- mobile antennas only send out signals horizontally. In other words: you won't have a super signal but quite the opposite... You will connect with your phone to the tower 500 meters away instead. You will not get the signal or any radiation from a tower 10 m next to you.
- the phone being 2cm next to your brain is much more critical than an antenna. And even that is by now in long time studies found to be harmless...
another thought: If you could find a protected/endangered species that uses the site as habitat, maybe you could have a case?
That would be some quick growing trees
However, I guess objectively speaking they must give it careful consideration and each mast is probably measured for maximum signal effect, which is deemed more important than spoiling a few peoples view form their back yard.
Still, nevertheless it sucks on an epic level and inevitably your house will become less desirable as a result. It would be nice if the telecoms companies at least had to compensate such cases by the drop in value after an official valuation was done before and after the mast was erected.
One can only facepalm at this kind of logic.
The house next door to the one I grew up in changed owners several times in the past 20 years. My father would sneak over there in between owners and plant young trees in the yard - and today there is a nice privacy screen between the two houses.
Given that chances are slim that the tower will be stopped from going up, I can't think of what else you could realistically do..
The whole town is so small and crammed into the small valley, there is not many places where no one would be pissed about the antenna.
The planned site is not that bad as it covers the street to Lenzburg and Egliswil. Another viable site, with the least pissied amount of people would be at the end of Strübistrasse/Strohackerweg. But it is more costly as additional cabling is needed.
[](https://www.englishforum.ch/attachments/other-general/114345d1464021437-help-mobile-tower-planned-10-meters-my-house-tower.jpg)
Did you or a lawyer go through the application of Salt in detail? That is the only way of opposition in case they made a mistake in not taking in account local rules, future environmental rules or federal rules for GSM towers. The other thing would be to audit their compliance to the given permit to construct it. All of this may be waved by the commune btw
PS: I was wrong at the end of Rietenbergstrasse is much better. But as it is in the woods a building permit is nearly impossible. The propsoed one Strübistrasse/Strohackerweg would have to be too height to be effective.
Tom
But I agree, if they built one 100m from my place and it would not affect me immediately like the things mentioned above I would not argue about it as I too use a handy.
From the look of the photo will the antenna be higher than your house. Since they send their waves horizontally is standing right under a tower the place with the lowest effect of that antenna in the entire village.
You want to know what really produces more exposure than necessary? Making calls when you have a bad reception. The phone will automatically up the power in order to keep the connection. So: If you are worried about electric radiation don't use a mobile phone indoors, in a car or ideally at all. The antenna on the ground next door is safe.
To all the "Why is nobody doing something about this" posts: You all want to use your mobile and you all want, no, expect more and more bandwidth... this won't work without infrastructure. Most of the time do phone companies try to hide them as good as possible - on roof tops and especially in Switzerland in a LOT of church towers... but especially in the cities are the operators hitting the limit of what they can deliver. I know countless of people who complain that the reception is bad on the trains along lake Zurich - but each and every new antenna is an endless effort and legal battle for the phone companies... by now they are running trials to hide the antennas underground for the city centers. So you will be walking over the antennas instead - but since you don't see them will there be less complaints.
Antenna emissions (amount and direction including verticality) are steerable by central control as well as by antenna software, emission values mentioned in the Baugesuch need not necessarily reflect what actually happens afterwards, especially as actual needs (connection requirements) years later need not at all have developed as originally planned.
This study raises some serious concerns, it's based on official cancer data. Granted, coincidence doesn't necessarily mean correlation, but with the amount of antenna and number of deaths the statistical significance looks rather strong, as does the distribution of deaths when related to distance from the antennas. Couple that with the distribution of deaths over time (though the change in numbers for 2004-05-06 look odd, needs explanation) and it seems to well warrant further study.
Furthermore - do you spend 24/7 in your apartment - or do you work elsewhere - perhaps in a building which already has a mast mounted on it?
I'd argue that looking out on a warehouse impacts your property value more than looking out onto a warehouse with a mobile mast on it.