02/13/2013 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Decision

Home Browse Search

F-- Bk- Board of Appeals Mashpee Industrial Park TR. -Telecommunications Tower 2. of aesthetics by utilization of a daylight strobe light system and with night lighting being blinking red in conformance with FAA standards. Mr. Butler stated that the building design and roadway location had been changed in response to reviews by the Design Review Committee. Comments were received by the Mashpee Economic Development Committee in favor of the project. The immediate abutter to the west raised concerns regarding engineering specifications for tower failure and fall zone requirements. On January 14, 1998,the Board continued the hearing and requested that the Applicant provide additional written information regarding fall zone and tower specifications. On February 12, 1998,the Applicant submitted correspondence to the Chairman together with specific engineering data which indicated that the tower could withstand up to 140 miles per hour at the top of the tower,with 1/2 inch of encased icing coating the entire structure,and that there was an additional co-efficient design load equal to 1.25 times the design prior to failure. Further, information was provided that would allow for design of the tower that in the case of catastrophic wind loading a collapse would occur between the 150 and 160 foot level,thereby resulting in a fall zone of less than 100 feet from the tower base,well within the property lines. At the continued hearing on February 25, 1998,the Applicant submitted additional information to the Board concerning the fall zone and engineering specifications. The Applicant also submitted a letter from abutters indicating no opposition to the application and proposed use as a tower. EENDINGS; 1. The subject property is located at 154 Industrial Drive and contains approximately 2.19 acres in an I-1 zoning district. 2. Mashpee Zoning Bylaws(Section 174-25(D.)(5))specifically allow use within this district of telecommunications facilities upon the grant of a special permit from the Board of Appeals. 4 3. The subject lot is governed by the Development Agreement between the owner and the Cape Cod Commission. This Agreement addressed regional issues in the development of the Industrial Park to facilitate the development of the property in a planned,phased development process, 4. The telecommunications tower and associated equipment building as proposed comply with the provisions of the Development Agreement. 5. The Board found that the use of the property for a telecommunications facility, as conditioned hereby will cause no adverse impact on public health or safety,will not cause excessive demand for community facilities,will not decrease groundwater 4