ZBA Hearing Minutes
Date: 8/24/11 – 73 Chestnut Hill Rd
Hearing began at: 2:01pm
Members Present: Fred Chapman, Chair, Cynthia Weber, Clerk, Robert Lazzarini Stanley Ross and Jonathan Levin, Alternate
Also present: Joy Brown, Doug Bruce, BNRC, Jeff Purvis, Wayne Burkhart, Select Board Chair, Stanley Stanicz, Gail Lindenberg, Maggie Leonard, Planning Board Chair, Richard Comi of The Center for Municipal Solutions, Peter Vallianos, Michael Dolan, Attorney for AT&T, John Lawrence, Centerline Consultant to AT&T, Francis Malabanan, Radio Frequency for AT&T, Eugene Bounous, Jesse Marino, Engineer Consultant to AT&T and Larry Klein, Planning Board member
The hearing began with Fred Chapman, Chair, explaining the hearing process and accepting a motion to waive reading the legal notice (which was posted for 2 consecutive weeks in the Berkshire Record and at the Town Hall). Cynthia then read the letters from the Planning Board, Conservation Commission, Board of Health, Emergency Services, Otis Select Board and Director of Operations. All letters are available for viewing at the Town Hall.
Michael Dolan, Attorney for AT&T commented that there is a gap in coverage in this area which prompted this application. He gave a brief summary of the tower proposal. The parcel on which it is proposed is over 104 acres. They believe the tower will have a minimal visual impact and photo simulations were provided to the Board. The applicant does agree to allow the town space on the tower as well as space in the storage area as long as it doesn’t interfere with AT&T’s equipment. Maggie stated that she was emailed the photo simulations earlier by Melissa and it satisfies one of the concerns noted in the Planning Board’s letter.
Jesse Marino, Engineer Consultant to AT&T presented the following to the Board:
- location of the tower
- the access road is approximately 2,400 ft which has a 15ft access easement
- the compound will be 50’ x 50’ (on page Z4 of the plans submitted)
- with regards to the access road:
- the access road is located just south of utility pole #13 on Chestnut Hill
- there are flags hung to approximate the path of the proposed road
- the flattest section is about 1 1/2 % and the steepest is about 13%
- regarding the proposed width, it was designed as a driveway and after construction there is only a few times a month that someone would be accessing the property. The applicant feels that a 10ft width is standard. The ditch on the side of the road is stone lined and in the “turnouts” there is a rip rap material.
It was asked if the applicant took into consideration tying their access road into the existing roads. Jesse stated that the buildings with those roads are actually to the south and if they used them the access road would have to be much longer. Jesse stated there are ledge outcrops and the road could probably be made wider but he suggested that if the town would agree they could provide emergency turnouts. One of the Board’s major concerns in having cell service is having it available during very bad weather and if you can’t easily access the road to get to the equipment it could be a problem. Jesse stated that the proposed road is about the same width of the existing Chestnut Hill Rd. and 20 – 22 feet of “road” will be cleared but only 10ft of it will be graveled.
The utilities as proposed are overhead because there is a lot of ledge. Battery and back up generators are proposed to cover any emergency situations that might take the power lines down. The run time of the generator is 48 hours if run at 100%. Specs of the generator were provided to the Board. The town’s consultant felt that with actual usage the generator would probably run 3-4 days. AT&T also noted that all of the power in town that would supply to the site is on poles, not underground to which the Board noted that those poles are maintained by the electric company and trees around them are trimmed. The Board was concerned with the overhead proposal and stated they’d like to see the utilities run underground.
Jonathan stated that there are 2 portions of Chestnut Hill, one of which is closed in the winter and he felt that AT&T should try to accommodate the Director of Operations concerns with the proposed width of the road for plowing and emergency services access. There were questions as to who would plow the 2,400 feet of the access road; AT&T would when they had to make a site visit, it would not be regularly.
Michael Dolan wasn’t sure if AT&T had lease rights to meander the access road any more than is proposed. AT&T will own this tower outright. It was noted that the cell tower antennas would be panel type and the emergency services antennas would be whip style.
It was asked if AT&T could get all the equipment in if the town would not grant a 50’ x 50’ enclosure and only granted a 25’ x 25’; the consultant stated that no they could not fit everything in that small of a space. It was asked if this tower was proposed on the highest point of Keswick’s property and they believe it is.
Joy Brown asked for clarification on if there were a power outage and how long cell service would be available on the back up power. AT&T confirmed that the back up generator power specs state it would last approximately 48hrs and they believe the battery power would be about 4hours. AT&T stated that they do not have the authority to direct the power company to enclose their equipment; the Board would have to deal with the power company directly on this if that is something they would like to see.
Peter Vallianos was concerned about the pond, bird sanctuary and wildlife that is located about 800ft from the proposed tower and he wondered if any study had been performed to determine the effect on the wildlife. Doug Bruce from BNRC stated that the bird sanctuary is no longer there. Doug asked if the Board could ask for impact studies to wildlife and vernal pools. Michael Dolan stated that pursuant to their FCC regulations they are bound by any concerns to endangered species and will follow any applicable regulations. Jesse stated that this site was mapped and there aren’t any vernal pools or endangered species. Christopher Lucas, a professional wetlands specialist visited in the spring and reported on his findings. Maggie stated she did see this report and it spoke to a lot of
things, it wasn’t an environmental impact study which would be great, but it was very informative and satisfied the requirements of the bylaw.
Jonathan stated that there would likely have been a clear view of the balloon from the homes that run along Mt. Hunger and Hupi Roads and other roads which look towards Chestnut Hill. Jesse stated that the person taking the pictures drove around 75 miles on public ways. Jonathan stated that there would be a different perspective from the private roads and may be more visible. Doug Bruce stated that a photo was not taken from the public road between Keswick and the BRNC property where the tower will be very visible. Michael Dolan stated that each photo simulation is actually 4ft higher than the actual height of the proposed tower.
Francis Malabanan a radio frequency engineer showed the proposed coverage maps for this tower. Everyone agreed that Monterey will not have any kind of coverage without installing 2 towers, 1 tower would not cut it.
The Board asked that their consultant provide a summary to the applicant of the information he is requesting in order to give an informed and educated review and opinion to the town of the application. The standards in modeling being shown are the standards AT&T uses throughout New England.
The Board is concerned with approving anything more than we need to get the coverage we desire. Larry Klein felt that the Board really needed to take into consideration approving for future uses such as 4G not just the technology currently available.
The Board asked Michael what they considered a “waiver” to be. He stated that our bylaws allow for waiving certain things without requiring a variance. He’s going to double check where he found this as the Board was not familiar with this being in our bylaws. He stated it’s more like “not applicable”. The Board felt that some of the requests didn’t seem to be “not applicable” and would actually be requests for variances and the Board wanted to know what AT&T felt the Board’s authority was on these matters and they did not feel a variance was necessary as they weren’t varying from norms.
Jonathan asked about the blacked out section in the lease section of the application, paragraph 22. The Board was concerned with whether it was a right of first refusal clause on the sale of the property. Michael will get the information for the Board.
Jonathan stated that most of the application stated that noise and odor information was “not applicable” and the Board felt it was as there would be a diesel generator on the property and information on the diesel generator was provided to the Board. The Board asked that the application be updated to show that this information has been addressed to avoid any appeals issues.
Jonathan reinforced that this application will need to go before the Conservation Commission because it falls under the Scenic Mountains Act.
Doug Brown asked about any regulations for diesel containment in case of a spill. He also wanted to confirm that there aren’t any lights on the tower; this is correct. There will be a manually operated light on the shelter. The town’s consultant asked if it could be made a motion sensor light instead of a manual switch to prevent wildlife from getting over the fence into the compound. There will be a chain link 8 foot fence around this compound. It was asked to remove any climbing ladders to 10ft above the ice bridge. Doug asked about the decommissioning bond and whether it was for the road in addition to the site. The Board stated no and why would you want this and that it was a driveway and not a road which would be regulated by the Planning Board. Doug was
concerned about future development of the property since there would already be a road in place. Doug stated that this proposal abuts a nature preserve and somewhere in our bylaws this is addressed, he feels it is his duty to point out that there is a protected open property there with 180 protected acres. Michael referred to our bylaws and read the section that regulates this and how they chose this particular location.
Eugene Bounous asked about common driveways and stated he has intentions of building on his property, is he allowed and is this right being taken away from him if he allows this tower. The ZBA stated this was not their jurisdiction and he should speak to his attorney and the Planning Board.
The Board gave AT&T the specific requests from our consultant and this is in addition to everything discussed today. Michael asked that the Board provide AT&T with a list of all the information the Board is requesting.
The Board agreed to continue the hearing to Monday, September 26th at 3:15pm
The hearing concluded at 5:00pm
Submitted by
Melissa Noe, Inter-Departmental Secretary
| 
