06-26-1996 Additions - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PCS is Coming to Town by Adrian E. Herbst Theresa M. Harris, Fredrikson & Byron We have all heard of Personal Communications Service ( "PCS") and the tremendous expenditure made by various operators to the FCC for the right to receive licensed spectrum. To date, the auctioned- off radio frequency spectrum has cost the industry in excess of $10 billion. These business operators are serious and will move ahead quite rapidly to deploy their systems throughout the country. The purpose of this article is to briefly describe what PCS is, some of the experiences of municipal governments to date, and how local officials can plan for this new emerging technology. WHAT IS PCS? PCS is a new wireless communi- cation service which will make wireless voice and data services faster, higher qual- ity and more affordable than existing ser- vices such as cellular phones. PCS oper- ates on a digital signal. As a consequence, more consumers can utilize this form of service at a lower cost. The downside is that the frequency of cell sites may present problems for municipalities. Traditional cellular telephone cell sites are spaced approximately seven miles apart. With a PCS system, the cell sites and tower sites for interconnection and transmission must be located much closer together. Cell sites which utilize micro- wave technology may need to be located 100 feet or more above the ground. Municipalities are being faced with requests from PCS operators to use public property, public buildings, or other properties within the municipality to locate antenna towers or to locate cell sites and microwave dishes. WHAT ARE MUNICIPALITIES DOING? Local governments are responding to multiple requests for the use of the pub- lic rights -of -way for PCS facilities. Local governments recognize that local control may be affected by the provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which limits their authority to zone the location and placement of these facilities. Some of the solutions local gov- ernments are currently utilizing include the following: 1. A moratorium on development of PCS systems in their community. In a re- cent case in Medina, Washington, a federal district court upheld the right ofa local unit of government to impose a six -month mora- torium to plan for the impact of PCS de- velopment. 2. Co- location of facilities. Municipali- ties are developing policies and standards for the review of PCS applications, includ- ing requirements for co- location of PCS facilities. When the local government re- ceives an application, it reviews the "grid.' plan for the PCS system, and ensures that to the greatest extent possible existing fa- cilities are utilized to reduce adverse im- pact to their citizens. 3. Use of facilities owned by a local unit of government and /or location on public property. Local units of government are exploring ownership of their own facilities and leasing space for utilization by PCS operators. Also, some are attempting to limit the location of antennas and cell sites on public buildings and property to gain rental income and/or in -kind service ben- efits. 4. Aesthetic considerations. Nu- merous aesthetic considerations are impor- tant to consider when allowing new stntc- tures in municipal rights -of -way. Munici- palities should review the color of the poles and antennas, screening, distance, and other factors to prevent intrusion to the greatest degree possible. 5. Rental and other payments. Require- ments for compensation for use of right - of -way and payments for space on public buildings and property varies considerably in different communities. MACTA can serve their members by collecting informa- tion and ideas. CONCLUSION In conclusion, local government must not rush to enter into agreements with PCS operators simply to gain revenues for their communities through lease agreements or other means. There are numerous consid- erations that are very important for local governments to evaluate before making a decision. In the end, what is most impor- tant is to determine the priorities for your municipality. Is it additional income through lease payments? Is it to reduce the impact or unsightliness of new antennas and towers? Is it to negotiate in -kind benefits that are important for the community in ex- change for use of the right -of -way or pub- lic property? The foregoing are just some of the is- sues that need to be evaluated. We recom- mend that you consider these issues and pre- pare a plan that best meets the needs of your municipality. • SP SUMMER 1996 Mos 7 Page 7