Cell antennae plan for Franklin Street
Published on May 28th, 2003
STONEHAM, MA - The Town's Zoning Board of Appeals continued a public hearing on a proposed nine-panel, 30 foot cell antennae that could be installed on the Villa Grande condominium complex located adjacent to Stoneham High School.
The 30 foot antennae represents the maximum height allowed under current town by-laws.
At the meeting held last Thursday night in the Town Hall Hearing Room, the board voted to postpone their decision on the requested zoning variance at Town Counsel William Solomon's request, so that the Town can independently verify data presented by three representatives of OmniPoint Holdings Inc, the parent company of T-Mobile.
"The substantive issue before you is whether or not they have a significant gap and whether there are reasonable alternatives to that," explained Solomon. "I would argue that the board needs professional consultation to determine that," Solomon added, stipulating that T-Mobile should assume the costs of hiring an independent consultant.
While legal counsel for OmniPoint, Needham resident Ken Spigle, agreed to Solomon's terms, all three representatives for the company presented arguments throughout the night that the town has little choice but to accept the wireless phone carrier's bid to erect the antennae.
Specifically, the representatives told board members that despite the fact that the 159 Franklin Street location is outside of the town's overlay districts, special sites set aside by town officials for the placement of cell-phone antennae, the wireless service has a significant gap in its coverage that can't be addressed by placing structures in those special districts. According to Spigle, because of Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Federal law, specifically the 1996 Telecommunications Act, prohibits towns from blocking a wireless cell-carrier from providing service to an area, the board would have to overturn Building Inspector Gene Argiro's decision to deny permits to T-Mobile.
"The key issue here is whether or not your zoning by-laws would effectively prohibit T-Mobile from the provision of wireless services in an area that is significant," said Spigle.
"I think it's important to understand that there's a substantial amount of law that says that use variances can be granted if the alternative is to prohibit service," he added.
Furthering Spigle's legal arguments, OmniPoint representative Joseph DellaSelva and OmniPoint Radio Frequency Engineer Michael Lucey claimed that the Franklin Street location was ideal for covering a two mile long gap in coverage that runs throughout eastern Stoneham.
"We really moved forward from the standpoint that from a [radio frequency] perspective it was an excellent place," commented DellaSelva.
"From a planning perspective, it's also a unique opportunity because we can use an existing structure to close out this gap...You're by-law indicates that an attempt should be made to locate it within an area that is non-residential. You have a recycling center, you have a school, and you have a landscaping contractor across the street, so I would say this is a passive use and I would say it would be fitting for this particular area," DellaSelva added.
Yet, while DellaSelva and Spigle attempted to convince the board that they had the right and perhaps even the obligation to ignore the town's zoning laws, Solomon disagrees, arguing the opposite case.
"I have been and remain of the opinion that unless the applicant can convince us otherwise, the board can not grant a variance if the by-law doesn't allow for that," said Solomon in a post-hearing interview.
Although Solomon agrees that the town will most likely have to provide the variance if the information provided by the carrier is accurate, he added that there are many ways to find alternative possibilities for the antennae's placement.
While the town will investigate those potential alternatives, including the possibility of covering the gap through another area or city, Solomon did make one fact clear to the board, that adverse environmental or health effects could not factor into the Town's decision to deny a variance.
"You may not regulate or deny an application based on environmental or health effects. So even when the public does speak about that, I think it's very important that you tell the public that you can't base your decision on that," advised Solomon.
"If there's discussion about that, the applicant can try to argue that the board made its decision on impermissible grounds," Solomon further explained.
Although for the most part the public remained very patient while waiting throughout the four-hour meeting to comment on the proposal, one citizen did blurt out a comment as the OmniPoint representatives stated their case.
"This is pissing me off...this guy is standing here threatening us," said Stoneham resident Edward Walters. "It's just kind of appalling here, and I just wanted us to have our say," Walters added sheepishly.
"Excuse me?" bellowed Zoning Board of Appeals Chairman William Sullivan. "I think upset would be a better word. You might want to be a little more patient. This hearing is not over and the public will have more than ample opportunity to comment," said Sullivan reassuringly.
While only approximately 20-minutes was given to the large gathering to comment, Sullivan promised the public that they would be able to comment more in depth on the proposal on June 26th, the next scheduled hearing date.
Eddie Previdi, one of the four or so persons who was allowed to comment, echoed statements similar to Walters, reprimanding the OmniPoint representatives for uttering subtle legal threats to the gathering.
"I feel as though our freedom in this country is dwindling and a big thing is telecommunication companies coming in and telling us we have no rights. That's disgraceful. I'd like you to remember that we're Americans and we have rights...This is just the beginning and I don't think we should put up with it," declared Previdi.
While the audience had a limited opportunity to offer their feelings on the proposal, several of the Zoning Board's members put up resistance to the proposal.
After Sullivan commented that T-Mobile's proposed antennae would only fill in half of what they termed the significant gap, Zoning Board member John Biggio questioned what actions would be taken in the future to fill those smaller holes.
"You have other voids and to fill those you're going to have to go into smaller residential neighborhoods...You're going to have these all over the area," Biggio lamented.
Responding with the comment that originally resulted in an outburst from Walters, the Franklin Street resident who spoke out of turn at the meeting, Spigle offered a sarcastic alternative.
"If you prefer, we'll build a 50-foot tower. We'll do that. As to what happens two years from now, there may be something that happens," Spigle shot back at Biggio.
Saying that he was uncomfortable with the task given to the board given its lack of support from Stoneham residents, Zoning Board member Frank Vallerelli asked the cell-carrier representatives why the issue shouldn't be brought before Town Meeting.
"I personally wouldn't feel comfortable with the five members here giving a spot zoning. I would feel more comfortable if you went to Town Meeting with this," commented Vallerelli, before Spigle responded by saying that he didn't trust that the decision would be properly handled by the town's citizens.
Although the school committee has yet to offer their opinions on the proposal, Assistant Superintendent John Casey said the school department will issue their comments on the antennae proposal shortly.
"The school committee was surprised by that the day before the meeting and so they asked the board to delay the meeting. Absent from that, the school committee doesn't have enough information to form an opinion on the issue," said Casey in a phone interview yesterday afternoon.
While Selectman Cosmo Ciccarello offered his opposition to the placement of the antennae at last week's selectmen meeting, saying that he was concerned with both adverse health effects and his opinion that the issue should be brought before Town Meeting, Ciccarello said he would respect the integrity of the Zoning Board of Appeals.
"I feel that it has to go before Town Meeting because it's a change of zoning. That's like me trying to build a three family house in a residential area. Why should they have that right?" commented Ciccarello.
"At the same time, it really isn't right for us to go there and to try to intimidate the board. I have to respect the integrity of the board and I think the board should give their own opinion," said Ciccarello.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!