St. Mary's Board of Appeals approves Queen Tree cell tower despite neighborhood objections

The St. Mary's County Board of Appeals voted to approve a conditional use application for a proposed 199-foot monopole at Wentworth Nursery near Oakville Road, allowing Telecom Capital Group (TCG) to build a new cell site to improve coverage along Maryland Route 235.

The decision came after applicants presented engineering, RF and environmental studies and answered board questions about height, siting, setbacks and noise. The board's vote followed public comments from nearby residents who said the tower would be visually intrusive and voiced health and property-value concerns; the board and staff noted federal preemption of RF health standards where facilities meet FCC limits.

Applicants said the monopole, proposed to serve Verizon as the anchor tenant, is 195 feet tall with an additional 4-foot lightning rod for a total structural height of 199 feet. "The monopole itself is 195 feet. On top of the 195 feet is a 4 foot, lightning rod. So the total height of the facility is 199 feet," testified Matt Budd, the project's civil engineer. Budd also said the compound will be a pad roughly 63 by 63 feet and that the fenced equipment area is a 60-by-60-foot compound set back from adjacent parcels.

Why it matters: County staff and applicants said the new site fills capacity and coverage gaps on MD-235 and at the Lovell Road intersection that existing towers do not serve. Manish Derezia of Telecom Capital Group said the RF study submitted with the application shows existing nearby sites (North Sandgate, Mary Dixon, Memorialville) are outside the one-mile target radius and do not provide the needed coverage or capacity for the corridor. "They have determined that it does not serve the need from the existing tower," Derezia said, referring to carrier network assessments.

Most important facts and supporting details - Site and equipment: The proposed site is inside Wentworth Nursery property, accessed from an existing Oakville Road entrance; applicants will use an approximately 10-foot-wide gravel access drive. The compound will hold the monopole plus equipment shelters for carriers and a backup generator. Budd said the site plan shows underground utilities, existing tree lines and required setbacks. - Height and fall/foundation details: The monopole is a single, self-supporting galvanized-steel pole with a base diameter of roughly 5' to 6 feet tapering to about 24 inches at the top. Foundation details in the engineering submission indicate a drilled shaft (applicants referenced a 7-foot diameter by roughly 48-foot depth in final foundation drawings) filled with rebar and concrete. - RF and environmental approvals: An RF study and propagation maps were submitted as part of the application (applicants identified that study as Attachment 3 to Exhibit 4); the NEPA review required by FCC rules and an FAA determination (no lighting required under 200-foot height) were also included as attachments to the submission. Applicants told the board the retention pond planned for stormwater is designed to hold 6 inches before overflow, consistent with state micro-retention design criteria. - Screening and visibility: Budd told the board the compound will be surrounded by trees on approximately 270 degrees, with the entrance drive creating the remaining opening. He estimated tree heights in the buffer at 50 to 60 feet. Applicants proposed to use the existing vegetation as the primary buffer rather than planting new double rows where the ordinance's buffer requirement was discussed; staff advised the ordinance requirement applies only to adjoining properties and the tested location already meets the intended buffering. - Noise and backup power: Applicants said a backup generator would be enclosed in a sound-mitigating enclosure if diesel generators are used; applicants reported measured sound at the generator of about 59.2 dB at the unit and noted propane options have lower noise profiles. Routine weekly-run maintenance cycles were discussed; applicants said such cycles are not a common requirement and would be handled per the carrier's standard procedures.

Public comment and legal limits Residents called in and testified they oppose the location because of visual impact, perceived health risks from radio-frequency emissions and potential property-value effects. Several written comments in the record raised similar concerns. County counsel and staff reminded the board that health effects from RF emissions are federally regulated; where facilities comply with FCC limits the county cannot deny a siting application on the basis of generalized RF health concerns. The board heard that the RF report concludes the proposed facility will operate within applicable FCC exposure limits.

Board deliberations and outcome Board members and staff asked detailed questions about siting alternatives, co-location capacity, fall-zone design, and how the proposed site fits carrier requirements. The applicant said the pole is built to accept up to five carriers, that the highest antenna position would be about 90 feet and the lowest roughly 45 feet with roughly 10 feet between antenna arrays when fully loaded. The board made findings that application standards were met and voted to approve the conditional use (CUAP 19-135-002 Queen Tree cell tower). The board recorded an affirmative vote and directed staff to prepare the written order; staff will include standard conditions commonly used in county cell-tower approvals (co-location capacity, lighting only if required by FAA/FCC/county, no commercial signage, abandonment/removal bond or surety, contact information posted at the fenced compound, and required final site approval).

What happens next Staff will prepare the written order for signature within 30 days; the order will note the appeal period that applies to circuit-court challenges. Applicants and carriers must comply with conditions in the order and the permits (building, grading, stormwater) required before construction.

Ending note Although several neighbors urged the board to deny the application over visual and health concerns, the board concluded the application met local conditional-use standards and the technical reports and federal reviews in the record supported approval.