Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile are adding 5G technology in New York City with a combination of “macro” sites (wireless transmitters generally located on the rooftops) and “small cells,” which are typically located street poles.
European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” released in July 2021 concluding that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns.
NEW: January 23, 2023 Letter from Congressman Nadler on 5G New York Cell Towers which have “generated widespread concern throughout the community.”
Today, I joined with my fellow East side elected officials raising concerns about the placement of these 5G cell towers in our historic neighborhoods without careful consideration of its effect on the community. pic.twitter.com/1TIQrF9hZf
— Rep. Nadler (@RepJerryNadler) January 23, 2023
New York Community Board Actions
- Community Board 8 (includes areas of Upper East Side of Manhattan and Roosevelt Island) passed a 5G moratorium.
- Community Board 9: Letter RE: Disapproval of new Link5ZG Kiosks within MCB9
- Manhattan CB5 (Times Square) – 1/5/23 – Parks & Public Spaces — 1/12/23 – Full Board passed a moratorium.
- CB9 West Harlem: 1/9/23 Health & Environment Committee resolved to pass similar resolution as Upper East Side to the Executive Committee and on 1/11/23- Executive Committee passed with some changes.
- Brooklyn CB10 Bay Ridge/Fort Hamilton: 1/10/23 – Communications & Public Relations Committee passed a disapproval.
Manhattan CB2 (Greenwich Village, Little Italy, SoHo, NoHo, Hudson Square, Chinatown, and the Gansevoort Market) — 1/19/23 — Full Board — passed a resolution for a moratorium in residential and landmark areas.
January 16, 2023 Letter on 5G Poles from New York Manhattan Borough President to Matthew C. Fraser Chief Technology Officer Office of Technology & Innovation of The NYC Office of Technology & Innovation
“…many residents have reported serious concerns about the site selection, outreach, and community engagement process. Residents have reported not adequately being informed about the placement of 5G towers in their neighborhoods, and many have questioned specific site selections and the fundamental need for the new towers taking up vital public space. We must better communicate with the local community, and better educate New Yorkers about these installations.”
Theodora Scarato, executive director of Environmental Health Trust has presented information as well as several others to some of the Community Boards regarding the scientific research and the lack of up to date regulations for the radiation exposure.
New York organizations to connect with that are working on raising awareness of the need for safer, faster technology, rather than excessive 5G poles.
- Wired Broadband.org : Odette J. Wilkens, President & General Counsel Wired Broadband, Inc. has been providing testimony on the need for wired broadband and safe technology solutions.
- New Yorkers 4 Wired Tech: Grassroots advocates sounding the alarm on the harmful biological effects of pulsed-modulated microwave radiation from densified 4G/5G wireless infrastructure antennas.
Listen to a radio interview with ProPublica Reporter Peter Elkind on 5G and wireless radiation. WABC Radio (New York, NY), Jan 17, 2023
Peter Elkind. How the FCC Shields Cellphone Companies From Safety Concerns. ProPublica, Nov 10, 2022
Map of New York Poles
The 5G Moratorium states:
The following resolution was then put forward by Community Board 8:
WHEREAS; New York City, through its Office of Technology and Innovation (OTI), has contracted with CityBridge to install and operate a citywide wireless communications network; and,
WHEREAS; CityBridge installed its LinkNYC network as the initial deployment of the citywide wireless communications network intended to replace outdated public pay phones; and
WHEREAS; LinkNYC provided free 4G wireless cellular connectivity using towers placed on sidewalks throughout NYC, many of which include electronic display screens; and
WHEREAS; Community Board 8 and constituents of its district have reported adverse impacts resulting from existing LinkNYC infrastructure, including visual impacts, inappropriate usage, impacts on sidewalk clearances, and rat infestation; and
WHEREAS; CityBridge is now in the process of upgrading its LinkNYC network to Link5G to accommodate technological upgrades that have recently become commonplace in cellular communications; and
WHEREAS; Link5G infrastructure is a 32’ tall tower that is installed on sidewalks in the public right-of-way; and
WHEREAS; Link5G towers in commercial districts include electronic screens similar to those found on LinkNYC kiosks that display advertising and public information; and
WHEREAS; the design of the Link5G towers has been approved by the Public Design Commission; and
WHEREAS; Link5G must adhere to siting requirements determined by NYC Department of City Planning, and must obtain Landmarks Preservation Commission approval if sited in historic districts; and
WHEREAS; CityBridge and OTI have proposed 18 sites across Community District 8;
WHEREAS; CityBridge and OTI have stated that the siting of proposed Link5G towers in Community District 8 are based on gaps in coverage and locations where excess demand for the network exists as determined by commercial cellular carriers; and
WHEREAS; 15 of the 18 sites proposed are in or near either the Upper East Side Historic District or the Carnegie Hill Historic District, where renowned architecture and iconic streetscapes would be interfered with if Link5G structures were installed; and
WHEREAS; locations proposed along Madison Avenue would be in conflict with strict guidelines for illuminated storefronts and signage, and would be in conflict with the Special Madison Avenue Preservation District’s design standards that specifically prohibit illuminated advertising; and
WHEREAS; residents of Community District 8 have strongly objected to the design and the visual impacts that Link5G towers would have on streetscapes, both with and without screens; and
WHEREAS; there are widespread concerns that 5G towers will be constructed at distances considered too close to adjacent buildings, as has already occurred in front of 520 East 90th Street, and
WHEREAS; 10’ of distance from a tower to a residence that is permitted is extremely insufficient and should be revisited as a policy; and
WHEREAS; there are no reported issues by residents of Community District 8 of cellular gaps and frequent dropped calls that would justify Link5G being installed in the proposed locations; and
WHEREAS; the proposed sites for Link5G don’t include any locations in areas known to be potential digital deserts within Community District 8; and
WHEREAS; OTI and CityBridge have not provided detailed plans regarding the full build-out of Link5G, both within Community District 8 and in areas north of 96th Street and in the outer Boroughs; and
WHEREAS; there is a desire for any telecommunications infrastructure to be buried underground both for reliability purposes and to minimize visual impacts; and
WHEREAS; there have been questions raised by some residents as to whether sufficient research has been performed to fully assuage concerns that the radiation emitted by 5G infrastructure won’t have any long-term impacts on public health or the environment, including young children, seniors, people with medical implant devices, pets, plants, and parks;
WHEREAS; the community-at-large has expressed their views that Link5G is unnecessary and unwanted in Community District 8 at present and until many of the issues identified have been resolved;
WHEREAS; New York City is in control of this process through its contract with the provider;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Community Board 8 Manhattan disapproves the proposal as presented to install Link 5G towers in Community District 8; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a moratorium be placed on construction and planning of Link5G poles and devices in Community District 8 Manhattan
EHT Lawsuit against the FCC
There has not been a review of the adequacy of FCC limits based on a review of the totality of the science. There is no US agency with health or environmental expertise ensuring safety for cell tower radiation emissions, nor for 5G, which will employ higher frequencies and higher data rates. On August 13, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit mandated the FCC explain how its 1996 limits addressed health effects from long term exposure, especially for children and the environment in their judgment in the case Environmental Health Trust et al. v. The FCC. Yet the FCC has not responded.