Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wireless Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board rejects appeal of Verizon 5G pole near Providence Senior Housing after experts say emissions will be below federal limits
Summary
Residents of Providence Senior Housing urged denial of a Verizon 5G pole permit over health concerns; an RF engineer testified calculated exposure at the building would be about 4.6% of the federal full‑time limit. The Board of Appeals denied the appeal 4–0, citing code and department reviews.
San Francisco — Residents of Providence Senior Housing and advocates criticized a proposed Verizon 5G wireless facility near their building at Third Street and McKinnon Avenue on health and safety grounds, but the Board of Appeals voted 4–0 to uphold Public Works’ permit after hearing engineering analysis and city department reviews.
Lisa Parker, speaking as an agent for Providence Senior Housing, said the facility alarmed residents: "We have 66 residents that reside at Providence Senior Housing, and they are very concerned about what could develop with their health from having this antenna so close to the building." Social‑service coordinator Shirley Foreman and residents described perceived symptoms and raised general concerns about 5G radiation.
Verizon’s consultant, registered engineer Bill Hammett, summarized his firm’s exposure calculations and peer review findings: he testified that the maximum calculated exposure at the building face "would be 4.6% of the allowable level for full time exposure," well below the federal limit. Hammett and applicant counsel also said the facility will be measured post‑installation and that the city requires certification of compliance with radio‑frequency standards.
Planning, Public Works and the Department of Public Health representatives said the application met Article 25 compatibility standards and that the department’s technical review concluded predicted exposures comply with public‑health guidelines. Planning’s deputy zoning administrator Tina Tam said the project "is consistent with article 25 of the public works code and the objectives and policies of the general plan."
Commissioners acknowledged resident concerns and sympathy for vulnerable populations but said the board’s review is limited by code and federal preemption over RF standards. President Rick Swig moved to deny the appeal; Commissioners Lopez, Lazarus and Chang voted Aye and the motion carried 4–0.
The board urged the permit holder and city staff to continue outreach and post‑installation testing for any residents who request measurements.
