<Also Read> • Police Tower Enrages Neighbors / Berkeley residents want new structure torn down Chip Johnson, SFGATE March 28, 2000 • Council activates radio tower despite opposition John Geluardi Daily Planet staff - January 24, 2002 City Council Public Access Cable Broadcast January 22, 2002 205:49 TRT Berkeley Citizen Archive Neighbors, Spring fight against tall radio tower By John Geluardi Daily Planet staff January 22, 2002 Neighbors of Berkeley’s new Public Safety Building will get a chance to sound off tonight on the 170-foot emergency radio tower they say is not only an eyesore but was erected without proper public review. Neighbors, who are supported by Councilmember Dona Spring, say they will ask the City Council during tonight’s public hearing to reduce the tower’s visual impact by breaking it into two, smaller “flag pole” style towers. The tower is located behind the Public Safety Building at 2100 Martin Luther King, Jr. Way. But they face opposition from the City Manager’s Office and the Department of Public Works, which are recommending the council leave the tower as is and activate it immediately to support police and fire department radio communication. The three-legged, five-story, steel structure, which neighbors compare to an “oil derrick,” was constructed in early 2000. The tower is designed to withstand a major seismic event and to continue providing critical communication during a major disaster response by multiple police, fire and medical agencies. City officials claim the tower, which has never been used, is located in position to best serve all sections of the city. It will also be valuable for daily emergency responses. “In an average calendar year, Berkeley police and fire departments each receive approximately 10,000 emergency calls,” a Department of Public Works report reads. “Wireless communication allows field personnel to effectively and efficiently respond to these incidents.” But neighbors say the tower is too large, and its design is inappropriate for its location next to a residential neighborhood and a historic district. Neighbors also charge that the tower was erected without the proper public review and permits. “This is Berkeley’s version of Tower Gate,” said Spring. “The process was a scandal, and it would be an assault to allow (the tower) to remain in place.” Spring said the tower should be broken into two or more parts and relocated atop the Martin Luther King, Jr. Civic Center. She also supports dismantling the existing tower and replacing it, in the same approximate location, with two “flag pole” styled antennas, which would be more visually appropriate for the neighborhood. MACRO Corporation studied the situation last year, which cost the city $50,000, and found the best alternative to the existing tower would be two towers, approximately 110 feet tall in the general area of the nearby, old Hall of Justice, its report said. The consultant estimated the cost of the redesign to be $300,000. There was no estimate of the cost to relocate the antennas on the roof of the Civic Center. Neighbors also claim the tower never went through the city’s normal approval process prior to construction. “This is a historical district and the tower is right next to Old City Hall, which is one of the finest examples of public architecture in the East Bay,” said Vito Lab, who lives across the street from the tower. “And this project never went to Design Review, never went to the Zoning Adjustments Board and never went to the Landmarks Preservation Commission.” But according to the Department of Public Works report, there was public input on the tower design. The report cites a design competition for the Public Safety Building, in which drawings were available for public viewing and a backyard presentation, which included computer-generated images, at PSB neighbor Deborah Green’s home. The report also says the tower was described in the PSB Environmental Impact Report. Lab said any description of the tower was lost in the overall presentation of the PSB plans and argues the public review process was clearly lacking. “I would say this tower is the second tallest structure in Berkeley and you don’t just trot out a plan in front of three or four people in Debbie Green’s backyard and say that’s a public review,” he said.

Public Safety Building Radio Communications Tower Public Hearing January 22, 2002
Community Public Comment Participants - Honor Participation

Police Tower Enrages Neighbors / Berkeley residents want new structure torn down Chip Johnson, SFGATE March 28, 2000 2000-03-28 04:00:00 PDT EAST BAY -- It stands 160 feet above the ground and is anchored to the earth with 16 feet of concrete and reinforced with steel supports. But members of a nearby Berkeley homeowners association think it should be moved. Never mind that the Berkeley Police Department's communications tower was depicted in plans for the new Public Safety Building for almost four years. When it actually went up a few weeks ago, so did the voices of some angry residents. "I protest the sudden appearance of an oversized antenna tower on top of the new public safety building," Berkeley resident Bob Marsh wrote in a letter to the mayor and City Council. "I can't believe that the people of Berkeley approved something that looks like that," he said. Members of the McKinley Addison Grant Neighborhood Association will meet with representatives of the city's Public Works and Police departments tomorrow to discuss possible alternative sites, said City Council member Dona Spring, whose office organized the meeting. Spring convened the meeting because she is unhappy with the location of the tower and has received complaints from residents, including Marsh, who lives in West Berkeley. Architectural renderings concealed the "negative visual impact" the tower has on neighboring views, let alone the emotional distress the tower is putting neighbors through, she said. "People feel like they're in a prison camp," Spring said, adding that residents have health concerns about what the tower could be emitting, like radio waves. "When you live right across the street from it, it dominates the sky," she said. "There's no way to look up and enjoy the sky." It should be pointed out that at its peak the tower is four to five feet wide. "It doesn't block anything," said Rene Cardinaux, Berkeley's public works director. "There are just some people who find it obnoxious, no matter where we put it." If obnoxious behavior by humans was a crime in Berkeley, well, you couldn't build a jail big enough. Moving the tower would cost at least $300,000, not including the costs of another environmental impact report or the fight to relocate it anywhere in Berkeley, Cardinaux said. "No matter where in town we put it, it would be a problem," Cardinaux said. Spring has suggested relocating the tower to the Civic Center building across the street or a less conspicuous site between the courthouse and the Hall of Justice. Police Chief Dash Butler has suggested painting it black so it cannot be seen at night. Even Berkeley needs a communications tower in order to transmit and receive police, fire and 911 dispatch calls. Moving the tower would prove costly and ensure a lengthy and expensive debate. "I wouldn't rule it out, but as a practical matter it's unlikely," Cardinaux said. Council activates radio tower despite opposition By John Geluardi Daily Planet staff January 24, 2002 The City Council voted to activate the Public Safety Building tower antenna Tuesday night after hearing public comment from city staff and police officers who said the tower is critical for public safety and from neighbors who argued it’s an eyesore and was erected without public process. The council approved the activation by a 6-2 vote with councilmembers Dona Spring and Kriss Worthington voting no. Mayor Shirley Dean, who is currently attending the U.S. Conference of Mayors in Washington, D.C., did not vote on the issue. The vote to activate the tower was taken after another motion by Spring to table the issue until the council’s Feb. 5 meeting failed to get the five votes necessary for approval. Spring said on Wednesday that Tuesday’s vote does not resolve the issue. “It’s not over, and I am bound and determined by hook or crook that the tower is going to be taken down.” she said. “I don’t know how long it’s going to take but I am strongly committed to it’s removal.” Director of Public Works Rene Cardinaux said after the council’s vote that he is most concerned about the immediate future. “I’m not arguing the long-term solution but for the short-term it makes the best sense from a safety perspective to turn the tower on,” Cardinaux said adding it should be activated within the next two weeks. Councilmember Polly Armstrong agreed. “It’s irresponsible of us to not vote for a resolution that will make the City of Berkeley safer,” she said. “We need to turn that antenna on and protect the citizens of Berkeley.” The three-legged steel tower, which is located behind the Public Safety Building at 2100 Martin Luther King, Jr. Way, has never been activated because of the controversy that erupted as soon as the tower was erected. Neighbors have fought to have the tower either removed or redesigned during the last two years, saying its five-story design is inappropriate for a residential neighborhood. In addition, neighbors say the tower never went through the city’s normal public process, which would have included review by the Landmarks Preservation Commission, Design Review Committee and the Zoning Adjustments Board. But citing citywide safety concerns and the unreliability of the two, 60-year-old antennae currently used by the police and fire departments for radio communication, Cardinaux, the fire and police chiefs and the director of the Department of Planning and Development, urged the council to activate the new tower. Five police officers also called for the activation of the tower during the public hearing. But nearly 30 residents told the council that the tower has lowered real estate values and has altered the quality of life in their neighborhood. “The tower has changed the neighborhood,” said Carrie Sprague who lives nearby the tower. “When you come out your front door, you don’t think about your rose bushes or your tomato plants or whether the dog got out the front gate, you just get mad at that tower.” Other neighbors focused on the lack of the public process. “As near as I can tell the structure was built on a change order, which is appropriate for a light bulb but not a 170-foot tower,” he said. “In the end what we really need is a public process.” Neighbors advocated for the city to replace the tower with two smaller, “flag-pole” styled towers. City Manager Weldon Rucker, who was not city manager during the construction of the Public Safety Building or the tower, admitted that the public process may have been lacking. “In the future we’ll have to be more open and consistent with the public,” he said. “But from a practical standpoint our recommendation is to activate the tower as soon as possible.” Also arguing for the tower, five police officers addressed the council during the public hearing. They said the 60-year-old antenna system is unreliable. In fact, the antennae did not operate for two hours last Thursday when a gas generator failed to start during a power outage. “Not being able to do our jobs because of aesthetic reasons troubles us,” said Berkeley Police Association President Randy Files, adding that radio communication is critical to officer safety. “I work with other officers and if one of them is in trouble, I need to know where he is, how he is and how to get to him.” In addition to aesthetic concerns, Erica Etelson who was a member of the neighborhood Tower Committee formed by the City Council in October 2000, said the tower’s electromagnetic field could pose a health threat. “Kaiser has recently released a study that shows these towers have been associated with a six-fold increase in the risk of miscarriage,” she said adding that they have recently been restricted in Britain and Spain. But city staff cited a report prepared by MACRO Corporation that determined the tower’s electric magnetic field would not cause adverse health effects. Spring said the tower will return to the council’s agenda on Feb. 5, and that she will ask that it be refereed to the Design Review Committee to begin the process of redesigning the tower, which is estimated to cost about $300,000. “With the safety issues no longer in the way, I’m hoping the council will support going for some alternatives,” she said. “We have to make this right and there’s no ifs, ands or buts about it.”