Cellular Tower Hearing To Resume

By Andrew Gorosko

The Connecticut Siting Council is scheduled to resume its public hearing on a telecommunications firm’s proposal to erect a 150-foot-tall cellular telephony tower in the vicinity of Exit 10 of Interstate 84.

The siting council’s public hearing on Omnipoint Facilities Network-2, LLC’s, tower construction proposal is slated to resume on Thursday, October 23, at 2 pm, at the siting council office at 10 Franklin Square in New Britain. Omnipoint is a subsidiary of T-Mobile, USA, Inc.

The siting council started the public hearing in Newtown last May 1, following its inspections of the three local sites that are under consideration for installation of a single monopole-style steel tower, which would serve as an antenna mast for cellular telephone calls. Only one tower would be built at one of the three sites.

Through its tower application, Omnipoint is seeking a “certificate of environmental compatibility and public need” from the siting council.

The three sites under consideration for tower erection are at 1 Edmond Road, 3 Edmond Road, and 79 Church Hill Road. The 1 Edmond Road site also is known as 32 Schoolhouse Hill Road.

Omnipoint’s proposal to build a tower at 79 Church Hill Road drew strong opposition last spring from Walnut Tree Hill Road area residents, who objected to the presence of such a structure in that residential area.

At the May 1 public hearing, siting council officials asked Omnipoint to provide them with additional technical information on the two Edmond Road sites. Both sites are in an industrial area.

 The 1 Edmond Road site is on the east side of Edmond Road, near Edmond Road’s intersection with Schoolhouse Hill Road. That site lies across the road from the Rand-Whitney Container factory.

The 3 Edmond Road site lies on the west side of Edmond Road and is to the south of the Rand-Whitney factory. Edmond Road is a private road.

The 79 Church Hill Road site is near the Exit 10 on-ramp for westbound I-84.

Rand-Whitney owns the 1 Edmond Road site. Businessman James Edwards owns the 3 Edmond Road property. Norwalk developer Carmine Renzulli owns 79 Church Hill Road.

Omnipoint has withdrawn from siting council consideration a proposed fourth site, which also is located at the 79 Church Hill Road address. That site lies behind residential properties along the south side of Evergreen Road.

Telecommunications firms lease land for tower placements and pay the landowner rent. Tower sites include electronic equipment sheds within a fenced compound.

Initially, Omnipoint had proposed that a tower be built in a residentially zoned area at 79 Church Hill Road, near the Exit 10 ramp. But following Walnut Tree Hill Road area residents’ strong opposition to that idea, plus a request from the town that Omnipoint instead build a tower in an industrially zoned area, the firm investigated the two industrially zoned sites off Edmond Road as potential locations for a tower.

In the past, the town’s Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) reviewed and ruled on such tower construction applications, based on an elaborate set of tower regulations that were created by the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z). A court decision, however, shifted the jurisdiction over tower construction proposals to the Connecticut Siting Council.

The siting council recently sought a recommendation from the Conservation Commission on the wetlands aspects of the Edmond Road sites. The Conservation Commission serves as the town’s wetlands agency.

Conservation Commission members discussed the topic at a recent session.

In a September 4 letter, Conservation Official C. Stephen Driver describes the commission’s views on the matter.

The site at 1 Edmond Road “has almost no impacts to the wetlands or watercourses…if the work is limited to the activities described in the map,” he wrote.

Site development at 3 Edmond Road, however, would require two wetland-related construction activities, Mr Driver noted. Those activities would be two wetland crossings, one of which would be minor, and the other of which would “need to be carefully reviewed,” he wrote.

If a tower at the 3 Edmond Road site could be positioned somewhat closer to Edmond Road than has been proposed, there would be less of an impact to wetlands on that site, he added.

The Conservation Commission’s views on developing either site are advisory and have no binding effect on the siting council, according to attorney Monte Frank, who represents the town in the tower application.

Intervenors to the tower application are: the town, State Rep Julia Wasserman, AT&T Wireless, and Walnut Tree Hill Road residents Julia Nable and Zoltan Csillag. Ms Nable and Mr Csillag conducted a petition drive that drew the signatures of more than 700 people who oppose building telecommunications towers in residential areas, such as Walnut Tree Hill Road.