STEALTH CELLS PLACEMENT OF WIRELESS TOWERS CREATING HANG-UPS FOR RESIDENTS.

Byline: Dominic Berbeo Staff Writer

In this cellular phone la-la land, cell antennas are springing up in the shape of fake palm trees, faux boulders and even church crosses.

But one gabber's convenience is another resident's hang-up. Communities are rallying against an upsurge in permit requests for cell towers, saying they cause blight in their neighborhoods and pose health risks.

Cell phone companies and their supporters say the risks are overblown and the benefit of clearer calls too important. And they're preparing for the next wave of towers that will stream data - like e-mail or sports scores - to cell phones and other wireless devices.

``Why don't they just keep these to commercial areas?'' asks Cathy Rankin, a West Hills resident leading a petition drive to fight a proposed antenna in her neighborhood. ``It is a luxury. We're basically accommodating people driving through our neighborhood.''

Every day, that traffic increases.

There were more than 7.3 million cell phones in use as of Dec. 31 in the Greater Los Angeles metropolitan area, or one cell phone for every 2.5 residents, according to Strategis Group, a research and consulting firm in Washington, D.C.

Nationwide, the number of wireless subscribers has swelled to more than 111 million from just 91,000 in 1985, according to the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association. To serve them, the number of cell antenna sites quadrupled in the past five years to more than 95,000, the association said.

In Los Angeles, the city is developing a master plan to control the burgeoning industry, but has come up against phone companies that refuse to disclose the number and whereabouts of their antennas on the grounds of proprietary trade secrets.

However, preliminary estimates put the number of cell antenna sites in the city at about 14,000, according to those helping to develop the master plan.

To improve reception, those towers are now moving into residential neighborhoods, sometimes setting up conflicts with neighbors who don't want the structures in their vicinity.

At a recent zoning hearing in Van Nuys, Sprint representatives seeking permits for antennas in Woodland Hills, Granada Hills and Studio City clashed with dozens of residents opposed to them.

While residents claim that the antennas could pose a cancer risk and lower their property values because of visual blight, they are generally at a disadvantage against the phone companies.

The federal government considers cell phones part of the public utilities communications infrastructure, and therefore encourages the building of antennas.

And while cell phones and their base station antennas are essentially two-way radios, producing radio-frequency radiation, the consensus of scientists is that the power is too low to create health hazards under normal circumstances.

The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 even states: ``No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the (Federal Communications) Commission's regulations concerning such emissions.''

However, some agencies are taking precautions.

Standards sought

The Los Angeles Unified School District board approved a policy last year that prohibits the placement of cell antennas at schools and urges the state Environmental Protection Agency to develop safety standards on tower radiation emissions.

``The policy recognizes the current debate over the health issue,'' said Angelo Bellomo, the district's chief environmental officer. ``The board decided that avoiding this type of exposure on school property is prudent at this time.''

As towers move into neighborhoods, they're becoming less like, well, towers.

Daniel Green, a Los Angeles zoning administrator who deals with zoning variance and conditional use permit requests from the wireless companies, says he's seen it all.

Stealth antennas dressed up as flag poles or giant palm or pine trees are common, he said, and in some cases he's even seen large boulders like those used in the movies.

``Some of the newest wireless service technology is being marketed to residents out there,'' he said.

Churches, prevalent in residential areas, have become favorite targets, with antennas disguised as giant crosses and attached to - or hidden in - church steeples. Rent for the space often runs in the neighborhood of $1,000 per month.

Last year, a group of neighbors successfully blocked a steeple antenna proposed for First Baptist Church on Fallbrook Avenue in Woodland Hills.

The success sparked interest among other groups interested in controlling the number of cell sites in residential areas.

``What right does a neighbor have to take money at the expense of his neighbors?'' said Gordon Murley, president of the Woodland Hills Homeowners Organization. ``The industry should come up with better technology instead of these antennas, like satellites.''

But the antennas will continue to be used in increasing numbers for years to come, experts say.

``Cell sites fit our needs, and will continue to do so for at least the next few years,'' said Sprint PCI spokeswoman Stephanie Walsh. ``Satellites are cost prohibitive, and it's just not where the wireless industry is right now.''

More towers on way

Robert Rosenberg, the president of Insight Research Corp., a technology think tank in New Jersey, said he also believes the number of cell sites will continue to grow rapidly.

``It's not just phones anymore,'' he said. ``We're going to see a whole new spate of these sprout up with high-speed Internet access.''

The growth is evident in the number of specialty antenna companies that often are contracted by wireless companies to lease space and build antennas.

The National Association of Tower Erectors boasts 450 members nationwide.

One of the largest companies, Boston-based American Tower, maintains some 13,000 antenna sites in North America that it leases to wireless firms.

``If you're coming into the Los Angeles metropolitan area seeking a site, it can be very time-consuming,'' said Bert Sexton, a property manager in Burbank for American Tower. ``We offer 400 to 500 sites already established in the area.''

He said the number of sites has exploded in Los Angeles from just a handful 10 years ago because of the growing number of customers and wireless companies requiring changes in frequencies.

Neighborhood groups are quick to acknowledge the effect.

``We're in cell phone antenna overload,'' said Tony Lucente, president of the Studio City Residents Association. ``The applications (for zoning permits) are coming in fast and furious.''

TOWER, ANTENNAS

TOWER - Antennas for cellular phone service are often placed on towers, rooftops and the sides of buildings, at typical heights of between 50 and 200 feet. The combination of antennas and associated equipment is referred to as a ``base station'' or ``cell site.''

ANTENNA - A typical base station may have several antennas that look like rectangular panels, typically measuring about one foot by four feet. A station also may use a second type of antenna resembling a pole or whip, about 10 to 15 feet long.

GROUPS - Antennas are usually arranged in three groups of three. One antenna in each group is used to transmit signals to cell phones while the other two receive signals.

At typical cell site, each of the three transmitting antennas could be connected to up to 21 transmitters for a total of 63 transmitters.

In urban areas, most cell base stations operate at less than 10 watts per channel of effective radiated power, which corresponds to an actual radiated power of 0.5 to 1.0 watt per channel, according to the Federal Communications Commission.

The signal from an antenna is essentially directed toward the horizon. Normal ground-level exposure is significantly lower than the exposure that might be encountered at the antenna height.

Research scientists say the power from cellular base stations is too low to create a health hazard at ground level.

SOURCES: Federal Communications Commission; John E. Moulder, Ph.D.

CAPTION(S):

6 photos, box

Photo: (1 -- 2 -- color) TOWER, ANTENNAS

(3 -- 5 -- color) The skyrocketing numbers of wireless telephone users across the country force companies to install more antennas to serve them. When undisguised antennas are mounted atop a mast (above, center), detractors find fault with the appearance. To avoid complaints, particularly in residential areas, communication companies try more creative approaches such as building towers that resembles church steeples or making masts and antennas look like trees and other natural features.

Photos: Dean Musgrove, Graphics: Jon Gerung

(6) Two cell phone towers disguised as boulders can be seen near the Rocky Peak sign on the Ronald Reagan Freeway between Rocky Peak Road and Topanga Canyon Boulevard.

Dean Musgrove, Staff Photographer

Box: TOWER, ANTENNAS (See text)