Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wireless Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Appeals upholds AT&T small‑cell permit after neighbors raise view and health concerns
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 4–0 on Jan. 9 to deny an appeal of an AT&T small‑cell permit at Turk and Lyon/Anza Vista, after the applicant and city staff said the project complied with Article 25 and public‑health standards; neighbors had argued notice errors and visual and health impacts.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Jan. 9 denied an appeal of an AT&T small‑cell permit for a pole installation near Turk Street and Lyon/Anza Vista, upholding the director of public works’ determination.
Neighbors including appellant Anthony Murphy told the board the installation would “significantly impair public views” from Arbel Lane and questioned whether the final public‑works signature met Article 25’s timing requirement. Murphy also raised health concerns for his son and asked the board to reopen the director’s decision for further review.
The permit holder’s agent, Michelle Yonomoto, a land‑use planner with MODIS representing AT&T Mobility, told the board the proposed 3‑foot‑3‑inch antenna would add about 30 inches to an existing pole and that vegetation and orientation would minimize visual impact. Yonomoto said the application was routed to Planning and the Department of Public Health, and that the submitted radio‑frequency analysis showed compliance with federal exposure limits.
An independent RF engineer who testified for AT&T, Bill Hammitt, summarized the exposure findings: “The projected exposure levels from this additive new facility are 0.05%,” and the maximum calculated ground exposure was described in the applicant’s materials as “0.052% of the FCC public exposure standard.” DPW and Planning staff told the board they had reviewed the application under Article 25 and found it met the city’s notice and compatibility requirements.
Board members questioned the address and notice conventions used for through lots (the applicant and Planning explained that notices are tied to the nearest parcel), and several commissioners urged clearer notices and more representative photo simulations in future filings. After deliberation Commissioner Daryl Honda moved to deny the appeal and uphold the director’s determination; the motion carried on the recorded ayes of President Frank Fung, Commissioner Rachel Tanner, Vice President Rick Swig and others, 4–0.
The decision leaves the AT&T site permit in place. The board advised departments and applicants to improve neighborhood notices and photographic renderings in future Article 25 filings.
