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 Board Looks to Pontoosuc Island Safety and Cleanup

By Breanna Steele

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Friends of Pontoosuc cleaned up the two islands on the lake and shared concerns of what they saw.

Kevin McGinnis, Friends board member, spoke to the Select Board last week about how the cleanup went and erosion the group discovered.

"We particularly wanted to go out and take a peek at the islands and it was seven bags of garbage and a lot of refuse from geese that we actually removed from both islands," he said. "The Keeler Island, particularly in Lanesborough, that had a Sheetrock bucket full of nails that we actually removed from there, too, and that was from probably multiple years of pallet burning out there."

McGinnis added that there is significant erosion on the east side of the islands, facing the deepest part of the channel.

He said Lee Popovich, who knows horticulture, suggested plantings along the edges to hold the soil and filter runoff that may help with the E. coli outbreaks on the lake.

"These are things that we can discuss on trying to keep those islands in enjoyable shape, and for people to be able to enjoy," McGinnis said, by reducing risks such as geese deposits, and plantings that can help filter some of the debris.

"We can't control how hard our rain comes, but we can mitigate some of that filtering processes to keep bacteria count lower. Because if you notice, pretty much the E. coli breakouts that we do have are right after heavy rain."

He wants to help keep the islands safe and healthy. He introduced the cleanup group, saying the cleanup was enjoyable and those who volunteered help make a difference.

"Look forward to in the future bringing more information back, and with a lot of moving parts to talk about mitigating erosion and certain things," McGinnis said. "But it's something that we all need to be kind of aware of, and this body of water is so enjoyable, and we definitely want to try to keep it as healthy as possible, and keep control or keep an eye on certain things."

Select Board member Jason Breault asked about what the insurance is for the islands to which Town Administrator Gina Dario responded that the island is a public park, so it's covered the same way as other town land, like Glaston Park. There's no added liability.

Breault then asked from a patrol aspect what that means.

"Obviously, if we have an underage drinking party, we have no mechanism to address it, or if there's a medical emergency on that area, we would have to get a boat from Pittsfield, so obviously we have some sort of a delay there," Police Chief Rob Derksen said. "That's the only concern, I guess, is it's a park that we can't patrol and we can't regulate on a regular basis," 

Breault wondered if they could get funding for a boat down the line but Derksen said it would be difficult with his small force.

"That's pulling the thread on a sweater because then I have to have certified boat officers and, I mean, so that's training that's time away and then I would have to be able to actually put them on the boat, which again as you've heard me say a million times, most of the time I have one officer on duty so I can't split them in half and put half on a boat, half in a car, so it would be a challenge."

He added that the lake is patrolled by the state Environmental Police but with recent funding challenges, it's not that much.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories