Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Visual Impact topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board members split over whether Homeland Towers would cause 'significant' aesthetic harm
Summary
Board members disagreed about whether a proposed 100-foot monopole for Homeland Towers would diminish public enjoyment of the Highland Valley scenic corridor; some called the change 'significant,' others said impacts are moderate and potentially mitigable.
Discussion at the Ancram Planning Board centered on whether the tower's visual presence in the scenic corridor qualifies as a ‘‘significant aesthetic impact.’’ Jessica (S2) argued the project would change the valley's character and public enjoyment, referencing the scenic corridor overlay; she said the tower is a permanent, industrial feature in a rural area.
Other members (S3, S6 and the Chair) characterized the effect as moderate and emphasized context, existing infrastructure and the tower's small ground footprint. Legal advisors and Nan (S5) read SEEKER guidance noting that significance depends on magnitude, extent, duration and how many people are affected. "A significant aesthetic impact are those that cause the diminishment of the public enjoyment," one advisor said, urging the board to apply the SEEKER context-based standard before issuing a positive declaration.
