Becket Planning Board
Approved Meeting Minutes
Wednesday , April 20th, 2010
Planning Board Members Present: Gale LaBelle, Martin Schlanger, Barbara Stuhlman, Ann Krawet, Bob Podolski.
Planning Board Members Absent: Stanley Oransky
Members of the public present: Donald Munger, Harvey Lerner, David Graves, Heather Graves, Mary Graves, Robert Gorden, Joy Lennartz, Joshua Lombard, Rach Alis, Susan Purser, Nandor Sala.
Meeting called to order: 7:06 pm
7:10 pm- Continuation of Mariner Tower II LLC, request for a Special Permit; Proposed Location of cell tower is 0 Wade Inn Road, Assessor Map 413 Lot 114.
Chairperson, Gale LaBelle re-opens public hearing, advising all present that there are agendas on the table for anyone who would like one. She goes on to advise that this meeting is being held in accordance with Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A and the bylaws of the Town of Becket. A decision to issue a special permit requires a minimum of four positive votes from a five member board. Gale explains that the board has 90 days to make a decision after the close of the public hearing and 14 days to file paperwork with the Town Clerk once a decision has been made. Any appeals of decisions can be made only to the court and must be made pursuant to Section 17, MGL 40A as amended, and must be filed within 20 days after the date of filing of the decision with the Town Clerk. Gale goes on to introduce the board members
present.
Mr. David Graves begins by advising Ms. LaBelle that he has new information and materials from Div. Of Fisheries and Wildlife. Mr. Schlanger advises Mr. Graves that such material should be reviewed and submitted to the Federal Government, not the Becket Planning Board. Mr. Graves states that he is very concerned for the honey bees and their future, he asks that careful consideration must be given to this very serious matter. Ms. Graves advises that Federal Law trumps State law and that her information is from the federal Government. Ms. LaBelle assures Mr. and Ms. Graves that she will review it.
Mr . Donald Munger- thanks the board for all the time they have given this matter so far. He also cites the acts of 1996, briefly discusses. Mr. Munger goes on to state that the owner of the property, Ms. Darcy Gibbs does not care about her land and that this was made obvious recently when the logging company came and went, leaving behind a huge mess.
Nandor Sala- Questions what is the standard for gaps in coverage, stating that the definition is very vague.
Chris Ciofi- replies that there is no standard in act that defines gap in coverage. Mr. Ciofi states that this was already covered in the report prepared by Mr. Mark Hutchins.
Robert Gorden- Mr. Gorden again states that he has concerns about the visual impact of the tower. Mr. Gorden goes on to explain that the Historical Commission had three members present when the balloon flight took place. At this time, Mr. Gorden passes out pictures/photos that were taken at the balloon flight for all board members as well as the public to view. He states that from a distance, the balloon was actually more visible. Mr. Gorden states that Becket is such a beautiful town and that the towers definitely cut into the attractiveness of the town. Mr. Gorden asks Mr. Ciofi if they fly there own balloon?
Chris Ciofi- Advises Mr. Gorden that they do fly their own balloon, and offers Mr. Gorden a brief explanation of how a balloon flight is determined, balancing minimum height requirement vs. co-locators, in order to make a 150 ft, tower.
Board members ask about the different style poles that are now available. Ms. LaBelle asks Mr. Ciofi if he has considered the style that looks like a flag pole? Mr. Ciofi responds that with such a pole, there is a definite reduction in coverage. Ms. Ann Krawet asks about the towers that are actually made to look like trees. Mr. Ciofi explains that the visual impact of such towers is not good, the structure usually goes well above the tree line , the size of the foundation has to be increased, the fake limbs shed fake pine needles that litter the ground profusely, especially during windy, winter conditions. Mr. Ciofi concludes by stating, in his opinion, these would be inappropriate and out of character for the town of Becket.
Ms. LaBelle asks Mr. Ciofi if other properties were looked at for the proposed tower? Mr. Ciofi explains that there were many other locations, however, they were unable to get land control of any of them.
Ms. Graves asks what is going on with the town of Chester and their cell towers? Ms. LaBelle asks Ms. Graves to please limit this conversation to the town of Becket.
Mr. Sala- asks if Mark Hutchins is available and present here this evening? Ms. LaBelle advises that he is not present.
Susan Purser- confirms that Cindy Sage’s Correspondence did in fact make it to the board members. Ms. Purser presents Mr. Ciofi with a list of questions that she would like to have answered. Mr. Ciofi explains that Radio frequency waves are everywhere, stating that they not only comply with the standard, but that they are only a fraction of the standard.
Ms. Purser submits a document containing alternatives that the board may consider during their deliberations.
Mr. Sala- States that it is speculation that Verizon needs another tower. He says it is also speculation that there are no health issues directly connected with RF waves.
Chris Ciofi- States again that they have already fulfilled the responsibility and obligation, by submitting all information requested to the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife.
Mr. Podolski, hearing no new information, makes a motion to close the public participation portion of the public hearing; Mr. Martin Schlanger seconds motion; unanimous Approval.
Ms. LaBelle advises that the Planning Board has 90 days to draft a decision Mr. Podolski explains that from the very first meeting, we were presented with a situation that was put in front of us. A RF Engineer was hired, and that engineer states what the FCC allows. Mr. Podolski states that from the first time the application was read, nothing has really changed and that all questions to this point have been answered. Mr. Schlanger agrees with Mr. Podolski. At this time, Ms. Stuhlman states that she also agrees.
Ms. Krawet explains that she believes that Mark Hutchins has very specifically presented all information to be considered. Ms. Krawet explains that she has given much thought to this and that she will continue to do so. Ms. Krawet advises that she has also, driven roads, checking for coverage, brought up tower-alternatives and has always tried to follow guidelines provided. Ms. Krawet adds that at this point all bases are covered.
Ms. LaBelle explains that the board will need more time to go over all the information that has been presented, to include new information submitted by the Graves family this evening. Ms. LaBelle announces that the planning board will meet again on Wednesday, May 12th and at that time she expects that they will have a decision to render.
8:30 Ann Krawet makes a motion to adjourn hearing; Mr. Bob Podolski seconds motion to adjourn; unanimous Approval.
Schedule next meeting for April 28th.
Respectfully submitted,
Heather Hunt
Administrative Assistant
Signed_____________________________ Date________________
Gale LaBelle
Signed______________________________ Date________________
Martin Schlanger
Signed______________________________ Date________________
Robert Podolski
Signed______________________________ Date_______________
Ann Krawet
Signed______________________________ Date________________
Barbara Stuhlman
| 