Southampton continues public hearing on proposed 160-ft cell tower at One Cook Road; peer review ordered after strong neighbor opposition

The Southampton Planning Board opened a public hearing on June 3 for an application by Atlantic Tower LLC to build a wireless communications facility on One Cook Road and continued the hearing after receiving extensive public comment and discussing technical and visual issues.

Attorney Francis Paresi, representing Atlantic Tower, presented the application and supporting materials and described the site as an 18-acre horse farm with substantial vegetative buffers where a 50-by-50-foot compound and a monopole tower would be placed. Paresi said Verizon is the anticipated initial collocator and that the company had conducted a 160-foot balloon visibility demonstration and photo simulations to show limited visibility in most nearby neighborhoods. He argued the board’s zoning bylaw permits wireless facilities subject to a special permit and that the applicant seeks a height waiver (the bylaw limit cited in package materials was 100 ft) to allow collocation and adequate coverage.

Board members pressed the applicant on practical details: winter access and maintenance; bonding and decommissioning; proximity of high-voltage easements; the need to relocate a horse shelter to avoid the tower’s ‘‘fall zone’’; generator noise and fuel type; and FAA/airport lighting triggers. Paresi said the facility would be unmanned, that operators post bonds and renew them annually, that generator use is limited (weekly exercise cycles) and designed to meet the zoning noise standard (applicant cited 50 dB at the property line), and that the project was intentionally sized to stay below 200 ft to avoid required aircraft lighting.

Public opposition was substantial. The chair read several emails and letters, including a multi-councilor letter from Easthampton city councilors objecting to the site; multiple neighbors spoke in person voicing concerns about property values, adverse visual impacts, and possible health effects from radio-frequency emissions. Resident Lori Blair said she worried about a “20% possible drop in my home's value” and “radiation,” while other speakers asked the board to require a robust alternatives analysis and more independent technical review.

After the applicant presentation, Q&A, and public comment, the board agreed it needed independent technical review. Two peer-review proposals were discussed; the board voted to retain Cityscape (proposal cited a $6,500 base fee, plus additional charges if further services were needed) to perform radio-frequency and visibility peer review and recommended the applicant reimburse review costs under normal town practice. The board continued the hearing to July 8 to allow the peer reviewer time to complete its analysis and to let the applicant and board respond to review findings.

What’s next: the peer reviewer will analyze the applicant’s propagation/coverage and visual simulations and present findings to the board. The hearing is continued to July 8; the planning board also intends to receive and post any consultant reports and to require documentation of Verizon’s collocation commitment if that is material to decision-making.

Quote highlights: Attorney Paresi emphasized the public-safety rationale for improved coverage: “Over 80% of 911 calls are made by mobile phones,” and said the proposal “meets all the requirements of the bylaw with the exception of height.” Neighbors uniformly urged more analysis of alternatives and visual impacts.

Ending: The hearing remains open; the board directed staff to secure the peer-review contract and scheduled follow-up testimony for July 8 so the reviewer can present independent findings.