Meeting The Challenges of Zoning in the Information Age: Planning For Wireless Communications Facilities

Chapter 2: Methodology

The methods of data collection for this project consist of three types of investigation. By examining 1) materials available on-line (Internet), 2) published articles, reports and community ordinances, and 3) development of case studies, the objectives of this project can be met. Case studies in this project will examine the regulatory history of the wireless industry in two selected communities. The issues and methods surrounding facility sitings, and the future wireless facility issues facing each community will be examined, as described in greater detail in the following paragraphs.

The main sources for wireless communication facilities information are on-line materials and the American Planning Association's Planning Advisory Service. Articles and reports are also becoming more common on this topic, as the issues of wireless facility siting unfold in the wake of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. The literature review critically considers the ordinances, reports, and articles that comprise the short bibliography on the topic. Ordinances are examined paying particular attention to the methods used to regulate facility sitings, the restrictiveness of the regulations, and the compatibility of the ordinances with the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Reports and articles are examined based on their relevance to the project, their observations concerning the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and their assessment of the applicable technologies of the wireless industry.

In addition, two case studies, one in Londonderry, NH, and the other in Fishers, IN, are examined in greater detail, considering a wider range of issues (suburban growth, sprawl, and economic development), as they apply to the increases in wireless facility applications.

The communities of Londonderry and Fishers were chosen for their similarities. First, both communities are among the fastest growing in their respective states. Fishers has seen the largest population growth (by percentage) of any town in Indiana over the past five years. Londonderry has been among the most rapidly growing communities in the state of New Hampshire over the past decade. Another similarity between the two towns is their location in relation to major cities. Fishers is situated just to the northeast of Indianapolis, the state's largest city. Londonderry is located just south of Manchester, New Hampshire's largest city. And perhaps most importantly in terms of an analysis of wireless communications facility siting, both towns have an Interstate highway running through them. Transportation corridors are vital for wireless communications providers as many of the users of cellular and PCS phones use them in their cars. The locations of Fishers with I-69 (connecting Indianapolis with Fort Wayne, and cities in Michigan), and Londonderry with I-93 (connecting Providence, RI, Boston, MA, and Northern New England) mean that the placement of wireless towers is much more likely to occur there than in towns and cities that are not served by major transportation corridors.

An additional reason for choosing Fishers and Londonderry is proximity (in the case of Fishers) and ability to access information (both Londonderry and Fishers). Several meetings and discussions with Jon Issacs, the Fishers Planning & Zoning Administrator, have taken place, and a second contact in the Fishers Development Department is Assistant Planner Brian Harvey. In Londonderry, the contact is Peter C. Lowitt, AICP, for whom I served my summer internship in 1996. All have been very responsive and shown interest in the thesis project, and have been instrumental in their help in the development of the case study analyses.

The case studies are developed in two stages. First, the existing conditions of the two towns are examined, including the number of wireless facilities presently located in each town, the number of pending tower applications, and the number of service providers located in both areas. This data is then analyzed summarizing the way both towns deal with the siting of wireless facilities. Their existing regulations and planning efforts concerning wireless facilities are also examined and critiqued.

To aid in the analysis of tower buildout, the project utilizes the resources available at the Intergraph Center for Mapping Excellence at Ball State University, by designing and building a functional Geographic Information System (GIS) for both towns in terms of their wireless communication facilities. The power of GIS is in the ability to tie together graphics and maps with information stored in a database. The locations of towers have been mapped and have associated databases tied to the graphic element that represents each tower. The tower height, range, owner, service provider, type of service (cellular, PCS, etc.), and any other pertinent data is linked directly to each tower.

The GIS also has the capability of performing a wide range of queries. This comes into play when performing the projections of tower buildout. By specifying the coverage area a tower of a particular type and height will have, it will be possible to locate where additional towers will be required to provide blanket coverage in both of the case study towns. This process uses two different methods. First, a tower buildout for each town is projected under their current state of regulations. Secondly, the towns are projected at buildout under the developed model regulations. This process will show the advantages in developing regulations for siting of wireless towers. The regulations will provide a means for adequate coverage, but without the associated tower proliferation that would likely occur under no regulations, a condition both local governments and wireless service providers can be satisfied with.

This project can become a tool that planners at the local level can use in their own communities to protect the property values of residential land, address the issues of public safety and deal with viewsheds and aesthetics. This project will be applicable to both large cities and rural towns and counties. It will assist planners, public policy makers at the local and state level, by spelling out the issues that are at stake in the siting of facilities. It will also be helpful to developers and to those in the telecommunications industry by outlining the procedures that will both assist the community to mitigate facility proliferation and provide incentives for service providers to share facilities and work in a cooperative, yet competitive nature. By having these regulations in place, many of the ill-natured conflicts between municipalities and service providers will cease, as the process will be beneficial to both parties involved.

The heart of this project is the development of a model wireless facilities ordinance. By combining research materials and personal experience in writing an ordinance for Londonderry, NH, I have developed a set of regulations that is capable of being adopted in any local government. I have used Model Subdivision Regulations, a book available from the APA Planners Press as a template to do this, since it is a widely recognized and utilized format. Chapter 5, devoted to the model ordinance, involved the writing of the actual text of the regulation, followed by a section explaining the rationale and consequences of each section. This provides the reader with ample background material and understanding for the reasons behind the regulation sections. The model regulations are written is such a way that the user has two options available. First, the regulations are designed to function as a "stand-alone" ordinance, much like a community's subdivision regulations. However, if the user does not wish to use the model as a stand-alone, the sections dealing with zoning can easily be adapted as an amendment to existing zoning ordinances.

Finally, as part of the model regulations, ordinance language has been developed that deals with removal of towers when communications technology no longer requires their use. This will lessen, and hopefully remove, the possibility of the local planning and zoning departments to be caught off guard by the changing technologies. Technology in the wireless industry is evolving so quickly that it is inevitable that towers will soon be a thing of the past and unnecessary for a wireless phone to operate. The technology surrounding Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and satellite technology suggest that, within the next five years, each wireless phone will transmit directly to satellite rather than to a tower in an individual cell. Removal of abandoned towers will be expensive, and it is important not to leave communities "holding the bag" and responsible for removing the towers themselves. That is why a portion of the model regulations is devoted to tower abandonment and tower removal.

Also, as a part of the model regulations, some guidelines will be included for dealing with applications for wireless facilities. A series of application and review guidelines and checklists will aid both the planners and government officials in their review of applications, but also aid the communications providers, setting out clear procedures to follow, making the permitting and approval process clear, understandable, and timely. This will, hopefully, reduce the expense that providers will incur for a series of costly plan revisions, as well as reduce the time necessary for government to review plans, freeing up time for other governmental activities.