The Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals is close to deciding on approving a special permit for a 190-foot-tall, monopole-style telecommunications tower facility on High Street in the face of a roomful of abutters airing their objections and concerns.
Industrial Tower and Wireless LLC seek a special permit to reduce the required setback distance of 200 feet from other property lines by 50 percent or to 100 feet. The project’s representatives argued in their initial hearing that the tower would sit on land owned by A.D. Makepeace and the closest adjacent property would be 521 feet away.
ITW’s attorney Jeffrey Angley began the March 24 hearing by noting “we feel we have mitigated the impacts.” Angley itemized that a market analysis study showed the tower would cause no measurable devaluation of abutting properties; the radiation frequencies to which residents would be exposed would be minimal, and the tower will provide gaps in wireless coverage that the area currently experiences.
Abutters in the seats filling the room rebuffed these assurances. Gary O’Neil of nearby 367 County Road said he wants the tower 200 feet away from the property line, not 100. “It’ll be 1,400 feet from my property. That’s too close.”
Another abutter said her research reveals the accumulative effect of the radiation from a wireless tower affects cells and DNA and could cause cancer. “Do you feel you have sufficient evidence that your tower will not cause harm to my children?” she asked.
James Ashley of 419 County Road said his concerns include the tower interfering with medical devices that depend on wireless technology. His wife has an insulin pump, he said, and the tower signal could interfere with receiving her glucose-level information. “We’re 1,100 feet away from the tower,” he complained. “I am the closest with only the bog in between.”
A father and son, David and Tyler Paquin, who work on the nearby Makepeace cranberry bog, complained the tower would ruin the neighborhood and endanger their health from tower radiation and the hazard of the tower falling close to where they work. Tyler Paquin’s mother, Lois Paquin, disputed the need for another wireless tower in Rochester. “There are 15 cell towers within 6 miles of this site,” she said. “There are no gaps.”
The biggest pushback came from Attorney Donald Nagle, who said he represents 19 of the proposed tower’s neighbors. He presented the zoning board with a petition signed by 54 neighbors voicing their opposition.
“This is an industrial site in a residential neighborhood,” Nagle said. “It doesn’t belong there. It doesn’t comply with bylaws.”
Nagle asked the board to deny the project’s special permit by reason of the abutters’ safety concerns. The tower will disrupt heart monitors and other medical equipment; if it falls, it could be a danger to workers in the bogs. He asked the board to do a peer review to take another look at ITW’s data.
ZBA Chairman David Arancio did not address Nagle’s input directly. Rather, he closed the public input section of the hearing, saying that Town Counsel would like a draft decision ready in time for the board’s next meeting in order to be present at the next meeting.
The panel provided little indication whether the draft decision will be a “yes” or a “no” as they continued the hearing to April 14.
The strongest negative response on the board came from member Thomas Flynn. “The board has a narrow decision to make,” he said. “The petitioner is asking for a special permit for 100-foot setback. We have to find whether the visual impacts will be improved or minimized. I heard the petition say 100 feet one way affects some houses, 100 feet the other way affects other houses. We have to find, is it advantageous to the general harmony or minimizes the general harmony. And nothing on the record demonstrates that 100 feet or 200 feet does that. So I will not support the petition.”
“I live 200 feet from high-power lines,” ZBA Vice Chairman Davis Sullivan countered. “A cell tower is a public utility. A 190-foot monopole is not a big deal.”
The board, however, took swift action in its next two public hearings on March 24. It approved a special permit for “A&M Winery,” a farm winery at 308 New Bedford Road. A&M will feature specialty dessert wines for wine tastings by appointment. Owner Anthony Ruocco said he will host no more than 9 to 15 customers at a time and will not need any extra on-site parking. The winery will be available for tastings from 11:00 am to 8:00 pm seven days a week.
The board also approved a special permit for a hobby kennel at 116 Walnut Plain Road to include kennel space in the basement, grooming space and dog breeding. Owner Alisha Fitzgerald said she breeds German Shepherds once a year and sells the puppies to help her afford the German Shepherds she keeps as her pets and for competitions.
“That’s a busy corner. What safety precautions will you have?” asked Arancio.
Fitzgerald agreed to the following conditions: She will erect a 6-foot-high privacy fence, own no more than six dogs six months of age and breed no more than two litters per year.
The board also granted a variance extension for a house plan at 0 Snipatuit Road. Property owner Carl Achorn explained his wife recently was seriously injured in a car accident and is still recovering. His plan to build a two-level house will have to change to a single-level home within the same footprint.
The next meeting of the Rochester ZBA is scheduled for Thursday, April 14, at 7:00 pm.
Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals
By Michael J. DeCicco