, will increase that by about three quarters of a percent.

"There are rules and regulations out there," says Stark, "and the fact is we far exceed those regulations." In addition, total output in that area will drop dramatically when analog broadcasting is halted altogether in 2006.

"Digital television will be added to that area, no matter what," Stark adds, referring to the nearby tower farm. "I was surprised that people [at the meeting] were acting as if there are no other towers out there."

The experts who conducted ATC's RF surveys could not be reached before press time.

Wyper, who lives on a secluded site on Port Royal Avenue, says the opposition is looking into ways to prevent not just this proposal but any that might come along in the future. Finding a buyer who will agree to a conservation easement—a permanent ban on development—so that the land can become part of a continuous greenspace is the most attractive option.

"There's not another place like this in the city," says Wyper. "It's completely unique. We're just trying to keep it from being destroyed."