Diana Stricker Photo
Keith Coppins Answers Questions
The company planning to build a cell tower in Short Beach is willing to work with the town to find an alternate site. But if that fails, it will build the tower on private property in the center of the community as originally planned.
“If we can’t get an answer here, we’re prepared to go ahead with the other site,” said Keith Coppins, of Florida Tower Partners LLC.
That means the tower would be built at 86 Shore Dr. behind Shore Automotive on land owned by Albert Petrosino of Glen Street in Branford.
Coppins said the company has a technical report ready for the private site, but itslowed down the planning process when the Orchard House site was suggested by neighbors who opposed the original site.
The proposed Short Beach cell tower differs from the other seven cell towers attempting to locate in Branford, which are primarily being driven by Amtrak’s need for continuous cell and WiFi service. In Short Beach there are areas of spotty or non-existent service. Florida Tower Partners is not currently involved in the other seven towers being proposed.
Coppins fielded questions for about an hour at a meeting of the Representative Town Meeting’s Administrative Services Committee Wednesday evening, which was attended by about 30 people. The meeting was called to discuss a proposed lease to build a tower on town property at Orchard House. However, that site is also opposed by neighbors.
Residents were concerned about how much time they have to find additional sites. “I don’t necessarily have a time frame,” Coppins said. “I feel this is constructive here … everyone is asking pretty good questions.”
Coppins said that comparing various potential sites for cell towers is part of the requirements for approval by the Connecticut Siting Council (CSC), which has overview over all towers in the state.
“I have not filed anything,” Coppins said in regard to the CSC. “I am ready to file it if this doesn’t work.”
Neighbors presented the committee with signatures asking for more time to find better locations.
“Your tower would be 200 feet from my house,” Peter Jackson told Coppins. “While you make millions, my property values are going to go the other way,” he said in regard to the Orchard House site. “Everybody wants cell phone service, me included. This tower is backing up to Killams Point, which is probably the most undeveloped property on Long Island Sound.”
When asked by another resident if the company cares about the amount of opposition, Coppins said they try to find a site that makes the least impact on the area. “We certainly care. I’ve been doing this a long time,” he said, noting that he has built 60 towers in the state. Only one site was rejected by the CSC. “I accept the fact, that with my job, there’s going to be opposition.”
Coppins said if anyone has a location to suggest, they should contact the town and he’ll look at the site.
At the beginning of the meeting, Gail Chapman ‑Carbone, who chairs the Administrative Service Committee, made a motion that the lease issue be postponed pending further investigation. She said the proposed site is on a wetland, and the lease needs to be “revised and clarified” before it can be discussed. She also said the town’s new cell tower advisory panel has just begun to study the situation.
“We would be remiss if we did not give them time,” Carbone said, as she explained her reasons for postponing a decision. “At this point, I think it’s important we hear from the advisory panel.”
Coppins said the town property at Orchard House “may be a little bit better” than the private property because it is farther from Tweed Airport. He said the tower could be situated elsewhere on the town property. “It won’t affect the dog park, it won’t affect the garden… It can be anywhere on that property. I don’t want it to be in a wetland.”
“The most important thing is to have it where it will work for you and for the community,” resident Warren Gould told Coppins.
Frank Twohill Jr., the minority leader of the RTM, asked how much the town would earn from renting out the site. Coppins said the lease stipulates $21,000 a year. When Twohill asked how much the owner of 86 Shore Drive would make, Coppins did not disclose a figure. “I’m not at liberty to say. …I’m bound by a contract. I can’t discuss that.”
Republican Third Selectman John Opie suggested that Florida Tower Partners’ engineers meet with the town’s advisory panel to discuss options.
A motion to re-refer the issue back to the Administrative Services Committee passed by a unanimous vote.
“I really do think this has been a very constructive meeting,” Carbone said.
###
We, in Stony Creek are also having that trouble. It seems anti American and unconstitutional for Americans to be 'enslaved' by a large corporation (or a Federal business)without any real recourse or protection