By Andrew Martins, Managing Editor
A Verizon Wireless consultant told the zoning board that a proposed cell tower at the Woods Road firehouse would not have any impact on the property values of neighboring houses.
For more than two hours, Mark Tinder, a real estate appraiser retained by Verizon Wireless, testified at a special hearing earlier this month to the potential impacts that the proposed cell tower could have on the surrounding residential areas.
Verizon wants to build the proposed tower on the property of the Woods Road firehouse to improve service, especially with 4G phones that people increasingly use to reach high-demand internet service, to the 2,200-home area.
The telecommunications company would then pay the fire company an undetermined amount per year for the right to operate behind the firehouse, beyond the outfield of a baseball field.
The proposal needs zoning variances, primarily to place a cell tower and house equipment in a residential zone, close to homes. The ordinance says a tower must be 1,000 feet from a residence.
Verizon is also asking the Board of Adjustment for a variance to come within 2,000 feet of the Woods Road Elementary School (the proposed tower is 940 feet away), and to exceed the allowable maximum 35-foot height for a structure in the zone. The proposed tower is planned to stand 126 feet tall, including the lightning rod.
The proposal not only calls for the construction of a 120-foot cell tower, but also the corresponding facility will be powered in an emergency by a natural gas generator.
Warren Stilwell, Verizon’s attorney, brought Mr. Tinder before the board to testify over the course of the meeting to his involvement in the project, as well as field any questions from the board and general public.
According to the Somerville-based real estate appraiser, his study of the property confirmed previous testimony that there were no flood plains or wetlands on the lease site where the tower would be constructed, though he did admit that there are some wetlands located elsewhere on the land.
Leaning on his professional experience, Mr. Tinder said he looked at three similar projects where cell towers were constructed near residential neighborhoods in other municipalities to determine the proposal’s impact.
“Based on my field observations of the site and the neighborhood, as well as my review of the proposed site plan and my ongoing work as a real estate appraiser … there would be no reasonable potential value impact that would be associated with this proposed use,” he said.
Residents in attendance at the meeting took issue with Mr. Tinder’s testimony, causing a brief moment of incredulity among the public. Calls of “Are you kidding?” and “Do you want to buy my house?” resonated in the meeting room.
Mr. Tinder said he based his findings on a number of factors, including the character of use for the proposed project. In his testimony, he said projects generally fall between either a passive use or an intensive use.
In this case, the proposed monopole cell tower would be a passive use, since it “does not generate noise or odors … (and adds) no traffic that’s typically associated with more intensive use.”
According to the project, the only traffic that would be added at the fire house as a result of the cell tower would be when “a tech came to visit the site every six to eight weeks.”
No lights and no burden on municipal services also mean the project is a passive use.
When asked by residents, Mr. Tinder shared some examples of what would impact property values.
“For example, I’ve seen cases where high-tension power lines have had an impact on property values,” he said. “Attempts for commercial use, such as a gas station immediately adjacent to a home, clearly can and would have an impact. There are a number of external factors that can have an impact.”
Though Mr. Tinder said he did not believe the proposed project would have an impact on property values, he could not definitively explain why they that was the case.
“I don’t attempt to determine why or whether (property values) should be (affected),” he said. “For whatever reason, the marketplace isn’t reacting to these installations. I don’t begin to posit a reason why.”
The next hearing will be Wednesday, Oct. 26, where Mr. Stilwell said he would have Mr. Tinder and a Verizon site acquisitions specialist on hand for cross-examination.
