TMCnet News
Residents oppose tower days before public hearing [Connecticut Post, Bridgeport](Connecticut Post (Bridgeport) Via Acquire Media NewsEdge) March 28--A Byram man says Greenwich's leadership has ignored residents of western Greenwich who oppose a new cell tower there. John Bowman, who lives at 56 Ritch Ave., close to where a proposed cell tower would be located at 36 Ritch Ave., said the town is guilty of a double standard on the location of cell towers. He says the town swung into action to stop a proposed cell tower on Palmer Hill Road in North Mianus two years ago, but has failed to offer he and other Byram residents similar support in their own opposition effort. "I have no idea why, but Byram has always been treated as a second-class citizen in Greenwich," he charged. Verizon Wireless wants to replace a 70-foot AT&T tower, which is in the shape of a flagpole, at 36 Ritch Ave. W., with a 77-foot tower camouflaged as a pine tree. It would be on the same property but in a different spot from the current tower. The site is across from the entrance to Byram Park. The Connecticut Siting Council is scheduled to meet Tuesday in the Cole Auditorium at Greenwich Library, 101 W. Putnam Ave., for a public hearing on the application. Selectman David Theis, who was acting first selectman Friday because Peter Tesei was not available, disagrees with Bowman. "I wouldn't agree with that," Theis said. "We went to bat for Byram residents when (the Greenwich Housing Authority) wanted to add on to McKinney Terrace. We have really tried to defend the neighborhood." Theis, who said he only learned of the plans for the cell tower while at a meeting this past week, said he is unfamiliar with the proposal. He urged neighborhood residents to work together to oppose it. According to Verizon's application for the change, the tower's "branches" would extend even higher than the planned 77 feet, bringing the structure to an overall height of 84 feet. The larger tower would be able to accommodate multiple wireless carriers, as well as Greenwich police radio communications. Verizon would place its antennas at the 57-foot level, while AT&T would locate at 67 feet and T-Mobile at 77 feet. Greenwich Police would install a microwave dish antenna and two whip antennas above the T-Mobile antennas. Bowman, who has said the tower will hurt his property value, is also angry the town didn't disclose to the public what its microwave dish antenna will look like. He said the proposal calls for the microwave dish to be anywhere from four to six feet in diameter. "You're going to be able to see that from everywhere in Byram Park," Bowman said. Bowman also questioned why any new cell towers should be approved since a planned merger between AT&T and T-Mobile was announced last week. He said T-Mobile will be "decommissioning" some of its towers because of the merger. A T-Mobile representative could not be reached for comment. In an e-mail, a spokesman for AT&T declined comment. "It is just too soon to offer specifics on something like this, and as such I will have to decline comment," Mark Siegel, executive director of media relations, said. Six of the nine commissioners will be present at the hearing, including newly appointed acting chairman Robert Stein of Stamford, said Linda Roberts, executive director of the siting council. Stein replaced chairman Daniel Caruso, who resigned Thursday after an allegedly inappropriate discussion with a lawyer opposed to a cell tower in Prospect, which is near Waterbury. Before the 3 p.m. hearing at Greenwich Library, commission members will meet walk the Byram site at 2 p.m., Roberts said. They meet at the Cole Auditorium for the first of two sessions. Beginning at 3 p.m., Verizon Wireless makes the case for the cell tower, and will be questioned by commissioners. Roberts said. That session is also open for other parties who have requested to make comments, she said. The commission will probably break at 5 p.m., Roberts said. If the first session is not completed by then, the commissioners will either resume following the 7 p.m. public session or continue it at a later date in New Britain where the agency is located. John Hartwell, who lives at 42 Ritch Ave. W., will be one of the parties allowed to speak at the 3 p.m. session. He questions why the application is going forward since AT&T agreed, as part of a 2002 legal settlement with the town, that it would be the only wireless carrier on the tower. AT&T wanted to erect a tower close to Hamilton Avenue School. The town, which had authority over cell towers at the time, opposed it. AT&T agreed to build one at 36 Ritch Ave. The town no longer has authority over the erection of free-standing cell towers. That lies with the siting council. Hartwell said he will argue the new cell tower violates that settlement and shouldn't proceed. Town lawyer John Wetmore said the law was changed since that settlement, requiring wireless carriers to open their towers to their competitors. Hartwell said the process is stacked against individuals like himself. He said he cannot argue for alternate sites in front of the council unless he is able to hire a consultant to write a technical report. "This isn't a level playing field," Hartwell said. "It's $7,500 to do that work and I don't have that in my pocket." Staff Writer Frank MacEachern can be reached at [email protected] or 203-625-4434. To see more of the Connecticut Post, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.connpost.com/. Copyright (c) 2011, Connecticut Post, Bridgeport Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services. For more information about the content services offered by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services (MCT), visit www.mctinfoservices.com, e-mail [email protected], or call 866-280-5210 (outside the United States, call +1 312-222-4544) |