The cell tower would be set near the bays at the Stony Creek fire station building,(pictured) near trees that are 70 feet high and an unrelated pole that is 60 feet high.
If the tower does not wind up on town land, Amtrak can always put up its own tower, even one twice the size, on nearby federal land.
Faced with a choice between a rock and a hard place, the Representative Town Meeting took the first steps to approve an option for this lease — not actually in force yet — for the Stony Creek tower.
Tower Town?
This is the latest in a series of cell-tower developments across town.
In Short Beach, residents recently rejected a cell tower in the middle of a dense residential area, but applauded its relocation to nearby Orchard House. This project is moving along in part because cell phone service in Short Beach is dismal. The popular dog park at Orchard House will have to be moved about 15 feet forward.
The Board of Selectmen approved the idea last week and sent it to the RTM for a vote.
Meanwhile the Connecticut Siting Council, the board that approves cell tower placement in the state, will make a field review and hold its first hearing at 3 p.m. Dec. 15 at the Community House on T‑Mobile’s application for a 110 foot cell tower at 123 Pine Orchard Rd., a private property. It will hear from the public on its application for “a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need for the construction, maintenance and operation of a telecommunications facility.”
T‑Mobile, Amtrak’s cell service provider, wants to put up four 75-foot towers across Branford, the shortest the company makes. Besides T‑Mobile, five other competing companies want to put up between five and six cell towers in Branford. The companies are the driving force, says First Selectman Unk DaRos.
Stony Creek residents assert the technology is changing; they predict cell towers will become obsolete. They are seeking changes in the state process and an inquiry into different technologies used in other states.
The surge of possible cell tower construction across Branford (there are currently three cell towers in town) has prompted DaRos to undertake a comprehensive review of cell tower placement.
The town has 22 square miles of land and six square miles of water. In an interview he said he also plans to meet with the Connecticut Siting Council. “All these companies want to be first before the Council,” he said.
DaRos said he will hire an expert to identify all so-called “dead zones” in town. Dead zones are a safety concern in an emergency for police and fire department communication.
DaRos also plans to convert the town’s Strategic Review Committee into a special blue ribbon panel in order to have the issue examined in a comprehensive way.
“We are dealing with companies that build towers. That is their business. If they get approval, the siting council makes those carriers go onto that pole. By the way, what this is is deregulation. This is where deregulation got us,” he said.
DaRos (pictured with Marvin Zimmerman) calls himself a dinosaur when it comes to cell phones. He doesn’t own one.
Nevertheless, he said, he recognizes that cell phone use is here to stay.
As for Amtrak’s needs, he said that if a cell tower goes up on town land, then rent is paid and the town has some control over it. He proposed the rent be given to the community in which the tower lies. Reject that idea, he said, and Amtrak can put a higher tower on its own land.
Creek’s Not Buying
Stony Creek residents (pictured) came out in force to discuss the cell tower proposal at their community at a meeting last week at the Willoughby Wallace Library. More than 125 people packed the room. It was clear from the outset they would take action to try to stop the fire station tower.
They argued that Stony Creek is an historic district with scenic byways. They called the idea of a cell phone tower intrusive.
The reason the firehouse was chosen was that it is less than 50 feet from the train tracks. DaRos told residents he suggested the Stony Creek Quarry. Tests determined it was too far way.
After the meeting, several residents said they plan to seek legal advice, They argued that Stony Creek’s historic district status requires an environmental review. It is not clear yet whom they would sue.
Stony Creek residents can galvanize quickly and are well-versed in tackling major
environmental issues. One example: the Islander East pipeline. Another: Broadwater .
They know how to get answers. They are well-organized. And they are adept at fund-raising.
“They will do what it takes to stop destruction of our historic district,” said Bob Babcock, a businessman. He is leading the legal effort.
Babcock said in an interview that “what is unique to Stony Creek is its historic district.” He confirmed that the group will meet with a lawyer well-versed in cell tower litigation next week so that “we may explore our options.”
State Sen. Ed Meyer, Rep. Pat Widlitz, who represents Stony Creek; and Rep. Lonnie Reed, who represents the rest of Branford, attended the meeting. They agreed to introduce a bill in the legislature to seek alternatives to unsightly cell phone towers dotting the state. They sounded caution about the possibility of success.
“I believe that miniaturization should be a key goal when it comes to building new communications infrastructure — antennas and other less impactful choices instead of towers whenever possible,” Reed said. “I’m joining with the rest of our legislative delegation to explore possible improvements to the whole site selection process.”
Widlitz told the audience that legislation was a good idea, but pointed out it would be taken up by the Energy and Technology Committee. “Lucky Lonnie Reed is a member of the committee. But we have a house chair and a senate chair who could not agree on much of anything during the entire last session. I don’t want you to hang your hat on a change of legislation.”
Behind the scenes residents are discussing the cell tower issue with State Department of Transportation officials. They are looking for alternative ways short of cell towers to achieve wi-fi coverage, perhaps through satellites, perhaps by co-axial cables running along train lines as in the BART system in San Francisco.
The legal and legislative fight will be difficult, Karyl Lee Hall, an attorney, told the group. She has studied the decisions of the siting agency. The burden of proof in these cases is extremely difficult, she said.
“Fundamentally, what I have seen is that there has to be very very substantial proof of environmental harm, including economic effect,” she told the audience. She did not discuss the historic district argument.
Sen. Meyer (D‑12 ) said he’s prepared to fight but said taking on Amtrak legally might fail “because Amtrak is part of interstate commerce.” He said the controversy in Branford is being repeated throughout his district and across the state.
He told the audience the siting council has “express jurisdiction here. It preempts local planning and zoning. It is a form of eminent domain. It is a form that can be exercised very arbitrarily.” Under the law, Stony Creek residents have the right to appear as a party before the council, he said. Several residents indicated they would intervene.
Creeker Bill Tower suggested that “we pull the shoreline together. Let’s fight.” After the meeting he telephoned the state’s congressional leaders seeking their guidance and possible intervention.
Hall and Meyer and others said if the siting council rules against a community, it is tough to win a court appeal. The council has six months to make a decision and then may extend for another six months, or a full year.
“And then you can bring a lawsuit attacking the decision in Superior Court. That could take three, four, five years,” Meyer said.
“Sounds good,” said Beverly Zimmerman, a resident.
In five years, some argued, a new technology would emerge to make cell towers obsolete.
###
Excellent synopsis of the meeting and the situation. It's interesting that other states do not allow such towers in residential areas and require the use of alternate, less intrusive technologies.