Voice Stream Wireless gets OKs
By: Marianne Hooker
At its Nov. 7 meeting, the Hopewell Township Zoning Board of Adjustment granted approvals that will allow Voice Stream Wireless to build a new 145-foot tower on a site near the intersection of Routes 31 and 518.
The board also granted two hardship variances. One of these will allow construction of a swimming pool on a residential lot in Brandon Farms. The other hardship variance will permit an 8-foot deer fence to be build around an agricultural area at 46 Yard Road, where the owner is also building a house.
New telecommunications tower Voice Stream Wireless will be building a new cellular tower on the property at 255 Route 31 North. Initial testimony on this application was heard at an October meeting.
Attorney James Mitchell, who presented the case on behalf of Voice Stream, said there had been some changes in plan. The applicants had found an alternative location on the site for the proposed monopole. The new site would allow the tower to comply more fully with the requirements of the township’s ordinance on telecommunications towers. The applicant was seeking a use variance for a third principal use on the lot, as well as bulk variances and preliminary and final site plan approval.
Mr. Mitchell said the proposed tower site is in a wetlands transition area. However, the state Department of Environmental Protection has told them they will have no problem obtaining a permit to put up a tower there. By moving the installation eastward on the site, Voice Stream will increase the distance from the tower to the nearest houses. They also intend to lower the height of the tower from 150 to 145 feet, which will bring it into closer compliance with the side yard setback requirements.
Mr. Mitchell said the design standard for cellular towers requires a parking space on the property. He asked the board to waive this requirement, since the area in question is in the transition zone. He said that the infrequent visitors to the proposed tower can easily park their vehicles in the driveway, and there is also an area where they can turn around.
Further details on the proposed tower were provided by engineers John Kathman and James Zdimal. Voice Stream presented photographic simulations showing what the monopole would look like from various locations. Mr. Zdimal dwelt at length on the testing that was done to insure that this installation would eliminate Voice Stream’s present gaps in coverage along Route 31. He said that with the proposed tower, there would be adequate and reliable coverage for the full length of Route 31 within Hopewell Township.
Planner Douglas Cowan described the characteristics of the site, noting that it is an 8-acre pie-shaped tract in the C-1 neighborhood commercial zone. There are now two houses on the site, and most of the surrounding area is zoned for residential use. Mr. Cowan outlined the search process that led the applicant to choose the proposed tower location. He said Voice Stream had originally selected a site further south, but when the Township passed the recent ordinance regulating telecommunications towers, that site was deemed not feasible because it was in a residential zone. The proposed location is one of the few properties in the C-1 zone that satisfied the applicant’s search criteria.
Mr. Cowan said the proposed site meets the relevant conditional use standards in most respects. Although they have moved the tower further away from the nearest houses, Voice Stream still needs a bulk variance because the distance to each of the houses will be less than 500 feet. They will also need a side yard setback variance.
Mr. Cowan said that the intent of the ordinance was to make it possible to locate a tower on an already developed lot. The lot in question has a rather low-intensity development at present, since there are only two houses on an 8-acre tract. Mr. Cowan argued that a use variance allowing a third use on the property would be warranted in this case.
He also advanced a number of special reasons why the site was particularly well suited to the proposed use. The site in question would allow the applicant to provide service in an area where there are currently gaps in coverage. There are no other available sites in the immediate vicinity. The proposed tower location is on the inner side of a curve on Route 31, which improves the effectiveness of coverage in this terrain. Mr. Cowan also noted that the wetlands would provide a buffer next to the proposed tower, and the woods would provide abundant screening for the monopole itself.
Mr. Cowan concluded by saying the proposed use would cause no detriment to the public good, nor would it cause any detriment to the zoning ordinance or the zone plan. In his view, the benefits of granting the variances would outweigh any disadvantages.
During the public comment period, the board heard testimony from Frank Baldorossi, of 11 Chase Hollow Road. He said his house is located about 100 feet higher than the proposed tower site, on the other side of Route 31. Mr. Baldorossi said he chose the home in part because of the beautiful view toward Hopewell Borough. Because of this view, he had to pay a premium for the house, and he also felt that he was paying higher taxes. He noted that the tower would be twice as high as the nearest tree, and it would be visually prominent from his house. All in all, he felt that he would be losing one of the main assets of his property if the tower were built as proposed.
Board chairman, William Connolly, noted that a telecommunications tower is a permitted use in the C-1 zone. He said the board does not have total discretion to deny an application for a permitted use. The Board then discussed ways of improving the appearance of the proposed tower, including the possibility of adding artificial branches to camouflage it as a tree. The Voice Stream representatives suggested they could eliminate the usual platforms for mounting the antennas. Instead, they could install the antennas flush with the monopole. This would create a slimmer profile and reduce the visual impact. The flush-mounting plan seemed to please the board, and the camouflage idea was dropped.
The board voted unanimously to approve the use and hardship variances, subject to several conditions. The owner of the property must return to the board before undertaking any additional uses on the site. Also, the existing woodlands must be maintained for screening purposes, and the applicant must provide additional screening if the township engineer determines that there is a need.
After a brief discussion of site plan issues, the board gave unanimous approval to the preliminary and final site plans. They granted Voice Stream a design waiver on the issue of the parking space, and a design exception to allow the tower to be located within the 20-foot buffer zone for the stream corridor. At the suggestion of the township engineer, they also required a conservation easement as a condition of approval.
Swimming pool Teresa and Joseph Genova of 80 Chicory Lane were requesting two setback variances, a 10-foot variance for the right side yard setback and an 8-foot variance for the rear yard setback, in order to build an in-ground swimming pool. With the pool, the impervious surface coverage on the lot would be approximately 34 percent. Mr. Genova said the plans for the pool had received approval from the Brandon Farms Homeowners’ Association.
There were no comments on this application from any members of the public. Board member Fred Crispin remarked that the Genovas’ request was similar to other pool applications from this neighborhood that had received Board approval. The board voted unanimously to approve the variance request, on the condition that when water from the pool is drained out, it may not be drained into the adjacent wetlands, but only into the street.
Deer fence Sergio Neri, who is building a house on the 22-acre property at 46 Yard Road, asked permission to build an 8-foot-high deer fence around a part of the property where he plans to plant 12 acres of grapes. A fence of this type is permitted for an agricultural property, but Mr. Neri needed a variance because his house will be located within the fenced-in area.
Mr. Neri said he plans to use the grapes to produce wine. He intends to put up an agricultural building of about 40 by 80 feet, which will be used for processing the grapes and bottling and aging the wine. The 8-foot mesh fence he proposes to install is estimated to be 95 percent effective against deer. To keep deer from crossing the driveway, there will either be cattle guards or an entry gate.
Also testifying on Mr. Neri’s behalf was William Walker Jr., a marketing specialist with the state Department of Agriculture. He said he encourages growers to invite people onto the property and sell directly to the public, in order to be successful with a wine-producing operation. This may involve scheduling special events such as tours and wine tastings, and positioning the farm as an "agri-tourism destination." The state grants two types of licenses for processing grapes, one of which allows the producer to bring in grapes from out of state.
Mr. Connolly said that in the past, the board has allowed farm stands to sell products that were not produced on the premises. However, it requires a variance to set up this type of operation. He suggested that Mr. Neri think through and obtain whatever variances he will need before committing himself to this kind of business. Board member Russell Swanson said that if the business attracts large numbers of people to the site, it probably should not be located in an agricultural zone.
There was little discussion concerning the proposed fence. The board voted unanimously to grant Mr. Neri a variance to build the fence, subject to two conditions. First, the township engineer must review the plans to make sure the fence does not obstruct the required sight triangles where the driveway meets the street. Also, the engineer must verify that the fence is not built within the township’s right-of-way.
In other business, the board adopted resolutions of memorialization to formalize its approval last month of variance applications by Charles Turi and William Lyness, and its denial of a variance requested by Thomas Lee Fisher. Other resolutions were passed for antenna collocation applications by Nextel Communications and Voice Stream Wireless.