Public tells Siting Council, 21-3, cell tower is not needed
Soundview Lane neighborhood in New Canaan does not need a 90-foot cell tower that could fall on children, was the gist of the feedback the Connecticut Siting Council received regarding an application for a monopine pole on private property.
Twenty-one of the 24 speakers spoke against the nearly 90-foot pole that is being contemplated for next to St. Luke’s School’s ballfield during a virtual public hearing on Thursday, July 9. They complained it could be a danger to children and argued cell coverage in the area is already good.
No decision about the tower was made at Thursday’s hearing.
The Siting Council is the agency with sole authority to decide whether a cell tower will be built at the private residence owned by Keith Richey at 183 Soundview Lane. Richey did not speak during the hearing.
Two speakers, First Selectman Kevin Moynihan and Councilman Tom Butterworth, supported the tower, and Planning & Zoning Commission Chairman John Goodwin said he wished the plans for it would be changed to conform with his commission’s regulations. Everyone else spoke against having it built at all.
AT&T signed a contract in September of 2019 to be the anchor for the cell tower that can accommodate four carriers on a quiet cul-de-sac, 38 feet from the St. Luke’s School at 377 North Wilton Road and 20 feet from the street.
The tower would have a walk-in mechanical cabinet, which would sit on nearly nine-foot square concrete pad; a diesel generator that would sit on a nearly eightfoot square concrete pad; and a hinge point at 52 feet.
Goodwin argued that the tower should comply with the four-acre zoning requirement of 50-foot setback, and noted there is only a 20-foot setback from the street.
“New towers should be located away for property lines and habitable buildings as far as the height of the tower including antenna. It is approximately 20 feet next to property line,” he told the hearing’s moderator, Robert Silvestri.
“As you know the height of the cell tower is 90 feet,” Goodwin said. “We acknowledge we do not have jurisThe diction over this application.”
Chris Ellis, who has three children who attend St. Luke’s School said, “My understanding of the Planning & Zoning requirements are that they are designed to prevent the cell tower from landing on anybody’s property other than Mr. Richey’s. If Mr. Richey wants to buy a cell tower that is going to fall and land on his property and not land on my kids at school, that is not my problem.”
Kimberly Harper, the mother of a sixth grader at St. Luke’s School, said that her son “will be there for the next seven years, and that is a long time to be exposed to the potential danger of a cell tower that does not have an adequately safe setback in a fall zone. It is not difficult to see a substantial risks exist.”
“The internet is flooded with montage videos of cell towers catching fire and collapsing,” so the setback or fall zone “should be greater” to “protect the children at St. Luke’s School,” Harper said.
Moynihan defended the need for a cell tower in that area, since there is no available town-owned property in the northeast corner of New Canaan.
“One of the primary reasons that I decided to run for first selectman in 2017 was to help to solve our problem of poor or non-existent cell service in large parts of our town,” Moynihan said.
“I urge the council to consider our P&Z Commission’s preferences carefully,” he added.
He compared New Canaan to Manhattan. “While New Canaan is a small town of only 20,000 residents, it is important to understand that New Canaan has a relatively large land mass of 22.5 square miles, four miles by six miles. We receive most of our cell service through antenna in five locations, four of which are in New Canaan.”
By comparison, “the isle of Manhattan has a land mass nearly identical to New Canaan’s at 22.8 square miles, two miles by 12 miles. Compared to New Canaan’s five locations, “Manhattan broadcasts cell signals from 14,000 antenna locations according to a google search,” Moynihan said.
“I believe the need for cell service in the northeast corner of town has been well documented,” Moynihan said.
He also said cell coverage is required for emergency calls and is an important issue for new home buyers.
“I have had sufficient cell service here for the last five years and that is mainly due to a tower that was up in Vista,” Roy Abromowitz, who lives at the intersection of Soundview and Laurel Road, said.
“I have full video coverage,” and he believes he gets coverage from the “140-foot tower, on the New York border, which Abromowitz said Moynihan has said is “ramping it up,” he added.
Abromowitz said people come from other areas to sit in cars to get cell service in the neighborhood, and the cell tower would not be practical in an area with four-acre lots, a reservoir and a lake in its 1.5-mile coverage area.
“Our children are being put at risk needlessly and it seems like we should be looking out for the safety of our children first and foremost. I can’t think of anything that is more important than that,” Harper said.