PLANNING BOARD MEETING
CELL TOWER PUBLIC HEARING
CANAAN, NY 12029

AUGUST 18, 2008


The meeting was called to order at 7:05pm. Joe Davis was absent. Also present were Chris Ciolfi (Mariner Tower), Scott Olsen( Verizon), John DiMuro (Berkshire Farm), Dave Everett (lawyer) and Linda Stancliffe(engineer).

Ron read the Public Notice aloud and stated this Public Hearing does not mean the application is complete. The purpose is to hear from the Public before doing the SEQRA review. He wanted to give the public the opportunity to speak especially the summer residents.

PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED SPECIAL PERMIT AND SITE PLAN APPLICATION(S) TO ALLOW NYNEX MOBILE LTD. PARTNERSHIP 2 DBA VERIZON WIRELESS AND BERKSHIRE FARM CENTER & SERVICES FOR YOUTH TO COLLOCATE WIRELESS COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT ON A 150 FOOT MONOPOLE STRUCTURE PROPOSED BY MARINER TOWER II, LLC ON PROPERTY OWNED BY BERKSHIRE FARM AT 13640 ROUTE 22.

Ron asked Chris Ciolfi to go over the application for the public. Mr. Ciolfi explained by using the charts. He said the location be accessed thru the main entrance at Berkshire Farm and by turning left at Spencer Cottage using the existing service road. The compound will be 58 feet by 85 feet running along the grade of the hill. They will tap into the existing utilities. The site has been moved 27 feet to the East and they now propose a 148 foot tower. He stated the tower is needed by showing propagation studies which shows the current towers would not project the signal and the new tower would cover the Route 22 corridor and tie into the existing coverage. He also showed the view shed analysis with the balloon test. The map showed visibility of the tower from Berkshire Farm, 1 place on Shaker Ridge Dr. and some areas along Queechy Lake Dr. The next diagram was the actual monopole which would be 5 feet in diameter at the bottom and 2 feet in diameter at the top. The antennas would be appx. 6 feet long and 8 inches wide. Berkshire Farm’s antenna would be at the top. There is an offer for the Canaan Fire Company to have an antenna if needed. He recommended galvanized steel for the tower which will blend in with the skyline. The antennas will be painted gray so as not to reflect the sun.

Scott Olsen wanted to speak on the necessity of this site. He said the current towers will not provide service to the North(Route 22) and even if they extended the existing towers to 400 and 800 feet, they would not provide the coverage. He wants to cover the valley on Route 22 and since low power signals will not go thru the mountains, they need this tower.

Mr. Ciolfi gave the RF information to the Board and copies to Linda Stancliffe to pass on to the RF engineer.

Ron asked Mr. Ciolfi to go over the submissions he had given to the Board tonight which included a response to an email sent to him from Dave Everett and the return receipt cards. Mr. Ciolfi went over the outstanding items from the July meeting:

1. Access road- the previous submission would have required more site work( culverts etc.). They plan to improve the existing service road and tie it into the site.

2. Utilities- there will be new overhead lines tied in with what exists.

3. Tower location- it is now shifted East in the compound to lessen its visibility. It will reduce the height of the tower by 2 feet.

4. Color of tower/antennas-Mariner will agree to use galvanized steel and paint the antennas gray.

5. Independent RF review-Mariner and Verizon submitted information to Linda Stancliffe for this review.

6. Additional photos of the balloon site- more have been provided.

7. Pictures of actual towers- photos of an actual tower submitted.

8. Light on the shelter- all lights will be switch operated. None on the tower.

9. Disturbance area-under 1 acre.

10. Memo of lease- entire lease provided.
Also submitted tonight:
1. Green return receipt cards.
2. C. Ciolfi’s response to Attorney Larry Machiz’s letter dated 8/13/08.
- impact to Chancer/Jacobsen property
-need for proposed facility
-balloon test inaccuracy
-reference to SEQRA review
- engineer hired by Chancer/Jacobsen presentation of Pepperell, Ma. Tower is inapplicable to this application.

Mr. Ciolfi read aloud (no copy given) a response from RF engineer Mark Hutchins. His
review is not complete yet but he feels there is a need for this tower. Although the proposed tower is outside the approved area, it seems there is a need. He will complete his review and submit his study to the Board.

Ron asked Mr. Ciolfi to address why the tower could not be sited in an approved area of the Tower (per Mr. Machiz’s letter). Mr. Ciolfi said Verizon is already on both of the existing towers and they cannot get the needed coverage. Verizon uses expensive and up to date equipment and their study showed another tower is necessary. If Verizon added several hundred feet to each tower, it still could not get coverage. Mr. Olsen said the original coverage was for major corridors like the Thruway and would not cover or consider other coverage areas. Pierre asked if digital technology existed at the time of the previous towers and Mr. Olsen said no, only analog existed then and did not reflect digital cell phones. This could not have been anticipated.

Public input- Ron said there was a sign up sheet for those who wanted to talk and only 4 people had signed up, however he let anyone speak.

1. Lynn Chancer- She said she was not opposed to the cell tower per se but viewing a balloon test is not the same as seeing a cell tower. They bought their house especially for the view and psychologically it is very emotional for them to see the tower. She said it could be a concern for the future as well. They feel they are sacrificial lambs. She said this a problem for the Town as well. She reviewed Canaan’s strategic plan survey and the people would not want this. She said this is the most scenic area in Town. She asked if there were any other options anywhere in Town ? Was there an independent review of the site chosen? She said the structure is ugly and there are other options. It is important for the Board to review the other options. She asked if there was a provision to take down the tower in the future and said it could be problematic. She stated the balloon test was done on a windy day and another test is needed.

2. Michael Jacobsen- provided a packet to the Board done by an engineer they hired which showed the balloon test and proposed tower. This included:
A) page 1- float
B) page 2- proposed tower before moving it 27 feet
C) page 3-tower after moving it 27 feet
D) page 4-wind adjustment
E) page 5-photosim by Mariner. Height questioned
F) page 6- tower height adjustment (black/white copy)
G) page 7- tower height adjustment (color copy)
H) pictures of existing monopoles

He said there is additional information out there and the Board should require an
independent to study all information provided by the developer. There are substantive questions that need to be answered. He said it needs another look. Is this the only option? Can it look like anything else? Can it go anywhere else? Are there options to get coverage elsewhere? Are other experts besides this developer and Verizon? The Board needs to look at the overall picture, look at all options. From their point of view, all the information is not there.

Ron said the balloon was blown off course Southeast and their engineer should have been able to generate where the balloon would have been. Ron said Linda Stancliffe showed the Board how it would have been blown to the Northwest. Mr. Manchiz said the only adjustment they did was upward using the wind and is therefore either 11 or 18 feet in error. Ron said he did not feel this was accurate. Mr. Jacobsen said the picture they did was for height, they felt they were conservative. They feel there is a big impact. Ms. Stancliffe said you can just overlay the 2 photos presented by Mariner and it shows the different position.

Pierre asked where the pictures were taken off their deck Mr. Jacobsen said they were taken directly from the deck, not on the peripheral edge. He said the pole by itself might not be as bad, without the antennas, but it is hard to visualize.

3. Larry Machiz- he would like the Town’s engineer to look at the whole picture, not just what is provided. According to the cell tower law, there has to be a justified outstanding reason to use this site. The law also states repeaters must be used and they were never mentioned. He wants the project to be looked at in total. He said to let the engineer ask if it can be elsewhere. He said the Board has to make a decision that will not diminish property values. He said everyone going along the road at Queechy Lake will be able to see the tower.

4. Patrick Hickey- he said the natural beauty of the Town is important. He said where he lives(Shaker Ridge Dr.) does not get cell service but he does not want it. He feels this only benefits Verizon and feels the people in Town will be giving up something to have this tower.

5. Terry Haas- She said she lives on Queechy Lake which overlooks the ridge and she will see the tower and feels probably 20-40 people will see it. Her view is directly opposite the Farm, she is in the cove and very visible. She said it will be above the ridgeline and would like another balloon test. She said it will change the view and effect the property. She said no one has discussed health issues and she is concerned about that.

6. Suzanne Pemrick- she has lived on Frisbee St. for 17 years. She stated several cell towers in other areas have been taken down due to technology. She asked what the life span was for these towers. She asked if anyone besides Verizon would use it. Mr. Ciolfi
said Verizon is the only FCC licensed carrier that has applied so far. The tower is designed for more carriers (Sprint/Nextel, ATT and T Mobile ). Mr. Olsen said no one has any idea how long technology will exist. Mr. Ciolfi asked where the towers were coming down and Ms. Pemrick said Codwell. NJ. Mr. Olsen said there is a requirement to take down the towers when necessary.

7. Bill Pennell- he said the selection of the location is conveniently planned due to the access road. Mr. Ciolfi said they will build 1400 feet of road and will improve 850 feet. Mr. Ciolfi said the location was chosen for the coverage and not for the road, but the road does help the location. Mr. Ciolfi said the original target area was on Shaker Ridge Dr. due to the best coverage. The next best site was at Berkshire Farm.

-Mr. Olsen asked if he could address the health issue. He said Federal law says the Board cannot consider health issues under FCC rules. He said the tower is low power and a microwave gives off more energy.

8. Cim Smith- she said she can’t use a cell phone where she lives (on Route 22) and has to go elsewhere to use one.

Ron asked if there were any more comments, there were none.

MOTION TO ADJOURN THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE NEXT MEETING-Pierre Gontier Second-Ian Hooper All in Favor

Roll call Chariman Davis-yes
Ian Hooper-yes
Jennifer Mickle-yes
Pierre Gontier-yes adopted
Michael Belknap-yes

CONTINUED REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT APPLCIATION FOR MARINER TOWER AND BERKSHIRE FARM

Ron said he wanted to address the new access road. Ms. Stancliffe said the new road is listed as less than 15% grade but she did not see the backup materials. Mr. Ciolfi said this can be provided; they had gotten their information from Foresight Engineering.
Items outstanding for the road:
1. Need a cross section of the road
2. Does the new road need the removal of top soil and replacement of stone. If so, show the displacement level.
3. Access road is silt loam and cobble. Need to address this with reference to
underground utilities. Mr. Ciolfi said he prefers overhead utilities. Mr. Ciolfi also said he feels the road is solid.

Tower location- it is now 27 feet off the original site. Board asked if the original flagging around the site area can be removed. Board asked if another balloon test could be done. Mr. Ciolfi said to eliminate confusion, they can refly the balloon and asked if they could avoid contacting each person by return receipt. They would like to just notify the Board and Clerk. Ian asked if another method besides string/rope could be used. Mr. Ciolfi said to some extent by using telescoping however it is not effective over 80 feet. Mr. Ciolfi said there are many variables for the balloon. Ron said the balloon was directly over the benchmark and Mr. Ciolfi said this was verified by Clough Harbor using GPS. Mr. Ciolfi said he feels it is a good and accurate picture. Ms. Stancliffe said she would agree to a 3D wire model instead of another balloon test. Mr. Ciolfi said they are open to that but where would they pick the view point from. Mr. Ciolfi said another balloon test will give the public a chance to view it. Ron said the abutters could be sent another letter by first class mail instead of return receipt. Ian feels the Board will not gain much by doing another balloon test.

Other towers- Mr. Ciolfi said there are other structures one is called a flagpole and is just a gray stick. It is a traditional monopole tower with a rod continuing from the top of the tower. The antennas are attached to the rod. The carriers must be very specific with their needs and coverage is reduced. Some carriers must take more than 1 slot and may even need more than 1 tower. The next one is called a brown pole. The painting of this is difficult. Mr. Ciolfi feels the Chancers would see it more and the lake people would see it less. The next tower is called surface mounted and only 3 antennas are allowed. It would limit coverage. A higher tower or multiple towers are needed.

Other sites- the target area is due to the signal and to move further North would create a gap in the new site. Their target area was Shaker Ridge and since that would not be acceptable, they talked to other owners including the Adams gravel bank. Their goal was to get the best site with the most coverage. They feel very few properties are impacted. Mr. Everett asked to have the other reviewed sites which were discounted put into writing. Mr. Olsen said the Verizon site has to fit where they already have towers and coverage.

Michael feels another balloon test would be helpful and Pierre agreed. Ian , Ron & Jennifer don’t think one is necessary. Ron asked if one could be done before Labor Day and only notify by first class mail. Mr. Everett said if the Board feels more information is asked for to ask now. Ian said weighing the benefit of cell coverage on Route 22 by asking if the service is wanted at all. Pierre said an immediate benefit is the number is accidents on Route 22, can this be quantified. Mr. Olsen said if there is a gap, the law
states they need to rectify it. In this case, there are several miles of gap and it can only mitigated by adding coverage.

Repeaters- this was addressed in the April 11th letter. They need a support structure such as a tower to get the signal from. To use them , they might need more towers. Mr. Ciolfi said repeaters are not adequate, they only amplify a signal. Without a tower, there is no signal.

Height- Ms. Stancliffe said the need is shown. Mr. Ciolfi said the height has been reviewed and the 146 feet is optimal. Verizon can go lower but every 10 feet lower will lower the signal. If the tower is too low, the future antennas at lower levels will not work. Mr. Ciolfi said to lower the tower will penalize Verizon. He feels it is better to put in a higher tower now. Mr. Olsen said other carriers need to be accommodated by the height of the tower. The tower has to be able to accommodate the future, either by being tall enough or to be expandable. Ron said the cell tower law requires the least amount of towers in Town. Mr. Ciolfi said this tower will allow the least impact and the most carrier coverage.

Ron asked if a date for the second balloon test could be set up. Mr. Ciolfi said August 25th with a backup of August 26th. There was discussion of having materials ready immediately and holding a special Board meeting however Mr. Ciolfi said there was not enough time to get the materials ready. It was decided to have the photo sims and documentation ready for the September meeting.

MOTION TO REQUEST THE APPLICANT PERFORM ANOTHER BALLOON TEST-Michael Belknap Second-Pierre Gontier

Roll call - Chairman Davis-yes
Ian Hooper-no
Jennifer Mickle-yes
Pierre Gontier-yes adopted
Michael Belkanp-yes

Notices will be sent to the abutters and Mariner will send a notice to The Register Star.

Storm water on new access road- Ms. Stancliffe would like additional information on how they will improve the new road to meet the Town regulations including the disturbance level (currently feel it will be 41,000 sq. ft.). Mr. Ciolfi said the new road is shorter but needs more work. Ron said the culvert on the old road is too small now and feels by replacing all 3 culverts they would be under the 1 acre requirement. Mr. Ciolfi said the environmental impact with wetlands requires a special review by FCC. Mr. Ciolfi feels the new road is the best solution. Ms. Stancliffe said if the disturbance area is under 1 acre it is only erosion control and not storm water.

* This will need more information on the existing road to see if it meets standard measures. Also, need to put a note on the map that improvements will be done as required.
Mr. DiMuro said this has always been a road with heavy equipment use. Ron said unless there is ditching along the road, there will be water problems. Mr. DiMuro said the water currently comes down from the upper level by pipes and runs off. Ron said if the grass comes off the road, the water will be a problem.

This will be continued at the September meeting.

Review and Approval of the July 21st minutes

MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED-Pierre Gontier Second-Michael Belknap
All in Favor

Roll call Chairman Davis-yes
Ian Hooper-yes
Jennifer Mickle-yes
Pierre Gontier-yes adopted
Michael Belknap-yes

Other business
1. Budget request needs to be in by September 9th.
Board discussed this and decided on Personnel -$2000.00
Point 4- 350.00
2. Pierre brought up the issue of the new Judges stand and said there are issues with it:
-the Planning Board needs room to spread out maps and paperwork and this table will not work
-if it is modular, who would move it?
Pierre said the building is not a Courthouse but is multiuse.
The Clerk asked the Board to put in writing. Pierre will work with Ron on a letter to go the Town Board.
3. Zoning revisions-Ron said he gave it to the ZBA Clerk for Chairman Cooper and he has not gotten a response yet.
4. Ian said he will not be at the September meeting and asked Ron if he would doing the SEQRA review on the tower. Ron said he plans to.

Correspondence
1. Addendum to Erdman Anthony contract to pay the RF engineer.
2. Bill for Whiteman, Osterman & Hanna thru 6/30/08.
3. Letter stating Erdman Anthony is approaching 75% of the estimate.
4. August ZEO report.
5. Letter from Columbia Land Conservancy re: workshop on Farmland Protection in October on Long Island.
6. Notice from Town of Richmond for a Special Permit
7. Talk of the Town Jul/Aug issue.


There was no more business before the Board.

MOTION TO ADJOURN-Michael Belknap Second-Jennifer Mickle All in Favor

The meeting adjourned at 11:15pm.


Respectfully submitted,


Tammy C. Flaherty
Planning Board Clerk

Back to index of Meeting Minutes