Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Blue Sky Towers seeks special permit for 120‑foot monopole at Charlton Beagle Club; hearing continued to May 20
Loading...
Summary
Applicant Blue Sky Towers presented a special‑permit/site‑plan application for a 120‑foot monopole at the Charlton Beagle Club (103 Bond Road). Applicant and engineers said the site would fill a Verizon service gap; the hearing was continued to May 20 for peer‑review responses and outstanding waivers.
Blue Sky Towers 4 LLC asked the Charlton Planning Board on April 15 for a special permit and site‑plan approval to construct a 120‑foot monopole telecommunications tower on property leased from the Charlton Beagle Club at 103 Bond Road.
Earl Duvall, counsel for the applicant, introduced the project package and listed seven exhibits submitted with the application: the ground lease, site lease template, zoning drawings, an RF feasibility (coverage) study, a radio‑frequency emissions (MPE) report, FCC license documentation, and an FAA determination of no hazard. Duvall said the monopole would be collocated to carry four wireless providers, with Verizon Wireless as the first tenant.
Site engineer Jesse Moreno (Forteira Design Group) described the proposal: a 70×70 leased area with a 60×60 fenced compound, stone access pads, a roughly 1,000‑foot crushed‑stone access driveway using an existing woods road, stormwater controls, and an estimated 1.4 acres of disturbance largely within previously cleared areas. Equipment at the base will include small cabinets on a concrete pad and a diesel backup generator; the site is designed to be unmanned except for occasional maintenance visits.
RF engineer Elvio Sotolongo (project consultant) showed coverage simulations indicating a white (no‑coverage) gap in the vicinity that the new site would fill for multiple Verizon bands (700, 850, 1,900, 2,100 and C‑band). He summarized the MPE analysis showing cumulative exposure at about 11.7% of the FCC limit; cumulative collocation estimates (with additional carriers) were projected to remain well below the safety threshold.
Neighbors raised concerns about the proposed location, noting an earlier proposed site farther south on the parcel and asking why the location shifted nearer wetlands and private‑conservation areas. A nearby resident, Robert McGrath, said the monopole would be visible from his backyard and asked why the original southern site was not used. The applicant’s team said siting choices considered wells, setbacks and access; they agreed to provide more documentation about alternatives and noted the balloon test was affected by weather and multiple attempts.
Town peer reviewer Graves Engineering and conservation representatives flagged outstanding items: a stormwater peer‑review letter remains pending and the stonewall/stonewater report had not been submitted in time for review. The applicant provided written responses and separate waiver packets; the board instructed the applicant to resolve peer‑review comments and supply outstanding materials.
After discussion, a motion to continue the public hearing to May 20, 2026 carried. The continuation gives staff and peer reviewers time to complete required analyses (stormwater/stonewall), confirms any necessary wetland or conservation comments, and allows the applicant to supply additional waiver documentation.
Quotes: Earl Duvall summarized exhibits and testing, noting the balloon float attempts; Elvio Sotolongo said, "This site fills the coverage gap," explaining the white areas on the coverage maps represent locations without reliable service.
What’s next: The hearing resumes May 20; the board requested final waivers, the missing stonewall/stormwater report, written responses to peer‑review comments, and clarifications about alternative sites and well protections. Until those items are supplied and reviewed, the board held no final decision.
