Re: [MDOsprey] Re: Radio tower in Rock Creek Park?
GAIL@UMDD.UMD.EDU
Sun, 04 Jul 99 10:50:46 EDT
Well, the NCPC voted to table Bell Atlantic's request pending a study of
best way to achieve phone coverage without derogation of Paresources, this
on July 1. The representative from Rep., Dan Burton's office (R-Indiana?)
somewhat threatened the commission that "Congress will go around you." For
some reason certain members of Congress are very anxious to see BAM's
application be approved, despite community opposition and testimony about
damage to park resources (plus the precedence issue). I have been to all
the hearings, and I think the political pressure has been unrelenting and
(considering the national non-importance of the issue), very "interesting."
Someone is getting to someone, that is.
However, having said that -- if what was reported is true, then there may be
a court action.
Btw, I recently returned from Finland, as you know -- a nation of 5 million
with 4 million mobile phones (so I was told). And NO cellphone towers.
There was expert testimony from several that phone coverage could be
acheived without the towers, using same techniques as used in other areas
such a GW Pky, but that BAM wanted the towers because they were cheapest..
solution.
If they indeed go up, the impact on migratory birds will be carefully
monitored.
I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the many MOS, ANS and
NAS members who sent comments to NCPC and especially to those who testified
at the (very long and tedious) hearing Thursday. All the "bird" folks
stayed to speak, even as other speakers drifted away. We had a very strong
letter from the American Bird Conservancy supporting our position, as well
as good testimony from National Audubon. The mayor, city council and Rep.
Norton also sent letters in opposition, based on a variety of reasons.
Guess we have to see what the neighborhood asociations do next -- they have
the most people and (some) resources.
Gail Mackiernan
Conservation Chair, MC/MOS