Letter: Lenox Planners Should Consider Residents in Cell-Tower Siting Bylaw

Letter to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

I have been attending meetings in regard to the new wireless zoning bylaw for the last 18 months. As a Lenox resident, the biggest concern is that the new bylaw is not protective of its residents. The new bylaw is industry-friendly and makes it difficult, if not impossible to push back on an application if you find one being proposed for next to, or on your home. The only recourse that was shared with us, if an application is approved, is private litigation. 

Private litigation would be against the town and against the telecom company. Hiring an experienced attorney who specializes in fighting inappropriately sited wireless installations is cost prohibited for many, especially elderly, low-income and disabled residents who don't want cellular antennas on the roof of our home at the Curtis.

Private litigation may or may not be more affordable for those on Delafield Drive, whose closest property line is 250 feet from a hypothetically proposed cell tower at the wastewater treatment facility, a site that was identified to offer additional coverage to Lenox Dale.

Well-resourced neighborhoods may be able to afford litigation, whereas less-resourced neighborhoods may be stuck with a cell tower they are not comfortable with. 



All residents should be protected. Many of us live in Lenox for the natural beauty, the historic qualities and the peaceful enjoyment of this town. While everyone deserves cell service, we equally deserve to be protected from the blight, real estate devaluation, and RF emissions — which are classified as a pollutant, hazard and environmental toxin. 

I acknowledge the work the Planning Board has put into this bylaw revision, but it simply is not written in favor of the residents. Shelburne, Great Barrington, Stockbridge and others have significant setbacks from schools and residences from 800 feet to 3,000 feet.

Lenox must expand setbacks, have comprehensive design standards and re-instate your existing strong purpose statement "to locate towers and antennas so they do not have negative impacts such as, but not limited to, visual blight, attractive nuisance, noise and falling objects, on the general safety, welfare and quality of life of the community" as well as to "preserve property values." These changes would go a long way to making the bylaw balanced for all.

Diane Sheldon
Lenox, Mass.

 

 

 


Tags: cell tower,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Pittsfield: Should Park Square Be an Historic District?

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The committee drafting a proposed local historic district around Park Square wants to generate interest and participation in the process. 

Members launched the charge during meetings in August and September. A survey and public hearing are planned to gather feedback early on. 

City Planner Kevin Rayner explained they are not just doing this out of a love for historic buildings, but for the timeless sense of place you get when you step into Park Square, which was laid out over 200 years ago and hosted the first-ever agricultural fair in 1810. 

"I think that the main thing that we need to kind of park on is that this is the heart of our community, and it really sets the stage for the sense of place in Pittsfield, and any change to that should have some review and some consensus from folks who have a passion for protecting the history and that character of Pittsfield," he said to the new Local Historic District Study Committee last week. 

"And there's that private property versus historic resource thing, but I’d say that a lot of these buildings on the square belong to the soul of Pittsfield here, and deserve to be protected, and I don't think that the layer of regulation that we're throwing down here is going to be unreasonable or a real boundary." 

In March, the City Council voted to amend the City Code, Chapter 2, to establish the study committee.

Pittsfield has more than 20 locations on the National Register of Historic Places, including the Park Square Historical District, but the designation just allows communities to apply for federal tax credits and doesn't impose restrictions on buildings. The central area was laid out a few decades after Pittsfield was given a town charter in 1761.

A district can be one building, several buildings, or an area. Historic restrictions only apply to the exterior of buildings; the committee has authority to say a building in the district cannot be demolished. 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories