Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Telecommunications topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Development Review Committee recommends against AT&T clock‑tower cell site at 109 Bank Street
Summary
On April 28 the committee voted to recommend denial of AT&T’s proposed clock‑tower telecommunications facility at 109 Bank Street, citing concerns about its height and visual impact on the locally designated scenic highway and historic downtown, and engineering risks tied to Wolf Creek culvert and adjacent utilities.
The Grass Valley Development Review Committee recommended on April 28 that the Planning Commission not approve AT&T’s proposed telecommunication facility at 109 Bank Street after a lengthy staff presentation, applicant briefing and public comment period.
Planning staff described a proposed three‑story, clock‑tower‑styled structure to be sited in the Gold Miners Inn parking area with antennas concealed inside a fiberglass‑reinforced plastic (FRP) camouflage. The applicant initially sought a total tower height that included an antenna top around 73–81 feet; staff recommended limiting the antenna top to 65 feet with an allowance for camouflage so the total tower would visually read lower.
"AT&T's engineering group has shown that [an 8‑foot height reduction] will not significantly degrade their coverage and capacity," said Nicholas Tagis, agent for AT&T with 51 Wireless. Tagis said AT&T would accept a reduced height but cautioned that a lower rad center could limit the ability of other carriers to collocate on the structure, potentially requiring new towers elsewhere.
Opposition at the meeting centered on aesthetic and heritage concerns. Terry McAteer, chair of the Grass Valley Historic Commission, said the proposed freestanding clock tower would dominate views into the historic town and urged the committee to reject the application. Committee members echoed concerns that a tall freestanding structure in the parking lot would become a focal point from Highway 49 and adjacent historic areas.
Technical and environmental worries also played a role. An engineering panel member noted that Wolf Creek runs in an 8‑ft concrete box culvert near the proposed footings and that footings and dewatering requirements — combined with a major sewer main and shifting easements — could complicate construction. Planning staff had routed an initial study and a mitigated negative declaration for public review because footing impacts on Wolf Creek and underground utilities had not yet been fully resolved.
After discussion about lower‑height options, material choices and alternatives (including rooftop collocation attempts that previously failed structural review), a committee member moved to not approve the use permit for the proposed AT&T facility at 109 Bank Street. The motion passed on a roll‑call vote recorded at the meeting (Andrew Polowsky: yes; Jacob McDonald: yes; Amy Wolfson: yes; Catherine Dikes: yes; Rocky Brewer: yes). The committee asked staff to convey the design feedback and technical concerns to the applicant and invited the applicant to return with revised alternatives or different sites.
The committee’s recommendation is advisory; the Planning Commission will receive the record and public comments before making a final decision.
