15 Sep 2014
92° Clear
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps
Patch Instagram photo by apennyforyourwraps

Palisades Land Use Committee Opposes Mount Holyoke Cell Tower

Calling for a more streamlined approach to cell tower proposals in the future, including developing a master plan, the motion heads to community council next week for vote.

Palisades Land Use Committee Opposes Mount Holyoke Cell Tower Palisades Land Use Committee Opposes Mount Holyoke Cell Tower

In a step to keep wireless telecommunications companies in check, the Pacific Palisades Land Use Committee announced an unanimous vote at their meeting Thursday to oppose the proposed AT&T cell tower for 302 Mount Holyoke Ave. The motion will be brought before the community council at their meeting next Thursday, Sept. 13.

In the motion, Chairwoman Chris Spitz said they oppose the cell tower installation proposal at 302 Mount Holyoke Avenue and in all public rights of way without:

  • The providers - including AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile - cannot file permit applications or initiate construction without bringing advanced written notice of all proposals to all property owners within 500 feet of the proposed facility, the homeowner associations and the communty council.
  • A master plan for Pacific Palisades being developed and implemented by the wireless telecommunications companies for all installations, including meaningful input from the local community.

Neighbors in the vicinity of the proposed tower , and brought questions to the .

Spitz noted that nothing's been filed with the Bureau of Engineering and AT&T is still weighing its options.

"We’ll take a global approach, so we don’t have to keep peicemealing this," she said. "We need a master plan. What are the design options? What coverage gaps are truly needed?

She also questioned the representative from AT&T's claim that they have to fulfill the obligation with the Federal Communications Commission to "fill the coverage gap."

"I've never seen any proof," she said,"and I've never seen any FCC rules. Maybe [it's] in their licensing agreement but I haven’t been able to find that out."

The committee also awaits reporting from the Los Angeles City Council on revising the city's above ground facilties ordinance, which would put stronger oversight on wireless telecommunication structure proposals.

Share This Article