Cell Tower Backdrop
The Connecticut Siting Council has given initial approval for T‑Mobile to build a 125-foot cell tower on Pine Orchard Road, the first new cell tower proposal to get underway in Branford. However, the cell company cannot begin construction until the council approves final site plans.
S. Derek Phelps, executive director of the Connecticut Siting Council (CSC), confirmed in a phone interview Tuesday that the council has acted on T‑Mobile’s request. The council ruled in favor of the project and issued a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need.
However, Phelps explained that the approval process is a two-step procedure and the company must now submit its Development and Management Plans to the council. Phelps said it takes about six to eight weeks for CSC to rule on those details.
“I’m disappointed,” said First Selectman Anthony “Unk” DaRos in regard to CSC’s action after the Eagle told him of the decision. “We know we need service but I hoped there would be better ways of going about it.”
DaRos formed an advisory panel recently to look into the cell tower issue and to formulate a plan that would lessen the impact of the towers.
“I still hope we get an opportunity to bring in a comprehensive plan for the whole town,” DaRos said. “We’re working on it.”
The tower would be built at 123 Pine Orchard Rd. on private property owned by Malavasi Investments LLC, which conducts the Ace Trucking business at that site. Several homes in the area would have year-round views of the tower.
“It upsets me because it’s an intrusion to my house,” said Amy Johansson, whose property is 342 feet from the site. “We’re talking with our attorney at this point,” she said after hearing about the CSC’s decision. Amy and her husband Gary spearheaded opposition to the project at a public hearing conducted by the CSC in December. They presented a petition with 170 signatures opposing the plan.
There are at least eight additional cell towers proposed for various locations throughout Branford. The Pine Orchard site was the first to have a CSC hearing.
There has been a proliferation of cell tower proposals all along the Connecticut coast and the town’s legislators have acted in two separate ways. State Senator Ed Meyer (D‑12th) would remove authority from the Siting Council and turn it back to city and town boards to decide where cell phone towers would be located. Rep. Lonnie Reed (D‑102nd) and Rep. Patricia Widlitz (D‑98th), who represent Branford, are moving to add a research component to the Siting Council’s process that would enable smaller, less intrusive communication system for shoreline communities.
Most of the towers being are being driven by Amtrak’s desire to boost cell and WiFi service for train passengers on the shoreline route.
The Stony Creek Association has hired an attorney to help residents fight a proposal to build a 75-foot tower on town property near a fire station at 84 Thimble Islands Road.
A proposal to build a 120-foot tower in Short Beach is not connected to the Amtrak plans, but would alleviate spotty coverage in the community. Residents there opposed the original plan to build a tower in the heart of the seaside neighborhood as well as a second plan to erect the tower on town-owned property leased by Orchard House. There are efforts now underway to search for a less-invasive location.
Six of the nine CSC members voted in favor of issuing the certificate for Pine Orchard, two voted against it, and one was absent.
A lengthy report on the decision is listed on the CSC Web site under the section on pending proceedings that have been acted upon by the council but await approval of final development plans.
In the Findings of Fact, Opinion and Decision and Order posted on the site, it says: “The Connecticut Siting Council finds that the effects associated with the construction, maintenance, and management of a telecommunications facility, including effects on the natural environment; ecological integrity and balance; public health and safety; scenic, historic, and recreational values; forests and parks; air and water purity; and fish and wildlife are not disproportionate, either alone or cumulatively with other effects, when compared to need, are not in conflict with the policies of the State concerning such effects, and are not sufficient reason to deny the application, and therefore directs that a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need… be issued to T‑Mobile…”
The certificate was signed Feb. 25 by CSC chairman Daniel F. Caruso, with instructions for a legal notice to be placed in newspapers.
###
a tower is needed in short beach. stat. preferably in the yard of the lady always hanging the unsightly anti-war banners.