Tall communications towers 200 feet or more will congregate along major highways in Fayette if the Planning Commission's early discussions translate into a final master plan for the towers.

But if cell phone companies need towers away from the highway corridors in order to meet their federal mandate to provide service to most of the country, the towers will be shorter 150 feet or less and there will therefore have to be more of them.

That's the panel's consensus after two hours of discussion in a workshop meeting last week, the second of its kind.

"Most of the people we've talked to would prefer towers only on major corridors," said commission chairman Bob Harbison. "We can do some things that would encourage those providers to locate along those corridors."

That means mainly Ga. highways 85 and 92, said commission member Al Gilbert, and some towers might congregate along a new east-west corridor being created by extension of Bernhard Road, he added.

The commission is working to design special rules for towers that will minimize their impact on residential areas of Fayette.

A rash of recent tower requests has met with a storm of neighborhood opposition, with several requests turned down in recent months.

Four such requests have been postponed from the Planning Commission's August meeting, to be considered at its Oct. 1 meeting, 7 p.m. at the County Administrative Complex.

No public comment will be taken, because the commission already has conducted public hearings on the requests. Unless they're tabled again, the requests will go to the County Commission for final action Nov. 12.

Any further requests are subject to a moratorium that won't be lifted until the new master plan is in effect.

County ordinances currently allow communications towers in the A-R (agricultural-residential) zoning category.

Companies can build towers up to 150 feet high without a public hearing, or they can request special permits for taller towers in A-R zones.

The county recently passed a new ordinance aimed at encouraging several companies to put their antennas on each tower, reducing the total number of towers needed. But that concept calls for taller towers, and taller towers have met even stiffer opposition than shorter ones.

Meanwhile, federal requirements mandate finding a place for all the towers that are needed, commissioners say.

"We need to come up with... a compromise that provides for what the telecommunications companies want and what Fayette citizens need," said Harbison during a recent County Commission meeting.

Representatives of the seven cell phone companies have attended both workshops to give input, along with members of the public. Based on information provided by the cell companies, zoning administrator Kathy Zeitler put together a map showing tentative target areas for towers in the future.

One problem in devising a workable plan is the complexity of providing cell phone coverage.

Whether cell phones work well in a given area is not just a function of how many towers there are, but also of how tall those towers are, how many people in that area are using cell phones or pagers, the topography of the area and other factors, the cell phone company representatives have said.

The dilemma is going to require a combination of solutions, said county attorney Bill McNally. "You're going to have to look at a combination of the larger ones and the smaller ones," he said.

Commissioners also discussed requiring that the smaller towers be disguised as tall trees or hidden in church steeples, or camouflaged in some other way. A variety of "alternative" towers have worked well in other communities, cell phone company representatives say.

A stand-alone ordinance that deals with towers separately from the county zoning laws is imperative, said several commission members.