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 Audit Committee Sees 2 'Advantageous' Proposals

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The city received two strong proposals for an independent audit and will evaluate their cost as the last determining factor. 

On Monday, the Auditing Services Evaluation Committee decided to advance proposals from CliftonLarsonAllen and from Scanlon and Associates, the firm that has audited Pittsfield for years. 

The city received two bid responses that members generally saw as equally strong. Some pushed for a new set of eyes, and some were comfortable with the knowledge Scanlon has built about Pittsfield over the years. 

They agreed that prices are an important factor and voted to advance both proposals to purchasing agent Colleen Hunter-Mullett so she can come back with financial information. 

"I think one was longer, but when I looked at it, I thought they both had in-depth information for us, and I really didn't have any issues with any of them, and I think they're both highly advantageous in that," said Kathy Amuso, who was designated to review the proposals. 

"… I contacted municipalities for both CliftonLarsonAllen and Scanlon, and no matter which one I contacted, all the CliftonLarsonAllen customers and clients highly recommended them, and the Scanlon clients highly recommended them."

She has worked with Scanlon through government since 2003 and, because both proposals were highly rated, doesn't see a reason to change.

"I think it's been pretty consistent. I think they've been good to work with; I think they found some issues that they worked with the City of Pittsfield on," Amuso explained. 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories