The Antenna Dilemma: Cell Towers + Property Values

My friend recently contacted me for my professional opinion regarding the affect, if any, that a cell tower on the roof would have on his property value.

Lured by financial incentive, my friend's condo association is pushing hard to get a majority decision to install a cell tower on the roof of their historic building in the South End.

This tower, or "base station," will consist of radios, computerized switching equipment, and antennas that receive and transmit radio frequency (RF) signals. The large box that houses all the cables and equipment will sit on the roof in plain site of the roof deck's public space, near an outdoor grill and picnic table.

"Exposures that exceed these recommended standards can sometimes be encountered on the rooftops of buildings where base stations are mounted. If this is the case, access to these areas should be limited. " - American Cancer Society

The enormous bundle of cables will run down the facade of the building and be painted the building color in an attempt to camouflage it. A dropped ceiling will need to be constructed in the hallway of the ground floor to conceal the cables that will snake through the building, noticeably reducing the ceiling height. Technically, the building's architecture will not be "altered." by this invasive equipment...

"Cellular and PCS (Personal Communications Service) base stations in the United States are required to comply with limits for exposure recommended by expert organizations and endorsed by government agencies responsible for health and safety. Measurements made near cellular and PCS base station antennas mounted on towers have confirmed that ground-level exposures are typically thousands of times less than the exposure limits adopted by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission). In fact, in order to be exposed to levels at or near the FCC limits for cellular or PCS frequencies an individual would essentially have to remain in the main transmitted radio signal (at the height of the antenna) and within a few feet from the antenna. This is, of course, very unlikely to occur"
- www.cancer.org

From what I gather, Wilkes Passage already gave the "OK" and had one mounted on their roof. One could argue that Wilkes Passage is a much larger building, however, assuming a cell tower was installed, were the residents consulted or informed?

Does it ease your mind knowing that, in 1993 The World Health Organization stated, "The epidemiologic and comparative clinical studies do not provide clear evidence of detrimental health effects in humans from exposure to RF fields."

"What Does the Epidemiologic Evidence Say?

No human studies have focused specifically on cellular phone towers or even on radio waves more generally. Several studies have looked at the effects of radio waves and microwaves combined; these have generally not shown any increase in cancer, except for a US Air Force study that suggested an increase in brain tumors in association with radio frequency/microwave exposure." - American Cancer Society

What Do the Expert Agencies Say?

The expert agencies that usually provide findings on carcinogenicity (whether something can cause cancer) – the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the National Toxicology Program (NTP), and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – have not issued findings on cellular phone towers.

"An FCC spokesman insisted cell towers, even at street level, are safe: “It’s extremely unlikely people would be exposed to levels of radio frequency energy that are above the accepted standards.” - Richard Weir, Boston Herald (http://tinyurl.com/buuoj)

Agencies such as the National Council on Radiation Protections and Measurements, the International Radiation Protection Association, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and the American National Standards Institute, have established guidelines for exposure to RF radiation originating from cellular communications base stations. These guidelines were designed to protect workers, as well as the public, from potentially harmful radio frequency. The recommended exposure limits are in the range of .41-.45 milliwatts per square centimeter (mW/cm2) for cellular radio frequencies (the first generation of cell phones was more like 4.0 rather than the current .40 milliwatts

My friend did the calculations and found that the radio frequency (RF) produced by a cell tower would be 1 Million times more than the RF produced by a cell phone, for the residents on the top floor living directly beneath the towers. Plus, these residents would be exposed to the RF 24/7.

There is no test to measure whether you have been exposed to RF radiation from cellular phone towers. However, if there is a cellular phone tower mounted near your home or office, you can ask a government agency or private firm to measure the radio frequency field strength near the tower to ensure that it is within the acceptable range.

What would you do if your condo association voted to add a cell tower on your building?

Is $180/mo/resident worth the health risk?

Would the tower negatively affect property value?

My professional opinion is that as long as the perception that cell towers can cause cancer, exist (and until the introduction of conclusive data disproving the theory that cell towers pose a health risk), it is possible that a property could be deemed less marketable, and thus less valuable. Would my friend's condo value will be negatively affected by a cell tower? It is hard to say.

My gut instinct, is that cell towers on residences aren't a great idea. Maybe the condo association should explore other options, like posting paid advertisements on the building to earn revenue to build the condo association reserves.