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 ConCom OKs Stairs at Pontoosuc Lake

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass.— Shoreline access stairs are coming to the south side of Pontoosuc Lake. 

Last week, the Conservation Commission approved an amendment to the Order of Conditions for work at Pontoosuc Lake Park.  There will be two stair sets on the south shoreline, and additional bank stabilization. 

In 2025, the park's south side saw new stairs from the parking lot, a boardwalk, and other improvements.  Later phases of the project will enhance the north side of the park for swimming, and remedy a concrete barrier wall that is partially underwater. 

"Generally, what we're looking to do at Pontoosuc Lake Park is install some stair sets in two locations to help folks access from up above the bank, over the bank, and into the water," Parks, Open Space, and Natural Resources Manager James McGrath explained during the July 23 meeting. 

"We're sensitive to some of the issues that are currently existing on the bank, and we're also sensitive to some of the needs for lake recreation out there."

Stairs for water access will be placed on the shoreline at the beginning of the boardwalk, where it is highly eroded, and the second staircase will be at the extreme western end of the project area, which has around 100 feet of highly eroded bank. 

Additional brush layering will also stabilize the bank. 

An area near the boat ramp where live stakes were vandalized will see them replanted after the ConCom found some of the bank erosion was worse than believed on a site visit last year. 

The city originally proposed not replanting the area where live stakes were removed. 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories