Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
 
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 31 Main Rd - 9/26/11
ZBA Hearing Minutes

Date:  9/26/11 – 31 Main Rd
Hearing began at: 2:00pm

Members Present:  Fred Chapman, Chair, Cynthia Weber, Clerk, Robert Lazzarini, Stanley Ross and Jonathan Levin, Alternate

Also present: Richard Comi of The Center for Municipal Solutions, Maynard Forbes, Director of Operations, Gene Bounous, Chief Backhaus, Randy Howse, North Atlantic Towers, Francis Malabanan, AT&T, Ken Curley, Infinigy Engineering, Peter Fales, AT&T agent, Mike Dolan, Attorney for the co-applicant,  Chris Tryon, Shawn Tryon, Fire Chief, Robert and Catherine Rodgers, Jonathan McNeal, Rick Mielke and Joy Brown

Fred reminded everyone that we still have not received the Attorney General’s approval on the bylaw so any decisions made by the Board may need to be revisited if the AG has changes. (The AG has until November 23rd to respond).

Michael Dolan apologized for having all of the information that was requested delivered later than expected.  He also noted that his client has agreed to install underground utilities on the site as the Board had requested.

Francis Malabanan of AT&T summarized the new coverage maps based on requests from the Board and the Board’s consultant for the Boston market.  Richard Comi requested a more legible map as the one he received was unclear and therefore he was unable to comment on it.  Coverage maps for a proposed tower at 200ft on Mt. Wilcox were also reviewed which would only cover Beartown Mountain Forest.  It was explained that the FTP 160 maps were coverage maps with the tower at 160’ within the required setbacks.  Francis explained what moving the tower to meet the setback requirements would do to the coverage.

AT&T stated they will only be putting 2 cell towers in town and Chief Backhaus confirmed that DCR will not allow a tower on Mt. Wilcox so discussing at as an option is moot.

Michael Dolan stated that the consultant Richard Comi, is not a licensed engineer, which Mr. Comi concurred and Mr. Dolan feels that the questions and data Mr. Comi is requesting are out of line and is making the application process more difficult and confrontational.  Richard Comi stated that he feels some of the problems may be due to the fact that AT&T uses different guidelines for their New England headquarters vs. their other AT&T headquarter locations.

Rick Mielke stated that he is the only abutter present that would be able to see the proposed tower and he doesn’t object at all to the proposed location and minimizing the proposed tower specifications (height, etc) would be stupid and foolish.  He’d like to see the maximum coverage and technology installed in Monterey.  He felt the Board was arguing over nickels and dimes and should be focusing on getting us the most coverage and technology possible.

The Board was concerned that the proposal wasn’t giving us the broadest coverage.  Fred asked for additional propagation maps for some additional scenarios but Francis stated that his tool would not allow him to meet all the requests that Fred asked for.  Francis stated that the tools he uses to show coverage are for the most recent 4g technology.

Randy Howser of AT&T stated that the best coverage is going to be attained by a 199’ tower in the proposed location that requires a variance.  Maynard asked why we were looking at lower heights, common sense states that a higher tower with the power proposed will give us the best coverage and since none of the abutters have expressed any concerns with the proposed location and the variances that are needed, the Board should accept the proposal as is and get Monterey the coverage it needs.

Buddy Rodgers, an abutter to this project stated he’d like to see the tower at 190’ to enhance the future carriers that may join this tower.  He asked Fred about the windmill on his property and why he made it the height that he did.  He felt if the proposal calls for 190’ feet or more to get the best coverage, it wasn’t rocket science, AT&T has the experienced engineers and we should run with what they’ve proposed.

Chief Backhaus stated that if we aren’t going to follow the footprint and standard that AT&T proposed, why bother.  He’d like to see this approved as soon as possible from a public safety point of view.  Verizon will not support our current phone lines (land) in Monterey and cell service is crucial for him (and other emergency personnel) to be reached in emergency situations.

Mr. Dolan stated that since only 2 abutter’s have appeared and have had no objections and have actually encouraged the Board approving a higher tower.  He also stated that he has worked in other towns where the bylaw hasn’t been approved by the Attorney General and they have no problems with proceeding at their own risk if the special permit is approved.

New site plans were reviewed with the Engineer from Infinigy which shows all underground utilities.  The Board stated that the compound as proposed right now presents a problem as it doesn’t meet the requirements of our bylaws but this is a matter we can take up at a later date.  The new plans also show the requested chain link fence versus the originally proposed stockade fence.

Chris Tryon of Berkshire Geo-Technologies presented a preliminary storm water management plan.  He added more rip rap swales and level spreaders to slow down the velocity of the water coming down the hill.  Chris confirmed that if the proposal didn’t work as planned once the site was in place, more check dams, swales, etc could be added.  He will have more detailed plans with calculations at the next meeting.  Chris did review his proposal with Maynard Forbes, Director of Operations.

It was asked if additional balloon tests would need to be performed if the height of the tower were to be increased, the Board will check with Town Counsel.  It was also noted that the current bylaw has not been approved by the AG.  It was asked if the applicant would be comfortable with going forward with a 195’ tower with no balloon test with the possibility that the application could be appealed.

AT&T needs at least 2 weeks to prepare the additional data requested.

The hearing was continued until Monday, October 24th at 2pm.  The hearing concluded at 3:38pm

Submitted by
Melissa Noe, Inter-Departmental Secretary