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.

Lanesborough Reviews DPW, COA, Ambulance Budgets

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff
LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Select Board and Finance Committee had a detailed look last week at the needs for the fiscal 2027 budget from the Parks Commission, ambulance, Council on Aging, and the Department of Public Works.
 
All were asked what it would mean if they were asked to level fund their budgets.
 
The Council on Aging Director Lorna Gayle said she had room to reduce her budget and her hours. Her spending plan budgets $54,187 and $38,000 for transportation.
 
She could cut $300 in office supplies but did request an increase to add a chair tai chi class, adding $3,500 for the instructor. 
 
Gayle she believed she take transportation driver line down to the 2024 level of $30,000; the current projection is a little over $35,000. When others were nervous about losing a driver, Gayle assured them he would not leave as he loves his job.
 
When asked about participation rates she said it varies but the COA has a good turn out and the yoga class is so full it's capped.
 
"The participation rates in the classes vary, but we've had sometimes three people because it's snowing, but then we have 22 people, and we're cramped in here," she said. "The line dancing class one started out there were like five of us tap dancing away."
 
View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories