Board of Appeals Minutes December 22, 2008

Board of Appeals Minutes December 22, 2008 Page 1 of 2

LAYTONSVILLE BOARD OF APPEALS

MEETING MINUTES December 22,2008 - 7:00 p.m.

Roll Call:

A special meeting of the Laytonsville Board of Appeals was called to order by the Chair, Jake Cecere, at 7:05 p.m. Board Members Ruspi, Sladki, Stadler, Hewitt, and Alternate Member Richard Whittington were present.

Attendance:

The meeting was attended by the following guests: Mr. J. Pomeroy, Mr. E. Donahue, Mr. M. Butcher, and Mr. M. Richards (LVFD).

Minutes

The minutes for the September, October, and November meetings were reviewed. Member Sladki requested that the few spelling errors which he had submitted to the Secretary be incorporated into the minutes. There being no further corrections, Chair Cecere asked if there was a motion to accept the corrected minutes. The motion was made by Member Sladki. Motion carried unanimously

Hearing

All persons providing testimony were sworn in.

Chair Cecere opened the hearing for the Special Exception application (SE-3-08) submitted by the Laytonsville Volunteer Fire Department and Cricket Wireless Communications for the property located at 21400 Laytonsville Road which requests the addition of three antennas on the existing tower and the placement of a 4 x 8' metal deck on lunar pads to hold a single equipment cabinet.

Mr. E. Donahue, Law Offices, replacing Mr. Ryan, representing Cricket Communications provided a brief overview and follow up regarding the questions raised during the meeting of November 13, 2008. He introduced Mr. M. Butcher, VP of Engineering, Roadsite Safe. Mr. Butcher submitted a report (entered into the record), which had been mailed to Mr. Pomeroy before the meeting, and addressed the issues raised regarding the number of carriers, wattage produced, level of usage and exposure, and FCC documentation.

Questions from the Board included the period of time people can be exposed to this power, if this power could be increased, and reconfirmation regarding the number of carriers attached to the monopole, and confirmation that the Pomeroy house would not be subjected to high radiation caused by radio signals..

Mr. Butcher's presentation and Mr. Donahue's letter of December 20, 2008, were submitted into the record as Exhibits 8 and 9.

Board of Appeals Minutes December 22 ,2008 Page 2 of 3

Member Sladki asked a follow up question to Mr. Richards representing the LVFD regarding their usage of the rnonopole as well as whether there was a requirement in Cricket's agreement with the LVFD that should Cricket decided that they no longer wish to use the rnonopole, would the equipment be removed from rnonopole at the LVFD's expense.

Mr. Doug Hebard stepped forward to address this question and advised the Board that Cricket Communications is a customer of Crown who owns the monopole and this would be in a separate agreement. Mr. Donahue informed the Board that there is usually a removal clause in these types of leases. Mr. Donahue will be looking into the matter and report to the Board.

Mr. J. Pomeroy (21404 Laytonsville Road, Laytonsville, MD) confirmed that two discrepancies which he had pointed out had been addressed by Cricket Communications, and he was satisfied with the analysis.

There were no further questions from the audience.

Chair Cecere presented a motion to close the record which was seconded by Member Sladki, and adapted unanimously.

The hearing record for SE-3-08 was closed.

Motion to accept application SE-3-08 with the requirement that Cricket Communications remove any equipment that is put on the monopole pursuant to the special exception when the equipment is not in use was presented. Motion seconded by Member Ruspi, and passed unanimously.

Application is so approve with the restriction and a two year limit. Statement:

That the proposed use will be in harmony with the adopted Comprehensive Plan and additionally if the use and improvement is located within the Town's Historic District must be consistent with conditions and requirements specified in the Comprehensive Plan or any amendment to the Plan with respect to proposed uses of the property upon which those uses are to be placed.

The proposed use will not adversely affect the health or safety of the residents or workers in the area;

The proposed use will not be detrimental to the use or future development of adjacent properties or the general area;

The proposed use will not adversely affect pedestrian or vehicular traffic in the area.