City extends antenna moratorium
Officials regroup after state enacts regulations which override local control
Communications companies are beginning to place antennas on utility poles to act as boosters, filling in coverage gaps and increasing data capacity for technological advances. North Royalton has extended its 120-day freeze to regroup before the state law, which strips local control, takes affect mid March. File photo by JAIME ANTON
NORTH ROYALTON – The 120-day moratorium the city enacted on cellphone pole antennas was extended after learning the state passed legislation severely restricting local governments’ ability to limit placement, location and aesthetics of said devices.
Late last year, Senate Bill 331 was passed granting more leeway to communications companies in terms of the placement of small cell antennas and poles within the public right of way.
The purpose of these devices is increased data capacity in today’s ever-evolving digital age. They are meant to not only fill in the gaps in service between larger cell towers, but also to support technological advances, such as self-driving cars.
These devices come in different sizes. There are whip extensions, or antennas, roughly 10-feet in length that affix to the top of existing utility poles; the traditional wooden utility pole; and metal utility poles. The state has limited height to 50 feet. Some of these poles also require support equipment, which also has dimension restrictions, likened to the size of a large suitcase attached to the pole.
“We are pleased they will only be at 50 feet high and that’s the statutory rule, as opposed to 120 feet one company was proposing,” Law Director Tom Kelly said.
But this is the only silver lining for local officials, who were hoping to have more say. Before the bill’s passage, the city had been looking at its own telecommunications ordinance as it is routinely approached by parties interested in a cell tower it owns. While looking into that, the city was approached by the communications company interested in installing a 120-foot tall unit.
The first moratorium was then enacted and an expert hired, John Sindyla, to consult the city on the matter and protect the community’s best interest. However, S.B. 331 negates the regulations the city was forming regarding antenna and pole placement, location, aesthetics and safety.
“In the past when a utility would come to us for the placement within the right of way, we could say yes or we could say no. Now we are pretty much limited to saying yes or yes,” Kelly explained. “Even if we find the location they want to place a unit to be undesirable, we then are obliged to tell them why in great detail and tell them what they can do to remedy our concerns. We can no longer flat out reject a particular proposal.”
The hope locally was to limit these devices to main arteries. Per the bill, they can now be installed virtually anywhere. Of particular concern are subdivisions where utilities are all underground. City officials can only hope these companies are good neighbors and cooperative.
“We are hopeful in most of our developments, if not all where we have underground utilities, there are major arteries nearby which are already lined with utility poles where another pole or two may not make much difference. If they can get the coverage they are looking for, this may not be much of a problem,” Kelly said. “We are still hopeful we will be able to work with them cooperatively and that they will work with us cooperatively rather than to create an unhappy public.”
S.B. 331 will become effective mid-March and the city moratorium will expire then, so telecommunication companies can begin bringing proposals forward to the planning commission for review and approval.
Council President Larry Antoskiewicz feels much like Kelly.
“It’s ridiculous the power they have received through this legislation. Basically, the legislation takes away the decision-making process from elected leadership and puts it in the hands of utilities whose only goal is to sell,” he said. “We have to rely on them to be a good neighbor.”
As technology director for the schools, Ward 1 Councilman John Nickell sees both sides. He said he too hopes companies work with the city.
“I see the benefits of the technology. In neighborhoods with telephone poles, these won’t hardly be noticeable, but where they don’t have them, putting up a pole could be ugly. We are hoping these companies are cooperative and work with us. If we can’t stop it, can we move it here or there? We want to do this with taste and respect.”
Late last year, Senate Bill 331 was passed granting more leeway to communications companies in terms of the placement of small cell antennas and poles within the public right of way.
The purpose of these devices is increased data capacity in today’s ever-evolving digital age. They are meant to not only fill in the gaps in service between larger cell towers, but also to support technological advances, such as self-driving cars.
These devices come in different sizes. There are whip extensions, or antennas, roughly 10-feet in length that affix to the top of existing utility poles; the traditional wooden utility pole; and metal utility poles. The state has limited height to 50 feet. Some of these poles also require support equipment, which also has dimension restrictions, likened to the size of a large suitcase attached to the pole.
“We are pleased they will only be at 50 feet high and that’s the statutory rule, as opposed to 120 feet one company was proposing,” Law Director Tom Kelly said.
But this is the only silver lining for local officials, who were hoping to have more say. Before the bill’s passage, the city had been looking at its own telecommunications ordinance as it is routinely approached by parties interested in a cell tower it owns. While looking into that, the city was approached by the communications company interested in installing a 120-foot tall unit.
The first moratorium was then enacted and an expert hired, John Sindyla, to consult the city on the matter and protect the community’s best interest. However, S.B. 331 negates the regulations the city was forming regarding antenna and pole placement, location, aesthetics and safety.
“In the past when a utility would come to us for the placement within the right of way, we could say yes or we could say no. Now we are pretty much limited to saying yes or yes,” Kelly explained. “Even if we find the location they want to place a unit to be undesirable, we then are obliged to tell them why in great detail and tell them what they can do to remedy our concerns. We can no longer flat out reject a particular proposal.”
The hope locally was to limit these devices to main arteries. Per the bill, they can now be installed virtually anywhere. Of particular concern are subdivisions where utilities are all underground. City officials can only hope these companies are good neighbors and cooperative.
“We are hopeful in most of our developments, if not all where we have underground utilities, there are major arteries nearby which are already lined with utility poles where another pole or two may not make much difference. If they can get the coverage they are looking for, this may not be much of a problem,” Kelly said. “We are still hopeful we will be able to work with them cooperatively and that they will work with us cooperatively rather than to create an unhappy public.”
S.B. 331 will become effective mid-March and the city moratorium will expire then, so telecommunication companies can begin bringing proposals forward to the planning commission for review and approval.
Council President Larry Antoskiewicz feels much like Kelly.
“It’s ridiculous the power they have received through this legislation. Basically, the legislation takes away the decision-making process from elected leadership and puts it in the hands of utilities whose only goal is to sell,” he said. “We have to rely on them to be a good neighbor.”
As technology director for the schools, Ward 1 Councilman John Nickell sees both sides. He said he too hopes companies work with the city.
“I see the benefits of the technology. In neighborhoods with telephone poles, these won’t hardly be noticeable, but where they don’t have them, putting up a pole could be ugly. We are hoping these companies are cooperative and work with us. If we can’t stop it, can we move it here or there? We want to do this with taste and respect.”