I would like to ask our communities help and support by in attending the Zoning Board of Appeals for Addison Township on June 8th at 6 p.m. to voice their opinion on the proposed Verizon Cell tower, 150 feet from a kindergarten school. The site they have proposed is very risky and a poor fit for what they, Verizon, want to achieve, which is to better serve and provide more coverage of the cellular service.

Not only is this parcel next to a kindergarten school and playground (Kingsbury Country Day Charter School), it is a very LOW swampy parcel that would have difficulty making a good foundation for the enormous 197 foot tower. Whereby the likelihood of it falling over would be great. As their proposed site plan has ascertained and why they want to place it as close to the school and lot line as possible. Risking lives at the school and property is not what should be allowed.

This is not to mention what a study found, according to the American Cancer Society website http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/cellular-phone-towers

“Researchers compared a group of more than 2,600 children with cancer to a group of similar children without cancer. They found that those who lived in a town that could have exposed them to higher than average RF radiation from cellular phone towers in the previous five years had a slightly higher risk of cancer, although not of any certain type of cancer (like leukemia or brain tumors). This study estimated the children’s possible exposure based on the number of towers in their town and how strong the signals were from the towers. It did not look at actual exposure of any individual child based on how far their home or school was from a tower. This limitation reduces confidence in the results of the study.”

Obviously a cellular tower that is only 100-200 feet away is VERY CLOSE and, with that closeness, the highest amount of exposure. The cancer research I have noted here is VERY OLD and does it not seem strange to you that they have only one study on the effects children living or being very near a cell tower since the beginning of cell phones over 30 years ago? It should be understood that as a child’s own cellular and body growth is rapid and any degrading effect of Waves of RF and EMF electromagnetic fields would cause issues within a few short years. We have had over 30 years of cellular communication (since 1983), there should be many detailed studies by now. But, there aren’t. I don’t think we need to or should create a test case study here by placing a tower within 150 ft. of the school. Do you?

Recently a ruling by India’s supreme court details that they support the conclusion that cellular towers cause cancer:

“April 2017, in a unique ruling, India’s Supreme Court has ordered to shut down a mobile tower after a man alleged that he got cancer from its radiation. Last year, Madhya Pradesh-resident Harish Chand Tiwari had approached India’s apex court, the highest judicial forum in the country, alleging that a mobile tower from state-run telecom operator BSNL exposed him to harmful radiation. ‘We direct that the particular mobile tower shall be deactivated by BSNL within seven days from today,’ Justices Ranjan Gogoi and Navin Sinha ruled, according to Indian daily Times of India.”

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RF energy as “possibly carcinogenic to humans”. The IARC classification of RF energy reflects the fact that some limited evidence exists that RF energy might be a risk factor for cancer.

I performed some research on the cell tower needs and what the proposed location attributes/deficiencies are in comparison to another potential site that would be a better fit. The topography of the parcel is very poor for the tower.

It is better suited for the Mulberry Hills Golf course, only 1/2 mile away from the proposed site. But, is the same distance from the nearest Cell tower(s) as the Cellular Tower Location Maps show. The golf course property is the most ideal as its topography shows it is over 150-200 feet higher than that of the proposed property. Giving Verizon a greater clear air space, as to what they want for achieving greater distances of service. I have contacted the Mulberry Hills Golf Couse and their representative was very interested in the proposition of having the cell tower on their property.

As for the service improvement needed by the location of a tower, according to www.Opensignal.com , the need of an additional cell service tower, due to poor service/dropped call reports, would be best placed toward the direction of the golf course. South and more West. Please see attached Map of Weak signal/dropped calls (red dots) in the area identified obtained from www.Opensignal.com .

Why does the leadership of Addison Township believe they should violate their own ordinance for wireless communication facilities placement lot sizes by asking for this variance to put it on a 5-acre parcel they own when the minimum required is 20 acres? The ordinance was adopted only four (4) years prior: 7-15-2013. Also why do they especially consider the dangers that this tower would bring to the school children. I believe Addison Township officials should be more willing to look at this in a better fit in all facets rather than only monetarily. Verizon would better serve its customers by placing it in the Mulberry Hills Golf Course property. Most likely in the rear of the golf course property as that has the highest topology and would not be continuously exposing children to the possibility of cancer or injury or be readily seen by anyone other than deer and bad golfers who lose their ball.

Ron Renaud

Addison Township