Northborough planning board closes hearing on proposed 130-foot Verizon tower after split on coverage need

The Northborough Planning Board closed the public hearing on a proposed 130-foot wireless communications monopole at 409 Green Street on June 25 and opened deliberations that the board agreed to continue on July 16, 2026.

The application, filed by TowerCo and Cellco Partnership doing business as Verizon Wireless, seeks a special permit and multiple waivers to construct a 130-foot monopole, a 70-by-70-foot fenced compound and related equipment. Chair Amy Peretzky read into the record a petition signed by 262 people — 141 from Northborough — opposing the project’s height and urging the board to deny the waiver.

Why it matters: The applicant said the structure is needed to close Verizon’s coverage gaps across a multi-town area and to provide capacity and resilient service along scenic Green Street and nearby corridors. Opponents said the tower would create an outsized visual impact on scenic roads, could harm property values near the site and that lower-height alternatives or municipal/greenfield options were not adequately vetted.

What the applicant argued: Attorney Michael Fenton, representing TowerCo, summarized the application and recent filings and said the company had submitted substantial technical and legal documentation, including supplemental propagation studies and a legal memo outlining federal standards. Fenton told the board the applicant had identified alternative parcels and conducted a multi-year search and that the record supports a finding of a Verizon coverage gap.

“We have submitted a case that warrants approval,” Fenton said, asking the board to consider federal and local standards together.

Technical testimony: The applicant’s RF presenter, who introduced himself as Keith Blankens of SeaScored Systems, explained the engineering rationale for the 130-foot height. He said the site sits at about 630 feet above the surrounding terrain and that antennas sited below the tree line would not provide reliable coverage. Blankens said lowering antennas to 70–75 feet would open up gray areas on the propagation maps and sacrifice coverage along Smith Road, Green Street and toward Togus Family Farm.

Town consultants: The board’s municipal consultant (addressed in the hearing as Lawton) summarized concerns and testimony presented to the Select Board on June 8, including evidence from public-safety staff that local radio communications had failed during past incidents. Mark Katie, the town’s radio-frequency consultant, told the board the proposed site’s elevation and backhaul options (microwave or fiber) make it a feasible location to support a future public-safety simulcast design, though he cautioned that final system design and vendor selection would determine exact coverage gains.

Public comment and local concerns: Dozens of residents spoke or submitted letters. Tej Maini asked detailed financial and contractual questions about tax and lease revenue; Adam Wosofsky and other neighbors argued that the chief outcome would be private financial gain and that a 75-foot solution might suffice for Northborough. Several residents cited appraisal and real-estate studies and said they feared diminished marketability for nearby homes. Larry Blanchard, who said he has used Verizon service for decades, noted Verizon’s advertising about satellite backup and questioned whether a new tower was the only solution.

“Why is a 130-foot tower good enough if a 75-foot isn’t?” resident Adam Wosofsky asked, summarizing a common skepticism among opponents.

Board deliberations and next steps: After the closing presentations and public comment, the board voted 4–0 to close the public hearing and began deliberations on the required federal and local findings: (1) whether the applicant demonstrated a substantial Verizon coverage gap; (2) whether feasible alternatives were exhausted; and (3) whether the proposed height and location are necessary and appropriate. Members were split in their preliminary polling on whether the gap was “significant” and whether the applicant had proven that no feasible alternatives exist; several said they wanted town counsel’s guidance before making written findings.

The board agreed to continue deliberations at a special session on July 16, 2026, and instructed staff to invite town counsel to advise on the precise legal standards and on how to articulate findings in a decision.

What remains unresolved: The board has not taken a final vote on the special permit or the requested waivers. Key outstanding issues include whether lower heights or small-cell deployments can satisfy Verizon’s FCC-focused coverage standard, whether municipal parcels or collocation on nearby infrastructure are feasible alternatives, and the board’s weighing of visual impacts versus coverage benefits.

The planning board’s administrative calendar: The hearing closure does not prohibit Verizon from pursuing other sites, and the board emphasized that any final decision must contain written findings tying facts presented in the record to the statutory standards the board must apply.