JOINT MEETING

Guests Signed In: Nancy P. Sabin John R. Ponsetto T. J. Sauthoff

Barbara Beall William Mullen Mark Shelp

Sylvia Sprigg Eleanor Russell Chris Bramley

Will Simonelli Stephen C. Brooks Debbie Ramsdell

Dale Knowles Tom Clark Mary Beth Freeman

John Farcel a Free Press reporter

1. General Business, Review of Minutes: Minutes for April 4^th were reviewed. Under the Jimerson decision, a clarification phrase about the old dwelling on Lot #1 was added. The definition of a lot (for the Morin application which didn’t have enough frontage) was read by Jeff and had been omitted. The driveway for Swan on Roscoe Road was more clearly defined as to direction and a time was specified for Paul Swan’s monitoring of a perkable site for the septic. Some clarifications regarding Marty Illick’s presentation were added. Al Moraska moved to approve the minutes of April 4, 2002 with additions. Jim Donovan seconded the motion and it was approved, 4 with one abstention and 2 members absent.

Since the first Thursday of July is the 4^th, there will be 3 meetings in June instead (June 27, 2002).

2. Zoning Board of Adjustment, Chairman Jonathan Fisher was introduced, to address the application for Site Plan Review for Independent Wireless One to install two antennas on an existing farm silo on 1324 Ferry Road known as the Knowles Farm.

Jonathan Fisher opened the warned hearing to address the application for Conditional Use Approval for Independent Wireless One. The following representatives of IWO were duly sworn in: Chris Bramley, Will Simonelli, Environmental Engineer, Eric Ulvila, T. J. Sauthoff, Project Engineer, Marc Shelp and Barbara Beall, who is an Environmental Engineer consultant for the applicant.

Atty. John Ponsetto asked to go through the Telecommunications Bylaw, section by section. He said there are some corrections from the submissions that he had originally given to Dean. One was the landscaping plan, and another was the RFR study.

The Conditional Use Permit is Exhibit 6, and the revised RFR study is Exhibit 4. The Site Plan application is exhibit #8.

Atty. Ponsetto said he would say if he thought the item is “not applicable” and if the Board doesn’t agree, they can tell him.

He said Sprint PCS is a wireless PCS service. They will try to provide safe and reliable service to the area. They have a lease agreement with the Knowles. Their intent is to install their towers on existing towers, silos, churches, barn cupules or rooftops, and not to build new towers. The locations covered are Burlington, Rutland, St. Albans. Each of the antennas run down the side of the silo, with coax cables, with equipment on a stationary platform which will be covered from ice but not visible from Ferry Road. The location of the antenna is 4' further north, as he indicated on the drawings.

Atty. Ponsetto then referred to Dean Bloch’s comments. The Knowles Farm is on the State Historic Register, so he suggested that they move the equipment to be less visible, building around it or screening it otherwise with landscaping.

Referring to the adequacy of landscaping and screening, it is for a small area in back of the barn. John Farcel said they have found that the barn is 45 years old. They would like to have a small building around it such as a shed from a lumber store. That would look more like the farm buildings than landscaping.

Flood hazard areas: They have a letter from the agencies that there would be no adverse negative impacts.

Jonathan asked if the application is correct, for a 65' silo. Dean said the drawing says it is 54' high, and the application said it is 65' high.

Chris Bramley said it would take about a month to build this site. After that the owners would just be there once a month for monitoring.

Landscaping: The applicants would rather have an enclosure as discussed above, because it would fit in better with the surrounding farm buildings.

Historic Structures: This application will use a structure that is less than 45 years old, so there would not be a historic structure impact. FEMA and Fish & Wildlife have agreed that there is no negative impact.

Visual Impact Analysis: There are 3 criteria which would make it have a negative visual impact; the site has to be visible, the road has to be frequently traveled, and the color would not fit in. At 400', there would be no negative visual impact, and the paint would be camouflaged.

Barbara Beall, a Wetlands Analyst, said there was a wetland analysis in February. The wet area would have to be on the Vermont Significant Inventory of Wetlands, but this is a farm pond with an excavated bottom. Sometimes this farm pond has water in it and sometimes it does not; the farmer excavates it regularly. The edge of the pond now has some cattails, but it is 220' away from the site. There is little habitat value and there is no drainage in the direction of the site. There is a stream, 1400' towards the east, after the agricultural field.

Existing conditions are on SP1. Atty. Ponsetto said he believed Sections 9.6.1 and 2 are not applicable, but he addressed condition 3. He spoke about the proposed utility line locations, from pole #23 and adjacent pole #24. One proposed to use overhead lines where there are already overhead lines, and “core bore” for the other.

The platform for the equipment that operates the antennas was described: 48" sq. X 9' tall, with the 10' to 11' tall landscaping trees if landscaping is the method to reduce the visual impact of the equipment.

Harley Allen wanted to enforce the feeling that this equipment cannot be expandable; that is, the application is for 2 antennas, 2 RF units and that they would not need an additional cabinet. The reply was that if it were to expand, it would have to be split but that would cut each of the two antennas.

The proposal is to take one month of construction, August 24 to September 24, and of this, one week to lay the lines. Harley reminded them that a platform is a structure according to regulations.

CPC portion of the Hearing: Jeff McDonald said the CPC should act within 60 days, while the time frame for the Zoning Board is 45 days after the close of its hearing.

Jim Donovan noted that the Doyle farmhouse was built in the 1800's and is on the Historic Register, #H-55 under the name of Frank. He agreed that the barn is 45 years old.

Wade Weathers noted that there was also a GPS antenna; he asked if that meant there would be other service on these towers. But John Farcel said this equipment is part of their setup.

Jeff asked if the telephone lines can go underground. Mr. Farcel said yes, they could go underground but there are existing overhead lines there. Jeff said the regulations state that all new utility lines have to be underground. There should be a 2' sq. sign for the r.f. location. A fence was discussed.

Jim Donovan talked about the small shed, and said the evergreens there might be out of place with the surroundings. Marc Shelp said they needed to protect the equipment from “ice bridges.” Jeff asked if the control building would be on a floating slab; but the reply was that there would be a concrete slab, but that there would still be pier supports.

Al Moraska said the cedars might be inappropriate in a farm setting. He asked about there being an enclosure. John Farcel said it wouldn’t be a problem to substitute the shelter for cedar trees.

The Planning Commission can continue the hearing to May 16, 2002 at 8:00 p.m. Jim Donovan moved to continue the Site Plan Review for Independent Wireless to May 16^th, 2002 at 8:00 p.m. Martha Perkins seconded the motion and it was approved, 4-0 with 3 members absent. Dean noted that Gordon Troy had submitted a letter on this matter, which he passed out to the members of CPC.

ZBA: Jonathan said their part of this would be the Conditional Use Application, which will be a continuation relating to General Standards, Subsection 8, and Zoning Regulations Page 39, 40-E.

John Farcel said this is all self contained and won’t interfere with the farming operation.

Brady Toensing asked to address the Authorization Letter. It grants the IWO a permit to apply, not a permit. To represent in the hearing it is for organizations or attorneys. There is a general grant to install this equipment. Brady asked to have a letter to clarify that Mrs. Knowles grants permission. SP2 has an indication of compliance.

Harley Allen asked if this would have any effect on the residence. The Historic Site is the residence. The applicants said it would not be attached to the residence.

Under Specific Standards, the attorney said he didn’t believe any of them apply. The backup power is a battery pack, not a generator. Wade asked if there is a fire issue with a battery pack. The attorney said this meets NFPA standards.

Brady asked if these 12V batteries pose an explosive hazard. Marc Shelp replied that there is to be a 24V service, and there would be 6 or 8 batteries in a containment. He acknowledged that they are not depicted on the drawings. But on SD2 detail, they are on the bottom portion of the standard.

Jonathan asked about ventilation, and they plan to have a fan.

Brady asked for that to be sent to the Charlotte Fire Department for review.

Under Specific Standards 1, Jonathan asked about electrical interference. Marc said there will not be electrical interference; they will own the service, with a license from Green Mountain Power. Harley asked about possible interference with things like a garage door opener or a baby monitor. Marc replied that this is a special service with 1900 MHz, is separate and is a low power site. There will be a total of under 600W. The 280W is for each sector. A 65º panel oriented at 85º and another 65º panel oriented at 280º, one going east and one going west.

Jonathan said under the 9.6.1 C.U., Exhibit 3 is the elevation showing the silo. It is not a tower. The silo is capable of holding the antennas; the added weight is okay, able to withstand winds, etc. (Ex. 5).

This is the only licensed user in the spectrum, Marc said. On SD4, it states that this is for 1962.5 MHz for cell phones they would be talking back to the antenna at 1800 MHz. There won’t be any bleed-over so the interference issue will be practically nothing.

John Farcel said they had a Radio Frequency study done and the calculations showed that the hottest spot is 30' from the site, and it was far below 1% of the allowable FCC Standards. The uncontrolled exposure, is 3 MW / CM² and the result of the uncontrolled exposure is .0006%.

If another carrier were to use the silo, they would need 10' elevation difference. The applicants will provide a copy of the entire lease. If there is a need for emergency power, Sprint will provide a portable generator, Mr. Farcel said. Dale Knowles said the January ice storm is the only time that his farm lost power.

Coverage: for Evidence of Need, there is coverage, but not reliable in some spots. This setup would provide coverage within a 30 mile radius of Charlotte. They are looking at a water tower in Shelburne, east of Route 7 and a site on Spear St. The study looks at the ability to withstand local environmental conditions. The additional loading looks at the possibility of 3 or 4 antennas and is negligible. They chose the Knowles silo among 4 or 5 other sites. The map shows the other two sites they plan on applying for in the five year plan.

Harley asked, if the company abandons the use of this equipment, what is the guarantee that it will be removed. John Farcel said there is always somebody else who needs such equipment, and it would be sold.

Atty. Farcel read several passages which he said were not applicable. The first one is the 300' setback which they do meet, Harley reminded them. The second one, the 1500' setback, which the attorney thought was not applicable, Harley objected to that interpretation. Farcel said he thought that was for health reasons because of concerns for radiation. If this is related to RFR, and that it is less than 10% of 1%, then there should be no problem.

Harley said the reason this 1500' was put in the regulations, is that there was, and still is, a problem with the radio station broadcasting from another tower is causing health problems and other stray leakage problems.

Wade asked why they didn’t apply for a Variance for that 1500' setback. Farcel said they’ve demonstrated that there is an RFR of .0004% (that is in the range of micro-watts); the emissions are very low.

Harley said the Zoning Board can look at the regulations; it does not say that the ZBA can decide if the regulations are correct.

The Zoning Board wants to have a Site Visit. Jim Donovan asked a question on which classification of wetlands this area falls into. It is Class II.

Nancy Sabin asked if there are any studies on the effect of these RF transmissions on cows. This will be looked at for the continuation hearing.

Jonathan Fisher moved to continue the hearing on the Independent Wireless antennas to the 15^th of May at 7:30 p.m. Wade Weathers seconded the motion and it was approved, 5-0.

The meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m., approved by both Boards.

Submitted by Nancy Lane

APPROVED BY THE CHARLOTTE PLANNING COMMISSION ON

_____________________________________________________________________

Chairman Date

APPROVED BY THE CHARLOTTE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

_____________________________________________________________________

Chairman Date