At the forefront of the meeting’s agenda was Verizon Wireless’s application, represented by Jennifer Kaner of Price Me Shman and Dr. Mano. The proposal detailed the installation of three new antennas, intended to replace existing ones and facilitate the upgrade of the facility to better cater to the increasing demand for wireless service. Mr. Minardi, presenting for Verizon, outlined the existing conditions and the specifics of the proposed antenna installation, including a review of the number of antennas and the accompanying equipment. He provided assurances regarding the project’s adherence to fire safety and construction codes.

In response to a board member’s query about the health implications of the increased number of antennas, the board’s attorney intervened, stating that federal regulations preclude the board from considering health impacts when evaluating such applications.

He underscored the necessity of the upgrade, which aimed to alleviate the persistent resource depletion and fulfill the demand for robust wireless service.

Amidst the technical deliberations, the potential health implications of the antenna increment were briefly contested. Yet, the conversation was steered back by the board’s attorney, who reiterated the legal constraints on health considerations and underscored the imperative to confirm that the new installations would not intensify the site’s existing impact. The witnesses effectively fielded the board’s inquiries on safety compliance, maintenance, and site impact. The session concluded without a definitive resolution on the Verizon Wireless application.

The meeting also delved into the specifics of adding a fourth set of antennas facing southward, aimed at bolstering the area’s 5G technology coverage. The enhancement was projected not only to augment service capacity but also coverage for Verizon Wireless users in the vicinity. The visual ramifications of the new antennas were evaluated, with the conclusion that there would be no incremental visual impact on the area. A planner presented qualifications and an analysis of the project, which is situated in the NC neighborhood core zoning District. The variance request for the expansion of an existing non-conforming use was defended on the grounds that it satisfied both positive and negative criteria for the use variance, aligning with state and federal legislation. Following the discussion, the board members cast a unanimous vote approving the requested variance.