08-06-2007, 03:14 PM
In dealing with citizen concerns over the construction of cell towers I learned that there are three things that can not be argued.
Health: If a tower is constructed and operating according to FCC guidelines, it’s illegal for any agency to deny a permit to construct based on health claims. This has been upheld in all courts.
Ugliness. Yes they are ugly, but if any other “pole” was allowed, including those constructed for emergency services communications, phone lines, electrical lines, lighting etc, and if the cell tower is equal in size and structure, denying a permit is potentially illegal. It could lead to an expensive lawsuit against the government agency denying the permit.
Danger of Collapse. Cell towers have collapsed. But cell companies have pre-empted this argument with stricter design and construction standards from what’s required. To argue this danger you are also arguing against any other similar like pole structure that is or may be constructed. You really don’t want the phone, electric, cable, police and fire communications siding against you.
What are considered legitimate arguments subject to consideration and can be used to deny a permit are things like the tower relationship to schools, hospitals, playgrounds, protected species, wildlife habitat, and even bird flying patterns. You can’t argue that “cell phone towers are bad”. You have to argue that this specific tower, at this specific location is harmful to the community because of this specific issue. All the generic concerns have little weight, but if someone were to open a child daycare within 1,500 feet of that tower, it would be 20 tons of bricks on the cell company’s shoulder.
Health: If a tower is constructed and operating according to FCC guidelines, it’s illegal for any agency to deny a permit to construct based on health claims. This has been upheld in all courts.
Ugliness. Yes they are ugly, but if any other “pole” was allowed, including those constructed for emergency services communications, phone lines, electrical lines, lighting etc, and if the cell tower is equal in size and structure, denying a permit is potentially illegal. It could lead to an expensive lawsuit against the government agency denying the permit.
Danger of Collapse. Cell towers have collapsed. But cell companies have pre-empted this argument with stricter design and construction standards from what’s required. To argue this danger you are also arguing against any other similar like pole structure that is or may be constructed. You really don’t want the phone, electric, cable, police and fire communications siding against you.
What are considered legitimate arguments subject to consideration and can be used to deny a permit are things like the tower relationship to schools, hospitals, playgrounds, protected species, wildlife habitat, and even bird flying patterns. You can’t argue that “cell phone towers are bad”. You have to argue that this specific tower, at this specific location is harmful to the community because of this specific issue. All the generic concerns have little weight, but if someone were to open a child daycare within 1,500 feet of that tower, it would be 20 tons of bricks on the cell company’s shoulder.