Public Present
John Kelly (Acadia National Park - ANP), Noel Musson (CES, Inc.), Billy Helprin (Maine Coast Heritage Trust - MCHT), Brian Reilly, and Misha Mytar (MCHT)
Board Members Present
Lili Andrews, Alt.; Sandy Andrews; Ellen Brawley, Chair; James Clunan, Vice Chair; and Joseph Tracy
Kim Keene, CEO; Claire Woolfolk, Recording Secretary
I. The meeting was called to order at 6:02 p.m.
It was agreed to take the Agenda Items out of order and first address Item III.
It was confirmed that the workshop notice was published in the April 12 and 19, 2012 Mount Desert Islanders.
II. Minutes
The draft minutes from the April 23, 2012 meeting were unanimously approved as amended.
A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE April 23, 2012 MEETING AS AMENDED WAS MADE BY MR. Andrews; SECONDED BY MR. Andrews.
A VOTE WAS CALLED AND THE MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. (4-0)
III. Workshops
A. Vistas and Views: Discussion of the list of candidates for the vistas and views ordinance.
Noel Musson presented an agenda of items for the evening (see attached). After the agenda review, he facilitated discussions between board members and the public.
Terminology
Discussion began regarding the terminology of vistas and views/scenic resources. Mr. Musson suggested change the terminology being used on this project from vistas and viewsheds to special places because it has less of a negative connotation. “Views & Vistas” is thought to have a somewhat negative implication with the public and provokes public fear surrounding what is going to be done with these places once they have been identified. Mr. Clunan said that it could be alarming to the public in terms of the economic value of their property and what they can do with it once it is “protected” (would they no longer be able to develop their property?).
Brian Reilly commented that Views & Vistas brings to mind viewpoints and the vistas from those viewpoints. Special places, such as Seal Harbor or Somesville, are not necessarily a view or vista, but are special places.
Mr. Andrews and Mr. Tracy thought that it sounded like the discussion was leaning towards adding a third description relating to a special place or cultural resources. Neither one thought the project should be broadened to include these special places. Mr. Tracy didn’t feel that the special places needed to be protected at the same priority level as the views and vistas. Mr. Musson didn’t want the Board or the public to get hung up on the terminology and suggested that they continue on, addressing this issue at a later date if necessary.
Acadia National Park
John Kelly, Representative of Acadia National Park (ANP), was present to speak to the Board regarding vista and view sheds. He gave a brief background as to why ANP came into existence and stated that essentially the park is primarily concerned with the scenic resources and preserving these resources for the public enjoyment. Mr. Kelly gave an overview of the information from a prior study done in 1988 which identified scenic resources and vistas, maps of Mount Desert, and the current focus areas of ANP.
Mr. Kelly displayed the maps from the 1988 study and explained what could be derived from the maps. He suggested that if you take what is already protected by ANP or MCHT, or semi-protected (i.e. College of the Atlantic - COA), then you can see what is not protected and therefore vulnerable.
Mr. Kelly also said the study indicated what visitors like to see when they come to Mt. Desert Island:
• Seek a sense of mystery
• Coastal views
• Distant views
• Landscape
• Adverse and well-maintained vegetation in the foreground of the views
• Do NOT like to see culturally modified or developed landscapes
• Do NOT like tourist oriented development or driven ads
Ms. Mytar suggested the Board use the Hancock County Planning Commission Coastal Assessment to assist in the identification of vistas and views. Mr. Kelly said it is a point of view analysis, not a spacial analysis, and also suggested the Scenic Assessment Handbook put out by the Maine State Planning Offices. Mr. Musson said the Board received these documents at an earlier meeting.
Map Review
Mr. Musson presented a map that combined all the areas protected by different entities: ANP property, MCHT easements, Somes wildlife sanctuary, and zoning for conservation and resource protection areas. He plans to talk to the Town Assessor for additional properties that could be considered to be privately protected such as Audubon property, Greenrock property, etc. and Town lands or land that the village improvement society looks after such as the Asticou area or Suminsby Park, etc.
Mr. Kelly said there are a number of tools to accomplish what the Board’s goals are regarding Vistas/Viewsheds. Once the list is compiled, then they should explore the tools available for protecting these properties (easement standards, etc.) Mr. Musson suggested that it would be nice to get ahold of some of the easement languages to take a look at the design standards that have been built in for protection. Ms. Mytar discussed how conservation easements vary by property. However, MCHT has boiler plate language as a starting point for setbacks and height limitations which can be customized for each situation. These could be useful for establishing guidelines.
Billy Helprin said that people value the night sky viewsheds. It would be important to keep in mind guidelines for maintaining this resource. Chairman Brawley said the night sky lighting standards are built into the current LUZO for the Town and agreed that this is an important viewshed.
Next Step(s)
Noel Musson will double check the layers on the map with the MCHT, Assessor identified properties, and the Hancock County assessment. He will add missing sites to the map overlay. Mr. Musson will send the maps via email in PDF prior to the next meeting and they would be available to put on the Town website.
Next Board scheduled the next workshop for Thursday, May 17th at 6pm to review the map overlay and to begin placing the identified areas.
IV. Other Business
ANP Cell Tower Plans
Mr. Kelly addressed what the Park is planning to do regarding cell tower placement. The Park Service is finding the technology on today’s phones is becoming a basic necessity like water and electricity, and ANP needs to provide this service to visitors.
The recent article in the paper covered the general issue that service providers are private corporations; they are in business and compete with one another. In fact, by law they are not allowed to coordinate their efforts for coverage.
Mr. Kelly shared information he had about Verizon and AT&T. Verizon is not planning to put up more towers and poles in the area. They have covered Rt. 3 in Trenton and into Bar Harbor. According to discussions, they don’t have a budget to do more acquisition or development. Their immediate focus is to upgrade existing service to 4G service.
AT&T is looking to spread out more geographically. They are co-locating with Verizon on two towers in Bar Harbor. AT&T plans to put antennas on the Jackson Lab research building. They also have plans for two locations in Mount Desert: Pretty Marsh and Somesville. They already have an active tower on Kelly Town Road. AT&T has indicated that towers in Pretty Marsh and Somesville would provide continuous coverage from the tower in Trenton to the tower in Tremont.
Park personnel and AT&T have had discussions on how to cover places within ANP such as Jordan Pond, Sieur de Monts, and Sand Beach. They would likely use several shorter towers to cover these areas (which could provide some coverage for Seal Harbor). They are also looking at the option of using the “flag-pole” antennas within the park. There are down sides to using camouflaged trees such as the two mono poles in Bar Harbor.
Essentially, a strategic plan for the island is not viable; the Towns don’t have the power to invite companies in to put up towers because most properties are privately held. The Park Service can do this as a large property owner. Mr. Kelly said ANP is primarily concerned with providing service within the park. However, they are willing to look at options that will provide service to the surrounding towns, although their focus areas may not be helpful to the Town of Mount Desert.
Due to power constraints, the areas where coverage could be placed are limited. The Beech Mountain Fire tower is often suggested, but no power is available. Another option often brought up is the top of Cadillac Mountain; that won’t work for Mount Desert. Chairman Brawly asked about a tower down by the parking lot at Beech Mountain; again power does not extend to that area. There is a small antenna on COA structures for service in the area by Red Sky and in Southwest Harbor. There is 40’ limit on height for separate poles or antennas.
Mr. Kelly stated that the Park has no opinion on Mount Desert’s pending moratorium on cell towers, except to say it isn’t a bad thing. Chairman Brawley said that at the moment it would only affect the proposed Somesville tower; the Pretty Marsh tower was submitted and approved prior to the moratorium.
Based on the information from John Kelly’s report of the Park’s plans for cell coverage, Board members agreed by general consensus to reverse their recommendation of the moratorium on cell towers at the Town meeting on May 8.
V. Meeting adjourned at 7:14 p.m. The next scheduled meeting/public hearing(s) is at 6:00 p.m., Monday, May 14, 2012 in the Meeting Room, Town Hall, Northeast Harbor.
Respectfully submitted,
Claire Woolfolk, Recording Secretary
| 
