By JOSEPH KELLARD
Jorge Winter, a pharmacist for 21 years with Ocean Chemist, plans to attend the hearing at Town Hall on Feb. 6 to object to this development.
"Although I'm just a pharmacist and I know very little about antennas and things like that, there is much written on the environmental hazards of these [antennas]," Winter argues. "Brain damage, birth defects and cancer have been known to be caused by long-term exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF). You don't have to be a brain surgeon to know this is not good."
In the apartments above his store live woman with children and women of expecting age who want to have children, Winter said.
"This is awful for [those residents] and the surrounding community," he said.
The claim that EMF's pose a health hazard was promoted in the late 1980s by Paul Brodeur, a journalist with New Yorker magazine, whose list of health problems that he consigned to their emissions included miscarriages and cancer.
However, in 1996, the National Academy of Science released the results of an extensive three-year review that had surveyed the entire body of literature dealing with the possible health effects associated with EMFs. The NAS concluded that "the current body of evidence does not show that exposure to these fields presents a human health hazard," reports Robert Park, professor of Physics at the University of Maryland, in his book "Voodoo Science."
A subsequent study released in 1997 by the National Cancer Institute on the possible connection between power lines and leukemia in children, found no association at all between such children and the proximity of their homes to power lines.
Cell phone and beeper companies that propose to mount their electrical equipment on public or private property are nonetheless required to apply for a license with local zoning boards. The board grants a variance based on its determination of whether the equipment complies with Federal Communication Commission (FCC) standards on the safety of the emissions from such equipment.
"Whenever we put in an application for a cell site, it's part of our filing with the town that we conduct a RF frequency test as required by the FCC," said Diane Rainey, a Nextel spokesperson. "Our tests are always a percentage of one percent below what is accepted by the FCC's standards."
The building at 3124 Long Beach Rd. has been chosen for its height, Winter said, since it is one of the tallest buildings in town and thus makes for better reception for phones and beepers.
Rainey said that the process by which Nextel determines where to mount its antennas starts with finding holes in its coverage areas that interfere with reception. Nextel is proposing to mount the new antennas to create continuous reception for customers using its cell phones in that area.
"While we learn about these gaps through different ways, generally our engineers go around with their measuring equipment, pinpoint general areas and find an optimal site," Rainey said.
Nextel generally rents and installs its antenna on existing radio towers or buildings, or it constructs its own poles for its equipment.
"There's always the option of finding existing structures, because then you're not spending more money on building and you are blending in with the scenery," Rainey said. "So, our engineers must have come across this building and thought it was a good site. And we've been negotiating with the landlord."
The building's owner, Joseph Tafuri, was unavailable for comment.
At the zoning board hearing, Winter said he will suggest that the Oceanside dump is a more ideal place to install the antennas. "There's no one living over there and you will get better reception because the dump is higher," he said.
However, Nextel currently has antennas mounted in that area. The company has rents space on a tower owned by SBA Towers Communications, located at the end of West Oceanside Rd.
