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.

Radon Reading Closes Pittsfield's West Housatonic Fire Station

By Sabrina DammsiBerkshires Staff
PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The fire station on West Housatonic Street has been temporarily closed after radon levels were found to be more than twice the normal amount.
 
Personnel at the station were relocated to the department's headquarters, located at 74 Columbus Ave., on Sunday out of an abundance of caution, said Catherine VanBramer, director of administrative services/public information officer. 
 
The West Housatonic Street station, built in 1951, has an officer and two firefighters on each shift. The station's apparatus has also moved to reserve bay at the Columbus Avenue headquarters. 
 
All of the city's fire stations and City Hall were tested. Once test results indicated concentrations above the recommended action level, the city promptly closed the station and began assessment and mitigation efforts. 
 
Initial tests found radon levels three to four times higher than normal, and further testing is planned in the coming days, she said. 
 
The department's headquarters is about 1.2 miles away from the West Housatonic Street station. 
 
"There are instances where PFD personnel are on a call in one part of the city and must respond to another call in a different part of the city.  The team continues to be ready to respond to any calls that are within their service area," VanBramer said. 
 
View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories