‘Weird’ tree-like McK cell tower approved

A proposed cell tower in McKinleyville, California is facing pushback from neighbors, and the case offers a useful window into how these fights actually unfold — and how much (or how little) power residents have once a project reaches the approval stage.

Cingular Wireless and AT&T Mobility want to build an 89-foot tower at 3386 Lily Ave., disguised as a fake evergreen tree in a "stealth design" meant to blend in with the real conifers nearby. It would replace an existing AT&T site on Murray Road whose lease is expiring. At the Humboldt County Planning Commission's Sept. 3 meeting, commissioners voted to delay a decision so staff can evaluate an alternative location at 3248 Letz Ave., after 21 residents of nearby Yamaha Place submitted a petition opposing the original site.

What the neighbors are worried about

According to the Mad River Union's reporting, residents raised a mix of concerns — including radio frequency emissions, visibility of an 89-foot structure looming over the treeline, and broader worries about property values and neighborhood character, especially with an Amazon facility also moving into a nearby business park. AT&T's representative, Aaron De La O, told the commission the tower's emissions would be a small fraction of the federal limit, and noted that local reviews legally can't set their own RF emission standards — that authority rests with federal law. Commissioner Peggy O'Neill said she sided with the neighbors, while Commissioner Iver Skavdal pointed out that commissioners lack good side-by-side visual and technical comparisons between the two sites to make an informed call. The commission unanimously voted to continue the review rather than approve it outright.

What this means if you're house-hunting or already living nearby

Stories like this are a good reminder that cell tower siting decisions move slowly, are shaped heavily by federal preemption on emissions, and often come down to visual and property-value arguments rather than health claims, since local boards legally can't weigh RF exposure limits in their decisions. If you're evaluating a home near a proposed or existing tower, it's worth tracking the local planning commission's docket directly, since these reviews can stretch on for months with multiple continuances.

For families who want to reduce everyday EMF exposure inside the home regardless of what's happening outside, it's often more practical to focus on controllable sources — like choosing a low-EMF air purifier for bedrooms, swapping in a low-EMF hair dryer for daily routines, or looking into EMF shielding paint for rooms facing a nearby tower. These steps won't change a local zoning outcome, but they can give health-conscious households more peace of mind while projects like McKinleyville's work through the approval process.

Originally reported by Mad River Union