Dear Editor: Five new cell towers are proposed in Sitka by one provider, who disclosed that information in a meeting before the Planning Commission. Their proposed 120-foot tower at 116 Nancy Court was denied a variance by the Planning Commission (120 feet is over three times the allowed height of 35 feet for Zone R1). The proposed tower is only 145 feet from homes in a very high landslide risk zone. (Please note that at the variance hearing, a commercial property owner eagerly offered his property for sale or lease to the applicant for a tower; however, to date, the applicant has not contacted him to discuss this alternate site.) The Assembly is reviewing the appeal of the Planning Commission’s unanimous denial of the variance on May 29 at 6 p.m.
In addition, a recent legal notice in the Sentinel requests public comments for a different 75-foot tower application at 404 Sawmill Creek Road, only 320 feet from Xoots (formerly Baranof) Elementary School. Unfortunately, our community does not have ordinances addressing current technology to ensure a thoughtful and consistent approach to the requests for additional cell towers with appropriate setbacks from residences, schools, and other sensitive groups. Recognizing the need for comprehensive technology ordinances, more and more communities, such as Juneau, have enacted clear regulations on cell towers addressing meaningful setbacks to preserve community character, viewsheds, and health/safety requirements (See Juneau’s Municipal Code of Ordinances on Wireless Communication Facilities, Section 49.65.900, et seq.).
We believe the City and Borough of Sitka must do the same, avoiding recent efforts to shoehorn cell towers into places that are not appropriate, bypassing typical standards developed for this technology.
Nationally, setbacks from homes are often at least ¼-mile, or in Juneau 1,000 feet, significantly more than the 145 feet proposed in Sitka. The Children’s Health Defense Organization recommends that cell towers be no closer than 1,500 feet from homes and schools.
Cell tower applications should meet established criteria and stated priorities before consuming the valuable time of our City and Borough’s governmental and administrative resources for multiple hearings and appeals. This is a critical need for all neighborhoods to protect themselves and the community, as failing to mobilize and respond quickly may be viewed as consent to these tower requests. We risk inconsistent results in a “whack-a-mole” approach addressing tower-by-tower requests without provisions in the Master Plan and ordinances.
Pending a final adoption of such ordinances, we urge all tower applicants who plan to erect towers in R-1 (residential) or school zones to exhaust co-location opportunities for service, and consider placement in commercial, non-residential districts, or explore the use of mobile Cell on Wheels (“COWs”) to address additional cell needs, particularly during the robust tourist visitation months.
Residents should not bear the burden of potential health effects, impacted aesthetics, blight, and declining property values without demonstrated public necessity. We appreciate the use and benefits of wireless technology, but urge the adoption of reasonable regulations that ensure consistent approaches and guide placement, construction, and modification of wireless communication facilities. These regulations need to balance federal rules/regulations with:
• Promote the public’s health, safety, and general welfare.
• Establish siting, design, and screening standards to maintain natural surroundings, neighborhood character, and scenic viewsheds.
• Encourage strong incentives for co-location on existing towers.
• Bring a thoughtful approach to the growing need and demand for wireless communications services.
There are several ways you can urge these considerations:
1) The Assembly will hear the appeal on the denial of the 120-foot tall variance at 116 Nancy Court on May 29 at 6 p.m. Write to Assembly members in advance and/or offer your 3 minutes of comment during the appeal (telephonic requests to speak are required by 5 p.m. on May 28 made to clerk@cityofsitka.org).
2) Submit environmental comments on the 75-foot tall tower at 404 Sawmill Creek Road to the FCC re: #A1312368 www.fcc.gov/asr/environmentalrequest, and provide comment regarding potential effects on historic properties to KB re: EBI #-232990-PR, 21 B. Street, Burlington, MA 01803 or kbaer@ebiconsulting.com (this deadline is June 6, 2026).
3) Educate yourselves about health and safety concerns by joining us in a public forum on May 22 at 6 p.m. at Harrigan Centennial Hall, Room 6 to engage with leading experts from the Children’s Health Defense Organization as they discuss current research on cell towers and ways to lessen these impacts through code provisions consistent with our community values and concerns.
Don’t just complain or wonder, be the change and be heard!
Sitka for Safe Technology
Hal and Carrie Spackman,
Clay and Larissa Nellis, Carol Voison, Taylor and Mike Vieira, Amanda and John Martin Jr.,
Jack and Jennifer Davis,
Laurie Johnson, Kelly Sweeney,
and Robert Krehbiel