image description
Signs at the end of Alma Street. The city put in a jersey barrier to keep construction trucks from using the street. A road was put in from South Street to service the tower.

Pittsfield ZBA Takes No Action On Cell Tower Petition

By Jack GuerinoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

The 115-foot tower is sited near a city water tank.
PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Zoning Board of Appeals took no action on a City Council petition to re-permit the 877 South St. cellular tower.
 
The ZBA voted Wednesday to adhere to City Solicitor Stephen Pagnotta's opinion that legally the board cannot re-open the special permit.
 
"After a decision has been finalized, to review the hearing or rescind the hearing is not allowable under the statute," Pagnotta said. "The purpose of that is to ensure that permits, and any rights that come under those permits, are final and the applicants can rely on them."
 
The petition was in response to the essentially complete cell tower that abutters say was put up illegally without proper notice.
 
Verizon received the permitting from the Zoning Board of Appeals in 2017 to erect the 115-foot cellular tower. Work began this spring at the end of Alma Street, a narrow dead-end road, catching the residents by surprise.
 
Neighbors claim that they were never properly notified and only became aware of the construction once construction vehicles started rolling through their neighborhood. The location is given as South Street but the tower sits on the far southeastern corner of the 45-acre property abutting a residential area.
 
This group brought the case to Berkshire Superior Court in August and hoped for an injunction forcing Verizon to halt the construction. The antennas reportedly went live in early August.
 
Pagnotta said if the court finds a defect in the granting of the permit it would be remanded back to the ZBA  
 
"We are not there now," he said. "Regardless of the merit or what the board may wish to do it is simply not authorized by the statute."
 
The City Council referred this petition to the board and the mayor knowing that this would likely be the response, but Ward 4 Councilor Christopher Connell was on the line during the Zoom meeting and asked that the board be aware of possible future cases.
 
"We both realize that this certainly can not be overturned but our hopes are ... really that going forward that a situation like this does not happen again," he said.
 
Connell did mention two petitions the City Council has sponsored that he hopes will reinforce this by creating a 1,600-foot setback from residential structures, and notification to all abutters within 1,600 feet of a proposed tower through certified mail.
 
These possible zoning changes were sent to Ordinance and Rules.
 
Board member John Fitzgerald said they had received more than 30 emails on the matter from abutters and concerned residents. Although some were on the call, Fitzgerald did not allow comment because it was not open hearing. 
 
In other business, the board approved a group of requests to keep chickens. These requests took up the bulk of the meeting as Fitzgerald had to read a long list of regulations and responsibilities that come with approval.
 
ZBA member Erin Sullivan asked that the city try to inform livestock sellers that there are regulations in regard to chickens. She noted that many purchase chickens without knowing they needed permission from the city. 
 
"Just to be proactive with this," she said. "We are dealing with it all the time."

Tags: ZBA,   cell tower,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Berkshire Mall Owners Press for Road District Dissolution

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff
LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — Berkshire Mall owner JMJ RE Holdings says without a dissolution of the Baker Hill Road District, the potential sale and redevelopment with the mall would fall through.
 
The Select Board last week authorized two of its members to work on a compromise between the JMJ and the road district. The two entities have been at loggerheads over assessments to the district — and the district's purpose.
 
Tim Grogan, development consultant for JMJ RE Holdings, recently responded to iBerkshires' coverage of the meeting, during which the board discussed mediation but took no comments from the public or the mall owners. 
 
Grogan said JMJ has been under purchase contract with real estate developer Cypress Equities since May and has an intention to close in the fall.
 
"We are contractually obligated to deliver the property with the BHRD dissolved. If that does not happen, the mall will not get redeveloped. If the BHRD is not dissolved, the transaction with Cypress cannot close," said Grogan over email. "That is not a position JMJ adopted as leverage. It is the express term of a fully executed purchase and sale agreement. Should the town proceed in a manner that departs from the existing settlement framework, JMJ will evaluate all available claims to protect its contractual rights."
 
The town had initially agreed to seek the dissolution of the district through the Legislature based on JMJ paying $1.1 million to resolve all tax disputes. But that article was pulled from the annual town meeting when town officials said the mall's owners failed to make payment by the deadline. 
 
The road district was established 40 years ago to maintain the Connector Road between Routes 7 and 8 and assess the mall for fire and police protection. The mall closed in 2019 and its various owners since then have sought to redevelop the property. 
 
View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories