Cell Towers Loom

UPDATE — The Connecticut Siting Council (CSC) voted today to postpone the Jan. 25 hearing for the proposed Pleasant Point cell tower. No new date has been set for the hearing. According to new information, T‑Mobile asked that the hearing be rescheduled because one of T‑Mobile’s experts is unavailable on that date; and because T‑Mobile in not able to respond by Jan 25 to most of the questions posed by the town of Branford. 

Branford is making progress in an uphill battle to lessen the impact of three proposed cell towers that are looming on the horizon. One new structure is already visible along Pine Orchard Road.

The most imminent of the three prospective towers would rise to a height of 160 feet off Pleasant Point Road. A hearing is scheduled Jan. 25 at the Blackstone Memorial Library for T‑Mobile Northeast LLC to present its case to the Connecticut Siting Council (CSC), which has jurisdiction in all cell tower placements. The hearings are open to the public. The town has requested intervenor status to voice its objections.

• In Short Beach, efforts have been ongoing for more than a year to find a logical location for a tower that will bridge the cell coverage gap in the village while causing the least disruption to neighbors. AT&T was prepared to file an application with the CSC in December, but agreed to a 30-day postponement at the town’s request.

• Cellco, doing business as Verizon Wireless, has already applied to the CSC for permission to build a 109-foot tower at 723 Leetes Island Rd. on the Medlyn farm. The tower will be disguised as a rustic-style water tank. A public hearing date has not yet been scheduled.

• The 125-foot tower at 123 Pine Orchard Rd. received approval from the CSC last summer despite an outcry from neighbors at the December 2009 hearing. 

As the towers loom, legislative efforts are underway to curb them. State Rep. Lonnie Reed, (D-Branford) is continuing the fight to update the state’s process for approving cell towers and to increase community input. In new legislation introduced this week, she is once again proposing legislation to encourage cell companies to use miniaturized technology instead of towers and to define regional sites to serve wider areas.

Several prospective towers are being driven by Amtrak’s efforts to boost cell coverage for passengers traveling along the shoreline. In addition, cell companies are trying to expand their signal areas to satisfy the escalating use of cell phones and smart phones.

Branford has taken a number of proactive steps after being hit by a swarm of proposals. A Cell Tower Advisory Panel was formed last year to delve into the issues town wide; and David Maxson, a Boston-based cellular consultant and engineer, was hired to provide expertise.  In addition, Keith Ainsworth, a New Haven attorney who specializes in cell tower issues, was recently hired to represent the town at the Pleasant Point hearings.

The town’s Cell Tower Advisory Panel will be sponsoring a community forum in the next few weeks to update information that was presented at a similar forum last April.

“We really want the public to participate,” said Doug Marsh, who chairs the panel.

One of the most innovative steps taken in the past few days was the addition of a new overlay to the GIS map on the town’s website. The advisory panel and the consultant worked with Branford’s Information Technology Department to devise a cell tower overlay to depict the current and proposed cell towers and coverage areas. Residents may now click on the town cell tower maps or neighborhood maps to see the carriers and the levels of cell coverage. One company typically constructs a tower and other companies rent space on the pole.

Marsh said the GIS mapping information about coverage and signal strength will help the town monitor whether cell companies really need additional service.

“That’s part of the homework we’re trying to generate… to develop a long-term view,” Marsh said, adding that this type of work helps develop fact-driven testimony. “It equips us to talk at a very responsible level with the Siting Council,” Marsh said. “We’re trying to get to the point where we can argue facts.”

“We have taken an active a role, as much or more than any other town on the shoreline,” said Karyl Lee Hall, a member of the Cell Tower Advisory Panel. “We’ve worked on it a lot, but so much is happening all at once… it’s challenging.”

Hall, an attorney, said the intervenor process is complex and the town has to suggest specific objections to a tower, and offer alternative sites or design modifications. 

“There’s hardly a location anywhere that somebody doesn’t like,” Hall said, explaining that cell companies have legal rights. “The question: where is the location that has the least environmental effect?  It’s a weighing between need and environmental effects.”

One of the environmental effects that the CSC considers is whether a tower would impact historic and scenic areas.

“We’ve been looking at Short Beach and Pleasant Point because they are the most immediate ones and because they will affect residential and scenic areas,” Hall said. “All of the towers are affecting views from the Sound…it’s the cumulative effect of all the towers along the shore.”

PLEASANT POINT

The tower proposed by T-Mobile would be constructed on property owned by Tilcon, with an access road on property owned by the Branford Steam Railroad Co.  at 77-145 Pleasant Point Road. The CSC docket number is 407.

According to information on the CSC Web site, the tower would be 160 feet tall, with a base diameter between 47 and 54 inches, and a top diameter between 23 and 30 inches. The tower would provide coverage of 3.81 miles along Route 146; 1.27 miles along Pleasant Point Road; and 2.10 miles along Amtrak lines. As of late December, T-Mobile said no other companies have asked to share space on the pole.

Hearings on Jan. 25 will be held at 3 p.m. and 7 p.m., with the public being offered a chance to speak at the evening session.

“It’s a very tall tower near scenic resources that would be impacted,” Hall said in regard to the Pleasant Point site. Route 146 is a state-designated scenic road and portions are on the National Register of Historic Places.

Branford’s consultant and the attorney will offer testimony on the impact of the tower on the historic and scenic area. As chair of the Scenic Roads Advisory Committee, Hall will also give a statement at the hearing.

“I’m optimistic the work we’ve done on Pleasant Point will give us a change to present the information,” Hall said.

The Connecticut Council of Environmental Quality is also expected to make a statement in regard to the impact on the scenic highway.

The Stony Creek Association is also taking an interest in these hearings because of the proximity to their village.

SHORT BEACH TOWER

Several proposals have been made to erect a tower in Short Beach, including the most recent one by AT&T and North Atlantic Tower. Those plans call for constructing a 120-foot pole in the rear of a parking lot at 171 Short Beach Road.

The town and advisory panel have suggested several alternative sites, including the former Branford Hills School, and sites near Summit Place. However, AT&T has indicated that most of the alternatives are unacceptable. The town has also suggested the company look at a site in East Haven that is just beyond the Farm River and would be close enough to Short Beach to provide cell phone service to that area. It is unknown how much longer the company will postpone filing an application with the CSC.

First Selectman Anthony “Unk” DaRos has asked AT&T for more time to discuss alternative sites and design options. 

Hall said if AT&T continues to pursue the 171 Short Beach Rd. site, then design and stealth techniques become important issues.

MEDLYN FARM

A 109-foot tower is being planned by Cellco/Verizon Wireless at 723 Leetes Island Rd. (Route 146) on farm property owned by James John Medlyn. The CSC docket number is 413. According to information on the CSC site, there are seven homes within 1,000 feet of the site, with the closest at 400 feet.

Branford and its advisory panels and committees have already been in talks with Verizon, and have agreed to the feasibility of disguising the tower as a rustic-style water tank to lessen the impact on the historic area.

AT&T and T-Mobile have already requested permission to share the tower. Coverage would be provided to Route 146, Amtrak, and areas of southeast Branford and southwest Guilford.

Marsh said a cell tower previously proposed for Stony Creek is on hold pending what happens with the Medlyn farm site.

“The goal has to be how few of these installations do we have and how do we mitigate the intrusiveness.” Marsh said

PROPOSED LEGISLATION

Reed and other shoreline legislators are continuing their fight for legislation to assist towns in dealing with cell towers.

A bill introduced by Reed last year made it through the House with a unanimous vote and was put on the consent calendar in the Senate, but died in the time crunch on the last night of the session, what she refers to as “the other side of midnight.”  She is continuing to pursue the issues this year.

“I have this week introduced legislation that pursues several key objectives and goes to the Energy and Technology Committee, where I have just been appointed Vice Chair,” Reed told the Eagle. “The bill has bi-partisan co-introducers representing several areas of the state. The tie that binds these objectives together is our effort to make the Siting Council much more responsive to public input and citizen concerns that are growing as the easy sites are taken and the new tower and fuel plant sites threaten to overwhelm neighborhoods and spoil scenic vistas.”
Essentially the bill’s goals would instruct the Siting Council to:

1). Encourage cell companies to use miniaturized technology instead of towers and to promote regional sites that service wider areas while also protecting neighborhoods and scenic and environmental assets.

2). Prohibit the location of a Cell Tower any closer than 750 feet from a school or daycare facility unless no other appropriate site can be found.

3). Allow the Siting Council to impose fines on applicants who intentionally file inaccurate or misleading information.

4). Maximize public input.

###