This government meeting is brought to you by Eastworks and our local cable subscribers. At this time, I'm going to open the Southampton Planning Board meeting for July 8, 2026. I have a full board tonight. Bob Riggs down to my right,
Mark Darnell, Paul Fala, Jim Lee, and our board consultant, a retired town planner for the town of South Hadley, Richard Harris, and I am Paul Dean, the chair. Um, the first order of business is I'm going
to read a letter. It's called the loan rule and Paul Fergal was not here for the first meeting and the state um has a uh form to fill out. Now that you can um read minutes before it used to be
reading minutes of a previous meeting. Now it being recorded you watch the recording and by virtue of that he can then be a part of the discussion and the vote for this this application. So Paul uh forwarded this
to me um today. I Paul Forgal hereby do swear and certify the pains and penalties of perjuries that follow and a member of the Southampton Planning Board. I missed a hearing session on the matter of the Atlantic Communications Cell Tower at One Cook Road which was
held on June 3rd, 2026. On June 24th, 2026, I examined all the evidence and testimony received at the hearing session that I missed, which included a review of the uh application. Official video recording of the missed
hearing session certification shall become part of the record of the proceedings and the above signed on the pains and penalties of perjury the 8th of July 2026. Paul forgot. So Paul is up to speed on what happened at the last meeting and he is eligible to join us
tonight for discussions. >> Did he give you the check? >> I didn't see the fee in here. No. So this is a continuation of a public hearing we had a couple of weeks ago, probably three weeks ago now. And um
attorney Francis Paresi is here to represent the Atlantic uh communications uh company. on a cell tower application they submitted for one Cook Road in Southampton. And um this continuation
after the last meeting we had uh selected a peerre company to um review the application and it was a cityscapes uh company out of Florida who the board selected. uh they have reviewed it and they have
questions that haven't been answered to uh to my knowledge yet. Uh but um the peer review isn't complete and I'm sure uh attorney Paresi here is to uh here tonight to explain um that going
forward. And also I believe you have um on your presentation tonight uh you moved the tower from the original plan. >> Let's talk about that. >> Okay. >> If I can go ahead and send out one
thing. One reason we asked per not proceed with it was we found I found out later that there was discussion of possibly moving it to a different portion of the property and therefore it didn't make any sense to have the peer
reviewer spend all the time those plans if there's a prospect that plans to revis that I agree with Irish about that again my name is Francis Pesi attorney looking at
Um, as we talked about at the last meeting, I understand the board has retained a peerreview consultant. We're prepared to send in the the fee for that. I didn't bring with me tonight, but he'll have it by the end of this week. Uh, and uh u and the peer review
did reach out to me. I have not engaged him yet for the reason that uh uh Mr. Harris has talked about that we think it's premature. At the last meeting, there was substantial concern raised by members of the public and questions raised by the board with respect to the location of the proposed facility and we
were tasked with is there somewhere else we can go on the lot that would be more palatable to a butters. We spent a lot of time unfortunately with the holiday uh over over the last month uh the engineer was on vacation, the landowner was out of town. I was actually out of town and we were just able to uh
coordinate um a a quick drawing uh and uh I I I met with the landowner today this this afternoon to talk about it and I'm just going to throw it out for discussion. I think uh uh you uh some of the concern was that the uh proposed
facility was in the middle of the existing farm u relatively close to the East Hampton border and the butters that uh um reside to the north and we were asked can we move it farther south on the property and we explored several
different options moving it farther east farther uh southwest and the engineers were able to uh come up with a uh a design that I think works to address most people's concerns. Uh uh we're going to propose moving it to the
southeastern corner of the lot. U uh we had three issues that we needed to um address. One of which is um um respecting the land owners use of the property. They it's an active horse farm. They have several horses. They
have several borders. fits their um business on the property and their passion as well. And so we needed to find a place that didn't have any impact on the current uh uh horse activities. Uh two uh we we need to meet all the zoning setbacks and there's both the
standard zoning setbacks, normal sideyard and rear yard setbacks and also special setbacks with respect to uh uh tower. Specifically, the town has a uh requirement that what we call tower height setback. uh people call it
different things that are misnomers but uh uh we uh refer to as tower height setback. So the proposed facility currently is 160 feet tall uh and so we need to be 160 ft from all abuing property lines by moving it in really
any direction we uh have issues with that requirement. But one of the things that we looked at was um the land, if I move here a little bit, the land to the due south and uh east of the property is owned by the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts. It's undevelopable land subject to conservation restrictions. And we've many times dealt with the Commonwealth in that regard because they don't care. Uh and we'll certainly notify them, but uh I don't think they're going to
matter. Uh and then but we were very conscious about meeting it. There's three private properties and this is essentially along Cook Road uh uh just to the due west and we were able to site it in such a way that we don't have any impact on the uh uh the landlord's force
operations but also meet that tower height setback requirement. And as you see, it's u oops u um you know, it it it moves the site. I didn't measure exactly, but it's approximately 750 plus feet from the
original location, which is basically uh see where the square is and the two dots in the square. It's essentially was there. >> So that was the original. Yeah, that's actually a uh remember uh there's there's a small horse shed there that we were relocating as part of the that but
that's essentially where it was previously. So um uh so we're moving it um almost 750 plus 750 plus feet from the original location. We stay on the same lot. I think it uh will address the other thing we I noted when I went out
there today. There's a much more robust and substantial vegetative buffer. All the trees right to the northeast there in between the uh uh are uh uh and the the where the new shower site will be in the barn are all pine trees so they stay
green all year round. They're inside the fence area of where the horses are. The the landowner actually uses it for shade. They're very important to the land there. So, uh there'll be a few trees taken down um you know around the base of the compound, but the majority
of the trees and I would say uh uh uh the area you know due northeast of the tower in between the uh the tower site and the barn will stay. I think that provides a much substantial vegetative bucket. >> Don't see where the new spot is.
>> Let the excuse me presentation. Okay. >> And then if you want to ask a question, raise your hand and the chair can recognize. >> So what uh what the the the black dot represents is the new tower location and the black lines around it is the fencing the compound. Uh so we're able to
utilize the existing clearing and uh farm road uh that already enjoys there. So there'll be minimal to no pre-claring for the access driveway and then uh um you know just the small area down there at the uh um the compound but that
square is um 60x 60. So the clearing is probably 75 by 75 at the most. So I think it it preserves a vegetative buffer uh dramatically. And uh uh like I said, all those trees just inside the
circle, but to the northeast are all pine trees, so they'll stay green all year round. Uh I think that uh um certainly addresses uh not all the concerns that were expressed at the last meeting, but a vast majority of them. And uh uh so uh um I'm really just here
to get the board's read on this. Um it requires us to do a little bit more engineering. uh both civil engineering and radio frequency engineering. Uh we'll be compiling new reports to uh send to the uh uh the radio frequency
consultant, the consulting company as well as um these site plans in a little bit more detail. I just got but uh it requires us to do a lot of of repetitive due diligence that we've already done. Last time we talked about um our federal
requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA, which we've actually completed at the old location, but because we're moving it, we have to redo everything. So, we have to renotify state agencies. We have to re uh and make sure and we're quite confident because they didn't have issue
with the first location that they're going to have issue with the second location. But it's a federal requirement that we do that. And so before I engage the civil engineers anymore, I engage the radio producing anymore and the NEPA consultants anymore, I just really want to get the board to read that this is a
more appropriate location than the original location that we had it, you know, farther north and in the middle of the farm. I personally do because it's uh it's a way uh much further away from the East Hampton
Pro uh neighborhood. Um it's not going to solve all the the neighbors concerns certainly, but um it's set back in the site. Is that going to do anything with the height requirement? uh the radio frequency
engineers resolve that. Um I would say maybe but not materially. Uh so uh if the board wants us to go forward with this I would engage the engineers. I think it it might ftish not 10 ftish.
It's not going to be dramatic. Uh well, and one of the things that um uh we would do uh as a courtesy here uh is to put up another balloon. We'll figure out a date tonight to do it so that people can get a better feeling as to uh what
the visibility will and won't be at this new location. U so uh but again, that again costs time and money and uh uh we're willing to do that for the uh uh for the benefit of the town. I just want to make sure we're not doing that. And then they say we like the elevator back.
Can I ask a question? >> It looks like it's almost cut off. Is is the elevation in the new location is 254 for the ground elevation. Is that correct? >> Yeah, I I walked it today. It it's it's probably 5 to 10 ft less in elevation
>> than the previous. That's all I was >> Well, the other one says 269 >> and this is um >> 254 it looks like. >> Right. 14 ft. >> 15. >> Okay.
Yeah. Uh um again, radio frequency engine would tell us that. Uh we try to keep it to the original height. Uh but I they have to tell us that they can. Could you enlighten me again why there's such a increase from the current zoning?
Current zoning is 100. You're looking for 165. why the the ne necessity for such a 65% increase. >> Um there's that 100 foot number in zoning is completely arbitrary and makes no technical sense. Um when you get a
town like Southampton, especially as you go south, east and west from here, uh where it's very heavily forested, the trees become a a structural impediment to the telecommunication signal. So you got to be above the trees. In addition,
when you have rolling terrain, uh uh you know, uh um you know, if if it were flat and you were just above the trees, that's one thing. But when you have terrain that rolls, you've got to get above that terrain. Uh and the third thing is there's already existing
infrastructure that Verizon Wireless and other telecommunications companies utilize in East Hampton and in South Hampton, and they're trying to uh connect the gap that's created. So that number is very calculated by the radio frequency engineers to um fill in that
gap at this particular location given the elevation of this location relative to the elevation in the surrounding area and relative to the tree canopy. So it's it's very um uh scientifically uh and and when when somebody said is it moving is it going to change? It might change.
It might uh uh not be as effective. It might require five or more feet of height, but um we'll come back and let you guys know that. Um >> what if the board didn't allow um decided to not accept that on the waiver
and um negotiated that that height downward? >> Um we have to prove that it's the minimum height necessary as part of the application and we'll do this for new location as well. will show that what we're proposing is the minimum height
necessary. The other thing that u kind of runs conflict to the height limitation is um the town has but zoning provisions that say that we have to build a tower that's what we call colloccable that is um accommodating to
both Verizon Wireless who we've got a commitment from and other telecommunications companies because you what you don't want is AT&T showing up 6 months or a year from now and which they will at some point and they'll say, "We want to get on that tower." Oh, but it's
too short. Uh so, and u back um back in the old days when I first started doing this, AT&T and Verizon were building their own towers and uh and u and uh and all the other different telecommunications companies, but
because they competed as a telecommunications entity and then they also were owning the real estate, they weren't very forthcoming. When a competitor said, "Can we get on that tower?" they said, "Yeah, no." And and
so infrastructure companies like Atlantic came in and we're agnostic. We leased everybody. We have relationships with everybody. We built towers and sites for everybody. But uh um but we also are cognizant of designing
structures that are accommodating. So when we say um the tower is uh 160 ft tall, we need to make and and and a tower is essentially what we call a vertical totem pole. There's different platforms for different carriers. And we
need to know that the guy on the bottom has equally good or reasonably good coverage as the guy on the top. Or else what's going to happen is a year from now someone's going to say, "We need a tower down the street, next door, around the corner." which is contrary to what your zoning bylaw encourages.
>> Um question and you're a tower developer. You're not a licensed carrier as I understand and my experience in past when we had developer doing it was
the tenant was a co-licant. what is the extent to of what's the extent of the commitment from Verizon and why are they not a co-licant for this and and that that gets to the gap
analysis because the gap analysis is varies from one car to the next because of their technology and what they have in the area. >> Okay. Um, a lot of it the the the the the business world with respect to what you talk about has evolved and part of
it is um we're moving the site. I don't know that this is going to get permanent if at all. And so u Verizon's they've expressed that they've given us what's called a collocation application but until they give them a definite site
they're not going to say that we are an applicant or non-applicant. So, um, all the applications that we file now don't have a carrier as a co-licant. We have them as an we call them the anchor tenant, an interested party, but they're
not a co-licant. Um, uh, and, uh, um, we ask for a waiver from that because it is a requirement in your bylaw. I routinely get it and and uh um quite frankly the the business around tower development
has changed in that regard because um the c the carriers that you know have gotten out of a real estate business and so uh but also um you know u I don't know that I'm going to get this done this year next year so they might not uh
allocate resources to it until next year. uh you know there a company like Verizon for example is trying to develop sites throughout the United States. If you can tell me this is going to get approved in August and built in October, they'll sign off. But if you tell me we
need an extension, which we'll talk about uh um and we need more time to look at this, they're going to say, "Well, we're going to devote resources to the sites that we can build this year." >> So is your gap analysis based upon Verizon's need or >> uh it's both. uh it it's it's based on
Verizon's need, but we also do height analysis to show because we assume that uh if there's an existing tower that it's available to everyone. So that uh
so we we look at it more the way the town would look at it. There's a tower in Southampton. There's a tower in East Hampton that kind of define the gap. And we know that Verizon's um on those towers, but uh but not everyone's on the
tower in Southampton and everyone's on the tower in um East Hampton. So, we designed I think they all are in East Hampton. Southampton has two, but not all of them. So, we designed them so that um assuming that they're going to go on the other tower in Southampton as
well. So at 165, are you assuming that Verizon's going to be at the top? >> Yes. So if it wasn't Verizon, then it could possibly be a lower tower kind of be a different area.
>> But like I said, we we look at it. Let me just get a picture. I can show you. And by the way, we're going to need a hard copy of this as well as digital copy of this for the record. >> Oh, absolutely. Yeah, absolutely. This PowerPoint is already in the
record. I gave them a complex. >> Okay. >> Uh uh this uh this is really what a tower looks like and I call it a vertical totem pole. Uh where different carriers will colllocate and there's got to be separation to prevent interference between the different carriers. the
>> each carrier has a different separation distance too, >> right? And uh uh but uh but when you do a monopole type facility, you have to design it with very specific port holes because all the cabling comes up through the middle >> and so you we'll design this with a port
hole at the tower itself is 160 ft. There'll be a small lightning rod to dissipate electrical uh current. So you know the top is 165 but the structure itself is 160. Um the antenna is
attached at a center line. So Verizon will attach their antennas at 155. Uh the the next set will be 145 135 and 125. and that and because your bylaw requires it, we need to make sure that
125 height is just as effective or reasonably effective as the 155 height because what you don't want is someone coming in a year or two from now and saying u uh you know it it I you know for lack of a better word it's it's a
vertical strip mall uh and u we we have an anchor tenant Verizon but we don't build it for just the anchor tenant and your bylaw requires us to not build it just for Verizon, but to build it thoughtfully uh with the height and the structural integrity for u multiple
telecommunications companies. Mr. Puzzy, could I ask you? I was looking at a map of the cell towers in the area. And why wasn't a location selected in the uh
westerly part of Southampton which does have some hills over there. I mean I see a big gap because there's a cluster of them between Holio and East Hampton and the ones in Southampton all seem to be on, you know, one side and
there's absolutely nothing on the other side of Southampton. Um these towers aren't designed to cover a huge geographic area. There's uh and quite frankly the population and the traffic is on what I'd say the eastern side of
Southampton including the east. >> So it's population related. >> Well it's gap related but um you know >> highway related. >> Yeah. And when when we first started building these, we thought it was going to be a mobile technology and we were focused on the 91 corridor and the 90
corridor and the major thorough affairs. And then what's evolved over the last 20 years in in in cell phones is it's become a residential technology and people are using them in their homes in their places of business. So we're um you know it it's required us to go to
where the demand is the residential neighborhoods. Uh, and this this isn't designed to cover all of Southampton or all of East Hampton. It's really to fill in the gap in the existing infrastructure that's already in Holio and Eastampton and Southampton. Um, and
uh um in in in the area, you know, at the uh along Cook Road um and and uh um the the the residential neighborhood to the north and the uh the residential neighborhoods to the south and east and west. It's uh you know this map doesn't
even show the western side of Southampton because that's another gap for another day and u we'll get to it eventually but we got to do things incrementally. We don't no one's looking at um um Southampton as a whole so much
as the gap that exists where the population is. >> Any questions from the board? So building off that concept. Um so obviously these not being an expert at all on on >> not being an expert on communication engineering or anything of that sort
radio technology is the in in essence is this going to relieve capacity issues if there is capacity issues to the existing towers that are within the certain radius of this. Uh it it's it's more we
look at this as more of a coverage site and coverage capacity are two different things. Um uh uh and so this if you look at this map here, this shows where there's existing coverage and certainly
um you know as you go south into Southampton along Cook Road and then north in the uh u the the the very densely populated area in East Hampton uh uh you know it gets very spotted in there based on the existing there's a
tower I believe it's in Holio but it's right here and It's it's what we call a boomer site. It's very high. It you can see it from a lot of places in East Hampton. Uh um given the lack of tree canopy and um the other thing that's
happening is that as the technology improves, the coverage from a site diminishes. And as we uh you know, our our phones are doing more than they used to. We started >> coverage as an as an area
>> as an area. Exactly. So uh you know uh uh people are going to say well I had coverage now but what happened is as we morph from analog to digital technology and then from digital to high-speed data with our cell phones the that technology
um the the the coverage from the existing sites diminishes. So as Verizon improves its network and and migrates from 3G towers to 3G antennas to 4G antennas to 5G antennas, the coverage is shrinking. So and that's why we have
this gap here where that site in Holio that uh uh I saw when I was driving around the Palmar Street neighborhood. You can see that clear as day, but it it um the coverage that we're getting from it is diminished. In addition, there's
some capacity issues as well uh given the volume of data that's being generated by the existing traffic u that is creating issues. So even in these areas here and we get spotty coverage, there's capacity issues where um there's
just too many people using the network at one time. >> So it's density. >> Yeah. So, so as we've gone from using cell phones to talk on to cell using to text with, use them to for Facebook, use them for
>> whole internet whole internet access. The same equipment no longer has same capacity. It it's been restricted. >> Exactly. You know what's happening? the higher speed data requires higher frequency bands and and uh and uh so you
know originally they were down in like the 700 megahertz range now they're migrating to the 1900 and 2500 MHz range and that um that frequency band um has higher data capability and higher speed
data but just less it it doesn't travel as far as as compared like AM radio amund years now that's down in the 400 and the 300 um uh megahertz range. And that technology is because it's a one-way
communication, that communication is designed to cover as wide an area as possible. I'm not sure if we get WBZ here, but I use that as example. >> I guess another looking at is it used to be a cell phone was replacing our home phone. Today, this is replacing our
high-speed computer at home. Well, well, we supplied a lot of statistic to show that uh um over over 70 over 80% of 911 calls are made by mobile phones. That realiz requires a better quality signal. Over 50% of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts has cut
the cord, meaning they don't have a landline anymore. I don't I haven't had a landline in 5 years. >> I am in 20 years. >> The downside is I have six cell phones because I got children. Uh uh but uh uh but you know we've cut the landline because we want mobile mobility. We want
this same phone to ring at the town hall in Southampton on the drive home on the mass bike and at my house and in my office and uh uh and that which requires a better quality signal. U u you know the other thing that's driving the bus here is that uh public safety requires
better signal. Um they um you know when you call 911 um public safety has to be able if you can't if you say help and they say where are you and you can't communicate public safety has to be able to say you're right here you're in town hall on the second floor and that requires a better
quality signal and when you're in a building like this which is you dense walls and brick exterior it's harder to penetrate. When you're in a house it's harder to penetrate than a car. So uh uh the public safety has to be uh you know
cognizant of where you are. So when I bought my condo in 2007 when the selection was can my cell phone be used in any room in the house because I had I was not going to the land line.
>> It's 20 years ago. >> Any other questions from the board comments before I open up to the public? a little bit. >> Well, we can certainly come back to it. At this time, I'm going to open this up to the public and I'll ask you when you
make a comment to state your name and address. And um we've heard all the positives about this, but I have a feeling we're going to hear some of the other side. So, yes, ma'am.
I was just voluntaring to go. >> Go ahead. >> Okay. Over here. Hi everyone. My name is Tamara Smith. I'm the precinct 5 city counselor for East Hampton. I was hoping for the visuals. Could you go back a couple ones just so we could The one
with the computer green. I just want to make sure that I'm understanding you right. that this is going from here to here. >> I would say it's going southeast. So up.
>> So here to here. >> Yes. Got it. >> Or all the way down to this end of >> No, no, no, no, no, no, no. Up. >> So here on this one lot, which is a sideways lot, you're coming down, but not much of a difference. And I just think that's important for you to see
that when we're talking about all of this green space everywhere else compared to this. Um, so I have a resolution that our city council has unanimously passed. I'm going to read it out for the record in today's meeting.
Would you like me to stand here or go there? >> Either way. >> Okay, I'll stand here. >> Camera's got a better shot of you there. >> Okay. All right. Um, so this is the East Hampton City Council resolution opposing the proposed cell tower at One Cookook
Road. And I assume it still would be One Cookook Road, just at an opposite end of the property. So that really doesn't need to change. Whereas a telecommunications company has proposed the construction of a cellular communications tower at One Cookook Road in Southampton, Massachusetts. And
whereas the proposed taller would be located immediately adjacent to established residential neighborhoods in East Hampton, placing a large industrial telecommunication structure within direct view of numerous homes and
families. And whereas the residents most significantly affected by this proposal are not solely East Hampton residents, but also many East Hampton, I'm sorry, Southampton residents, but also many East Hampton residents whose home lie within close
proximity to the proposed site and who would hear the visual, economic, and quality of life impacts of the project despite having no vote in Southampton's municipal decisions. Whereas homeowners in the surrounding
neighborhoods have invested their life savings, time, and labor into purchasing and maintaining their homes with the reasonable expectation that their residential community would be protected from incompatible industrial
development. Whereas the proposed tower would permanently alter the landscape of the area, introducing a highly visible communial structure that would dominate views from homes, yards, streets, and public spaces throughout the surrounding
neighborhoods. Whereas some residents have raised earnest concerns about the visual impact of the tower where it would currently sit. And whereas residents residents support reliable cellular service and recognize the
importance of telecommunications infrastructure but strongly reject the false choice between improved service and protecting residential neighborhoods. And whereas no compelling evidence has been presented demonstrating that this specific location is the only feasible
location available within the city of the of South sorry the sound of the town of Southampton or that less intrusive alternatives have been fully exhaustive. And whereas the burden of this project fails overwhelmingly
on falls overwhelmingly on nearby residents while financial benefits acrew primarily to private corporations and property owners involved in this lease arrangement. And whereas the approval of this proposal would create a precedent
that places private corporate interests above the preservation of our East Hampton residential charm, property rights, and community well-being. Now therefore, be it resolved that the East Hampton City Council opposes the construction of the proposed cellular
tower at One Cookook Road until additional consideration is made for alternative sites and more information is made available to the impacted residents in the surrounding neighborhood. Be it further resolved that the East Hampton City Council respectfully
requests that the Southampton Planning Board require the applicant to demonstrate through independent and objective analysis that no alternative locations exist that would result in less harm to surrounding residential neighborhoods. Be it further resolved
that the planning board give substantial weight to the testimony of affected residents whose homes, property values, daily views, and quality of life would be directly impacted by this proposal. Be it further resolved that the East Hampton City Council publicly advocated
for the interests of affected residents and ensure municipal decisions do not unfairly impact economic and aesthetic bur burdens on neighboring communities. Be it further resolved that no approval be granted until a comprehensive review
of alternative sites, collocation opportunities, visual impacts, property rule impacts, and neighborhood effects have been completed and made available for public review. Be it finally resolved that the city East Hampton City Council respectfully urges the
Southampton Planning Board to preserve the residential aesthetic of our neighborhoods, protect the values of our homes, respect the voices of affected families, and reject the proposed cell tower at One Cookook Road until all other alternatives are considered in good faith. The residents of East
Hampton and Southampton deserve reliable cellular service. They also deserve solutions that do not place a massive industrial structure directly across from h homes, disrupt the predominant land use of established neighborhoods,
or force residents to bear the cost of a project from which they receive little benefit. We respectfully asked the city plan, the Southampton planning board to deny this proposal and require the exploration of um more appropriate
alternatives. And I had one other thing that I just wanted to add and I think this is important. East Hampton and Southampton actually share our 911 services. East Hampton already has a cell tower in the
middle of East Hampton that is taking all calls from Southampton. So the coverage is currently there and it is very close to our neighborhood already. And so seeing the red one from Holio in addition to the one over here, in
addition to the one in East Hampton, and now a fourth one is overkill. So that's what I came here to say. Um I can send you a copy of the resolution for your records as well. Thank you. >> Who's next?
>> I guess I'll talk here as a teacher. Um, hi everyone. I'm Lisa Coughlin, uh, 28 Pomeray Street, uh, in East Stampton. And I'd like to just pass around this photo. Um, this is a photo of exactly where the tether ball was located in our
backyard. You can see, um, and I'd like to preface it with just saying even if it's moved, I am here to support my neighbors and my community. So whether we see it or whether other community members see it, this is what it would look like. And really, it doesn't do it
justice. I mean, if you look at our pool, you can see our neighbors. I'll pass it around, but you can see our neighbor's garage, our kids play tape, and there's just a little string and a and a ball. But when you look, if you can go back to the um the screen with
the the cell tower and all of the everything coming off of it, um it's quite large and very intrusive. And I just I'd like to pass it around so you can just see that sort of image. Um, again, this is this is taken from like our deck coming off our house and then
there's the pool and there's a deck on that side. So, um, and our property line, just to put in perspect, so we're 28 pomeray, so our property line literally abuts the horse farm. Our kids love hearing the horses nay. It's actually very very sweet when they go in the woods and and hear them nay. But
anyway, thank you, Mr. Demon, um, members of the planning board. Thank you for hearing us and and all of your community members. I'm going to read a little bit just because I'm going to sort of take bits of abuse because Tamara said so much that I don't want to be redundant. Um but I also think that redundancy is important because these
are important topics that affect our daily lives. So um I sort of addressed the proximity of our you know the tower to our home. I think we're probably Steve and I are probably the most affected from the initial
location. But when I think of other locations and I think of our cookab friends and I think of it's it's still an issue and I can go into a little bit of detail of what my issues are because I think attorney Paresi you had mentioned that really as a community we
need to prove that this is not for the greater good. Um so I'm sort of here to do that. Um one of the reasons we purchased our home back in 2019 was the fact that we actually had woods. We don't really have that in East Hampton, right? I mean, Southampton, you guys have that. We don't really have that.
And we love that. We love being able to see the tree line. We love being able to see the hawks, the paragan falcons, the birds of prey, um, all of that stuff. I mean, that is like unheard of in Western Mass because there's not a lot of land left. So, um, I I am not an
environmental extremist. I'm not an environmentalist. I love animals. I love, you know, nature. Um, I'm a medical provider actually in the community. Um, I take care of people. And one thing I do as sort of a scientist, if you will, my husband's a nurse as well, is we follow science. And
one thing that this is greatly lacking is long-term EMF exposures. We know short-term exposures. There's no real um data that shows that short-term exposures exist. Okay, great. But what about long-term exposures? We don't know. And you can look at the World
Health Organization. In fact, I have tons of articles in here from CDC and the WHO that don't show good long-term studies. We don't have that. The data is lacking. Um, so, you know, that is certainly a concern. Um,
when we think of long-term, uh, and I've sort of been reading up on studies and talking to fellow colleagues, we look at things like cancer risk, neurological conditions, fertility conditions, pregnancy outcomes, and children's development. I have an eight and 10year-old. I don't want my children to
be a statistic 15 years down the road. Um, I use cell phones. I We love technology. We don't want it in our backyard. put it by Southampton. Put it somewhere else. And I've heard it the last meeting that you did talk about this in terms of well, you can't just
say put it somewhere else. But you can you can say put it somewhere else because this is where we live. This is where we breathe. This is where we raise our children. Um I'd like to speak to the idea of real world exposures. So comparisons have been made at the last meeting to students parking near EMF
towers like at school. There was a I think a a example about high school students parking near cell phone. you're parking your cell phone tower. Um, you know, you're not living 245 ft from where the cell phone tower would be,
which is our property line. Um, and so this is, you know, Verizon, right? This is this is your client. I have 5G. I called 911 when my daughter was two because she had a febral seizure. They came like that. I called
911 two years ago when her pellet stove started smoking. They came like that. I have no 911 issue. Um, so I think that it raises reasonable questions about whether the need isn't as it is as
urgent as this is being said that it is. I don't necessarily think that the greater good is going to benefit from this. Um, another major concern which multiple multiple people and I think everybody here agrees on is property value. Um, one of the strongest selling
points of our home again was the large yard, the private wooded backyard. I mean, the process of actually obtaining some documentation from a legal council colleague of mine, um, about how the that this can actually deplete our property values by up to 30%, maybe
more, especially with the way that the market is. So, you know, I I haven't really had a chance to meet with him because he's been in court, but um, but that information is definitely forthcoming. Um so beyond that this power you know this um tower it's near
prop um we talked about it last or you talked about it last uh meeting that's your gas lines power lines but really the conservation land again I'm not an environmentalist I mean I I love I love our earth I want to like you know be smart with our earth but like but that's
a concern why would you want to build it near an abuing conservation land in addition to where people live that's a huge concern my husband hikes there all the Fog hollow. It's beautiful. Um and also while we're being told that there's
no lighting on top of the tower, we are um we experience lowf flying. I mean, we just got F-35s at Barnes. How is the FAA and Barnes not going to say that there needs to be some sort of lighting on there? I I that is not
that's a promise. I'm not quite sure I I believe that will be, you know, upheld. Um, we talked a little bit about property, you know, cell phone towers in other areas. Um, so, you know, I think that
for us it's an inconvenience. I mean, I'll be personal. It's a total incon when you look at that picture. I mean, that is me waking up every day, my beautiful kids running around in the backyard, running in the woods, and I get to see a cell phone tower. I mean, that's just and again, even if it's not
put there in that exact location, our friends and neighbors, they get to see that. Um, lastly, and this I think is really important and important for the town of Southampton. I I just think it's a broader point with everything. Um, if this zoning is waved,
it sets a huge precedent and it sets a precedent for for your town. Um, you know, zoning exists. It protects our property rights. It ensures thoughtful use of land and overriding it feels like corporate influence
superseding local authority. Um it could open the door for additional towers, create a tower belt effect impacting visual, environmental character, all of that over time. And I just don't think that the town of Southampton wants to go in that direction. I feel like we as East
Hampton and Southampton folks like we're kind of like cousins. um we're we're very, you know, connected. I just don't think that's the direction that that the town wants to go. And so for all these reasons, and I'll end it here, environmental concerns, health uncertainties, property
value impacts, visual disruption, alignment, zoning bylaws, I respectfully ask the planning board to deny this proposal proposal. And I thank you for your time and your consideration. I might be a little emotional because I love my family. I love my home. I love my community. I love my children. So,
thank you. >> Thank you. THANK YOU. WHO'S NEXT? >> SURE. >> UM, actually this isn't um >> name, please. >> I will say my name. My name is Connie Denim. I also sit on city council. I'm an atlarge
um counselor. Um, but this is actually from one of your residents who outreach uh to us. Um, so I'm just going to read this individual's letter. uh to whom they may concerned. My name is Chris Marchetto of
86 Lion Street of Southampton. I'm one of many Southampton resident residential homes that would be affected by this cell tower. Not only is this tower completely unnecessary, but these are his words uh but it's idiotic and
another be for the next man boomer policy. We currently have policy. We currently have no issue of sell service of any kind. I've been a Southampton homeowner since 2018 and I put every every dime I have into making
this my home permanent and a standard of what I think Southampton looks like. And should it be and should it be? It is not theory. It's factual that every house around a cell tower dramatically reduces the value of
home. Not only would it bring down the value of our home and an eyesore health risk of un unwanted radiation, it's unpleasant and has no positives whatsoever. The fact that we have resident
The fact that we have the residents, sorry, this is the fact that we have residents who don't have a say or vote is crazy. Hope this maybe gets across to the right person. So that's your resident who uh reached out to uh myself
and other counselors to express uh his concerns about the cell tower in in his community. So thank you. >> Thank you. I was going to read his because I have it right here, but >> you saved me the uh >> I wasn't sure who got it. It just sent to me. So
>> before I asked anyone else, I would say there's Emily Grilly Scott sent an email. She lives at 84 Line Street in Southampton. And uh she has some questions. What other sites
were considered? Why do we need more within East Hampton, Southampton, Ho, and Westfield? Where is the evidence that the community asked for this or needed it? And is there data on local calls dropped in connection with the band issues? There's another letter from
uh Anna Holly. >> Gosh, you're here. You can read it. Sure. >> I'm not Anna, but I'm Biz, but I help you send it from Anna's um email address. Uh so I'll just I'm Elizabeth
Holly Biz. I live at 27 Tomy Street right across from Lisa and um these are all a lot of my neighbors and um I consider community Southampton my neighbors too. I agree that statement that we're like you know I I think of us
not just as two distinct communities but very close communities. Um you know I go grocery shopping in Southampton you know I get I get my coffee in Southampton so really close. Um, okay. So, I will just read um this out loud. Uh, dear
Southampton Planning Board, when reflecting on the June 3rd meeting where attorney proposed his plan to construct the cell tower at one Cook Road, we were struck by his attempts at undermining your authority. He made several statements insinuating that you do not
have the knowledge, intelligence, or power to make any other decision except to approve his plan. This is simply not true. The truth is you were elected by constituents who hold a great deal of trust in your authority to do the same. Represent the citizens of Southampton while fostering good relationships with
your neighbors, including East Hampton, who are valuable contributors to Southampton's economy. You can make the best decision for your community regardless of what Attorney Gy claims. As concerned citizens, we've carefully read the relevant Southampton bylaws that support your authority by
specifying restrictions around the construction of cell towers. The proposed tower is in direct violation of several stipulations made in your own bylaws. For instance, to the extent feasible, all service providers shall colllocate on a single tower. Accordingly, towers shall be designed to
structurally accommodate the maximum number of users technically practical. New towers shall be considered only upon a finding that by the planning board that existing or approved towers cannot accommodate the wireless communication equipment plan for the proposed tower. I'll just pause here because I have a
separate sheet that I brought and I brought five copies. I'm sorry, there's six of you now. There were five last time. Um to um to uh leave with you all. Um I don't I I haven't seen the the proof
yet. maybe it's available and just hasn't been made known yet that the existing infrastructure can't be leveraged to um to uh close the supposed gap that also I don't think has been proven sufficient thing um that's an
aside okay number three no tower shall be located closer than 2 miles to any other such tower there are four towers within 2 miles of this proposed site and I have those mapped out um to to show Um, and tower height shall not exceed
100 ft above the existing terrain. As you said, 65% increase, not just higher, 65% increase. The claim is that that's an outdated rule. You know what else is outdated? The 1996 resolution that the
um FDA said that we that we can't consider health effects. So, taking that in with a grain of salt. Um, according to this map, and I put a link to the map, um, there are several existing towers in the immediate area
for which Mr. Precy needs to show up proofs why those facilities cannot be leveraged to improve coverage. Furthermore, in our preliminary research, we found cell towers. I I just said this um as an aside, so I won't reread it. Um, again, you were elected for your knowledge, intelligence, and
power to uphold these bylaws that were carefully crafted to best support and protect community members. We urge you to stand firm, resisting attempts at being persuaded otherwise. Moreover, when reviewing footage of the June 3rd meeting, Attorney Frey seemed unprepared to challenge opposing arguments that a
cell tower would decrease property value and make selling property near the tower needlessly challenging. Instead, he undermined this argument, insulinating that it was irrelevant and the lack of cell service would hinder the sale of homes, but offered no data or studies to support his plans. And as other people
have mentioned that the data to support our claims is there that it lowers property values. Um I'm going to skip over that that part of the email about the property values again because I don't want to like beat a dead horse other people who that
point. Um uh these concerns are not irrelevant. They impact real people. Many of them have lived in their homes 40 plus years. The burden is on Mr. agrees to show that there are no alternative sites in less densely populated areas which also the east
board um spoke to um or eastampton counselors what's it called again resolution um Mr. reason would have you believe that local rural government bodies cannot legally oppose his applications. However, there are many towns that have
su successfully blocked cell towers from being built in particular zones. For example, that's my partner, that's me, that spoke with FA Whitney, the administrative assistant to the Shelurn math zoning board, who shared while it is illegal to completely forbid cell towers in a town, they can be banned
from certain areas in a town. Shelburn has five zones and then she says which zones they're allowed and which they're not in. It's most densely populated zones where they're not allowed. Uh this statement demonstrate that there are ways to improve cell service and protect the interests of citizens as
well as being good neighbors. Um, and I've shared this status before, but within a 1500 foot radius, which I'm using that, by the way, because that's the um there's a lot of research about that number, but also um I have the Shelurn bylaws um printed out, and
that's the that's the number they use for the residential setback of um where the towers are allowed to be compared to residential properties. Um so within that 1500 foot radius um the one foot road site disproportionately impacts 111
East Hampton residences compared to 15 Southampton residences. Um so and we have received overwhelming feedback from residents in this area on both sides of the town line that the negative trade-offs of erecting a tower in this particular location outweigh any
boost in already sufficient self-s service. Um, I brought the most updated I sent last night, the most updated um, uh, petition signitories and um, I have a printed copy because I actually have one more um, added to that um, who's
also here. So um, yeah, I think that's about it for me. >> Can I ask a quick question? >> Yeah. >> Um, I know one of those cell towers I was just trying to find them and I couldn't find them. Uh 22 Lane Drive in
Southampton. >> It's near there. That's not >> I drove there and I could not find a tower anywhere. Is there one there? >> No, I drove there. >> I went looking for And then I also >> It's on the map saying >> it's not there. There's nothing there. >> I don't know. And then Picard Circle. I don't know. Maybe it's very short. I
couldn't I'm just I'm not saying anything other than I'm just I was looking for the towers and I couldn't. >> Yeah. I don't know. >> Either way, this is the research that >> Okay. >> that I found. >> Okay. I only have copies. I'm sorry. >> The email is this is in addition to the
email and you can also send health organization. >> Okay. >> So that that was from Elizabeth height, right? >> Elizabeth Holly. >> Um >> Oh, you know what? I think Elizabeth, it looks like Elizabeth height. Is she here
tonight? >> That's me. That's my name. >> Oh, okay. All right. Yeah, I I had two different names. >> Yes, that's my >> And finally, in addition to the ones I got the last meeting, but Terry Hog sent one from Southampton. And you're here
tonight, Terry. Why don't you just get up and say what you want to have and I won't have to read it. >> I didn't I don't know what you got there. I didn't >> Aren't you on Aren't you on 29 Cook Road? Yeah. >> Got an email. >> You got a letter from >> Yeah. Do you not remember?
>> I didn't write it. I want I want to see that. I did not write it. >> Is someone Hey, is someone else using your email? Because it's signed by Terry and Andy Pignitary. >> That is an old one. He hasn't been in on this at all. >> But it's from It's from your email.
>> What's the What's the date on it? >> July 7th. >> Oh my god. Let me see that. See, now we really don't need more cell towers cuz we're already getting interference >> or or fraud. One of the two. >> It's a ghost.
>> This is >> all right. Well, anyway, I'll have to ask my husband about this. >> Do you know those people? >> Who you mean? I >> the dignitaries. >> Yeah, that's my husband, Andy Pignetier. He must have done this without my
knowledge, but I don't. >> You better straighten that out. >> Uh I I'm just going to give a quick little shmeir cuz I live on Cook Road and I Here's the birds that I've lived with. I've lived there for 31 years and
uh we're very happy with the um wildlife that we have. And um I just want to say that the cell towers do impact birds through physical hazards rather than radiation. And as Lisa
pointed out, now we know that the radiation is fine, but years from now it may not be. Um millions of migrate millions of migrating birds die annually from collisions with towers.
So, this is something that I want to consider because I've just been introduced to this topic and I haven't, >> you know, heard now I know from tonight, but birds are always on my mind. Also, um, large birds like eagles, which we
have in the area, often build nests on towers, which can disrupt telecommunications and harm the birds. And if you have a nest on top, I guess there's a certain amount of time at which the cell tower can't be serviced.
Anyway, I'm just basically getting into this. I'm brand new. I don't have a lot of um you know, I haven't done any research other than birds. So, that's my short. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> I'm Joan Ders. I live at 21 Cook Road in East Hampton and we've been there 30 years. >> What's your last name? Joan >> Digris Dig R. >> And we've been there since 1989 and um you know there's tons of wildlife.
There's a bird sanctuary. There's a wildlife sanctuary right there. All the land on the cornfield was donated. I mean, it's going to be a crime if the animals get harmed from all that donated land that was kindly given to the town,
to the area, and there's deer there every day. I saw a moose there this week. Um, I feel very strong that this is going to impact the wildlife. >> Thank you. >> I'm Dave Fost, 96 County Road, Southampton.
Um, so this map right here, um, doesn't show County Road and County Road is elevated at that location. So the tree canopy were up higher than a lot of the tree
canopy and it's 160 ft tower. You're proposing >> So how tall are the trees in the area? And that's a hard thing to say because it's you're talking about 5 ft from the tower, 50 ft from the tower, 100 ft from the tower because the ground.
>> Well, we just had a a solar survey cuz we're having solar panels put on our house and they knew precisely what the height of the trees were in juxosition to the roof of the house. So there should be some type of
technology that would show how high above the trees that this tower is going to go above. >> Again, it's it's it's relative to perspective. Uh, one of the things that I'm going to again offer is that we put
a balloon up at the new location and we'll tell everybody the date and they can assess their visibility from their own location because um it it it it varies from location to location. Uh, at
the tight at the at the tower site, it's probably 60 to 75 ft above the tower. But at a half a mile away or wherever anyone lives, you might be seeing the top 10 feet. So, it's it's very location specific.
>> You have do you have >> you know the photograph that I see here um shows that you're seeing about um that balloon is 3 feet. So, I'm guessing you're seeing about 20 ft of tower and I can't and I can't wait to put the balloon up.
>> But not the not the base because the base is very quite thick compared to the tether. I understand that. But you're correct. But yet you're seeing the top 20 ft of tower above the tree canopy. So uh so when I move it back 750 ft, it's
going to have a dramatic effect on this visibility here. Uh uh it it may affect other visibility at very location. >> Do you mind putting up this uh this slide that has all the different
>> Excuse me for a second. Go ahead before you leave that slide. So you're showing a 160 foot uh radius from the site and assuming that that that property line is the
protected land. >> The um the land to the south is owned by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The land to the west is private property. >> Yeah. All right. >> This is all the conservation area. Now, I also don't know if there's any impact
uh with the aquifer which is right across the street between County Road and Cook Road >> and under the area that's preserved. >> The the the foundation that we would build would be dramatically less than a
residential foundation. >> It's just designed to support the tower. So uh my my suspicion is that any of the residential development had far more impact on the aquifer than this tower. We we we certify that we don't have any impact on wetlands uh because that's
what the uh conservation commission requires but uh there'll be no impact on wetlands. >> How deep is the foundation? >> Um it's very sight specific. Generally it's about 6 feet uh after yeah uh yeah what what we don't know really what's underground there. we consume. But after
the plan board approves it, we go back in and do geotechnical analysis and then design a foundation very specific to the location. So it's spread. It's not not a uh >> to it it uh generally they're a a spread
foundation is but it'll be very spec. This is a single pole which uh so it's it's not like threelegged where you do a peer type thing. And I keep hearing uh 1500 ft.
I'd be interested to see how many houses are 1500 feet away if there was any type of a map that could be developed. >> Um anyone can develop any map. I would I don't know where this 1500 ft comes
from. Um your zoning bylaw requires us to be what we call tower height setback. That's the only requirement in South India. Uh I've heard 500 feet. I've heard 1500 feet. I've heard not in my backyard. Uh those are all arbitrary things. And so u we we look at what
we're legally required to do. >> That's all I have to comment about. >> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. >> My name's Jack Bzel. I live on the west side of town here in Southampton.
Um, I've been involved with various things going on around the area, but in regards to this, one of the things I look at is I I know that spot and it seems like one of the lowest spots over in that geography. And right after that,
you start going up a hill with a lot of woods. I would think if you need some elevation, there may be some less populated spots that you can find nearby. maybe not as convenient in terms of access, but there are other I would
think alternatives in there where you could get to put a tower that wouldn't impact anybody the way this might directly. The other thing is talking about that conservation area which is right below there. It's called Southampton Wildlife Management Area and
it's uh well I'll just read what's online about it. Uh, it's a fantastic destination for walkers and hikers. Diverse terrain, stunning natural beauty. This park offers a plethora of opportunities for outdoor activity enthusiasts. Whether you prefer a
leisurely stroll or challenging hike, visitors to the wildlife management area may encounter a variety of wildlife, including white-tailed deer, wild turkeys, various bird species, small mammals, rabbits, squirrels, not to mention some of the things that were
just mentioned. So definitely I've heard ex many many accounts where cell power radiation not it's not like a nuclear radiation but it's an electromagnetic radiation can affect a lot of people. I've know people I've heard of many
people that have moved because towers were put up in a proximity to where they live. It affected them. They couldn't deal with it. They had to move. So there are people if they're too close to this thing that stand to be possibly affected. Animals definitely can be
affected whether you're talking horses or the wild critters down in that area just right adjacent to where this proposal is sitting. Again, are there options where you can go up a little further? be up a little higher, a little more
uh a little less populated, let's say, maybe more woods, a little bit more difficult to access for construction purposes. But there may be other alternatives in terms of trying to sight a spot instead of plopping it in somebody's backyard where it could cause
various kinds of financial and physical harm. ANYONE ELSE? >> HI, my name is Stephen Cofflin. Um, please go back to the uh drawing of the cell phone camera real quick.
>> Yeah. Yes. 28 Street East. Um the reason there's so many um different layers of technology up there is so different carriers can have different services. Verizon can rent it out, make money from other car characters.
Um so that's why that's designed that way. They are correct. It says smaller footprint, but it's a lot taller as well. Chairman Demon, members of the planning board, neighbors, my name is Stephen Coffman at 28 Street. Um, I'm against
the 165 ft cell phone tower on Cook Road. We recognize the goal of improving wireless coverage, but this particular location on the residential horse farm is the wrong site. The tower would create significant visual blight in our rural neighborhood and cause substantial
negative impact on the property values around 30%. Some of our houses that' be over $100,000. This would create real financial harm to thus investing in saving our lives and building our lives in Eastampton and spending time in Eastampton and
Southampton. Um, many of us, including myself and my wife, are longtime Verizon customers and lived in the area for several years without experiencing any gap in meeting cell phone coverage. We also use 911 twice
in our house with our cell phones. Um, I'm not going to go over the wildlife reserve. We've already covered that. We do believe there could be better alternatives, higher elevation areas somewhere around Pomeroy Mountain if we
need it at all in the in the areas. We saw there's four different cell phone towers. Um in our community um most of us are on Wi-Fi anyway when we're at home. We're not on um the cell phone service. They also sell extenders you can buy and plug in and extend your
Wi-Fi throughout your house and your yard if you need it. Um, I'm also concerned with the pathway of Barnes Air Force Base. There's several low-flying airplanes that travel right over that area where the tower is going to be. Our proposed site will be
uh which will need to have a light flashing constantly. Um, I asked for a moratorium for at least 24 to 36 months so further environmental studies can be conducted and Barnes Air Force Base can be informed about this decision. Thank
you. Thank you. Any else? Mr. Harris, where do we go from here? >> Well, the applicant needs to make a revision to his application. He's on the site. Um
uh there is a deadline for making decision if they qualify under the federal shot clock and also whether or not under the zone by so the applicant if they're not going to withdraw and resubmit they need to grant
the board an extension of the deadline for rendering decision. Um given moving the application have moving the site the simplest way be withdraw and resubmit without any additional fee being being
required but um because I'm not sure when you're going to have your plans ready. >> Um I understand that. Um I believe that because the address is still one Cook Road but as we're probably notified we're moving on one Cook Road. Um uh we
don't require further notice. Uh I I came here because the board asked me to look at other alternatives and we did that in good faith. Uh I believe it's going to address some of the concerns that were expressed tonight. Not all. I
I'm never going to address all, but um either the board can deny the application now or give me a reasonable time to present an alternative. Um >> but that's how long it's going to take you to have revised plans for we'll have
revised plans within the next two weeks. We'll have revised RF to the radio consultant within the next two weeks. I think we can continue this along and uh um um the and just so what um Mr. Harris alluded to um the federal government
encourages this. The federal government encourages expedited review and it basically has what they call shot clock regulations that require boards to make a decision within 150 days of the
application. What that does is um allow if the c if the board is kicking the can down the road, kicking the can, let's do more studies, let's have a moratorium for an unreasonable amount of time. It allows me to assume a denial and move
forward on an appeal period. Uh I'm not looking to uh uh litigate this. I'm looking to appease the board, appease the town of Southampton, and uh uh and find a site that's that's reasonably.
And I I I can tell you right now, it's not going to be invisible. It's not going it's just technically impossible to be invisible. Uh all these concerns that people address uh are very easily answered with uh the application if they
review the application materials. Uh uh but uh so I'm u I'm assuming that the board would rather me proceed with a revised site plan on the new application. Not a new application on
the new site. We'll put a balloon up so that we can I know this gentleman here is looking at the photo simulations. they will change not globally but you know there might be no visibility at the new location for some people and no vis more visibility
at others and I think that's a fair u ask to do a new balloon and we'll get that done I probably do it like the last week of July so we'll have the photos for the August meeting uh and uh um we're not we're nowhere near the 150day
a time frame yet. So, uh, we applied in April, we had our first, no, we applied in May. Um, we had our first public hearing in June, May, June, July, August, September, October. >> The application was received May 4th, >> right? So, so we're that'd be October
1st of October. >> Right. And uh um if we're moving towards a positive decision, I'll gladly extend, but there's it's premature to extend it at this time because we're nowhere near the application deadline. I mean the uh the shot clock restrictions. >> Robert, you had a question about the shot clock?
>> Well, just on the comments that we've received, has he um received that the comments we've received so far >> from the peer review? >> Right. >> I did not see the peerreview comments and I and to be fair, the peer review did reach out to me and I communicated
Mr. Harris. I just thought it was premature to, you know, start running up a billion. Uh, and uh, so now I'll reach out to him. I'll answer whatever preliminary questions they have. U we, we'll get them revised site plans, provide
radio frequency analysis, and uh, um, and we'll engage them in whatever answers they need to to satisfy their concerns. >> In your photo simulations, could you you've got the bloom there.
Could you have them insert an image of the tower? >> I thought they had seen the package. >> So, some of them have a note saying that there you can't see it. >> Okay. >> Right. >> So, we need to do a simulation of note,
but but some of them had to touch >> I was mean a copy >> to build off that. >> That's simulation. >> That's the simulation. That's not the actual You had actual photos of the >> No, we had There's a photo of a balloon
like similar similar to this photo. >> Yeah. And you had you also had uh photos from the balloon test that was done, >> right? And but in in the places where there was some visibility, they show the balloon and then the next picture shows the uh what it's going to look like from >> Yes.
>> Are you proposing to use the same data points or same locations? Um, I can't go on private property, but if people want to say take a picture from the street in front of 123 Main Street, we'll certainly do that. Uh, our uh the the
the u uh those people that do that are engineers. Uh they certify that the balloon was a requisite height and the photos are accurate. Uh and they can take, you know, photo. I'm not going to go to every house long, you know, with in the radius, but they can take
representative photos. But if someone said I can vote from this vantage point. >> Excuse me. >> I want to ask a question. If you do do that, could you possibly do it longer than 3 and 1/2 hours and not on a Monday after a holiday so that
>> people who live there could see it a little bit longer like maybe a week or something so people would actually see it. That would be my only request if you do that. >> The answer to that is yes, we can pick. We're going to agree on a date now. Okay. Uh the issue with putting it up
longer is um it's really hard to predict wind speeds. So if we're going to pick a date now, July 27th. Uh and I just I'm just throwing that out. That's not the actual date. Uh uh the problem is is that I don't know what the wind is going to be on July 27th. So uh and what we
have found doing many of these is that wind speeds increase during the day as the warms up. And so we try to do them in the morning, we try to do them for a finite amount of time and we try to get the word out as best as possible because
uh you know if the balloon is going like this then it's of no value. If uh if the balloon goes so far that it pops on the tree next to it u it's of no value. So we try to pick times that are predicted wind speeds below 10 miles an hour and
for a defined duration. three hours tends to be the safest thing. We used to do them at 7 o'clock in the morning. Now we do them at nine because people complain about 7 am. But uh uh but yeah, to say put it up to eight hours is just technically impossible given u you know
the weather and and what we did the last time um when we pick a date I'll tell you I have a website called busydem.com. I maintain and I notified the town clerk. I think I Mr. human um and I'll
notify anyone uh uh via email, but also I post on the website the balloon will be up tomorrow or will be postponed until the next day. Uh and and the last time we did this, we actually uh mailed to all the abutters who got the notice of the public hearing including all uh
folks in Eastampton that were 300 foot butterers the the balloon and the name of that website. So uh I could do it on a Saturday if people would rather a Saturday. I can do it on Monday, but um you know and so let's look at the calendar now and come up with an
appropriate date. >> Couple of questions questions. Uh JP M city councelor East Hampton what first got me interest in this situation was uh several constituents
reached out and said you know we got a notice but we didn't we weren't home. you got the notice and I was unable to get it was return receipt or something I had to sign for and there was only so much time and well that concerned me because I heard uh
Mr. Breezy speak about notifying everyone to get the 300 ft >> and yes you can send notice but actually getting the notice receiving the notice and having planned to time your day let's say you were going to work at at that morning you weren't going to be
there I was going to suggest and I don't know if everyone else thinks this may make sense having a weekend time for the so that everyone was available presumably more people could be
available and that you do whatever you need to do, post signs or whatever to let folks in the neighborhood know when. And I appreciate the applicant making the opportunity available to be able to have a new balloon test uh with the new
proposed site. Uh so I to to to respond to that we provide a notice the same notice that's required for the zoning board because those are the people that got notice at the public hearing. I also put an ad in the paper and I'll put another ad in the paper but putting signs up you know am I going to put up
100 signs or thousand signs that you know that's not as effective as uh an ad in the paper which is where the Eastampton City Council and the Southampton City Council advertises their public hearings. So, uh, uh, that that to me is the most effective. Uh,
you know, I'll I agree that a Saturday, you know, some people say they don't want to do it on Saturday. Some they do want on Saturday, but they want a Saturday, we can do it on Saturday. The problem with doing it on a Saturday is that if the weather doesn't cooperate, then I got to wait till the next
Saturday. And so that's part of talking. Uh so one of uh so just looking at my calendar now uh I might propose that we do it on um um
uh Saturday July 25. I know I could probably do it on Saturday, July 18, and if not 18:25 and I I have to get out of the paper tomorrow. What paper does you advertise your public hearings in?
>> Daily Hampshire does that? >> That comes out once a week. I mean, once a day, >> six days a week. >> All right, fine. So, I can get in the paper probably Friday. U this week. Um and we'll do it on the 18th. And I would say if not Saturday, we do it Sunday,
the 19. And then if not um 18 or 19, we do 25 or 26. So I I I've got to have some flexibility because I can't tell you what the weather's going to like on the weekend right now. >> Thank you. Anything else? >> Well, I also wanted to just make a quick
note. I know Mr. Breezy was very proud of the fact that he had been involved in lots of projects and mentioned several communities that he worked in and how experienced the company was. It seemed to me that he mentioned that there was a place in Monterey. Well, if you look at
the site in Monterey, it's on a summer camp uh way out in the in in in in the woods and the average population per square mile is 35 people. If you you mentioned Conway, it's 46 people per
square mile. Uh just for comparison purposes, East Hampton has,7 people per square mile. That's,217 people per square mile. We're talking about experience with density,
experience with lots of exposure to lots of people. And I think those factors are going to be important in mitigating or reducing any impact that may be pres Mr. Besie mentioned when the he used to have
one cell phone in his house. Now there's six. Well, you know, people spend a lot more time than a few minutes making a call or two or three on cell phones. They're up to five and six hours on the phone. If you multiply that times the
number of people, I'm talking about exposures. The exposure studies I think need to be updated and thought about when as you consider this because it's a great much greater number of people much
greater number of exposures and time. uh he also mentioned that you know there was a 100 watt RF output per for the tower and he may have been speaking about total output or he may have been speaking about output per
stack for the individ I don't know uh they were they were considering you know Verizon T-Mobile maybe AT&T and they have to provide additional locations so I would take a look at that sort of data
and information. One other thing that that is unique I think to this partic particular parcel if you look at the utility easement that's a utility easement for power line I believe uh if you look at that that has an RF or an RF
probably an RF measurement and an EMF measurement I don't know what calculations he's shown but what about the interface between RF energy emanating from the cell tower and EMF energy e emanating from the utility
easement and the com combination of those two together when you consider that I will also throw in heard today AI is coming big time and it's going to have an extreme power need and that was
going to mean maybe double or triple the power generation necessary in our society that have an effect on those power lines and on the interface. All things for you to consider. I thank you so much for considering this in a fair and honest
way and I hope you're able to find a solution that meets the needs of everyone. >> Thank you. Someone else. >> Hi, my name is Slaughter. I live a 25 um Palmer Street, East Hampton. Um, this is, you know, the first time I'm hearing
about this project. It's pretty concerning. We live within, this is my dad. He's 77. He's, you know, getting up there. Um, we have Sorry, Dad. You know, like we live within like 500
feet of this tower, proposed tower. Um, and there's just a lot of questions that we still have. We didn't see the first water balloon, the first weather balloon. Um, I think, you know, it would be great if we could do another weather balloon, um, and have, like, we're
asking for a little more, um, publicity around it, keep it up longer. It doesn't seem impossible to maybe, um, you know, have some anchors around this balloon to keep it from blowing around. It It seems like an achievable a solvable design
problem for some engineers. Doesn't seem that um, expensive. It just feels like we're getting a lot of pressure to do this really quickly when we have a lot of more questions. Can't we just take a little time? It doesn't feel like there's an emergency
in terms of the problem. We're just getting sold like an emergency solution and I'd like to take some time to get some questions answered before we push it forward. Thank you. And we have we have that
and we have that time because the peer review company, you know, hasn't completed their independent review and that will probably u trigger some more questions. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Harris. So go back to when will I
have the hearing continue to >> when's your next regular schedule meeting? >> Our next meeting is July 20th, but I can't do it that way. >> You mentioned >> August mentioned four weeks out. So the
the schedule meet on August 5th. You um Paul, you've got a hearing I think on schedule that already on >> there's a site plan and special permit scheduled for August 5th. So that's on the agenda. You know, we can do two. I don't
>> It's up to you if you think >> it's up to you. I'm You're the chair. >> What's What's everybody's availability for August? >> I'm available. You're not flying anywhere. >> By the way, you had a question about the uh or made a comment about the flying. Would you explain to him the height
requirement for flying for >> Well, I lights on the tower. >> Yeah, it Well, that's up to the FAA. The FAA is the one that's going to respond to that. I'm sure you've already contacted the FAA and they'll give you that. >> We're very conscious of that. Um uh and we've had issues with we have issues in
other towns surrounding the Air Force base here. uh at this particular location, the original location. We'll confirm it for the new location, but I'm sure it's going to be the same. Uh uh we've determined that no lighting or marking would be required under FAA
regulations. Uh and it's a function of elevation u uh where and and this area elevation as someone point out is lower than the surrounding terrain. If you go farther east, it gets very dramatically higher. Uh and uh and I think those
towers in Holio are lit because of that. Uh so we're very conscious. >> Three towers in the field you're talking about? >> No, there's some up on Mtown. >> Um they're they're right up against Route 91 in Holio. You see them from the Palm Street neighborhood. Uh and I think
those are lit because of the elevation. Uh but we've determined at the original location and I'm sure at the new location, no lighting is required. Uh, and we're conscious of that because um um we don't um we don't like to light them only because maintaining the lights
is a a chore and uh so we try to stay under applicable limits if we can. >> Um will the peer review be back for the fifth though? You know, I don't want to we want to keep on laboring this. That that was my my original question to
attorney and Paresi is >> how about the 19th >> when will they have have it ready because we didn't didn't need to have the peer review it. >> So I talked to the engineers on the way here and he said um
based on my telling him tomorrow to go forward with the new location he could have it in in about two weeks. So, we'll have it done in two weeks and that'll give the peer reviewer two weeks to review it, which I think is >> But you really want the peer reviewers report before the hearing.
>> Um, we want peer review before hearing. >> I suggest the 19th. >> Yeah, >> I give us room um to work on that. >> July 19th, >> August, August 19th.
>> We could do that in alternatives. Don't tell your engineer because engineer will then take three or four. >> I've learned that many times. I completely agree with you. >> Never tell an architect engineer more time than
>> what are you trying to say? >> I think that's true. I I think you know how those engineers are >> kind of >> last minute >> or surveyors. >> Surveyors are more um trustworthy than us. So, I'm going to announce and I'm
going to say it really loud so the people in the audience can hear. I'm going to put up another balloon on Saturday, July 18 from 9 to 12 a.m. If I can't do it Saturday, June 18 because of weather, we'll do it uh the 19th, which
is Sunday and and each successive Saturday or Sunday until we're successful. uh uh if um and we make the decision the day before and we monitor the weather for several days just to gear up but we make the decision on so
in this case we'll do it on the 17th and I have a website that I maintain called busydem.com and all the abutters got notice of that with the original application so I asked them to look at the website the afternoon on the day before meaning on
the 17th and that'll say the balloon will be up or the balloon will not be up the next day. Uh and uh I will also notify Mr. Demon. I'll notify Mr. Harris and the town clerk. Uh and I'll also put an ad in the paper uh to let the general
public know. Uh and I think that's all very need on that continue. >> Yes. So, do I have a motion that we'll continue this hearing August 19th
pending the balloon test and the peer review >> to August 19th at 7 p.m. >> 7 p.m. Can I ask a question before you mind if I ask a question to this? Yeah, we do.
>> Uh, so just one of the questions I was asking earlier was the proximity to the overhead transmission lines that are um in general vicinity within the fall zone. >> What are the height
um what's the height of the poles that are there? Do do you know like just >> I haven't tried to measure them, but you can see in the uh um the photo simulation you're looking at. Can you kind of guess me based on that? How about um um my guess is that they're in
the 100 foot range maybe. Uh >> yeah, it depends which you're looking. But yeah, I see what you're saying. Yeah. >> But will the new location be closer to power lines? >> Yeah. Um the power company, we routinely
deal with them. We actually build towers for the power company um on their uh land sometimes. Uh they uh because they're involved in telecommunications as well. uh uh they we built many towers
um within not on their easement but immediately adjacent to >> I would um encourage you in your revision to include a narrative about any structure that is
within the fall zone and then the tower so that we everybody understands you got 165t tower and you got 100 foot high power line if it's within the fall zone that could be issued.
>> Um I'm saying that the likelihood of your tower falling is >> well um we we'll certainly notify the power company. I I agree with that. But the one thing I'm going to tell you is that um um towers don't collapse.
They're engineered and we have lots of data because we had hurricane Sandy and Hurricane Katrina and no towers fall down. >> The monopole, they don't even break. They they've had some instances where they bend, but by having the monopole
design, you have the internal cabling inside and that holds it together more. So, there've been some incidents of bending >> uh in extreme weather, but never toppling. I I've had engineers tell me that they are designed to
>> collapse in sections so they don't >> Exactly. And and you can actually pre-engineer it. I think what you do is you over design the bottom and then you normally design the top. So there's a point about halfway that if there was some extreme catastrophic, it would
bend. It would bend onto itself. And I can't say that's never happened, but uh um you know they've the no instance where it just topples over. And the reason is because they're engineered with a foundation and a a mounting bolt to be >> so and I get I can get an engineer to
certify that. >> I'm supposed to endorse this. >> Yeah, they we will provide the notice. They won't object. I can we build many um either on their property or um adjacent easements like this and and
they're they're well aware of they own towers too. >> Well, some are mounted on their that they have a pole uh on the subject property and in the in the primary neighborhood that don't meet tower height setback from the property line
that they control and they're those towers are engineered to not topple either. So they're very familiar with the technology and the engineering. So, the follow's going to have on that front. I've noticed, you know, I think
in Chiki, you're driving on I90. Um, some of the transmission lines that are parallel or turn, it almost appears there's sort ofation equipment on those on those poles, the transmission poles. Um
there's been uh in the past not so much these type of poles, they're the single poles and they don't really have the foundation with the uh structural integrity to support the antennas that we engage. uh um some of the bigger, more substantial ones
like the four-legged stansions. Um um in the past, we've attached antennas to them, but what's happened is as we need new maintenance or upgrades, they've become a nightmare and so the power company won't let us do it anymore. And
um I was just in a town last night where there there was antennas on a power station and we're putting building a tower right next door because the carrier on the tower can't access them because they can't get people to access the high. >> They can't shut them down
>> and and they have to shut down. When you call up Eversource and say we want to access that tower to swap out an antenna, they say how about October 2028? Uh we'll shut it down. and uh and we know we need to get there this month. It's not working. Uh so it's become a
maintenance nightmare and as we've been doing upgrades in the industry. Uh so we've actually uh permitted several towers in eastern Massachusetts in more densely residential neighborhoods than this um that are offloads of existing
power stansion mounts. U I also want you know um this technology has been around for 100 years. Uh we talked about residential density. Uh in Newton, Massachusetts, a much more densely residential neighborhood than East Hampton or uh there there are
towers that have been broadcasting AM and FM radio for about 100 over 50 years for uh television and over 100 years for AM radio. Uh with uh so lots of document data with respect to radio frequency sleeping.
>> All right. Do I have a Do we have a motion? >> Motion to continue to August 19th at 7 p.m. >> So move. >> Thank you very much. >> I have a second. >> It's 7:00 p.m. or 7:05. >> We meet at 7 and hopefully these guys
will get here by 7:05. >> Oh, you you listed at 7:05 on the agenda. That's right. >> I'll put it seven. >> Thank you. Uh all in favor? All right. >> All right. >> All right. >> All right. My friends from Eastampton.
>> Um, spread the word if you want to come back on August 19th. >> I'm sorry. Anything she anything she provided pictures from you can take that
And that same wood and hearing banging shed and it was coming to the window frame. There was a proper
window. >> Are we good? So we can so we can I just want to get your approval. There was two building permits came in the last week before Susan Drive and 152 County Road
and those were both ANRS we had just recently approved and there was under well under 40,000 square ft. So just needs you're okay that I approve the motion. >> I move that uh we
uh agree with the approval by >> the approvement. We >> have a second. >> Second to approve the approval. >> All in favor? Hi. >> Hi. >> Hi.
>> Can we recap before we turn? >> So, all right. So, in July 20th, everybody get the notice for that. It's a Monday night for the >> Yeah, I have a question that uh is it crucial that I show up? That's for the um >> solar
>> solar. It's a big solar one. Um I'm supposed to be in New York on Tuesday morning at 8:00, but um that's a big one. But uh I hate to miss that one. >> But >> it's the only date we could >> Yeah. >> get everybody.
>> You asked me if I was available and he said yes. >> And furthermore, Jim has got to recuse himself. >> How about a butter? I got my letter for the meeting today. But I can >> we'll try to certainly going to be continued. I mean that's that's going to be a goound, but I I'm pretty sure
that's going to be late. >> Yeah. But I mean to be have attended hearing. I'm I'm expecting on the 20th that what you're going to do is have a introduction of the project. Yeah.
You're going to have p public p of comments and then you're going to continue because you're going to select a peer reviewer that night. And on that note, I mentioned >> Paul did. >> Did you find >> I have um sent out emails to
uh someone from VHB, Dan Delaney from uh Vessel Neil, Ryan Christenbury at Tying Bond, uh Jeff Lacy at Rural Plan Associates expressed interest in it, and a gentleman from the
Berkeley Group expressed interest in it. I put out mass planners lister and Jeff and the Berkeley group respond to that and I went through my contacts on and online about the others. Uh and Ryan
Christenberg responded on uh to that as well. So I have sent out emails requesting, hey, if you're interested, this is what I need from you. You're basically uh uh saving qualifications.
this lack of conflict of interest and your proposal for doing the work and I'm specified it's in the water supply protection district at part and there's concern about how best impacts the water supply but also as a storm water permit
as well so they should be giving me proposals I request they separate out those tasks in case decide we don't need storm water conservation looked at or whatever But on so and I specified they need to
get to me by noon on the 20th. I'm expecting folks respond next week and if I get everything next week, I'll send to you beforehand. >> Can you have them verify or identify identify what projects they've reviewed in the past are comparable to
>> the statement qualification should do that, but I will I'll email them and and request that as well. Um, so that's what I'm expecting happen. So I'm not really expecting a lot of
substantive except the public comment which is very substantive. >> Yeah. Well, don't want to mess up the continuity of being able to attend. >> Yeah. Future period. So I'll make it. >> All right. The other quick question I'm
just going to ask this back to this tonight. When I got that email from Paul, I looked at it and it had 22 Lind Drive and it had the one in East Hampton. Um, I drove on those streets looking. I went
right to 22. There's no cell tower there. There's no cell tower in the plains just off of Bel Street. I drove on that street looking and looking. I can't see anything. >> One of those same I did. >> I couldn't find it. So, I don't The only cell towers >> wasn't that discussing that outside the
hearing. Okay. Well, I didn't know if it was still open. >> No, the hearing No, the hearing has been completed. >> Okay, I won't talk about that. Withdraw that. >> So, anything? No, we we shouldn't be discussing. >> Okay. >> That outside the hearing without the applicant being here because >> I withdraw that interest in.
>> So, we can't have any private session over this. >> No. No. >> Ever. That's how this works. All right. >> I'll bring up the next discussion outside of the hearing. would be either executive session
>> adverse to the applicant or adverse to the public and therefore both part all parties have the right to hear what the board is discussing about. >> So this is just a question of procedure and how this is all going. So this
balloon test goes off. It's neither here nor there. It's not relevant to this. It's it's relevant to public speak basically. >> It's relevant to >> Oh, it's relevant to us as well >> to a a complete a completion of the application.
>> Yes. But and then the peer review is going to happen based on the new site. >> Correct. >> Mhm. >> Regardless or only if the balloon >> regardless. So it's going to happen regardless. They're going to begin this process
>> and then the peer review will happen and they'll get to see this >> before our before they show up at the next meeting. >> You saw the list of questions they had about the application. >> Yes. And I never was I didn't have any clarity tonight as to whether or not they had seen that before the meeting and had not.
>> He It's funny because I sent him that and I don't know whether he reads all his emails but he didn't respond to a couple of mine but he he hasn't. I know darn well he >> so he did forward those questions from Elizabeth. >> Yes, I did. Um, >> so I should just if I have something to
say or any question or problem with any of this, I just need to alert this on the meeting. >> Yes. >> Period. >> Yeah. No pigeon post. Remember that. >> Um, we can't use pigeons to forget it's a joke. the and there is a years ago
there was another community that their select board uh had a email chains and they got slapped down by the AG's office twice >> not once but twice and this was not a
unsophisticated community it yeah so you can't what they used to do is do daisy chains Paul would email Paul. Paul would then email Mark. Mark email you. You email. And the AG said, "No, no, no, no. >> I'm not trying to figure a way to get
around it. I'm just asking. We're not trying to hide anything. We're just trying to be straight. I just thought it was we were able to talk about it because it was on the agenda. We're here." No, >> that's fine. That's fine. >> Motion to adjourn. >> So move. >> Second. >> All in favor? Hi. Hi.
>> This government meeting is brought to you by Eastworks and our local cable subscribers.