Item 3 - PH/Ord. on Cell Towers - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CELL TOWERS 194 o For how many carriers do we anticipate needing to provide service? o What is the infrastru~re already in place -- here and in neighboring *' .s~_~is_!s- .n~ot the a,ver,.ag.e.three, bedroom colonial house proposed for a communities? ' , ,~;~,u~ut~a~ pto~ or.a suo..mwston request, ca Am ther~ areas you really want to avoid -- scenic ridgelines, other * · ~reat Barrington, Massachusetts, was one of the first communities ' In the country to incorporate the requirement for such RF engineering vulnerable areas? ~ detail, as well as thorough monitoring, and proof of liability coverage for c~ Am there appropriate and acceptable town-owned sites where the'town could gain some revenue? the town, into zoning regulations. (Numerous communities across the o How nrc you going to handle the NIMBY phenomenonV Are we the ~ country have subsequently 'used this model, with various adaptations.) It ~Y phenomenon? ' - set the bar for telecom siting regulation at a .new high for. a local ca 'How have neighboring communities fared in their dealings with the ' municipality'7 carriers? ~, Great Barrington is located in the southern Berkshire Mountains of o Do we need a whole new bylaw, or a revamp of the existing bylaws7 + Massachusetts. The area is scenic and laden with historic assets to protect Its economy is heavily dependent on tourism dollars. InaPPropriately: a Is there a process for input from citizens and from experts into the end + placed telecom towers are seen as a direct threat to the local eCOnomy and product? Who has control over that process7 Is that Board or person on your side? the underlying aesthetic sensibilities of the community. + The following bylaw was written while the town and some private a ~ sides are likely to be drawn up during this procesS? Who is likely to be opposing whom? citizens were involved in a court case, appealing a special permit for a + cellular tower on a private schoOl campus near a residential neighborhood. ca Do you have a consensus about these and other questions as you start? (ARer six years, the case was won by the town.) Or are you going to have to work out these issues 'as you go forward? ca Is an application already pending? ~ The following Great Barrington bylaw, with italicized comments, ca Are the necessary experts in place? Are you going to be.using the town g is fourteen pages long. Some towns have expanded it to 30-40 pages:' The attorney for lesal advice as you proceed? What is that person's -' point is to be thorough and adapt it to your town's needs. Note that it is I written to conform with both Great Barrington existing 'bylaws (so the orientation on this subject? Are they up t° speed on wireless numbering is Specific to Great Barrington) and with Massachusetts law. telec~mmunicaiiions issues and case law?' If not can they consult with another finn that is? ' I Any adaptations must be consistent with your own state. The basic attitude you take into the process will often determine what you get out of it. The more professional you are, the better. ' Understand that, =cordia8 to the Telecom Act, you may have to allow +' these facilities somewhere. You are trying to' balance the best interests of your community with those of the telecommunications providers. The best way to accomplish that balance is to create a stringent, thomush,.and fair bylaw to locate wireless facilities that will be adequate for the carrie~s, and have the least detximental impact pOssible. ~ Good Telecom Regulations + As mentioned before, this is a different kind of land-use regulation 7 The Great Batrington regulations effect many of thc same provisions used by the mn most planners or zoners are familiar with. It requires a lot of Connecticut Stung Council - a state agency With vastly greater resources - in reviewing ngineering detail for wireless energy ~ something invisible that exists in telecom proposals. s See Appendix D, for fl~e regulations of Cabot, VT.