Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 16-02; VERIZON CARLSBAD VILLAGE; Admin Decision LetterJuly 21, 2016 Verizon Wireless 15505 Sand Canyon Avenue Irvine, CA 92618 PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION SUBJECT: CUP 16-02-VERIZON CARLSBAD VILLAGE {._City of Carlsbad At the July 20, 2016 Planning Commission meeting, your application was considered. The Commission voted 6-0 to approve your request. The decision of the Planning Commission is final on the date of adoption unless a written appeal to the City Council is filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) calendar days in accordance with the provisions of Carlsbad Municipal Code section 21.54.150. The written appeal must specify the reason or reasons for the appeal. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please contact your project planner Austin Silva at (760) 602-4631 or austin.silva@carlsbadca.gov. Sincerely, DON NEU, AICP City Planner DN:AS:fn c: Bill Larson, Water's Edge Properties, LLC, 3150 Pia Pica Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Data Entry File Copy Enclosure: Planning Commission Resolution No. 7182 Community & Development Planning Division 11635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-73141760-602-4600 1760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov amp In.stitute Jan Lazarus 1202 Basswood Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 July 9, 2016 City of Carlsbad Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Appeals to the City Council-CUP 16-02-Verizon Carlsbad Village 3150 Pio Pico Drive City Council Planning Division: City of Carlsbad JUL 1 8 2016 Planning Division I am a Carlsbad resident living one block away from 3150 Pio Pico Drive and believe that the scope of this proposed project will have a significant impact on the environment surrounding the residential community and increase serious health risks for the residence in this area. Scientists that have researched and read decades of literature on this subject would agree that there may be NO "safe exposure" level, particularly when it comes to chronic exposure. 1. Oxidative Damage. Depletion of the body's natural store of antioxidants like Super Oxide Dimutase (SOD), Catalase, Glutathione, CoQ10, and Melatonin. When the body becomes depleted in antioxidants, premature aging, increased infections, and sticky blood are a few of the consequences. With a depressed level of antioxidants in the blood, for example, high-density lipoproteins (HDL) or the good cholesterol will bind with free radicals (oxidants) turning the good cholesterol into bad cholesterol or low-density lipoproteins (LDL). 2. Abnormal flux of calcium. When there is an abnormal influx of calcium into mast cells, for example, they produce histamine. This is just one of the ways in which microwave exposure has been known to trigger or aggravate allergic reactions. 3. Mitochondria dysfunction. Dysfunctional mitochondria will interfere with the cells' ability to produce energy and can be linked to fatigue and possibly even obesity. 4. Clumping of blood cells. The amount of oxygen getting to the brain cells and the cells of the body's other organs is diminished substantially, leading to hypoxia. This can cause symptoms similar to altitude sickness: nausea, dizziness, inability to concentrate, and so on. 5. Decrease in the numbers of Natural Killer (NK) cells. This weakens the body's ability to recover from viral and other types of infections. Long-term microwave radiation has been shown to change a particular form of white blood cell (lymphocyte) ratio-known as the T-helper/T-suppressor (T4/T8) cell ratio-from normal to abnormal. Abnormalities in this T-lymphocyte ratio have been shown to lead to an increased susceptibility to viral, fungal, and bacterial infections. Symptoms include sore throats, low- grade fevers, weakness, persistent fatigue, and swollen lymph glands. 6. Increase in microbes (viruses, bacteria, mold, parasites, and yeast) in human hosts and Mycotoxins (Kiinghardt: chronic infection aggravated by EM exposure). (from: Do you have Microwave Sickness? by Paul Doyon) Doctors, did you know that ... ? Scientific & Medical Concerns that can't be ignored! 7. Induced "subliminal" stress causing the adrenal glands to excrete an abnormally greater amount of cortisol and adrenaline. Excretion of adrenaline, for one, can lead to irritability and a feeling of hyperactivity-the latter now very common in children with ADHD. In a continuous state this will eventually lead to adrenal exhaustion. Excessive cortisol has been linked to obesity. 8. Decrease of 5-HT in the blood. 5-HT is a precursor to the production of the brain hormone serotonin. Low levels of serotonin have been linked to anxiety and depression. An increase in anxiety and depression can in turn be linked to an increase in the number of suicides. 9. Decreased levels of brain norepinephrine. This hormone is essential for control of the autonomic nervous system, and lack of it can lead to autonomic nervous system disorders. The body will have trouble regulating its temperature. An abnormal decrease in norepinephrine levels has also been connected to short-term memory disturbances and depression. 10. Altered production of melatonin. This brain hormone and antioxidant is necessary for proper sleep. 42 million Americans (approximately one in five) now take sleep medication for insomnia. A drop in melatonin levels has also been connected with increases in breast cancer. 11. Decreased dopamine in brain. A drop in dopamine levels has been linked with depression, Parkinson's disease. 12. Decreased levels of acetylcholine. A drop in the levels of this neurotransmitter has been linked to a number of neurological and neuromuscular disorders-including Alzheimer's disease. 13. Induced restlessness and may be responsible for restless leg syndrome (RLS). 14. Altered regional cerebral blood flow. In conditions like autism and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) it has been shown via SPECT scan. 15. Increased mobilization of mercury from fillings. This has been shown for cell phone use and for exposure to MRI. Scientific & Medical Concerns that can't be ignored! The residents within a quarter of a mile have the highest risk according to documented studies. In addition, there is a school within 100 yards of the building. It is critical that the City Council gives us the opportunity to present the issues and review the science of electromagnetic field exposures and the potential health risks to the residence in this area. The studies that are available clearly confirm the highest risk is with young children. I am planning to represent the residents in this area and appreciate the opportunity to attend the public hearing and the concerns we have regarding this project. We are requesting that the City Council does not allow for the installation, operation and maintenance of Wireless Communication facility in this residential neighborhood. Please review the attached documents and research the thousands of scientific studies on the effects of EMF both on humans, animals and especially babies and young children at a developmental age. Please refer to The Brag Report as only ONE resource that should be reviewed at length. Executive Summary The BRAG'M Report Recommends that ... 1. schools, school districts, all municipalities and states call upon the FCC for a ruling that requires a 1,500 feet setback for any/all wireless infrastructure near schools. This is the distance at which the scientific literature indicates acute symptoms of electrohypersensitivity are not noticeable and background levels of radiation return to normal from most cellular infrastructure. Note this does not apply to WiMax, a high-powered series of antennas being installed across the U.S., for which the return to background level distance is likely to be much greater than 1,500 feet. Symptoms of electrohypersensitivity have been demonstrated at exposures that are a fraction (0.04%) of U.S. exposure guidelines, in part because the guidelines themselves only take into consideration a 30-minute exposure, not chronic exposures. Until guidelines are formally changed to reflect the current science, a policy of "prudent avoidance" would justify setbacks for antenna infrastructures near schools. 2. radio frequency radiation in school environments be monitored and documented on a regular basis, and especially after antennas are erected nearby or when new wireless technology is introduced into the school environment. 3. if levels of exposure to radiofrequency fields, magnetic fields or dirty electricity exceed the BRAG•M recommendations for these frequencies, that steps be taken to reduce these exposures on school property. 4. health complaints of electrohypersensitivity reported by students and staff be taken seriously, that they be documented, and that appropriate steps be taken in a timely fashion to address the complaint. This involves education of teachers and nursing staff. Note: those who want to conduct a BRAG'M antenna search for their school, visit www.magdahavas.com for "how to" instructions .. The attached report includes a Research and Resolutions section to include only a few of resources and scientific references that should be reviewed. Sincerely, Jan Lazarus 760-525-2228 Print this Page Expressions of Concern from Scientists, Physicians, Health Policy Experts & Others William Rea, MD Founder & Director of the Environmental Health Center, Dallas Past President, American Academy of Environmental Medicine "Sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation is the emerging health problem of the 21st century. It is imperative health practitioners, governments, schools and parents learn more about it. The human health stakes are significant". mank, PhD Associate Professor, Department of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, Columbia University, College of Physicians and Surgeons; Researcher in Bioelectromagnetics; Author of the Bioinitiative Report's section on Stress Proteins. "Cells in the body react to EMFs as potentially harmful, just like to other environmental toxins, including heavy metals and toxic chemicals. The DNA in living cells recognizes electromagnetic fields at very low levels of exposure; and produces a biochemical stress response. The scientific evidence tells us that our safety standards are inadequate, and that we must protect ourselves from exposure to EMF due to power lines, cell phones and the like, or risk the known consequences. The science is very strong and we should sit up and pay attention." Associate Professor, The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden; Author of the Bioinitiative Report's section on the Immune System. "It is evident that various biological alterations, including immune system modulation, are present in electrohypersensitive persons. There must be an end to the pervasive nonchalance, indifference and lack of heartfelt respect for the plight of these persons. It is clear something serious has happened and is happening. Every aspect of electrohypersensitive peoples' lives, including the ability to work productively in society, have healthy relations and find safe, permanent housing, is at stake. The basics of life are becoming increasingly inaccessible to a growing percentage of the world's population. I strongly advise all governments to take the issue of electromagnetic health hazards seriously and to take action while there is still time. There is too great a risk that the ever increasing RF -based communications technologies represent a real danger to humans, especially because of their exponential, ongoing and unchecked growth. Governments should act decisively to protect public health by changing the exposure standards to be biologically-based, communicating the results of the independent science on this topic and aggressively researching links with a multitude of associated medical conditions." David Carpenter, MD Professor, Environmental Health Sciences, and Director, Institute for Health and the Environment, School of Public Health, University of Albany, SUNY Co-Editor, The Biolnitiative Report (www.Biolnitiative.org) Electromagnetic fields are packets of energy that does not have any mass, and visible light is what we know best. X-rays are also electromagnetic fields, but they are more energetic than visible light. Our concern is for those electromagnetic fields that are less energetic than visible light, including those that are associated with electricity and those used for commtmications and in microwave ovens. The fields associated with electricity are commonly called "extremely low frequency" fields (ELF), while those used in commtmication and microwave ovens are called "radio frequency" (RF) fields. Studies of people have shown that both ELF and RF exposures result in an increased risk of cancer, and that this occurs at intensities that are too low to cause tissue heating. Unfortunately, all of our exposure standards are based on the false assumption that there are no hazardous effects at intensities that do not cause tissue heating. Based on the existing science, many public health experts believe it is possible we will face an epidemic of cancers in the future resulting from tmcontrolled use of cell phones and increased population exposure to WiFi and other wireless devices. Thus it is important that all of us, and especially children, restrict our use of cell phones, limit exposure to backgrotmd levels ofWi-Fi, and that government and industry discover ways in which to allow use of wireless devices without such elevated risk of serious disease. We need to educate decision-makers that 'business as usual' is tmacceptable. The importance of this public health issue can not be underestimated." Magda Havas, PhD Associate Professor, Environment & Resource Studies, Trent University, Canada. Expert in radiofrequency radiation, electromagnetic fields, dirty electricity and ground current. "Radio frequency radiation and other forms of electromagnetic pollution are harmful at orders of magnitude well below existing guidelines. Science is one of the tools society uses to decide health policy. In the case of telecommunications equipment, such as cell phones, wireless networks, cell phone antennas, PDAs, and portable phones, the science is being ignored. Current guidelines urgently need to be re-examined by government and reduced to reflect the state of the science. There is an emerging public health crisis at hand and time is of the essence." Whitney North Seymour, .J:r., Esq. Retired Attorney; Former New York State Senator & United States Attorney, Southern District of NY Co-Founder, Natural Resources Defense Council "Electromagnetic radiation is a very serious human and environmental health issue that needs immediate attention by Congress. The Biolnitiative Report is a major milestone in understanding the health risks from wireless technology. Every responsible elected official owes it to his or her constituents to learn and act on its finding and policy recommendations." B. Blake Levitt Former New York Times journalist and author of Electromagnetic Fields, A Consumer's Guide to the Issues and How to Protect Ourselves, and Editor of Cell Towers, Wireless Convenience? Or Environmental Hazard? Ambient man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs), across a range of frequencies, are a serious environmental issue. Yet most environmentalists know little about it, perhaps because the subject has been the purview of physicists and engineers for so long that biologists have lost touch with electromagnetism's fundamental inclusion in the biological paradigm. All living cdls and indeed whole living beings, no matter what genus or species, are dynamic coherent electrical systems utterly reliant on bioelectricity for life's most basic metabolic processes. It turns out that most living things are fantastically sensitive to vanishingly small EMF exposures. Living cells interpret such exposures as part of our normal cellular activities (think heartbeats, brainwaves, cell division itself, etc.) The problem is, man-made electromagnetic exposures aren't "normal." They are artificial artifacts, with unusual intensities, signaling characteristics, pulsing patterns, and wave forms, that don't exist in nature. And they can misdirect cells in myriad ways. Every aspect of the ecosystem may be affected, including all living species from animals, humans, plants and even microorganisms in water and soil. We are already seeing problems in sentinel species like birds, bats, and bees. Wildlife is known to abandon areas when cell towers are placed. Radiofrequency radiation (RF)-the part of the electromagnetic spectrum used in all- things-wireless today-is a known immune system suppressor, among other things. RF is a form of energetic air pollution and we need to understand it as such. Humans are not the only species being affected. The health of our planet may be in jeopardy from this newest environmental concern-added to all the others. Citizens need to call upon government to fund appropriate research and to get industry influence out of the dialogue. We ignore this at our own peril now." Eric Braverman, MD Brain researcher, Author of The Edge Effect, and Director of Path Medical in New York City and The PATH Foundation. Expert in the brain's global impact on illness and health. "There is no question EMFs have a major effect on neurological functioning. They slow our brain waves and affect our long-term mental clarity. We should minimize exposures as much as possible to optimize neurotransmitter levels and prevent deterioration of health". Abraham Liboff, JllbJ) Research Professor Center for Molecular Biology and Biotechnology Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida Co-Editor, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine "The key point about electromagnetic pollution that the public has to realize is that it is not necessary that the intensity be large for a biological interaction to occur. There is now considerable evidence that extremely weak signals can have physiological consequences. These interactive intensities are about 1000 times smaller than the threshold values formerly estimated by otherwise knowledgeable theoreticians, who, in their vainglorious approach to science, rejected all evidence to the contrary as inconsistent with their magnificent calculations. These faulty estimated thresholds are yet to be corrected by both regulators and the media. The overall problem with environmental electromagnetism is much deeper, not only of concern at power line frequencies, but also in the radiofrequency range encompassing mobile phones. Here the public's continuing exposure to electromagnetic radiation is largely connected to money. Indeed the tens of billions of dollars in sales one finds in the cell phone industry makes it mandatory to corporate leaders that they deny, in knee-jerk fashion, any indication of hazard. There may be hope for the future in knowing that weakly intense electromagnetic interactions can be used for good as well as harm. The fact that such fields are biologically effective also implies the likelihood of medical applications, something that is now taking place" As this happens, I think it will make us more aware about how our bodies react to electromagnetism, and it should become even clearer to everyone concerned that there is reason to be very, very careful about ambient electromagnetic fields." Harden, MD, Professor at University Hospital, Orebro, Sweden. World-renowned expert on cell phones, cordless phones, brain tumors, and the safety of wireless radiofrequency and microwave radiation. Co-authored the Biolnitiative Report's section on Brain Tumors by Dr. Hardell "The evidence for risks from prolonged cell phone and cordless phone use is quite strong when you look at people who have used these devices for 10 years or longer, and when they are used mainly on one side of the head. Recent studies that do not report increased risk of brain tumors and acoustic neuromas have not looked at heavy users, use over ten years or longer, and do not look at the part of the brain which would reasonably have exposure to produce a tumor." Samuel Milham MD, MPH Medical epidemiologist in occupational epidemiology. First scientist to report increased leukemia and other cancers in electrical workers and to demonstrate that the childhood age peak in leukemia emerged in conjunction with the spread of residential electrification. "Very recently, new research is suggesting that nearly all the human plagues which emerged in the twentieth century, like common acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children, female breast cancer, malignant melanoma and asthma, can be tied to some facet of our use of electricity. There is an urgent need for governments and individuals to take steps to minimize community and personal EMF exposures." Libby Kelley, MA Managing Secretariat International Commission For Electromagnetic Safety; Founder, Council on Wireless Technology Impacts; Co-Producer of documentary, "Public Exposure: DNA, Democracy and the Wireless Revolution"; EMF environmental consultant and leading appellant in challenging the FCC Radio Frequency Radiation human exposure guidelines, 1997-2000. (www.icems.eu) "Radiofrequency radiation human exposure standards for personal wireless communications devices and for environmental exposure to wireless transmitters are set by nationall governments to guide the use of wireless communications devices and for wireless transmitters. In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Communications Commission set these standards. The Council on Wireless Technology Impacts considers these exposure standards to be inadequate as they are based on heating effects and do not accommodate the low level, cumulative exposure conditions in which the public now lives. These standards are also designed for acute, short term exposure conditions and do not acknowledge the medical evidence pointing to increased risks and actual harm that results from chronic, intermittent exposure. Federal and State public heath agencies are not officially addressing what many concerned scientists and medical doctors now see as an emerging public health problem. There are no health surveillance or remedial response systems in place to advise citizens about electromagnetic radiation exposure (EMR). As wireless technology evolves, ambient background levels increase, creating electrical pollution conditions which are becoming ubiquitous and more invasive. We strongly encourage consumers, manufacturers, utility providers and policymakers to reduce, eliminate and mitigate EMR exposure conditions and to support biologically based standards." .James S, Chairman of the Board, Citizens for Health Co-author, Voice of the People: The Transpartisan Imperative in American Life Attorney, Swankin-Turner, Washington, DC "According to the Biolnitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields-from electrical and electronic appliances, power lines and wireless devices such as cell phones, cordless phones, cellular antennas, towers, and broadcast transmission towers-we live in an invisible fog of EMF which thirty years of science, including over 2,000 peer reviewed studies, shows exposes us to serious health risks such as increased Alzheimer's disease, breast cancer, Lou Gehrig disease, EMF immune system hypersensitivity and disruption of brain function and DNA. The public needs to wake up politicians and public officials to the need for updating the decades old EMF public health standards. This report tells how." Ca.nlina Rees, MBA CEO, Wide Angle Health, LLC Patient education and advocacy "The U.S. spends over $2 trillion dollars on health care each year, of which about 78% is from people with chronic illnesses, without adequately exploring and understanding what factors- including EMF /RF-contribute to imbalances in peoples' bodies' in the first place. After reading The Biolnitiative Report, it should come as no surprise to policymakers, given the continually increasing levels of EMF 1RF exposures in our environment, that close to 50% of Americans now live with a chronic illness. I grieve for people who needlessly suffer these illnesses and hold out the hope that our government leaders will become more cognizant of the role electromagnetic factors are playing in disease, health care costs and the erosion of quality of life and productivity in America." L. l,loyd Morgan, BS Electronic Engineering Director Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States, Member Bioelectromagnetics Society, Member Brain Tumor Epidemiological Consortium* "There is every indication that cell phones cause brain twnors, salivary gland twnors and eye cancer. Yet, because the cell phone industry provides a substantial proportion of research funding, this reality is hidden from the general public. The Interphone Study, a 13-country research project, substantially funded by the cell phone industry has consistently shown that use of a cell phone protects the user from risk of a brain twnor! Does anything more need to be said? It is time that fully independent studies be funded by those governmental agencies whose charter is to protect its citizens so that the truth about the very damaging health hazards of microwave radiation becomes clear and well known." *For identification purposes only: All statements are mine and mine alone and do not represent positions or opinions of the Central Brain Tumor Registry of the United States, the Bioelectromagnetics Society or the Brain Tumor Epidemiological Consortia. Janet Newton President, The EMR Policy Institute www.EMRPolicy.org "The radiofrequency radiation safety policy in force in the United States fails to protect the public. Currently in the US there are more than 260 million wireless subscribers, the demand that drives the continuing build-out of antenna sites in residential and commercial neighborhoods, including near schools, daycare centers, and senior living centers and in the workplace. The January 2008 report issued by the National Academy of Sciences committee whose task was to examine the needs and gaps in the research on the biological effects of exposure to these antennas points out that the research studies to date do not adequately represent exposure realities. Specifically, the studies 1) assume a single antenna rather than the typical arrangements of a minimum of four to six antennas per site, thereby underestimating exposure intensities, 2) do not pertain to the commonly used multiple-element base station antennas, thereby not taking into account exposures to multiple frequencies, 3) lack models of several heights for men, women, and children of various ages for use in the characterization of Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) distributions for exposures from cell phones, wireless PCs, and base stations and 4) do not take into consideration absorption effects of exposures from the many different radio frequency emitting devices to which the public is often simultaneously exposed. A federal research strategy to address these very serious inadequacies in the science on which our government is basing health policy is sorely needed now." Prof. Livio Giuliani, PhD Spokesperson, International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (www.icems.eu) Deputy Director, Italian National Institute for Worker Protection and Safety, East Venice and South Tyrol; Professor, School of Biochemistry of Camerino University, Italy The Venice Resolution, initiated by the International Commission for Electromagnetic Safety (ICEMS) on June 6, 2008, and now signed by nearly 50 peer reviewed scientists worldwide, states in part, "We are compelled to confirm the existence of non-thermal effects of electromagnetic fields on living matter, which seem to occur at every level of investigation from molecular to epidemiological. Recent epidemiological evidence is stronger than before. We recognize the growing public health problem known as electrohypersensitivity. We strongly advise limited use of cell phones, and other similar devices, by young children and teenagers, and we call upon governments to apply the Precautionary Principle as an interim measure while more biologically relevant exposure standards are developed." Professor Jacqueline McGlade Executive Director, European Environmental Agency Advisor to European Union countries under the European Commission "There are many examples of the failure to use the precautionary principle in the past, which have resulted in serious and often irreversible damage to health and environments. Appropriate, precautionary and proportionate actions taken now to avoid plausible and potentially serious threats to health from EMF are likely to be seen as prudent and wise from future perspectives." Paul J. Rosch, MD Clinical Professor of Medicine and Psychiatry, New York Medical College; Honorary Vice President International Stress Management Association; Diplomate, National Board of Medical Examiners; Full Member, Russian Academy of Medical Sciences; Fellow, The Royal Society of Medicine; Emeritus Member, The Bioelectromagnetics Society Claims that cell phones pose no health hazards are supported solely by Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) limits safety standards written by the telecommunications industry decades ago based on studies they funded. These have made the erroneous assumption that the only harm that could come from cell phone radiofrequency emissions would be from a thermal or heating action, since such non thermal fields can have no biological effects. The late Dr. Ross Adey disproved this three decades ago by demonstrating that very similar radiofrequency fields with certain carrier and modulation frequencies that had insufficient energy to produce any heating could cause the release of calcium ions from cells. Since then, numerous research reports have confirmed that non thermal fields from cell phones, tower transmitters, power lines, and other man made sources can significantly affect various tissues and physiologic functions. We are constantly being bathed in an increasing sea of radiation from exposure to the above, as well as electrical appliances, computers, Bluetooth devices, Wi-Fi installations and over 2,000 communications satellites in outer space that shower us with signals to GPS receivers. New WiMax transmitters on cell phone towers that have a range of up to two square miles compared to Wi-Fi's 300 feet will soon turn the core ofNorth America into one huge electromagnetic hot spot. Children are more severely affected because their brains are developing and their skulls are thinner. A two-minute call can alter brain function in a child for an hour, which is why other countries ban their sale or discourage their use under the age of 18. In contrast, this is the segment of the population now being targeted here in a $2 billion U.S. advertising campaign that views "tweens" (children between 8 and 12 years old) as the next big cell phone market. Firefly and Barbie cell phones are also being promoted for 6 to 8-year-olds. It is not generally appreciated that there is a cumulative effect and that talking on a cell phone for just an hour a day for ten years can add up to 10,000 watts of radiation. That's ten times more than from putting your head in a microwave oven. Pregnant women may also be at increased risk based on a study showing that children born to mothers who used a cell phone just two or three times a day during pregnancy showed a dramatic increase in hyperactivity and other behavioral and emotional problems. And for the 30% of children who had also used a cell phone by age 7, the incidence ofbehavioral problems was 80% higher! Whether ontogeny (embryonic development) recapitulates phylogeny is debatable, but it is clear that lower forms of life are also much more sensitive. If you put the positive electrode of a 1.5 volt battery in the Pacific Ocean at San Francisco and the negative one off San Diego, sharks in the in between these cities can detect the few billionths of a volt electrical field. EMF fields have also been implicated in the recent massive but mysterious disappearance of honeybee colonies essential for pollinating over 90 commercial crops. As Albert Einstein warned, "If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe, then man would only have four years of life left." Finally, all life on earth evolved under the influence of solar radiation and geomagnetic forces that we have learned to adapt to and in some instances even utilize. The health of all living systems (ranging upward from a cell, tissue, organ or person, to a family, organization or nation) depends on good communication-good communication within, as well as with the external environment. All communication in the body eventually takes place via very subtle electromagnetic signaling between cells that is now being disrupted by artificial electropollution we have not had time to adapt to. As Alvin Toffler emphasized in Future Shock, too much change in too short a time produces severe stress due to adaptational failure. The adverse effects of electrosmog may take decades to be appreciated, although some, like carcinogenicity, are already starting to surface. This gigantic experiment on our children and grandchildren could result in massive damage to mind and body with the potential to produce a disaster of unprecedented proportions, unless proper precautions are immediately implemented. At the same time, we must acknowledge that novel electromagnetic therapies have been shown to benefit stress related disorders ranging from anxiety, depression and insomnia, to arthritis, migraine and tension headaches. As demonstrated in Bioelectromagnetic Medicine, they may also be much safer and more effective than drugs, so we need to avoid throwing the baby out with the bath water." Print this Page Ilia Garcia wore jewelry the first day she went back to work as a fire lookout for the state of California in the summer of 2002. The intense radiation from dozens of RF I microwave antennas surrounding the lookout heated the metals on her body enough to burn her skin. "I still have those scars," she says. "I never wore jewelry to work after that." Likely Mountain Lookout, on U.S. Forest Service land with a spectacular view of Mount Shasta, is one of thousands of RF/microwave "hot spots" across the nation. A newly-erected cellular communications tower was only 30 feet from the lookout. "One antenna on that tower was even with our heads," recalls Garcia. "We could hear high-pitched buzzing. There were also three state communications antennas mounted on the lookout, only 6 feet from where we walked. We climbed past them every day." Motorola company manuals for management of communications sites confirm that high frequency radiation from these antennas is nasty stuff. Safety regulations mandate warning signs, EMF awareness training, protective gear, even transmitter deactivation for personnel working that close to antennas. Garcia and co-worker Mary Jasso were never warned about the hazards. This, they say, demonstrates extreme malfeasance on the part of agencies and commercial companies responsible for their exposure. By the end of fire season, Garcia and Jasso were so ill they were forced to retire and the lookout was closed to state personnel. Garcia, 52, is now severely disabled with fibromyalgia, auto- immune thyroiditis and acute nerve degeneration. Medical tests confirmed broken DNA strands in her blood and abnormal tissue death in her brain. Dr. Gunner Heuser, a medical specialist in neurotoxicity, states that Garcia's disorders are a result of chronic electromagnetic field exposure in the microwave range and that "she has become totally disabled as a result." Dr. Heuser wrote, "In my experience patients develop multisystem complaints after EMF exposure just as they do after toxic chemical exposure." Jasso, who worked the lookout for 11 seasons, is also disabled with brain and lung damage, partial left side paralysis, muscle tremors, bone pain and DNA damage. Jasso discovered that all lookouts who worked Likely Mountain since 1989 are disabled. At only 61 years of age, she has lost so much memory that she cannot remember back to when her first three children were born. She fears that communications radiation may be a major factor in the nation's phenomenal epidemics of dementia and autism. Both women say they have been unjustly denied worker's comp and medical benefits. Their pleas for help to state and federal agencies have been fruitless. Between them they have racked up over $150,000 in medical bills, although there is no effective treatment for radiation sickness. Twenty-two other members of Garcia and Jasso's two families received Likely Mountain radiation exposure. All now suffer serious and expensive illnesses, including tumors, blood abnormalities, stomach problems, lung damage, bone pain, muscle spasms, extreme fatigue, tremors, numbness, impaired motor skills, cataracts, memory loss, spine degeneration, sleep problems, low immunity to infection, hearing and vision problems, hair loss and allergies. Jasso's husband, who often stayed at the lookout, has a rare soft tissue sarcoma known to be radiation related. Garcia's husband, who spent little time at the lookout, has systemic cancer that started with sarcoma of the colon. Garcia's daughter Teresa was at the lookout for a total of two hours during her first pregnancy. Her daughter was born with slight brain damage and immunity problems. "That baby was always sick," says Garcia. Teresa spent only three days at the lookout during her second pregnancy. Her son was born with autism. Garcia and Jasso have a terminal condition known as "toxic encephalopathy," involving brain damage to frontal and temporal lobes. This was confirmed by SPECT brain scans. Twelve others in the two-family group who also had the scans were diagnosed with the amiction. "All of us with this condition have been told that we are dying," says Garcia. "Our mutated cells will reproduce new mutated cells until the body finally shuts down." Painful conditions endured by the families of Garcia and Jasso are identical to those suffered by Japanese victims of gamma wave radiation after nuclear explosions at Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. Five decades of studies confirm that non-ionizing communications radiation in the RF I microwave spectrum has the same effect on human health as ionizing gamma wave radiation from nuclear reactions. Leading German radiation expert Dr. He yo Eckel, an official of the German Medical Association, states, "The injuries that result from radioactive radiation are identical with the effects of electromagnetic radiation. The damages are so similar that they are hard to differentiate." Understanding what happened at Likely Mountain is critical to understanding the public health threat posed by RF I microwave radiation in the United States. The families of Garcia and Jasso, plus previous lookout workers and multitudes of tourists who visited Likely Mountain for camping and sightseeing, were beamed by the same kind of high frequency radiation that blasts from tens of thousands of neighborhood cell towers and rooftop antennas erected across America for wireless communications. The city of San Francisco, with an area of only seven square miles, has over 2,500 licensed cell phone antennas positioned at 530 locations throughout the city. In practical terms, this city, like thousands of others, is being wave-nuked 24 hours a day. The identical damage resulting from both radioactive gamma waves and high frequency microwaves involves a pathological condition in which the nuclei of irradiated human cells splinter into fragments called micronuclei. Micronuclei are a definitive pre- cursor of cancer. During the 1986 nuclear reactor disaster at Chernobyl in Russia, the ionizing radiation released was equivalent to 400 atomic bombs, with an estimated ultimate human toll of 10,000 deaths. Exposed Russians quickly developed blood cell micronuclei, leaving them at high risk for cancer. RF I microwaves from cell phones and cell tower transmitters also cause micronuclei damage in blood cells. This was reported a decade ago by Drs. Henry Lai and Narendrah Singh, biomedical researchers at the University of Washington in Seattle. Dr. Singh is famous for refining comet assay techniques used to identify DNA damage. Lai and Singh demonstrated in numerous animal studies that mobile phone radiation quickly causes DNA single and double strand breaks at levels well below the current federal "safe" exposure standards. The telecommunications industry knows this thanks to its own six-year, wireless technology research (WTR) study program mandated by Congress and completed in 1999. Gathering a team of over 200 doctors, scientists and experts in the field, WTR research showed that human blood exposed to cell phone radiation had a 300-percent increase in genetic damage in the form of micronuclei. Dr. George Carlo, a public health expert who coordinated the WTR studies, confirms that exposure to communications radiation from wireless technology is "potentially the biggest health insult" this nation has ever seen. Dr. Carlo believes RF I microwave radiation is a greater threat than cigarette smoking and asbestos. In 2000, European communications giant T-Mobile commissioned the German ECOLOG Institute to review all available scientific evidence in regard to health risks for wireless telecommunications. ECOLOG found over 220 peer-reviewed, published papers documenting the cancer-initiating and cancer- promoting effects of the high frequency radiation employed by wireless technology. Many corroborating studies have been published since. By 2004, 12 research groups from seven European countries cooperating in the REFLEX study project confirmed that microwaves from wireless communications devices cause significant single and double strand DNA breaks in both human and animal cells under laboratory conditions. In 2005, a Chinese medical study confirmed statistically significant DNA damage from pulsed microwaves at cell phone levels. That same year, University of Chicago researchers described how pulsed communications microwaves alter gene expression in human cells at non-thermal exposure levels. Because gamma waves and RF I microwave radiation are identically carcinogenic and genotoxic to the cellular roots of life, the safe dose of either kind of radiation is zero. No study has proven that any level of exposure from cell-damaging radiation is safe for humans. Dr. Carlo confirms that cell damage is not dose dependant because any exposure level, no matter how small, can trigger damage response by cell mechanisms. Officials at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the National Institutes of Health closely reviewed the damning results of WTR studies, which also revealed microwave damage to the blood brain barrier. But these officials have chosen to downplay, obfuscate and even deny the irrepressible science of the day. Raking in $billions from selling spectrum licenses, the feds have allowed the telecom industry to unleash demonstrably dangerous technology which induces millions of people to become brain-intimate with improperly tested wireless devices9 and which saturates the nation with carcinogenic waves to service those devices. Dr. Carlo says that even the American Cancer Society is in bed with the communications industry, which infuses the Society with substantial contributions. Medical science illustrates that there are two ways to die from radiation poisoning: Fast burn and slow burn. Nuclear flash- burned Japanese had parts of their flesh melt off before they died in agony within hours or days. People have also quickly died after walking through powerful radar beams, which can microwave- cook internal organs within seconds of exposure. Slow-burn radiation mechanisms are cumulative, progressive, ongoing and continual. Thousands of Japanese nuke bomb victims died painfully years after exposure. The slow burn process of RF I microwave exposure is manifested by cancer clusters commonly found in communities irradiated by cell towe:r transmitters. Recent Swedish epidemiological studies confirm that, after 2,000 hours of cellular phone exposure, or a latency period of about 10 years, brain cancer risk rises by 240 percent. * For the location of cell tower antennas in your neighborhood Click Here* Communications antennas now blast the human habitat with many different electromagnetic frequencies simultaneously. Human DNA hears this energetic cacophony loud and clear, reacting like the human ear would to high volume country music, R&B plus rock and roll screaming from the same speaker. Irradiated cells struggle to protect themselves against this destructive dissonance by hardening their membranes. They cease to receive nourishment, stop releasing toxins, die prematurely and spill micronuclei fragments into a sort of "tumor bank account." This is precisely how microwave radiation prematurely ages living tissues. The constant roaming pain is intense for 32-year-old Kenneth Hurtado of Southern California. He's been to hell and back, starting with a seven-pound tumor on a kidney, diagnosed in 2002. The cancer spread to his brain. His first brain tumor was removed by craniotomy, the second by the cyber knife. In 2005, cancer nodes were found in his lungs. By 2006, the cancer had metastasized to his legs. This year he is battling three excruciating tumors on his spinal cord. Hurtado hates his seizures. His last one came on while he was driving. "It's like the devil taking over your body," he says. Now unable to work, Hurtado says he was relatively healthy in 1998 when he began a career as an installer for a large international corporation manufacturing electronics equipment for wireless providers. At the base of cell towers there is an equipment "hut" where installers assemble the radios, amplifiers and filters which generate man-made microwave frequencies and route them up to transmitter antennas through huge cables. Mounted on sector supports aptly named alpha, beta and gamma, the antennas send and receive these carcinogenic radio waves and their pulsed data packets at the speed of light. Posted on locked fences around the huts are "danger" warning signs. Hurtado says, "You look around these sites and you find many dead birds on the gravel. They can't take the radiation and they'll just die. You don't have to ponder that too long to figure it's bad." Hurtado doesn't know how much radiation he got on the job. He says there are at least four connection spots inside the hut where radiation can leak. He could not avoid the "heat" when he turned the radios on for testing and he wonders if his cancer is the result. "When I first got hired, we had safety meetings, but they pretty much minimized the hazards," he remembers. He was issued no electromagnetic safety clothing and it was not until 2002 that he got a radiation meter to wear. "The meter is supposed to warn you if you are getting too much radiation," he says, "but I put mine on a stick and placed it next to antennas and the alarm never went off." A medical report in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health confirms that workers exposed to high levels of RF I microwave radiation routinely have astronomical cancer rates. The report notes that, for these workers, the latency period between high radiation exposure and illness is short compared to less exposed populations. Hurtado says there are many industry workers who are dangerously over-exposed. "I've talked to guys on power crews who have to climb around the antennas and they, ve told me that before a work day is half over, they start feeling really sick." He adds, "In my mind they are getting cooked." Hurtado suspects that, since the early days of the wireless buildout, there has been illegal activity related to public exposure from transmission sites. "I'm pretty sure," he says, "that some of the carriers are exceeding FCC exposure limits. They can turn the radios and amplifiers up to get a bigger footprint and they don't care if the alarms go on once the installers are gone." Regulatory inspectors could identify violators because channels can be spectrum analyzed. "But," he says, "there is just no one to check and I believe that the public is getting way too much radiation now." The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the single agency with authority to regulate the broadcast/ communications industry, has neither money, manpower nor motive to properly monitor radiation output from hundreds of thousands of commercial wireless installations spewing carcinogenic waves across the nation. The FCC admits that physical testing to verify compliance with emissions guidelines is relatively rare. Critics say that FCC appointees, with virtually no medical or public health expertise, represent an old-boy network and a cheering squad for the telecommunications and broadcast industries. The Center for Public Integrity found that FCC officials have been bribed by the industries with such perks as expensive trips to Las Vegas. Dr. Carlo confirms that there is no regulatory accountability. He says, "You have to go to those base stations and independently measure what is coming out of them because we have had many instances where you have an antenna that is allowed by law to transmit at 100 watts and we have seen up to 900 to 1000 watts. You can turn things up when nobody is looking." Neighborhood groups monitoring the broadcast/communications antenna farm on Lookout Mountain near Denver, Colorado, have consistently found that, despite protests to the FCC over nine years, radiation on the mountain has been measured at up to 125 percent of exposure levels permitted by federal law. Even if there were reliable compliance monitoring, many experts say that FCC public exposure guidelines for RF I microwave radiation are deadly because they are based on the obsolete and unfounded theory that only power density hot enough to flash-cook tissues is harmful. This puts FCC at odds with current scientific knowledge regarding the minimum exposure level at which harm to living cells begins. Myriad symptoms of radiation poisoning can be induced at exposure levels hundreds, even thousands of times lower than current standards permit. Russia's public exposure standards are 100 times more stringent than ours because Russian scientists have consistently shown that, at U.S. exposure levels, humans develop pathological changes in heart, kidney, liver and brain tissues, plus cancers of all types. Norbert Hankin, chief of the EPA's Radiation Protection Division, has stated that the FCC's exposure guidelines are protective only against effects arising from a thermal (flash burn) mechanism. He concedes that, "the generalization by many, that these guidelines protect human beings from harm by any and all mechanisms, is not justified." Thus, public microwave exposure levels tolerated by the FCC and its industry-loaded advisory committees are a national health disaster. Yet, for pragmatic and lucrative reasons, federal exposure limits have been deliberately set so high that no matter how much additional wireless radiation is added to the national burden, it will always be "within standards." The FCC regulatory mess comes into focus with the Likely Mountain case. Jasso says that when she and Garcia contacted the FCC regarding their radiation injuries, they were met with an appalling lack of expertise and concern. "FCC has no answers," Jasso says. "Their exposure guidelines are convoluted and nonsensical. They refuse to address problems of multiple antennas, field expansion, human body coupling and blood reversal because they want to avoid regulatory problems at telecommunication sites." She adds, "FCC will fine a licensee thousands or dollars for not having a light installed on top or a telecommunications tower' but they have not issued even a warning letter to their licensees for the injuries that occurred on Likely Mountain. They say injury cannot occur because their licensees are regulated." When Garcia and Jasso filed suit against companies operating microwave transmitters on Likely Mountain, they could find no attorney who would take their case and they were forced to proceed pro se. In August, 2007, a California district court denied their claim, mainly on the grounds that they had not proven that the defendants had exceeded FCC exposure guidelines. Under federal law the shattered health or 24 people, plus medical testimony, is not sufficient proof of negligence and liability. Since FCC provides no enforcement monitoring at transmitter sites and since the radiation industry is not required to prove with consistent documentation that it is compliant, injured parties have little chance or proving non-compliance because the damage to their health often becomes obvious months or even years after their exposure. The court worried that the Garcia-Jasso case highlights "the conflict between the FCC's delegated authority to establish RF radiation guidelines and limits and plaintiffs, attempt to establish that wireless facilities like the one at Likely Mountain are ultrahazardous. "So, while current science provides ample evidence that FCC's guidelines are ultrahazardous, the radiation industry hides behind FCC incompetence, simply because FCC retains exclusive authority to set the standards. The FCC's disastrous authority is calcified by the Telecommunications Act (TCA) of 1996. The telecom industry is infamous for lavish "donations" which keep legislators on its leash. Anticipating a national radiation health crisis and the public backlash that would follow, the telecom lobby blatantly bought itself a provision in the law that prohibits state and local governments from considering environmental (health) effects when siting personal wireless service facilities so long as " ... such facilities comply with the FCC's regulations concerning such emissions." Many say the TCA insures that America's war on cancer will never be won, while protecting gross polluters from liability. After passage of the TCA, a group of scientists and engineers, backed by the Communications Workers of America, filed suit in federal court. They hoped the Supreme Court would review both the FCC's outdated exposure guidelines and the legality of a federal law that severely impedes state and local authority in the siting of hazardous transmitters. In 2001, the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. The group's subsequent petition to the FCC asking the agency to bring its exposure guidelines current with the latest scientific data was denied. This is where we stand today. The public has no vote, no voice, no choice. Chronic exposure to scientifically indefensible levels of DNA-ravaging radiation is now compulsory for everyone in America. This is why Garcia and Jasso are ill today; this why the industry enjoys unchallenged power to place dangerous transmitters in residential and commercial areas with unsafe setbacks and this is why untold thousands of Americans in buildings with transmitters on the roof are given no safety warnings, though they work and dwell in carcinogenic electromagnetic fields. In the meantime, the radiation industry rakes in $billions in quarterly profits, none of which is set aside for to pay for the national health catastrophe at hand. Every citizen is now condemned to protect and defend himself against radiation assault as best he can. There have been a number of lawsuits against the radiation industry since cell towers began going up in backyards across the nation. In 2001, a group action lawsuit was filed in South Bend, Indiana, by families living in close proximity to towers. The complaint describes health effects suffered by the plaintiffs, including heart palpitations, interference with hearing, recurring headaches, short term memory loss, sleep disturbances, multiple tumors, glandular problems, chronic fatigue, allergies, weakened immune system, miscarriage and inability to learn. The South Bend suit was settled out of court on the basis of nuisance and decreased property values. Health claims don't hold water if emissions are within FCC exposure standards. This case is valuable for understanding the lunacy of FCC standards. The sick families enlisted the help of radiation consultant Bill Curry, who honed his expertise as an engineer for Argonne and Livermore labs. Dr. Curry found that one of the towers was irradiating homes at over 65 microwatts per square centimeter. This power density is well within federal exposure standards, which allow any neighborhood to be zapped with at least 580 microwatts per square centimeter, or higher, depending on the frequencies. If the families were sick at 65 microwatts/cm2 what would they be at 580? Considering that the Soviets used furtive Cold War microwave bombardment to make US embassy personal radiation-sick at an average exposure level of only .01 microwatts/ cm2, America's clear and present danger is obvious. How radiation sick is America? Since the wireless revolution began wave-nuking the U.S. in the 1990s, there have been no federally funded health studies to assess the cumulative effects of ever-increasing communications radiation on public health. There is no national database enabling citizens to study the location of transmitters in their areas. Local and state governments can offer no information on how much commercial wireless radiation is contaminating their populations. When trying to find out who owns a tower or which companies have transmitters on that tower, citizens usually hit a brick wall. Dr. Carlo heads the only independent, post-market health surveillance registry in the nation where people can report radiation illness. Dr. Carlo says the registry has heard from thousands of people who believe that their illnesses, including brain and eye cancers, are due to telecommunications radiation from both wireless phones and tower transmitters. In the last two years, the registry has seen an upsurge in reports as transmitters become ever more energetically dangerous in order to accommodate increased data flow for new, multi-media technologies. We can only guess how many Americans are in their graves today from microwave assault. Arthur Firstenberg, who founded the Cellular Phone Task Force, wrote that, on November 14, 1996, New York City's first digital cellular provider activated thousands of PCS antennae newly erected on the rooftops of apartment buildings. Health authorities reported that a severe and lingering flu hit the city that same week. In response to its classified newspaper ad advising that radiation sickness is similar to flu, the Task Force heard back from hundreds of people who reported sudden onset symptoms synchronous to microwave startup"symptoms similar to stroke, heart attack and nervous breakdown. Firstenberg then gathered statistics from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and analyzed weekly mortality statistics published for 122 U.S. cities. Each of dozens of cities recorded a 10-25 percent increase in mortality, lasting two to three months, beginning in the week during which that city's first digital cell phone network began commercial service. Cities with no cellular system start up in the same time period showed no abnormal increases in mortality. Studies abroad Recent health surveys in other nations confirm that people living close to wireless transmitters are in big trouble: In 2002, French medical specialists found that people living close to cell towers suffered extreme sleep disruption, chronic fatigue, nausea, skin problems, irritability, brain disturbances and cardiovascular problems. German researchers found that people living within 1,200 feet of a transmitter site in the German city of Naila had a high rate of cancer and developed their tumors on average eight years earlier than the national average. Breast cancer topped the list. Spanish researchers found that people living within 1,000 feet of cellular antennas had statistically significant illness at an average power density of 0.11 to 0.19 microwatts I cm2, which is thousands of times less than allowed by international exposure standards. An Egyptian medical study found that people living near mobile phone base stations were at high risk for developing nerve and psychiatric problems, plus debilitating changes in neurobehavioral function. Exposed persons had significantly lower performance on tests for attention, short term auditory memory and problem solving. Researchers in Israel studied people in the town of Netanya who had lived near a cell tower for 3-7 years. They had a cancer rate four times higher than the control population. Breast cancer was most prevalent. Europe in an uproar A new European Union poll of more than 27,000 people across the continent reveals that 76 percent of respondents feel that they are being made ill by wireless transmitters. Seventy-one percent in the UK believe they suffer health effects from mast (cell tower) radiation. In April 2007, The London Times reported a startling number of cancer clusters in mast neighborhoods. One study in Warwickshire, found 31 cancers around a single street. Some sick Brits send their blood to a lab in Germany, which uses state of the art methodology to confirm wireless radiation damage. Radiation sickness is now so prevalent in Germany that 175 doctors have signed the Bramberger Appeal, a document calling the situation a "medical disaster." It asks the German government to initiate a national public health investigation. This appeal closely follows the Freiburger Appeal, signed by thousands of German doctors who say they are dealing with an epidemic of severe and chronic diseases among both old and young patients exposed to wireless microwave radiation. The head of the cancer registry in Berlin found that one urban area with cellular antennas had a breast cancer rate seven times the national average. Sweden was one of the first nations to go wireless. Swedish neuroscientist, Dr. Olle Johansson, with hundreds of published papers to his credit, says that a national epidemic of illness and disability was unleashed by the wireless revolution. Long periods of sick leave, attempted suicides and industrial accidents all increased simultaneously with introduction of mobile phone radiation. Ninety-nine percent of the Swedish population is now under duress of powerful third generation masts. Johansson reports that people are plagued with sleep disorders, chronic fatigue that does not respond to rest, difficulties with cognitive function and serious blood problems. Recurrent headaches and migraines are a "substantial public health problem," he says. Rooftop transmitters, which readily pass microwave radiation into structures, can be a death sentence. Across the world there are reports of cancer clusters and extreme illness in omce buildings and multi-tenant dwellings where antennas are placed on rooftops directly over workers and tenants. In 2006, the top floors of a Melbourne University omce building were closed after a brain tumor cluster drew media attention to the risks of communications transmitters on top of the building. Likewise, ABC's Brisbane television complex, topped with satellite dishes and radio antennas, was the site of a well-publicized breast cancer cluster among workers. In the meantime, the radiation cowboys of America are having a good ol time because they know there's no sheriff in town. The commercial wireless industry is relentless in its drive to construct thousands of new transmitter sites in neighborhoods and schoolyards everywhere, while adding more powerful antennas at its older sites. Countless WiFi systems, both indoors and out, accommodate wireless laptop computers, personal digital assistants, WiFi-enabled phones, gaming devices, video cameras, even parking and utility meters. Hundreds of cities already have or are planning to fund WiFi networks, each consisting of thousands of small microwave transmitters bolted to buildings, street lamps, park benches and bus stops. Some networks are being buried under sidewalks. These access points or "nodes" blast carcinogenic energy at 2.4 to 5 gigahertz with virtually no warning signs about radiation exposure. WiFi radiation is unregulated by the FCC. Sprint-Nextel and Clearwire are now rolling out in U.S. cities tower-mounted WiMAX transmitters providing wireless internet access "to die for." WiMAX is WiFi on steroids. Upon startup of WiMAX transmitters near the Swedish village of Gotene, the emergency room at the local hospital was flooded by calls from people overcome with pulmonary and cardiovascular symptoms. WiMAX radiation could one day be cranked up to a bone- incinerating 66 gigahertz. A single WiMAX tower could provide internet coverage for an area of 3,000 square miles, although coverage for 6-25 square miles is the norm now. Promoters say WiMAX may some day replace all cable and DSL broadband services and irradiate virtually all rural areas. Yet, not a single environmental or public health study has been required as the industry unleashes infrastructure for this savage new wireless technology from which no living flesh will escape. The commercial ray-peddlers are not alone in their quest to make the U.S. a radiation wasteland. In August, 2007, Congress a:pproved new Homeland Security legislation which funds a program to "promote communications compatibility between local, state and federal officials." We catch a glimpse of what this portends as the state of New York gears up to erect hundreds of new wireless installations for a "Statewide Wireless Network (SWN)." This system will blanket 97 percent of the state, allowing agencies at various government levels to communicate instantly while greatly adding to the fog of commercial wireless pollution. The New York Office for Technology says that the radiation power densities of the system will be within FCC limits. That assurance should give us the shivers. Angela Flynn, a 43-year-old caregiver, lives in Santa Cruz, California. Last spring she took classes at a local church where wireless antennas were concealed in a chimney on the building. She recalls, "Every muscle in my body felt sore. And my joints were feeling creaky. My instructor mentioned how people at the women's center on church property had similar symptoms. During my sixth day I had a severe reaction. My short term memory was gone and I was disoriented and confused. When the instructor asked a question, I could not recall anything from the lecture." At night, Angela could not sleep and she would lie awake, feeling her body buzz. She became hypersensitive to other sources of electromagnetic radiation. The symptoms became so bothersome that she canceled the rest of her course. Using a chart for calculating cumulative, non-ionizing, electromagnetic radiation exposure levels, she found that the classes"located only 100 feet from antennas in the building"had suffered the highest possible exposure during peak operation. "It took a month before I regained my health," she reports. When Angela wrote letters to the church inquiring whether it was monitoring the health of the people exposed to antenna radiation, church officials were "unresponsive and dismissive." So Angela saw the light. She helped organize a community group to put pressure on county officials for answers. After hearing community testimony, officials directed the zoning department to create a comprehensive map of county transmitter sites and to put together a report on emissions testing. Angela says, "We recently had a delay of an installation of a tower near a middle school. The superintendent has even come out against the tower and was instrumental in delaying the hearing on the site. He also arranged a school board meeting on the issue." Angela's efforts to share critical information with her community made a difference. America must soon face its radiation cataclysm. The EMR Network says that millions of workers occupy worksites on a daily basis where operating antenna arrays are camouflaged and where no RF safety program is carried out. Thanks to shameless predatory advertising techniques, American youth are now literally addicted to "texting," watching TV and accessing the Internet on tiny wireless screens. These are the toys that keep cell towers and WiFi hot spots buzzing. A nation that requires compulsory mass irradiation to fuel its trivial entertainment needs is surely destined to have a sickly and short-lived population. Right now, 11.7 million Americans have been diagnosed with cancer. Because humans can harbor cancer conditions for years before detection, additional millions of cancer victims are yet undiagnosed. The Journal of Oncology Practice predicts that, by 2020, there will be so many cancer cases in the U.S. that doctors may not be able to cope with their caseloads. The report concludes the nation could soon face a shortage of up to 4,000 cancer specialists. A recent CBS news series on the raging American cancer epidemic left viewers with the mindset that trainloads of federal cash must flow if we are to find the cancer answer. But a proven cancer initiator now inundates our cities, roadways, schools, offices and homes. Any environmental stressor that jackhammers human cells at millions to billions of cycles per second is a cancer factor. Any wave-pollution that breaks the DNA and causes pre-cancerous micronuclei in human blood is a cancer factor. Logic tells us that there will be no "answer to cancer" until we eliminate the cancer factors. Wireless communications radiation is to America today what DDT, thalidomide, dioxin, benzene, Agent Orange and asbestos were yesterday. Historically, the truth about the public health menace of extreme toxins is never told until thousands sicken and die. Dr. Robert Becker, noted for decades of research on the effects of electromagnetic radiation, has warned: "Even if we survive the chemical and atomic threats to our existence, there is the strong possibility that increasing electropollution could set in motion irreversible changes leading to our extinction before we are even aware of them. All life pulsates in time to the earth and our artificial fields cause abnormal reactions in all organismsThese energies are too dangerous to entrust forever to politicians, military leaders and their lapdog researchers." Our mission to save the nation's health and restore sanity in the wireless age seems daunting. The wireless juggernaut is an aggressive, mean machine. Federal regulators are clearly compromised and incompetent to protect the public health. Uninformed consumers dearly love their magic digital toys and don't yet understand the connection between those toys and a national raging cancer epidemic that may consume us all. Powerful economic interests have lied to us long enough. Americans deserve the facts. We need dialogue. Wireless radiation is a form of electronic trespass. America must decide whose rights are more important"idlers beaming death rays for piddling gibberish or the elderly with pacemakers who are made ill by cell phone and tower radiation wherever they go. Must we all prematurely perish so that wireless enthusiasts can capture cell phone photos and instantly send them for processing via carcinogen express? Must all neighborhoods become sick zones so that radiation addicts can receive recipes, ads and other frivolous text messages on their cell phone toys? Does a human being have the right to NOT be forcibly WiMAXED into a coffin, or do only wireless providers and their devotees have rights? What can we do? We can commit to join the growing radiation awareness movement and continue educating ourselves and others. We can employ digital and audio radiation detectors to help safeguard our personal health and to demonstrate the ceaseless brutality of ubiquitous wireless radiation which threatens the genetic integrity of future generations. We can promote emerging technologies that could make communications technologies safer. We can demand that federal radiation exposure standards and setback requirements be updated to reflect the realities of modern science. Federal communications law must be rewritten so that local jurisdictions can regain their right to consider health and environment when reviewing wireless siting applications. We can insist that wireless emissions from transmitters be drastically reduced as they are in Austria and Russia. We can demand routine compliance testing at all transmitter sites. We can see to it that people who have been living and working near powerful transmitters be given opportunity to report their resulting illnesses in national surveys. Proper epidemiological studies must be conducted and their results published and broadly disseminated. Each of us can break the seductive, but oppressive wireless habit ourselves. We can play no game, use no wireless Internet system, make no trivial phone call that necessitates enlarging America's dense forest of wireless transmitters. If no one buys WiMAX- enabled devices and related services, this dangerous system will fail. Whenever possible, we can go back to the old-fashioned, corded phones and message machines which made yesteryear a far more healthy time. Cordless household and office phones emit powerful megahertz or gigahertz microwave radiation, causing damage to hearing, eyesight and brain function. DECT cordless phones irradiate a huge area even when not in use. We can encourage others to contact us by conventional land line phones only. Can we enjoy a leisurely conversation knowing that an irradiated caller risks disease and disability for mindless chatter? What good is wireless convenience if it means being ultimately tethered to a hospital bed? We can teach our children that health is more important than passing convenience and instant gratification. According to OSHA, no environment should be deliberately made hazardous. Backed by current scientific knowledge, we can refuse to work or shop in an environment which endangers our health. We can demand that megahertz and gigahertz cordless phones, walkie talkie radios, WLAN and WiFi systems be removed from schools, offices, hospitals and any public place where people are grossly irradiated without their informed consent. Second hand smoke is bad; second hand radiation is worse. We wish to thank the courageous radiation victims interviewed for this report who have generously revealed the details of their personal suffering in order to warn others. Following their example, we must continue undaunted in the moral quest to protect the national health and restore the world to sanity before it is too late. Meters and resources The Electrosmog Detector allows you to HEAR the intensity of RF I microwave pollution in your environment. Developed by British radiation expert Alasdair Phillips, this battery-operated device will quickly allow you to identify dangerous RF I microwave hotspots, even where transmitters are concealed, and take action to protect yourself. This meter is $99 (price includes shipping) and can be obtained from HEARING IS BELIEVING, Box 64 Hayden, Idaho 83835. E-mail: gzz@icehouse.net. The Trifield Meter ($145), produced by Alpha Lab, is used mainly to measure the milligauss of electromagnetic fields coming from 60 hertz sources. Use this digital meter to make sure your living and working spaces are under 2 milligauss. Alpha Lab's Microwave Power Density Meter ($320) is a more sensitive digital microwave meter that will help you assess the kilohertz, megahertz and gigahertz radiation in our wireless environment. This easy-read meter measures microwave radiation in microwatts per cm2, allowing comparison of your readings to the power density used by the Russians to make our embassy staff sick. Remember, people inside the embassy reportedly received only about .01 microwatts per cm2. For more information, contact Alpha Lab Inc., 1280 South 300 West, Salt Lake City, Utah 84101; (800) 658-7030; www. trifield.com Alan Broadband produces radiation detection devices with models ranging in price from $159 to $2,800. The $159 model, while not giving detailed readings, is an extremely sensitive and sturdy instrument that gives an accurate dial read on whether or not radiation is present and its relative intensity. It lets you know when you are being irradiated and serves as an excellent tool to illustrate exposure levels to others. For more information, contact Alan Broadband 93 Arch St., Redwood City, California 94062; (888) 369-9627; www.zapchecker.com Books Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age, Dr. George Carlo and Martin Schram, Carroll & Graf Publishers, 2001. Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette, Robert C. Kane, Vantage Press, 2001. Cell Towers: Wireless Convenience or Environmental Hazard? The Berkshire-Litchfield Environmental Council, Edited by B. Blake Levitt, 2000. Order from Barnes and Noble. Websites These websites provide excellent information on all aspects of health and other issues relating to electromagnetic fields and radio frequency/microwave radiation. www.buergerwelle.com This excellent German (but in English) site features RF I microwave radiation news from all over the world. The science keeps pouring in and this is where to find it, along with lots of human interest. www.cprnewsbureau.org This is an excellent source of up-to-date news on How far away from a cell phone tower is considered 'safe'? Of course, the farther away from radiation-emitting towers and antennas the better, as our bodies are not adapted to this kind of biological disruption and exhibit signs of distress at the cellular level. Scientists who have read the decades of literature on this topic believe there may be no 'safe' exposure level, particularly when it comes to chronic exposures. I recommend each of you watch the video presentations from the Commonwealth Club of California, the nation's leading public affairs forum. This footage will give you an excellent, and truly unparalleled education on this important topic. The hald-day program, "Health Effects of Electromagnetic Fields", is available in small 10-20 minute video segments for convenient viewing. All of the experts at the event, the largest yet in the United States on this topic, agreed governments need to institute 'biologically based' human exposure guidelines, not the exposure guidelines we have today that are concerned only with physics with no relationship to biological effects. The experts cited effects on fertility, neonatal and human heart irregularities, cognitive function, impacts on DNA, among many other concerns. They expressed grave concern about the long-term effects of chronic, whole body radiation and, importantly, effects on children who are more vulnerable. BRAG Report Guidelines for Distance from Cell Towers The BRAG Antenna Ranking of Schools Report calls for at least a 1,500 foot setback of any antenna from a school. This is about Y4 mile, or roughly 5 city blocks. To be categorized with the best BRAG grade of Green, a school would have to have no antennas within 0.25 miles and have less than 6 antennas within 0.6 miles. To be classified as "Black", the worst BRAG Grade, schools would have two of the three possibilities: the closest antenna within 0.06 miles (~100 yards); more than 12 antennas within 0.25 miles and/or more than 75 antennas within 0.6 miles. Dr. Magda Havas states, "If we want children to do their best academically, emotionally, physically and socially, schools should be microwave-free-free from ambient radiation from neighborhood antennas, as well as free from wireless internet." She adds, "Not only have symptoms of electrohypersensitivity been demonstrated at exposures that are a fraction (0.04%) of U.S. exposure guidelines, but the guidelines themselves, which are based on an assumed 30- minute exposure, do not take into consideration the effects of realistic exposure durations, such as chronic exposures experienced in school, office or residential settings." Reflections Another factor little understood, that guidelines do not take into consideration but on which there is mounting scientific evidence, is the importance of 'reflections', which sometimes increase our RF exposures to levels well over current FCC safety guidelines. FCC guidelines are presently only concerned with heating effects of radiation, overlooking the non-thermal effects on biology from frequencies, modulation of the signals, etc., as well as the effects from reflections. The risks from 'reflections' is an important consideration to understand, as reflections are common near cell phone antennas, impacting homes, schools and work environments. For example, one bau biologist found that his home, while not in the direct line of radiation exposure from a nearby neighborhood cell tower, nonetheless was being highly impacted by it because the radiation was bouncing off a nearby metal garage door on an angle toward his house. An important new paper by Vermeeren et al, 2010 describes a study at the Swiss ITIS wireless emissions testing laboratory documenting the importance of considering the "reflective environment". Magda Havas, PhD says research in Zory 's Archives also shows "people themselves can also reflect microwave radiation, and two people standing near each other may have up to 3 times higher exposure (or lower exposure due to shielding) depending on the geometry of the radiation and the location of the people." While some radiation is absorbed into the body because we are conductive, our bodies will also reflect radiation. Metal In or On the Body Another important consideration with reflections has to do with people who have metal implants, dental braces or who spend a lot of time in metal wheelchairs. There are heartbreaking cases of people who literally cannot function, or who have seizures or mental disorders linked to these appliances, and especially in the case of internal implants, which are difficult to reverse. I have counseled and helped remediate the homes of people with metal rods in their bodies, and also discovered certain perfectly healthy children had seizures after getting metal braces put in their mouth. It is clear people with metal on or in their bodies (even metal dental fillings) are having a very hard time in the wireless age. Doctors and dentists need to be informed of this and non-metal implants, braces and fillings used instead. I recommend everyone order a copy of a Primer on Electrosensitivity by the U.K. charity Electrosensitivity-U.K. and share this excellent compilation of the research and clinical understanding with their doctors and other health related personnel. Beyond the 'electrosensitivity' symptoms near cell antennas, German doctors have found that the proportion of newly developing cancer cases is significantly higher among people who live within 400 meters of a cell phone transmitter. The relative risk of getting cancer in the study increased by 200% after 5 years operation of the transmitter. (H. Eger at al, 'The !JJJluence of Being Physically Near to a Cell Phone".) In Israel, Wolf et al (2004) found that within 350 meters of cell phone antennas there was a 300% increased incidence of cancer among men and women and a 900% cancer increase among women alone. Questions? Schools may e-mail Campaign for Radiation Free Schools at: Questions@EMF-Help.com. This blog brings the wisdom of world-class experts in electromagnetic fields to your school. In the next Blog, we will interview a second expert in EMF mitigation and learn how exactly he goes about assessing an environment for electromagnetic fields. Don't miss it! It is in the field where the most important learning takes place. Advisors to the EMF-Help Blog™ include David Carpenter, MD, Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment, University of Albany, USA; Magda Havas, PhD, Trent University, Canada; Alasdair Philips, Powerwatch, U.K; Vicki Warren, BSEE, CIE, CERSA, BBEC, Past Executive Director, Institute for Bau Biology & Ecology, USA; Karl Maret, MD, M.Eng., President, Dove Health Alliance, USA; and science writer, B. Blake Levitt, author of "Electromagnetic Fields: A Consumers Guide to the Issues and How to Protect Ourselves", USA. Copyright Wide Angle Health, LLC © 2011. Reposting this Blog is fine. Inquiries to reprint or syndicate are welcome. If you quote from our blog, please give attribution. o •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• End Blog #5 with the public health paradigm that everyone can apply. Here are our suggestions based on these guidelines: The primary means of intervention is through avoidance or minimizing exposure. This simply means to avoid contact with EMR as much as possible. In case of a cell phone tower close to your home, this could mean using specially formulated RF shield paint, shielding fabric, shielding glass or film for windows, etc. Although they may sound extreme, these measures are a life-saver for someone who suffers from electrosensitivity, a condition in which a person experiences physical symptoms aggravated by electromagnetic fields. (Sweden is the only country so far that recognizes electrosensitivity as a real medical condition, and their government pays for measures to reduce exposure in their homes and workplaces). The secondary means of intervention is to minimize the effects of exposure. This includes the use of bioenergetic devices that help reduce the effects of EMR, such as pendants, chips or other devices designed to strengthen the biofield of the individual. A biofield is the matrix of weak electromagnetic signals that the body's cells use to communicate with each other. EMR disrupts these signals, causing the cells to eventually shut down and result in build up of toxins and waste products within the cells, including free radicals known to result in cellular dysfunction and interference with DNA repair. A scientifically validated bioenergetic device restores intercellular communications and normal cellular function by strengthening the biofield against the effects of EMR. The third means of intervention is to help reverse damage caused by exposure. This includes nutritional support such as anti-oxidant supplementation, particularly helpful in countering the effects of free radicals. Supplementing with anti-oxidants SOD, catalase, glutathione, and Coq10 are especially recommended. Microwave radiation has been shown to decrease levels of these anti-oxidants that the body normally produces to protect itself. These levels are sensitive indicators in stress, aging, infections and various other disease states. Additional information: 1. The Influence of Being Physically Near to a Cell Phone Transmission Mast on the Incidence of Cancer (PDF) (German study) 2. Increased Incidence of Cancer Near a Cell-Phone Transmitter Station (PDF) (Israel study) 3. Environmental Epidemiological Study of Cancer Incidence in the Munici!Palities of j-iausmannstatten & Vasoldsberg (Austria) (PDF) (Note: This article is shared for educational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. If you believe that you have a health problem, see your doctor or health professional immediately.) © 2007 Taraka Serrano Cell Phone Towers: How Far is Safe? by Taraka Serrano If you or people you know live within a quarter mile of a cell phone tower, this may be of concern. Two studies, one in Germany and the other in Israel, reveal that living in proximity of a cell phone tower or antenna could put your health at significant risk. German study: 3 times increased cancer risk Several doctors living in Southern Germany city of Naila conducted a study to assess the risk of mobile phone radiation. Their researh examined whether population living close to two transmitter antennas installed in 1993 and 1997 in Naila had increased risk of cancer. Data was gathered from nearly 1,000 patients who had been residing at the same address during the entire observation period of 10 years. The social differences are small, with no ethnic diversity. There is no heavy industry, and in the inner area there are neither high voltage cable nor electric trains. The average ages of the residents are similar in both the inner and outer areas. What they found is quite telling: the proportion of newly developed cancer cases was three times higher among those who had lived during the past ten years at a distance of up to 400m (about 1300 feet) from the cellular transmitter site, compared to those living further away. They also revealed that the patients fell ill on average 8 years earlier. Computer simulation and measurements used in the study both Electmmagnetic Radiatic•n Protecton Solutions Personal EMF Protection: Q-Link Pendant Home EMF Protection: EarthCalm Home Protection System Cell Phone EMF Protection show that radiation in the inner area (within 400m) is 100 times higher compared to the outer area, mainly due to additional emissions coming from the secondary lobes of the transmitter. Looking at only the first 5 years, there was no significant increased risk of getting cancer in the inner area. However, for the period 1999 to 2004, the odds ratio for getting cancer was 3.38 in the inner area compared to the outer area. Breast cancer topped the list, with an average age of 50.8 year compared with 69.9 years in the outer area, but cancers of the prostate, pancreas, bowel, skin melanoma, lung and blood cancer were all increased Israel study: fourfold cancer risk Another study, this one from Israel's Tel Aviv University, examined 622 people living near a cell-phone transmitter station for 3-7 years who were patients in one clinic in Netanya and compared them against 1 ,222 control patients from a nearby clinic. Participants were very closely matched in environment, workplace and occupational characteristics. The people in the first group live within a half circle of 350m (1148 feet) radius from the transmitter, which came into service in July 1996. The results were startling. Out of the 622 exposed patients, 8 cases of different kinds of cancer were diagnosed in a period of just one year (July 1997 to June 1998): 3 cases of breast cancer, one of ovarian cancer, lung cancer, Hodgkin's disease (cancer of the lymphatic system), osteoid osteoma (bone tumour) and kidney cancer. This compares with 2 per 1 222 in the matched controls of the nearby clinic. The relative risk of cancer was 4.15 for those living near the cell-phone transmitter compared with the entire population of Israel. Women were more susceptible. As seven out of eight cancer cases were women, the relative cancer rates for females were 10.5 for those living near the transmitter station and 0.6 for the controls relative for the whole town of Netanya. One year after the close of the study, 8 new cases of cancer were diagnosed in the microwave exposed area and two in the control area. Locate the Cell Phone Towers and Antennas Near You Do you know how many cell phone transmitters are in your neighborhood? You'd be surprised. Visit antennasearch.com to find out where the towers and antennas are in your area and how close they are to your home or place of work. The site will also pinpoint future tower locations, additional helpful information for those considering buying a home. For clarity, towers are tall structures where antennas are installed. A typical tower may easily hold over 10 antennas for various companies. Antennas, on the other hand, are the actual emitters of signals for various radio services including cellular, paging and others. Antennas are placed on high towers or can be installed by themselves (stand alone) on top of buildings and other structures. Using where I live as an example, I've located 3 cell phone towers and 22 antennas within a quarter mile from our home, with the closest one at 845 feet.. And this is in a relatively quiet residential neighborhood by the ocean in the small city of Hilo in Hawaii. As you may guess, I did my research only well after we've moved in. Fortunately, we're here on just a lease and we'll be a bit wiser next time we look for a new home. What to Do If You Live Near a Cell Phone Transmitter Short of relocating, there are some things you can do to fight the effects of electromagnetic radiation (EMR). The Safe Wireless Initiative of the Science and Public Policy Institute in Washington, DC, outlines three levels of intervention in accordance Taraka Serrano is a health advocate dedicated to sharing information and solutions relating to serious health issues of our time. Watch video reports on the dangers of cell phone and EMF radiation, and learn more about the right emf protection solutio!l§ for you. Visit EMf-Health.com You have permission to publish this article electronically or in print, free of charge, as long as the bylines are included and the article remains unchanged. A courtesy copy of your publication would be appreciated. Word count: 1 ,235 June 28, 2016 Maree Hoeger Core Development Services 2749 Saturn St. Brea, CA 92821 SUBJECT: CUP 16-02-VERIZON CARLSBAD VILLAGE The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project will be sent to you via email on Wednesday, July 6, 2016. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) meeting which will be held on Monday, July 11, 2016. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 9:00a.m. If you have any questions concerning your project you should attend the DCC meeting. It is necessary that you bring the following required information with you to this meeting or provide it to your planner prior to the meeting in order for your project to go forward to the Planning Commission: 1. Unmounted colored exhibit(s) of your site plan and elevations. For residential projects of 2 or more homes a typical street scene of the elevations shall be provided. The corresponding rear elevations for the homes shown for the typical street scene shall also be provided; and 2. A PDF of your colored site plan and elevations. The colored exhibits must be submitted at this time to ensure review by the Planning Commission at their briefings. If the colored exhibits are not available for their review, your project could be rescheduled to a later time. The PDF of your colored site plan and elevations will be used in the presentation to the Planning Commission and the public at the Planning Commission Hearing. If you do not plan to attend this meeting, please make arrangements to have your colored exhibit(s) and the PDF here by the scheduled time above. Should you wish to use visual materials in your presentation to the Planning Commission, they should be submitted to the Planning Division no later than 12:00 p.m. on the day of a Regular Planning Commission Meeting. Digital materials will be placed on a computer in Council Chambers for public presentations. Please label all materials with the agenda item number·you are representing. Items submitted for viewing, including presentations/digital materials, will be included in the time limit maximum for speakers. All material~ exhibited to the Planning Commission during the meeting (slides, maps, photos, etc.) are part of the public record and must be kept by the Planning Division for at least 60 days after final action on the matter. Your materials will be returned upon written request. If you need additional information concerning this matter, please contact your Planner, Austin Silva at (760) 602- 4631 or at austin.silva@carlsbadca.gov. Sincerely, DON NEU, AICP City Planner DN:AS:tm c: File Copy Project Engineer Community & Economic Development Planning Division j1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314j760-602-4600 J760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov May 25,2016 Maree Hoeger Core Development Services Suite 250 3350 East Birch Street Brea, CA 92821 SUBJECT: CUP 16-02-VERIZON CARLSBAD VILLAGE Dear Maree, t 1~led :s-!zs-1 1<, FILECcityof Carlsbad The City has completed its review of the Verizon Carlsbad Village project, which was most recently submitted on May 4, 2016. No further issues were raised during this review period. Staff will proceed in scheduling the project for the next available public hearing. A letter will follow announcing a tentative hearing date and also requesting final exhibits and a public noticing package, Please contact me at (760) 602-4631, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, AUSTIN SILVA, AICP Associate Planner AS:fn c: Waters Edge Properties, LLC, 3150 Pia Pica Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Van Lynch, Principal Planner Kyrenne Chua, Project Engineer File Copy Data Entry Community & Economic Development Planning Division \1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314\760-602-4600 \760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov April 20, 2016 Maree Hoeger Core Development Services 2749 Saturn Street Brea, CA 92821 SUBJECT: CUP 16-02-VERIZON CARLSBAD VILLAGE-CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) APPLICABILITY/PROCESS DETERMINATION AND TARGET DECISION IOATE CEQA Determination: This is to advise you that after reviewing the application for the project referenced above, the City has determined that the following environmental review process (pursuant to CEQA) will be required for the project: The project is exempt from the provisions of CEQA, pursuant to CEQA Categorical Exemption for Existing Facilities (Section 15301}. No environmental review is required for the project. A Notice of Exemption will be filed after approval of the project with the San Diego County Clerk's Office which involves a filing fee. Please submit a check to the project planner in the amount of $50.00 made out to the San Diego County Clerk. The check should be submitted approximately one week prior to the Planning Commission hearing date. Target Decision Date: In the interest of expeditiously processing your application consistent with the State Permit Streamlining Act (California Government Code Section 65950), the project should be scheduled for a public hearing no later than June 15, 2016. Therefore, in the interest of achieving that decision date/hearing date, all remaining project issues must · be addressed by May 5, 2016. If all project issues are not resolved by the date listed above, you may formally request a one-time 90 day application extension. Otherwise, you will need to withdraw the application. For additional information related to this CEQA applicability/process determination or should you have any questions regarding an application extension or would like to withdraw your application, please contact Austin Silva at 760-602-4631 or by email at austin.silva@carlsbadca.gov. Sincerely, Principal Planner VL:AS:fn c: Kyrenne Chua, Project Engineer File Copy Data Entry Community & Economic Development Planning Division 11635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-73141760-602-4600 1760-602-8560 f 1 www.carlsbadca.gov March 24, 2016 Maree Hoeger Core Development Services 2749 Saturn Street Brea, CA 92821 1c\,kJ 3kzy lHo F I L5(City of Carls Dad SUBJECT: 1st REVIEW FOR CUP 16-02 -VERIZON CARLSBAD VILLAGE Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Division has reviewed your Conditional Use Permit, application no. CUP 16-02, as to its completeness for processing. The application is complete, as submitted. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. The City may, in the course of processing the application, request that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise supplement the basic information required for the application. In addition, you should also be aware that various design issues may exist. These issues must be addressed before this application can be scheduled for a hearing. The Planning Division will begin processing your application as of the date of this communication. At this time, the City asks that you provide two (2) complete sets of the development p~ans so that the project can continue to be reviewed. The City will complete the review of your resubmittal within 25 days. In order to expedite the processing of your application, you are strongly encouraged to contact your Staff Planner, Austin Silva, at (760) 602-4631, to discuss or to schedule a meeting to discuss your application and to completely understand this letter. You may also contact each commenting department individually as follows: • Land Development Engineering Division: Kyrenne Chua, Assistant Engineer, at (760) 602-2744. Sincerely, d/!1 AUSTIN SILVA, AICP Associate Planner AS:fn c: Waters Edge Properties, LLC, 3150 Pio Pico Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008 Kyrenne Chua, Project Engineer Van Lynch, Principal Planner File Copy Data Entry Community & Economic Development . Planning Division J1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314J760-602-4600 1760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov CUP 16-02-~~f.ftfoN EAiftL~B?\V VILLAGE ~-'i:~·g·~i~,~J ~~~~ ~::~ '~~ March 24, 2016 ;; :,~ ·· .. ·\:. Page 2 i<•:iF'b.,r; l;.!\!iil:::>:; I'~' ISSUES OF CONCERN Engineering: 1. To the maximum extent practicable, avoid trenching within the street and relocate the proposed Telco conduit behind the curb and gutter within the sidewalk as shown on the redlined site plan. 2. Provide earthwork volumes: cut, fill, import, export, and remedial in cubic yards on the title sheet. 3. Label and show on the site plan the APN and/or addresses of the adjacent properties. 4. Label and show on the site plan all existing facilities that could be affected by the proposed Telco conduit. Clarify whether said facilities are to remain, to be replaced or to be removed. 5. Verify whether the proposed Telco conduit trench within the parking lot will affect the existing concrete block wall. Label on the site plan whether the existing concrete block is to remain, to be replaced or to be removed. 6. Provide a completed and current version of the Storm Water Standards Questionnaire, Form E-34, which is available on the city's website. Based on the first plan check, the project does not appear to be a 'Priority Development Project'. 7. Address the redline comments on the site plan to facilitate the next review.