MINUTES
WATERTOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS<= o:p>
PUBLIC HEARING
WEDNESDA=
Y,
JANUARY 25, 2006 - 7:30 P.M.
WATERTOW=
N HIGH
SCHOOL
TECHNOLO=
GY
ROOM
APPLICATION #812 – NEW CINGU=
LAR
WIRELESS PCS, LLC
PRESENT:
=
&nb=
sp; =
&nb=
sp; John Griffith
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Roger
Mitchell
&=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; Phil
Roger, Vice Chairman
=
; &n=
bsp; =
; &n=
bsp; =
; Enrico Sarandrea, Chai=
rman
ABSENT: &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; &=
nbsp;
ALTERNATES PRESENT: &=
nbsp; Scott
Stewart
ALTERNATES ABSENT: &=
nbsp; Chris
Lafferty
OTHERS PRESENT: &n=
bsp; =
; Moosa Rafey, Assistant
Zoning Enforcement Officer
1. =
Call
Meeting To Order
Mr.
Sarandrea, Chairman, Called the Public Hearing to Order at 7:34 p.m.
2. &nb=
sp; Roll
Call
Ms.
Bisson, Secretary, executed the Roll Call.
WATERTOWN
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC H=
EARING
APPLICAT=
ION
#812 – CINGULAR WIRELSS=
S PCS
LLC
JANUARY =
25,
2006
Page 2
Mr.
Sarandrea, Chairman, read aloud the Ground Rules for the record as follows:=
“Rules For Condu=
ct of
Public Hearing
The applicant, or his
representative will make his =
formal
presentation to the Board stating his specific hardship and precisely why t=
his
merits a variance from the Zoning Regulations of the Town of Watertown. All comments, discussions, and
observations shall be made through the Chair after proper recognition by the
Chairman. This is necessary to
ensure that only one person at a time speaks on any issue, thus making it
easier for everyone to understand for clear, legal transcription.
All persons addressing=
the
Board shall begin by first clearly stating their name and address for the
record. If necessary, the per=
son
may be asked to spell his name for the record. Following the presentation of the
application the Zoning Board of Appeals will ask specific questions of the
applicant. After the Board has
asked its questions of the applicant, the Chairman shall then allow any mem=
bers
of the public who wish to speak either for or against this application, to
address the Board. The Chairm=
an
shall then allow the applicant to respond to the comments of the members of=
the
general public. The Chairman =
shall
then allow members of the general public who wish to discuss any additional
information or clarifying discussions, to do so. The Chairman shall then provide an
opportunity for the applicant to respond to these additional remarks if he =
or
his representative(s) so wish.
The
Zoning Board of Appeals has 35 days from the date the Public Hearing commen=
ces
to complete the Public Hearing. The
Board may ask the applicant for a 35 day extension of the Public Hearing pe=
riod
if the Board requires any additional information or wishes to schedule a si=
te
walk to observe the situation for themselves. The Zoning Board of Appeals has 65=
days
from the date the Public Hearing is closed to render its decision. The Board may or may not make its
decision tonight at its Regular Meeting following the Public Hearing. You may stay for the Regular Meeti=
ng if
you wish or you may leave at the end of the Public Hearing and contact the
Zoning Officer the following morning to determine the status of your
application.”
3. Hearing of Cases=
&=
nbsp; A. Application
#812 of New Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC d/b/a Cingular requests for a 23 fo=
ot
height variance to permit the installation of a panel antennas at 27 Main Street,
Oakville, CT.
&=
nbsp; Recess
or Adjourn, the Public Hearing, must be Closed by March 1, 2006 unless
applicant grants a time extension.
WATERTOWN
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC H=
EARING
APPLICAT=
ION
#812 – CINGULAR WIRELSS=
S PCS
LLC
JANUARY =
25,
2006
Page 3
&=
nbsp; Ms.
Bisson, Secretary, read aloud the Legal Notice for the record as follows:
&=
nbsp; The
Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Watertown will hold a Public Hearing=
at
7:30 p.m. on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 at the Watertown High School
Technology Room, 324 French Street, Watertown, CT to hear and act upon the
following application:
&=
nbsp; Application
#812 of New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC d/b/a Cingular request for a 23 foot
height variance to permit the installation of 6 panel antennas on the rooft=
op
of an existing commercial building to be 88 feet above ground level at 27 M=
ain
Street, (Old Pin Shop), Oakville, CT in an B-C Central Business Zoning
District.
&=
nbsp; Section
60.F.(c) of the Watertown Zoning Regulations permits maximum height of 65 f=
eet
for a building and antenna in a B-C Central Business Zoning District.
&=
nbsp; At
this Hearing interested persons and written communications will be heard.
&=
nbsp; Dated
at Watertown, CT this 12th day of January, 2006.
&=
nbsp; Dated
at Watertown, CT this 19th day of January, 2006.
&=
nbsp; Mary
Bisson, Secretary
&=
nbsp; Zoning
Board of Appeals”
Atty. Chiocchio: We’re here tonight seeking a height varian=
ce
for a rooftop wireless facility.
The building is the Old Pin Shop and what we’re proposing to d=
o is
(inaudible) 6 panel antennas on top of the existing penthouse and enclose t=
he
panel antennas in a structure that will look like the penthouse, so you
won’t actually see the panel antennas, it will just look like an
extension of the penthouse.
We’ll also install electronic equipment cabinets in the existi=
ng
courtyard. Back in 2003 this =
Board
granted another wireless carrier a height variance. Their panel antennas are actually
mounted on the penthouse, around the penthouse, and they have equipment
cabinets within the same area at grade.&nb=
sp;
So we have elevation drawings that show, here’s the penthouse,
those are the existing panel antennas.&nbs=
p;
We’re proposing to go on top of the penthouse.
WATERTOWN
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC H=
EARING
APPLICAT=
ION
#812 – CINGULAR WIRELSS=
S PCS
LLC
JANUARY =
25,
2006
Page 4
We’ve also provi=
ded in
the application package what we’ll call photo simulations to show wha=
t it
would look like from different areas around so we have 4 views in the
area. So on this one, here is=
the
existing penthouse and here it is without the proposed addition. Same idea on the other photos, so =
you
see it’s right on top of the penthouse, it looks like just a little b=
it
of an extension of the penthouse.
The felt screening is pretty versatile, we can tape it to match pret=
ty
closely to what it’s attached to.&nb=
sp;
We need this height variance in order to provide wireless services in
the area. This area is kind o=
f in a
valley and our existing sites aren’t really serving it, so we need th=
is
site in order to serve it and fulfill the obligations under our F.C.C.
license. There weren’t =
any
other properties in the area that were available. We designed it at our minimum heig=
ht
necessary in order to provide this service. There really was no other spot on =
the
building that we could use to mount the antennas. We couldn’t mount them on the
existing penthouse because another carrier is there, so we tried to come up
with a stealth design that accommodates our need and also mitigates any of =
the visual
impacts. We provided, as I sa=
id,
the photo simulations.
There’s information regarding the need for the facility in the
area. We also provided calcul=
ations
that shows the cumulative effects of our facility and the existing
facility. The calculations sh=
ow
that we meet all of the federal requirements for the radio frequency energy
associated with this facility. If
you have any questions I’d be more than happy to answer them.
Mr. Mitchell: <=
/b> I just want to, I’m not only
(inaudible) if you combined up with (inaudible) AT&T, is that going to =
be a
hazard?
Atty. Chiocchio: No, actually what we’ve provided in Exhibi=
t D
of our application package is the results of a calculation. We do a worst case scenario calcul=
ation
and it’s based on the federal standards and it shows worst case scena=
rio,
it’s only 27.19% of the federal standard so the federal standard being
100%, cumulative it’s going to be 27%, worst case scenario, that̵=
7;s
everything transmitting at the same time, so in actuality it would be a lot
less than that.
Mr. Rafey:<=
span
style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt'> I just want to make a comment that=
our
Zoning Regulations encourage applicants to use existing structures and
buildings for antennas instead of building a new tower, so this is an exist=
ing
building and there are other antennas on that building and it doesn’t
change anything.
Mr. Sarandrea:<=
/b> Is there anyone from the public who
wishes to speak for or against this application? Do you have anything else you̵=
7;d
like to ask?
Atty. Chiocchio: Thank you very much for your time.=
WATERTOWN
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
PUBLIC H=
EARING
APPLICAT=
ION
#812 – CINGULAR WIRELSS=
S PCS
LLC
JANUARY =
25,
2006
Page 5
MOTION: &= nbsp; (Mr. Mitchell, sec. Mr. Griffith) to Close the Public Hearing for Application #8= 12 of New Cingular Wireless, PCS, LLC d/b/a Cingular requests for a 23 foot he= ight variance to permit the installation of a&n= bsp; panel antennas at 27 Main Street, Oakville, CT.
Discussion: None<= o:p>
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; MOTION
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY
Public
Hearing Closed at 7:44 p.m.
Respect=
fully
submitted,
Enrico
Sarandrea, Chairman
Zoning =
Board
of Appeals
&nbs=
p; _________________=
_________________
&nbs=
p; Lynn
M. LaForme, Minutes Secretary