News and commentary on wireless infrastructure siting were under the Sunroom Desk Paperweight last week.
Court says cities have the right to bar telecommunications towers, in Monday’s LA Times, discussed the recent Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals case Palos Verdes Estates v. Sprint, which Sunroom Desk reported on earlier.
The Glendale News-Press published Cell-tower ordinance could still be better, a community commentary by John McMahon which appeared Wedneday, the day of the first scheduled community meeting to discuss the city’s draft wireless ordinance.
The News-Press followed up the next day with a report on the first community meeting.
Also on Thursday, the Orange County Register published a brief report on a La Habra Planning Commission approval of a roof-mounted wireless facility, which concluded “There was a lot of community opposition to the tower.”
Saturday, the Pasadena Star-News reported that a Tiny cell phone antenna still has Pasadena residents on edge. This “tiny” site sparked the controversy in Pasadena that led to a two-year moratorium and a new ordinance that just went into effect. “Yes, it is inconspicuous, only because we fought to have all the accessory equipment under-grounded,” a resident involved in the fight commented.
A further comment she offered as a comparison with Glendale: “There is no requirement by the City of Pasadena to have the Wireless companies maintain or verify that any of these cell sites comply with the FCC standards for EMF emissions…[while] in the first draft of the Glendale wireless ordinance there wil be annual 3rd party checks to verify that the cell sites comply to the FCC standard for EMF emissions.”
At Brand Park tonight at 6:30 p.m., the city will host the second of three community meetings to present the draft wireless ordinance . Now is the time to review and offer comments on the city’s rules for wireless installations.