One item on the agenda was the petition from Blue Sky Towers 3 LLC, seeking to construct a 93-foot monopole telecommunications tower. This revised proposal came after a remand order from the district court and a previous denial by the board. The original plan, which included a 110-foot monopole, had been approved by the Cape Cod Commission but was later modified into a clock tower design, which the board rejected. The new monopole design aims to accommodate two carriers, AT&T and Verizon, and offers room for future installations.

Board members scrutinized the proposal’s impact on the surrounding environment, particularly concerning tree preservation and parking for a nearby church. The applicant’s attorney clarified that the project would minimally affect parking and emphasized the tower’s necessity for enhancing cellular service, especially during peak tourist seasons. The board discussed the tower’s color options, ultimately deciding against painting it white due to concerns that a painted tower might be more conspicuous than the typical galvanized gray.

During the meeting, the board debated the implications of the tower’s height and location adjustments. Questions were raised about its visual impact and technological adaptability, with assurances provided that the design accounted for future advancements in telecommunications technology. The board also considered the potential for additional antennas, emphasizing the importance of spacing to prevent interference.

Public input on the proposal focused on the aesthetic impact and potential noise from a backup generator, which is mandated by the FCC for such installations. The board addressed concerns about the generator’s noise, noting it would be enclosed to minimize disturbance. The meeting also touched on the financial responsibilities associated with deconstructing the tower if it were to become obsolete or abandoned. A bond condition was proposed to secure funds for potential future removal, highlighting concerns about the town’s aesthetic standards.

The board ultimately approved the permit with several conditions, including a maintenance plan for landscaping and a limit on the number of carriers without further board approval. This decision was underscored by the need for improved cellular service along Route 28, an area for both residents and emergency services. The board expressed gratitude for the applicants’ cooperation in addressing prior concerns, viewing the project as a step towards enhanced connectivity in the region.

Beyond the telecommunications tower, the board addressed a variance request for a garage on Locust Street. The applicants sought relief from front setback requirements, and the proposal garnered community support. Neighbors submitted letters endorsing the garage as a beneficial addition to the neighborhood, emphasizing its design and integration with the local aesthetic. However, board members expressed reservations about the structure’s proximity to the street layout, with concerns about setting a precedent for future projects.

The board’s deliberations acknowledged the unique challenges posed by the property’s corner lot status and the street’s characteristics, ultimately approving the variance with conditions to maintain access during construction.

Another topic was the withdrawal of a special permit application for a property on Run Pond Road, where the petitioner decided to withdraw their request without prejudice, which the board approved. Similarly, the board reviewed a petition to combine two lots on Katherine Michael Road, aligning with zoning regulations to create a single, buildable lot. This move was viewed as a logical step towards responsible development, with board members expressing support for the proposal’s alignment with community housing needs.

Finally, the meeting addressed a petition from Joseph and Deanna Dipio to replace a pre-existing nonconforming structure on Chilton Road with a new single-family dwelling. Despite concerns about view obstruction, the board approved the petition, citing the project’s compliance with flood zone regulations and its reduction of neighborhood nonconformities.