Atkinson selectmen to decide tower case

From the Eagle Tribune;

Atkinson selectmen to decide tower case
By Eric Parry
eparry@eagletribune.com

ATKINSON — Selectmen are to decide on Monday night whether to allow the owner of the Hog Hill tower to add three antennas to the 160-foot structure.

Selectmen and the tower's owner, SBA Tower II, have met several times in recent months to discuss adding the three flush-mounted antennas.

Nearby residents who have attended three recent public hearings have received notification of this meeting but won't be allowed to speak.

"It's not a public hearing but it has the flavor of a public hearing," Selectman Bill Bennett said.

Since the last public hearing in September, selectmen have been reviewing documents on the tower from years past.

The tower's owners have been presenting similar proposals since 2006.

The latest is almost identical to the one denied a special exception by the Zoning Board of Adjustment in March 2007.

SBA Tower II challenged the decision by filing a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in September 2007, but a federal judge ruled a year later that it was up to selectmen to decide the case. The zoning board issued its decision when the 50-year-old tower was owned by Mariner Tower.

The three antennas are expected to improve T-Mobile's cell phone service in Atkinson, primarily near Route 121.

But there is still more information selectmen would like to see.

SBA Tower II has applied for a building permit to establish anchors for the guy lines needed to support the additional weight of the three antennas.

But so far, SBA Tower II has refused to pay for the town to hire an engineer to make sure the anchors would be able to handle the weight, Bennett said.

"They don't see why they should have to pony up $2,500," Bennett said.

Monday's meeting is scheduled to begin at 7:30 p.m. at Town Hall.

Atkinson Police Chief Receives Federal Homeland Security Grant for Improved Communications and Denies It!

Anonymous said...

Article Submission:

Atkinson Police Chief Receives Federal Homeland Security Grant for Improved Communications and Denies It!

In 2004, several area Police Departments including Atkinson, Plaistow and Kingston, collaborated on a solution to the police radio communication problem plaguing the area. Plaistow Police Chief Savage headed this effort, a study was done and a Federal Homeland Security Law Enforcement Terrorism Protection Program ( LETPP) grant application was filed with the State of NH Department of Safety. Over $81k was received in 2006 and in accordance with Federal law, reports filed detailing the location of the equipment in Atkinson, Plaistow and Kingston.

Police Chief Consentino has repeatedly and publically denied receiving any grant money. In fact, this equipment was purchased and recorded as being installed in Atkinson! Up until recently, requests for the grant documentation under RSA 91A, were denied by the State of NH, Department of Safety. According to the grant documentation, Atkinson received a receiver, canopy microwave and two IPmux.

According to a recent statement by Atkinson Selectman Bill Bennett, Plaistow Police Chief Savage and Atkinson Police Lt. Bill Baldwin thought the the equipment could be placed on the APD antenna but it wasn;t high enough so it was thrown into a closet in Plaistow. The equipment was never installed but the funds were disbursed to 2-Way Communications for the installation and to the town of Plaistow for the equipment purchase.

Bennett claims that a repeater purchased under this grant was instead installed on Timberlane HS to improve police radio communication in the school. Bennett is also looking to find out what happened to the rest of the equipment Atkinson received since the Atkinson Communication Committee is looking for similar or identical equipment to solve the problem now. Bennett claims that Lt. Baldwin has the information but cannot be reached at his post in the Middle East and has no access to email.

Is anyone else wondering why they pushed so hard for a $700k tower to support $9k worth of equipment?

Where did the repeater at the HS come from?

How much more of this solution was not installed and not used as reported?

The Federal grant indicates that a study was done yet no one knew the APD antenna was not high enough, not sturdy enough?

Why does the application claim that the Atkinson equipment would be installed on the Atkinson Fire Department, while Bennett claims the plan was to install it at the APD?

Atkinson cuts trees at dangerous intersection

From the Eagle Tribune;

Atkinson cuts trees at dangerous intersection
By Eric Parry
eparry@eagletribune.com

ATKINSON, N.H. — One of the town's most dangerous intersections was made safer this week, as highway workers trimmed about 10 trees at Linebrook Road and East Road after receiving permission from the property owner.

Police Chief Phil Consentino said the intersection frequently has been the site of accidents because trees blocked the view of Linebrook Road from East Road. Drivers turning onto East Road also had problems seeing other cars.

"You're shooting dice because you can't see if anyone's coming," Consentino said.

Road agent Ted Stewart credited homeowner Bill Fulmore for allowing the town to clear two large maple trees and a couple of spruce trees. The intersection has been a problem for at least 20 years, he said.

The town had made earlier attempts to remedy the situation, but the previous homeowner wouldn't give the town permission to clear the trees, Consentino said.

Stewart said the Planning Board and Highway Safety Committee recently sent a letter to Fulmore and he complied with the town's request.

The intersection, near the Timberlane Regional High School and Middle School, has a lot of bus traffic before and after school.

"It makes everyday life more comfortable on the way to school," Stewart said.

Non- Veteran Hypocrits Get Free Vets Breakfast...

This was gypped from the Plaistow Town Crier, Thank you Mr. Herrick;

This comes from the Atkinson Reporter II Blogspot. Anonymous is criticising Police Chief Consentino and Former Selectman Sapia for appearing at the towns yearly Veterans Breakfast.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anonymous said...

Kinda of Hypocritical of them after their efforts to STOP the Vietnam Honor Roll Panels!

Phil said in an open meeting "that woman will never get her way with these" Talking about Carol Grants project to get those panels in place.

All it took was TWO town meetings, TWO elections ordering them to do it, FOURTEEN selectmens meetings to discuss it, and ONE Court Case!

And Jack wanted them to go on top of the Town hall leach field! Jack, you seriously wanted to "honor" vets by putting their memorial on top of a "shit field"?

Now they come to the vets breakfast to schmooze with the vets?

You can't make this stuff up!

Trucking firm owner gives up appeal in Atkinson

From the Eagle Tribune;

Trucking firm owner gives up appeal in Atkinson
By Eric Parry
eparry@eagletribune.com

ATKINSON — The owner of a trucking company whose plans were rejected by the town's zoning board has dropped his appeal in Superior Court.

Paul Murphy, owner of PJ Murphy Transportation Inc., said he can't afford to appeal the town's decision to deny him permission to build a 24-hour trucking facility in the town's commercial/industrial zone.

"I've already spent a ton of money on legal costs," Murphy said yesterday.

In May, Murphy said he had spent more than $100,000 on plans and legal costs to build the proposed facility on Industrial Way. Plans included seven trucks and 14 trailers transporting petroleum and swimming pool water in the summer.

Murphy, who owns transportation facilities in Dracut and Methuen, said he's still looking to expand, possibly in the Lawrence area.

The town's zoning board denied Murphy's plans for a 24-hour trucking facility at its meeting April 15.

The project initially was approved by the zoning board in March. That decision was appealed by a group of residents from Atkinson and Salem.

Murphy said he still feels cheated by the town, but couldn't continue spending money in court.

"I just didn't see that working out," he said.

Residents were concerned about the facility generating noise in the middle of the night and environmental issues.

In addition to appealing the board's initial decision, the residents also appealed in Rockingham County Superior Court. That lawsuit was stayed after the town denied Murphy's plans in April.

Members of the zoning board wrestled with the project for months.

Atkinson's zoning regulations specifically identify what is allowed in the commercial and industrial zone, and the trucking facility didn't fit the requirements despite the fact that similar businesses are located in the same area, according to some board members.

Atkinson asks court to force removal of addition

From the Eagle Tribune;

Atkinson asks court to force removal of addition
By Jarret Bencks
jbencks@eagletribune.com

BRENTWOOD — The town of Atkinson has requested help from the court to require a local resident to remove work he had done to his house without permission from the town or state.

The town has asked the court to grant a permanent injunction ordering John Mason Jr., of 4 Rocky Point Lane, to remove a 10-foot by 25-foot addition he built on his waterfront property without a building permit from the town.

Mason has been contacted by the town and the state Department of Environmental Services on numerous occasions since September 2007 regarding the addition but no progress has been made, according to court documents.

On Sept. 5, 2007, Mason applied for a permit to "rebuild existing structure," that was rejected because it did not meet wetland zoning regulations — it needed DES approval and a variance from the town zoning board, according to court documents. The addition already had been built at that point, according to the injunction.

A year later, DES officials conducted an inspection of Mason's property and found the construction of the closed porch brought the structure closer to public water, violating state law. On Dec. 2, 2008, DES sent a letter to Mason requesting a wall for the enclosed porch be removed within 20 days. That letter was returned to the DES as undeliverable, according to spokesman Jim Martin.

Atkinson selectmen sent Mason a letter on Dec. 31, 2008, requesting he either take down the addition or appear at a hearing on Jan. 14 to request a variance.

Mason applied for two variances, but didn't attend the hearing, at which both requests were denied.

The town received a letter from Mason on Jan. 22 that stated he intended to resolve all outstanding issues with the state in the next 45 days and would then address the town issues. But that did not happen.

DES sent out a second letter of deficiency on Feb. 5 asking Mason to correct the additions to his property by April 6.

On April 28, Mason applied for a variance with the town's zoning board. On July 8, the zoning board denied the variance. Mason did not appeal that decision.

The town inspection office, in a letter July 23, demanded Mason demolish the addition.

"It is now necessary for you to get a demolition permit and remove the 10-by-25-foot addition that you constructed without a building permit," the letter read.

The DES sent a letter to Mason on Sept. 22 warning him the state would be sending an administrative order demanding he remove the enclosed porch. That order is being drafted and will be sent in the next couple of weeks, Martin said.

On Oct. 22, Atkinson Town Attorney Sumner Kalman filed a petition for an injunction in Rockingham Superior Court. It asks the court to require Mason to remove the work he has done and to pay the town fines and penalties.

The injunction request does not specify how much money the town is seeking, but it states that Mason's failure to comply with the town ordinance "adversely affects the health, safety and welfare of other Atkinson residents," and further states that "civil penalties have and continue to accumulate."

Fred Childs, chairman of the Board of Selectmen, said the town has given Mason numerous extensions to apply for permits and he has continued to do nothing.

"It's been a long time; he's had extension after extension," he said. "We've asked him to correct it and he hasn't."

In a brief statement yesterday, Mason said he only received the court papers yesterday and intends to resolve the issue.

"It's in the attorneys' hands and they are going to try to work it out," he said.

Mason's property was last appraised in 2006 at a value of $373,100.

Fiscal Responsibility For These Difficult Times

NEW ARTICLE SUBMISSION

Fiscal Responsibility For These Difficult Times

Atkinson is now entering the budget season when department heads will either come in with budgets that (1) show their solidarity with our hard-pressed
taxpayers; or else (2)they will selfishly ’thumb their nose’ at our townspeople.

So many Atkinson households are struggling to make ends meet. The number of our townspeople
who have lost their jobs due to lay-offs, down-sizing or business failures is unbelievable. Many homes have gone on the market because financially-pressed owners can not meet their mortgage obligations.

These are very tough and difficult financial times for so many. Our town officials and department
heads have got to respect that when they submit their budgets for 2010.

Some department heads consistently act responsibly and come in with low budgets or at least, hold the line while other department heads regularly selfishly act like pigs at a trough, demanding more and more every year. Each year’s budget is an increase over the previous year’s.

TO ALL SELECTMEN AND BUDGET COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Please REFUSE to accept ANY AND ALL budget increases from dept. heads. Please hold the line
for the struggling tax payers you
are supposed to represent. Announce and then enforce a ZER0
TOLERANCE LEVEL for those giving taxpayers the bird.