ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1997, Roanoke Times
DATE: Friday, January 24, 1997 TAG: 9701240071
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: B-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: GREG EDWARDS STAFF WRITER
A NORTHERN VIRGINIA PLANNER urges local government to encourage providers to place antennae on existing structures.
A Fairfax County planner urged local government officials and Roanoke Valley residents to develop policies to encourage wireless communication providers to locate their antennae on existing structures instead of building huge towers.
David Mullett said that until 1992, Fairfax County had been averaging about two applications per year from cellular phone companies and others wanting to construct wireless communication towers. But in 1993, that number began to grow; in 1996, the county received more than 60applications.
Mullett attributed the increase to the introduction of PCS digital telephone services in Northern Virginia, which are offered by companies that compete with existing cellular providers and require as many antennae. Mullett spoke Wednesday at a seminar held by the Fifth Planning District Commission on the role of local government in the location of wireless communication towers, an issue of growing concern in the Roanoke region.
U.S. Cellular, for instance, filed suit against Roanoke County in federal court in December because of the county's denial of a proposed cellular tower near Dragons Tooth and the Appalachian Trail.
Blacksburg officials, in another example, are trying to prevent the construction of a tower on North Main Street. Instead, they would like the provider to place an antenna on top of Virginia Tech's Lane Stadium.
Based on information from wireless providers, Mullett said that Fairfax County faces the prospect of becoming home to 390additional wireless antennae. But by good planning and by working with service providers, the county will have to consider new tower permits for only a fraction of those sites, he said.
Fairfax encourages providers to locate their antennae on existing structures and to share these structures with other providers, Mullett said. Fairfax County high schools have raised as much as $1,800a month by allowing wireless providers to lengthen light towers at football fields and attach antennae to them, he said.
Local governments are limited in how much they can regulate cellular phone and other wireless communication towers, which can stretch as high as 250feet or more. Under the federal Telecommunications Act passed last year, localities are forbidden from blocking altogether the construction or modification of wireless communication towers. The new law also blocks localities from turning down a tower site because of residents' health concerns.
That, Mullett said, is because no study has ever proven that wireless communication antennae pose a health threat. Other common concerns of residents, he said, are the effect of towers on real-estate values, their visual impact and the proliferation of large numbers of towers.
Mullett urged local officials to prepare to deal with a growing number of tower applications when PCS enters the Roanoke market by educating themselves on the technology, forming a committee with broad representation to deal with the issue and gaining the cooperation of the wireless communication industry.
Another speaker, Paul Rosa of the Potomac Conservancy in Annandale, warned local officials to watch out for a new U.S. Postal Service policy to rent space for wireless towers on post office property. Normally, local zoning laws don't apply to federal property, but such towers might be challenged because of their commercial, nongovernmental nature, he said.
The Telecommunications Act, however, encourages federal agencies to work with wireless service providers to make federal property available for their antennae and directs the FCC to encourage states to allow towers on state property.
LENGTH: Medium: 69 linesby CNB