OTISFIELD — Friends of Scribner Hill on Tuesday night handed out a five-page document detailing its “findings of fact” concerning the proposed U.S. Cellular communications tower on Scribner Hill Road. It includes:
* The Telecommunications Acts of 1996 expressly preserves local zoning authority over the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless service facilities.
* The Purpose Section of the Otisfield Telecommunications Wireless Facility Siting Ordinance makes the application subject to the Site Plan Review Ordinance.
* The Future Land Use Plan and map section of the Otisfield Comprehensive Plan makes the application subject to the Site Plan Review Ordinance.
* The site plan applicability section of the Site Plan Review Ordinance makes the application subject to the ordinance as it is a new use in excess of 500 square feet even if structures within it are less than 500 feet.
* The Otisfield Planning Board failed to apply the Site Plan Review Ordinance when vetting this application.
* The leased land does not meet the minimum lot requirements of two acres.
* There is no language in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 or the Otisfield Telecommunications Wireless Facility Siting Ordinance requiring a municipality to service the needs of another municipality in regards to the placement, construction and modification of a personal wireless service facility.
* The proposed tower site will be on a peninsula of land on the southeastern most section of town. Less than one-quarter of the output of the tower at this site will service Otisfield and its citizenry.
* This tower at this location will not serve the area of town that has no service at all, according to U.S. Cellular’s existing coverage map. It will leave a major route in and out of town with no service at all, endangering the life and property of the citizens not serviced.
* According to U.S. Cellular’s coverage map, the tower on Scribner Hill will not service the area of town that is most vulnerable and in greatest need of service.
* There is no language in the Telecommunications Act of 1966 guaranteeing cellphone providers of service without dead spots of dropped cells.
* The Planning Board did not make written findings on whether the proposed facility complies with the ordinance.
* The Telecommunications Act requires that any decision denying a request to place, construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record.
* Proper notification was not sent out to “the abutters to the site as shown on the assessor’s records.”
* The telecommunications Facility Siting Ordinance sites the comprehensive plan, specifically, the purpose of the Otisfield Telecommunication Wireless Facility Siting Ordinance is to “further the goals and policies of the comprehensive plan.”
* The Otisfield Comprehensive Plan designates clear areas of land use. The area of the proposed site is in a growth area which is considered residential.
* U.S. Cellular and the Planning Board did not apply the priority standard which they “must comply with,” according to Section 7.
* Neither the Planning Board nor U.S. Cellular looked at alternative sites, a good faith effort was not made to identify and evaluate less intrusive alternatives…
* The code enforcement officer has not made any attempt to rectify numerous violations which have been made during the vetting of this application.
* Selectmen, or their authorized agents, have not eliminated the violations of this ordinance and as a result (their) inaction puts the public health and safety of the citizenry at risk.
* For all the stated facts above, this approval should be revoked and a new review conducted considering the above noted facts.
ldixon@sunjournal.com
Send questions/comments to the editors.
