No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-09-23 - PH Planning Board Public Hearing 9/23/97 — -3 5 a, Page 1 Town of Ulysses Planning Board Public Hearing on Cellular Tower September 23 , 1997 Present : Chair David Tyler, Members Greg Hoffmire, Rick Geiger, Krys Cail , and Peter Demjanec . Also present : Town Attorney Bruce Wilson, Town Supervisor Doug Austic, Code I Enforcement Officer Alex Rachun, and consulting engineer Thomas Aiston . Recording Minutes : Clerk Debra Austic • Citizens Present : Tom Reitz, Paul Harrington, Paula Mount, David Masin, Henry Chan, Bob Howarth, Roxanne Marino , Wayne Titterington, Diane Hillman, Meredith Kwiatkowski , Suzanne Hillman, Jim Baase, Dave Weisenreder, Susan Axtell, Ken O 'Neil, David Reynolds, Suzanne Reynolds , Dave Gell , Walt Pacyga, Blair Hoover, Bill Luce, Scott Musachio , Rick Mehlenbacher, Andrew Hillman, Jean Foley, Norman Foley Leo Soderholm, Jr. , Michael Kobie, William Couch, Katherine McComas, Susan Brock, Curt Dunham, Rob Shoffel , Jodi Marshall , Mike Marshall, Irene Kolberg, Bill Kolberg, Judith Reese , Richard Coogan, Mark Scibilia-Carver, Rebecca Cardina, Timothy Cardina, Geri Keil , Lysle Gordon, Marion Boratynski , Gary Myers, Don Collins , Linda Collins , Tom Rodman, Karen Thompson, Susan Fritts , Bill Wright, Anthony Caparera, Scott Hoffman, Karen Henion, Rebecca Schneider, Robert Burgdorf, Don Sola, and Julie Jordan. Dave called the regular meeting of the Planning Board to order at 6 : 35 p .m . Bruce Wilson informed the Board that the litigation brought by Frontier had not been withdrawn . Rick made a motion, seconded by Krys, to adjourn to executive session to discuss the pending litigation. The motion passed unanimously and the Board adjourned into executive session at 6 : 40 p . m . The Planning Board returned from executive session and resumed the regular meeting at 7 : 06 p . m. The minutes from 8/28/97 were reviewed and the following clarifications added : on page 1 , paragraph 1 , clarify the executive session was to discuss pending litigation brought by Frontier Cellular; paragraph 4 clarify the resolution was not a denial of the application, but a remand to the applicant for more information. Greg moved to approve the minutes as amended, seconded by Krys, and passed unanimously . The Board Members introduced themselves . Dave opened the public hearing at 7 : 10 p .m . and read the legal notice announcing the public hearing. Dave explained that Frontier would have 30 minutes for an overview and then Susan Brock would be allowed 30 minutes to discuss the concerns of the 20 individuals she represents . Each individual would be allowed 3 minutes to speak. In response to a question about written comments, Dave suggested that comments regarding the public hearing would be accepted for 1. 0 days. Dave offered the floor to Robert Burgdorf, attorney representing the applicant . Burgdorf introduced himself and explained that he was present on behalf of the Telephone Company, NY RSA. No . 4 Ithaca Wireline Cellular Limited Partnership, a partnership including NYNEX, Rochester Tel , and Trumansburg Tel, with the marketing name Frontier Cellular. Burgdorf then introduced individuals present to respond to 0 questions . These were Rick Jacobson, senior cellular engineer; Jim Baase, VP cellular operations and director of engineering ; Barbara Fisher, project manager, David Weisenreder, professional engineer with an independent civil engineering firm ; Walter r . Pacyga, site acquisition consultant; and Scott Musachio , tower manufacturer representative . ' Burgdorf pointed out that the Telephone Company was a public utility and the ` FCC B -Band licensee for this area and responsible for providing wireless telephone communications for this part of the state . The Telephone Company currently has no service to this cell and must place a transmitting facility in a technologically appropriate spot. Burgdorf gave an overview of cellular technology including cell layout, topography , coverage, and frequency . Burgdorf then showed a map of the local area and explained the coverage objectives for this area. These were sufficient handoff to the Ithaca Cell and coverage of the Village of T-burg and Route 96 . He explained the Ulysses tower cannot cover Route r r r qj Planning Board Public Hearing 9/23/97 — W Page 2 89 because of the rapid topographical drop-off, but will cover east shore of the lake . The Telephone Company is looking for a signal strength of Neg . 75 DBM for primary coverage ; secondary coverage objectives are Neg . 85 DBM . Design protocol suggested by the tower manufacturer is no more than 25 % or 1 .4 miles for the Ulysses Cell . Burgdorf showed the search area on the map and showed a propagation study that displayed coverage from Ithaca facility and proposed Mekeel Road site . Burgdorf explained the site acquisition consultant ' s priorities are to first find existing towers , secondly industrial areas , and lastly a least visible site . Their consultant submitted tower in T-burg (site # 5 ) which would need to be replaced and still would not provide sufficient coverage along Route 96 and handoff to Ithaca. Also submitted site #7 , the county home water tower, and did propagation studies at present 140 ft and up to 285 ft and would not provide sufficient coverage. Lacking existing towers , the consultant suggested site # 1 , Town DPW site , however the Town was not interested in leasing at that time . • Burgdorf discussed alternative sites proposed by neighbors . The Telephone Company would be willing to discuss alternative sites provided it meets coverage objectives, does not involve unreasonable cost, or unreasonable delay . First alternative suggested was county tower system, however there were no towers in the area that would work for Ulysses Cell . Burgdorf thanked Dave Gell for the suggestion . Another alternative suggested to split the cell between site #5 (T-burg) and site #7 (Co . Home) This alternative had RF problems with propagation studies but also unreasonable additional costs . The bulk of the cost comes in through the electronic equipment, approximately $ 850 , 000 . Tower replacement and recurrent costs would add to about $ 1 . 2 million for a second tower. Burgdorf suggested that if the RF problems could be solved , the Town could pay for the second tower. Other possibilities raised were Christian Hill , which failed to work because of distance from the search area. The town site was reexamined and Burgdorf felt it was a better location from a land-use perspective because of more trees, also Town would receive the revenue, and tower would be 195 ft, which typically doesn' t need a light or striping . There would be design compromises , and coverage problems , and will need to convert to digital sooner than planned . The Telephone Company also looked at southern peaks, but even at heights greater than 250 ft and 285 ft there were coverage problems with Village . They also revisited site #6 , and cannot go under 195 ft. They could compromise at height of 250 ft. , but it does not have the 5 acres required by the ordinance . For the proposed site , Burgdorf offered to amend the application to build tower at 195 ft as a compromise , but would not waive their right to sue for a taller tower. Dave Tyler asked on what basis the Telephone Company can request a 285 ft tower if they can use a 1. 95 ft tower and are required to make the least impact. Burgdorf answered that the Telephone Company was not required to provide digital service to this area and the analog system would require the taller tower . The Telephone Company offered shorter height and guy wires as a compromise to aesthetics . Burgdorf suggested that cellular towers were part of the modern landscape and offered letters of support from police . He also showed photographs of a 185 ft tower in Penn Yan at different distances to display the visual impact. Dave asked whether a copy of the transcript from the stenographer provided by the applicant could be shared with the Planning Board . Burgdorf stated that pending agreement by the applicant that would be acceptable . Krys asked for clarification of the lack of service in the Ulysses area. Burgdorf stated there is not reliable service , and individuals may be able to get service by changing to A Band on their phone . Dave invited Susan Brock to speak . Susan introduced herself as a local attorney representing Ulysses Citizens for Responsible Technology , a group of residents who live near the Mekeel Road site . The group felt Frontier had not proven the need for the tower at the location for original height of 285 ft. Susan expressed appreciation that the height was able to be reduced . Brock suggested that with the digital technology alternative , a better-screened site could be used . Brock requested that additional information provided by the applicant be made available to the public and public comment on the information be allowed through writing or a public hearing . Susan questioned the coverage needs and boundaries of the cell . Brock stated that one member of the group was told by a salesman that Frontier provided good service throughout Ulysses for non-hand-held units and another member placed calls on a Frontier cell phone at various locations throughout the Town. Brock suggested the need to determine where coverage exists and what gaps need to be filled . Brock stated this could be achieved by a drive test and suggested the iI . ; i mi 351 ' Planning Board Public Hearing 9/23/97 — Page 3 Planning Board require this of the applicant. Dave asked about the reliability of the drive test and dependence upon the strength of receiver. Brock suggested that the applicant had not proven that coverage objectives could not be met at a more screened site . Brock asked that the Planning Board require the applicant to provide specific information regarding topographical features and their impact to evaluate the limitation of the search area. Brock suggested the applicant had not adequately considered alternate locations, as per the ordinance requiring consideration of all possible existing structures within a 10 mile radius, including the Cellular One tower and Seneca Road towers . Brock urged the Board to look carefully at costs presented by applicant and stated that she had gotten a figure of $ 500, 000 from a Cellular One representative . Brock suggested that assuming a 40 year lifespan on a cellular tower, the calculated additional cost of $ 20, 000 per year for a second tower is not unreasonable to • request of the applicant, considering an $ 80 million profit claimed by Frontier for the first 6 months of 1997 according to the Frontier website . Brock discussed visual impact. She stated that the applicant failed to answer question # 14 on the environmental assessment form, which asks whether the site included scenic views known to be important to the community . Brock said the Board needs a better map of the visual impact of the tower. Taughannock Falls is one of the most important scenic views in this region. Brock suggested the Board require Frontier to submit a balloon float test or computer generated graphics to determine visibility . Brock requested that the lighting issue be determined up front as to the need for lighting or striping . She suggested the applicant could apply for FAA determination of lighting prior to approval . Without lighting information, Brock suggested the Board had no alternative but to assume a negative environmental impact under SEQRA . Brock claimed that under SEQRA, the criteria for significant environmental impacts of "the impairment of the character or quality of important aesthetic resources or the existing community or neighborhood character" had been met. Brock stated that the Board must also consider adverse impacts on property values . She suggested the tower would make property surrounding it virtually unsaleable due to concerns about aesthetics and fears about adverse health impacts based on the perceptions of the homebuying public . Dave raised the question regarding the FCC prohibition on considerations of health impacts and Brock suggested the Board would be considering the adverse impact on property values based on public fear of the health impact. Brock turned the remainder of her time over to Curt Dunham . Dave requested that Burgdorf provide the Board with copies of the exhibits he presented . • Curt Dunham introduced himself as a resident of Perry City Road and researcher at Cornell with a background in electrical engineering and physics . Dunham shared information from speaking with an RF engineer engaged by the group . He suggested the Frontier application was lacking in completeness . Dunham felt the reduction in height was a big step in the right direction but should also consider whether the tower could be moved elsewhere or cell restructured . Dunham suggested the cell splitting should provide as good or better coverage but questionable whether worth the extra cost. Dunham stated he understands that the applicant rejected regional cell restructuring but they could consider adjustments of neighboring cells to allow use of a site with Iess impact in Ulysses . Dunham would like to see reduced height propagation studies for the different sites to determine the breakpoint for diminishing return . Dunham stated that propagation studies all done in DBM in which receiving antenna becomes part of the equation, and III requested clarification of the kind of antenna would be used. Dunham suggested the search area could be broadened by use of a directional array . Dave announced he would call on people to speak and allow each person 3 I minutes . Andy Hillman handed out a written statement and claimed the tower would have a negative impact on Taughannock Falls Park views . Hillman shared photographs taken from a plane at the 280 ft height showing views of the site and park area. Hillman suggested the area was very open with little screening vegetation. Bob Howarth spoke next. Howarth and his wife submitted a statement of 8 failures of the application to meet the town ordinance and suggested the Board be obligated to turn down the application. He suggested there was no documentation supporting the need for a 280 ft tower and the claimed the 195 ft Frontier proposal supports that. Howarth stated he has spoken to FAA and suggested the FAA prefer telephone companies to apply for lighting as early as possible . He also suggested Grund x E f 4 GJi Planning Board Public Hearing 9/23/97 — Page 4 Airfield in Enfield and the site area being in a designated pilot practice field for Ithaca Airport might require lighting even if the tower is 195 ft. Rebecca Schneider was present representing 5 families, some of which have recently bought property specifically for the rural aesthetic character. Schneider stated that these people would like more information about the lighting and potential impacts on property values . She also suggested that without an application for a 195 ft tower it is difficult to evaluate and consider a real option . Wayne Titterington confirmed with attorney Burgdorf that his home was one that would see the entire tower . Titterington also stated that any lighting on the tower would shine in his kids ' bedrooms . Don Sola submitted a written statement and stated that he would like to see the application denied without being sued. Sola shared his positive feelings about the area. He also suggested the site area had a history of high concentrated wind and fog and could result in potential life and property damage . Sola also spoke about regional planning and • suggested Ulysses should hold firm with the 100 ft tower limit and stand as an example to surrounding counties . Karen Henion apprised the Board of a private airstrip on their farm on Iradell Road. She suggested that the tower would be in the approach path for their runway . Dave asked how long the runway had been there and the distance to the tower site . Krys asked whether the airstrip was used in their business . Henion answered that the airstrip had been present for 40 years and her husband used it for transportation to consulting jobs . She claimed the distance between the site and their property was about 1 `A miles. Tom Reitz reviewed the history of the application review, tower ordinance , and earlier inquiries about the Town DPW site . Reitz stated he felt some of the applicant' s responses to questions brought up at the July 31 , 1997 Planning Board meeting were vague . Reitz suggested that although the lease agreement for the site need not be made public , information such as the length of the lease and responsibility in case the tower comes apart or is abandoned . He mentioned a plan to bring water to Jacksonville from Ithaca includes a water tower located at the same site and perhaps could include co- location . Meredith Kwiatkowski said she checked service with her Frontier cellular phone throughout areas of Ulysses including Route 89 . Kwiatkowski suggested the public needs concise information about the service already available . She submitted a statement and. attached a map locating successful calls . Kwiatkowski also stated that the view from her property is a large part of the value, which would be negatively impacted by the tower. She suggested the tower would put an unfair burden on the neighborhood and negatively impact the scenic views . Kwiatkowski also suggested the balloon test be done after the leaves have fallen . She also listed a potential loss of tax revenue and residential growth, unproven need for the tower as issues to be considered . Mark Scibilia.r- Carver stated that he was uncomfortable with the FCC not allowing consideration of the health implications . Carver said he felt they would not win on the visual issues because the applicant has said they will put a tower somewhere in the Town. Carver asked whether the land hand been sold or leased . Burgdorf answered that it was under option . Susan Axtell stated that she lived on West Seneca Road across from the tower at that location. She said she was healthy when she moved there in 1987 . In November she was diagnosed with a brain tumor which was removed, leaving her deaf in her left ear and partially blind in her left eye and balance problems . Dave Gell displayed photographs showing line of site from the water tower on • Perry City Road to the water tower in Trumansburg, suggesting there was not need to build a second tower . Gell also shared a bill proposed by majority leader Bragman to encourage siting of facilities on existing towers and properties . Gell talked with Peter Meskill and was told the Board would receive a letter from the county agreeing to allow co -location on the county tower system . He also suggested that the propagation studies should print a third color to indicate coverage overlap . Scott Hoffman , a police officer for Trumansburg and Ithaca, questioned Meredith Kwiatkowski about what type of phone she used for her test. Hoffman stated that with his handheld 3 -watt phone he needed to drive halfway to Jacksonville to make a call . Hoffman also stressed the value of cellular phones in saving lives. Peter asked Hoffman to clarify where he was able to receive a reliable signal for his phone . He responded that along Route 96 he could receive a reliable signal most of the way to Trumansburg, but not within the Village . g 9/23/97 — 3 % Planning Board Public Hearin Page 5 Norman Foley stated he believed there would eventually be a cell tower in Ulysses, but believed the Board should look at all communication tower needs comprehensively knowing that Cellular One will apply in 1998 and possibly Sprint soon after. Foley suggested that this would result in the site becoming the impacted area of the Town. Mike Kobie introduced himself and stated he ' s a Frontier salesman . He said that police and others carry the smaller, less powerful , phones for portability . Kobie said that anyone with a smaller phone would probably not be able to make calls throughout most of Ulysses . Roxanne Marino , said she and her husband carefully studied the application. Marino quoted the Board ' s right to consider the potential effect of the tower on the material value, use and enjoyment of surrounding properties . She stated the tower would • be three times higher than the tree line and impact an important view from their home, and the lights would shine in their windows. Marino suggested her family ' s life ' s savings and emotional energy had been invested in their home and questioned why the applicant' s economic and time delay concerns should be given more weight than the residents' concerns . Marino urged the Board to deny the application and request a complete application specifying height and lighting . Bob Howarth submitted letters from appraisal and real estate agents . Suzanne Hillman stated that they purchased their home in October for the beautiful views and glassed porch, which looks directly on proposed site . Suzanne suggested that the house would be difficult to sell with the tower and she was opposed to it. Jean Foley suggested that property values would suffer due to a generally held public fear of health hazards . Foley suggested the population demographics of the area are unique in their health concerns and much of the home-buying public would not consider purchasing a home near a tower. Foley spoke with a Caldwell Banker Real Estate agent who agreed that towers are considered adverse property impacts . Anthony Caparera stated that he bought his house for the aesthetics, which would be compromised with the tower. He confirmed that he has seen the Henion' s approach over the area in their private aircraft and stated that at times of high winds the southern approach for the Ithaca Airport is also near the site . Judith Reese stated that she lived on Bostwick Road before and after the tower built in that area and is very concerned about the potential visual effect of the Ulysses tower and the effect on property values . Dave gave attorney Burgdorf and Susan Brock copies of a report evaluating the Frontier application from Barton & Loguidice, consulting engineers retained by the Town . Dave asked Thomas Aiston to introduce himself and comment on the application. Mr. Aiston introduced himself and stated he is not an RF engineer. He explained that Barton & Loguidice has historically worked for municipalities but has also recently begun working for Sprint preparing applications for cell sites . Aiston stated that the firm provided the Board with a checklist of things that needed more information. Dave asked Aiston to highlight some of the checklist. Aiston reviewed some of the discrepancies between the application and ordinance . He also suggested the visual EAF information was inadequate . Aiston suggested the tower was not designed for a co-located cell site and thought that would be a requirement . Aiston suggested there is middle ground to be found . Dave opened the floor to rebuttal from the applicant . Burgdorf suggested the ® applicant has shown need through propagation studies and submitted letters . He stated that with agreement with the applicant but they could perhaps do a drive test. Burgdorf suggested they would be willing to look at any reasonable sites offered by the Board but could not possibly test every location . The applicant could also provide visual information but needs direction from Board as to which views are desired . He referred to submitted information from MAI certified appraisal companies regarding impact on property values . Applicant would consider a location suggested by the Board with less impact. Burgdorf read a Westchester County court ruling that overturned a Planning Board denial due to adverse impact of property values . Burgdorf submitted a letter from NYSDOH stating there are no adverse health affects from this type of facility and explained that cellular technology operates on radio frequency similar to TV and radio but at much lower level . Burgdorf asked for direction from the Board as to what sites breakpoints as suggested by Dunham would be helpful as well as what view sheds . Burgdorf stated the applicant would notify FAA about private airstrip and adhere to FAA . • , Planning Board Public Hearing 9/23/97 — 0� Page 6 ruling on whether tower location meets air safety . They have not done ASAC report to determine FAA lighting requirements . Burgdorf stated the tower was designed to withstand sustained 75 mile an hour winds and is designed to fall within one third of its height. The lease is 5 years with 4 5 -year options . If the lease was not renewed, the applicant would remove the tower, or it could be conditioned on a bond . Burgdorf suggested the lighting would be a slow pulsing red light and would not light up a house . In response to Aiston' s question about the tower supporting co-location Burgdorf confirmed it would . Dave confirmed the applicant ' s willingness to provide a 195 ft tower at Mekeel Road or DPW site and waive their right to sue for 285 ft. Krys questioned whether there was a Lansing tower in place . The applicant responded it would be soon but no definite timetable . Krys asked why they were not concerned about coverage on Route 13 . Mike Covary stated that the Dryden tower • provided coverage to Route 13 . Krys suggested information on the Lansing site propagation and timetable would be important to the Board in determining service to Route 89, particularly considering the option of two sites . Rick Jacobson displayed a propagation of the region overlaid with a grid, showing coverage from Ithaca and Dryden. Dave questioned Jacobson about the cell to the north to which Jacobson answered service would be coming from the Routes 5 &20 area. Jacobson showed propagation studies for the county tower system which showed spotty coverage in T-burg and virtually no coverage along Route 96 , even at increased tower heights . Dave Gell questioned using the county home water tower. Jacobson showed a propagation study for that site which did not meet coverage even at increased 285 ft. Peter asked whether the studies were for analog or digital . The answer from Jacobson was that they were done for analog, but that the applicant had to provide a minimum baseline analog coverage . David Weisenreder added that the proposed tower would be a dual mode site with analog and digital coverage and they would encourage individuals needing better coverage to take a digital phone . Krys asked to see propagation studies of the Dryden tower and proposed Lansing site if they were available . Rick asked for confirmation from Jacobson that a propagation study was an estimate and requested an empirical drive test of the actual existing coverage to determine need . Rick further requested information about height breaks to determine ability to meet the need . Burgdorf offered studies of height breaks on the 3 remaining viable sites (# 1 - DPW, #2 - Mekeel Rd, and #6 — Reynolds Rd) . Burgdorf explained that site #6 would have design compromise and strength difficulties but would be willing to accept that if the Board preferred . There was discussion of the relationship between the dots marked on map and actual latitude and longitude . Dave closed the hearing for public comment at 10 : 15 p .m . and the Board discussed additional information to request on the 3 sites . Krys questioned the cost analysis of using two sites, subtracting the cost of the tower. Dave also questioned the figures based on the difference between wholesale and retail costs . Scott Musachio confirmed that the cost of a 270 ft tower would be $ 80 , 000-$90,000 . Burgdorf confirmed the antenna used would be a series 2 Omni . Peter asked what information would be required to determine whether the cost of a second site is a significant addition for the applicant. John Baase suggested that the financial information from Frontier would not be relevant because the RSA No . 4 is a small subsidiary of Frontier, the partners are NYNEX, Rochester Tel, Trumansburg Tel , and US Tel . • Burgdorf confirmed it would be 2 weeks to receive an ASAC report and they would need time to do additional site plans, which would take at least a month. Krys suggested the Board set a meeting in 2 weeks and review whatever information is available . Burgdorf confirmed the information the applicant would try to provide within 2 weeks [note confirmation letter of 9/26/97] : • propagation from Dryden and Lansing if available, • drive test, • height breaks for sites # 1 , #2 , and #6 at 100ft, 150ft, 200ft, and 250ft • appraisal information about initial drop in value (maybe in 2 weeks) • ASAC report • view shed from Taughannock Park Overlook of sites # 1 and #2 , site # 1 from Pleasant Grove B&B on Route 96 , site #6 from Reynolds Rd. i Page 7 PP d that the agreed Bur g g dorf a a licant would notify the town attorney if a balloon 35S would be used in preparing the view sheds so neighbors could see where the tower would be . Walter Pacyga, site acquisition consultant agreed to take interested Board members to the sites . Dave set a regular Board meeting , for October 7 , 1997 at 7 : 30 p . m . in the Town Hall . Burgdorf requested a tentative confirmation of the Town' s willingness to lease the DPW site as soon as possible . Burgdorf confirmed the applicant could do guyed or freestanding tower depending on the Board ' s determination. Burgdorf asked whether the applicant should bring the consultants to the 10/7/97 meeting and the Board confirmed that would be helpful . The hearing recessed at 10 : 50 p . m . 1