The discussion about cell splitting is particularly interesting,
because it is resulting in zoning law changes in many communities.
Perhaps this is best taken to the law reflector...so let's not debate it.
But it's worth mentioning once here, as a heads-up.
To avoid the cell profusion, the trend is for towns to adopt telecommunications
sections in their zoning ordinances. These require co-location, and
cosmetic treatment to reduce the visual impact, including painting of
antennas. Imagine having to share an antenna with a ham who lives 2 miles away!
Imagine having to hire an attorney to argue why that's a PRB1 violation.
Imagine having to paint your th7.
My town is presently developing such an ordinance, and I've been active
in review of the proposed ordinance. My objective is to get amateurs
exempted from the telecommunications section, to avoid later litigation.
We've used the ARRL volunteer counsel to review the ordinance draft, and
recommend language changes. Planning staff has been receptive to the
suggestions, and we've had a cordial working relationship. I'm waiting
for the results of the planning commission vote, to see whether our ideas
take.
Among the suggestions:
* Require that no commercial installations take place on towers which
are provided height waiver for amateur radio operation. i.e. if you want
a cell site, you have to apply like a cell site.
* Provide height waivers for amateur radio operation so long as the licensed
amateur continues to own the property. i.e. the tower goes with the license,
not with the land, as it would with a variance.
* Our ordinance has minimal regulation, considering towers over 40' on an
ad-hoc basis. I've suggested that planning staff and a committee of amateurs
work together, to develop a set of "guidelines for amateur radio towers", which
deal with saftey, aesthetics, height and setback.
The first two are incorporated in the draft language. The third is a late idea,
which looks like it may take root.
As part of our effort, we created an EMC Consulting Committee, composed of
amateurs.
(with professional backgrounds.) It serves to assist the zoning and planning
staffs
in resolving emi/rfi disputes, which might arise from consumer devices
operating
under part 15 waivers (but which make the amateur look bad). The town
recognizes
it doesn't have the expertise or resources to resolve these things.
Again, let's not debate the topic. We're in process. Whatever is adopted here
will likely set a standard for the state of Vermont. Its had professional
review,
thanks to the ARRL volunteer counsel program.
Keep an eye on your own community. Catch it early, and you may be able to avoid
onorous limitations and a costly and time consuming process.
Jim Jarvis, N2EA
Essex Vermont
|