The Cellphone Tower Quandary

By CURT CLARK

Published: Mar 27, 2009 12:00 am

The Cellphone Tower

Quandary

To the Editor:

I own land bordering the proposed cell tower on Dingebrook Lane.

Cell towers are essentially industrial/commercial infrastructure with an industrial purpose and an industrial look. Installation of cell towers in residential forested areas is an intrusion of industrial infrastructure in areas not zoned for industrial/commercial activity.

Indisputably the presence of cell towers impact property values in residential areas. Cellphone towers are aesthetically displeasing and inappropriate in nonindustrial/commercial areas. To add insult to injury, in this instance, I have been advised by AT&T that they are uncertain if the tower would result in cell coverage at my home. Currently I have no available service.

While I recognize that considerations of a broader public interest call for a reasoned attitude toward tower installation, surely the impact on property values and the infringement upon the natural aesthetics of a neighborhood cannot and should not be ignored.

It seems to me that there are two possible solutions to this quandary.

1) It is time the Connecticut Siting Council recognizes their primary responsibility to protect property owners from the invasion of these towers and work with GPS technology and local zoning to identify areas that are most appropriate for their construction. In other words, find a better site where the impact is minimal or nonexistent.

2) Absent a better site alternative, evaluate the real impact on property values, honestly estimate an impact on aesthetic sensibilities (admittedly subject to the eyes of the beholder) and insist that AT&T, in this case, fairly compensate affected property owners. AT&T reached a financial agreement with the owner of the property where the tower is planned to be located A similar arrangement should be made with bordering properties effected by the siting. After all, the AT&T remuneration is not simply in exchange for minimal square footage occupied by the tower, but rather to compensate for the impact on property and aesthetic values resulting from their intrusion into residential forested areas.

Gary Tannenbaum

Pond Brook Road, Newtown Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â March 22, 2009

NewSylum Brewing Company Reaches $7,700 In Total Giving To NYFS

Friends Of The C.H. Booth Library 49th Annual Book Sale Comes To A Close

Newtown Parent Connection Presents Second Scholarship To High School Student

Stone Bridge Center For Health And Rehabilitation Resident Juana Geraldino Celebrates 104th Birthday

Fire Reports | July 9-15, 2025

Sorry Lynn, not letting you get away with this. Yes, we all have the constitutional right to demonstrate peacefully but NO, no one ever said anything about taking that right away. You just made it up.

Expresses Opposition To Proposed Assembly Ordinance

A small Newtown business lost important revenue because of the protest. Traffic was disrupted causing a safety concern. Newtown taxpayers paid for police OT because the PD had to react to the protest rather than be prepared in advance. God forbid, if there was loss of life or property, Newtown could be liable legally for negligence. Your comment sounds like Liberal Woke thinking and apparently you are more sympathetic to protestors than to Newtown. Non-issue? In Kerrville TX the legislative body had the chance to vote for a flash flood siren warning system. They thought it was a non-issue. Now, over 200 people are dead and families are destroyed. No way does the town not get expensively buried in court should it be foolish enough to NOT go down this path.

Assembly Ordinance?

Hi David, I did not ignore anyone. I presented 4 quantifiable advantages and one intangible that an ordinance addressing protests would benefit Newtown. That was my only standard. No one that came to the meeting including the other LC members provided any argument to over come those benefits and remember, the threshold was set extremely low. The only thing the LC was voting on was to "just consider" if an ordinance would be in order. Get over the "stadium" joke. It is scandalous that you don't have the mental capacity to understand it was a joke. Remember when I asked to meet with you for breakfast to see in we could compromise on some of your many complaints? I am sure could have found compromises but apparently the word "compromise" is not a part of your vocabulary. Either is acting like an adult. By the way, the intangible...that was to provide protection for you and your family, God forbid, that you were protesting and someone came barreling through the crowd in a car. My point was you always plan for worst case scenario, not best case scenario. In Kerrville TX, the legislative body had the chance to vote to put a flash flood warning siren in place. Someone like you probably thought they didn't need it. Now over 200 people are dead. Nothing bad could ever happen in Newtown right?

Pisani to Sue Newtown – Part 1

Reservoir Rd. does indeed appear to have an interesting history that I often ponder as I hike the Rochambeau Trail. Early on it was apparently part of a main route from the center of the Borough to Taunton, which went up Mt. Pleasant Rd. and then roughly followed a watershed boundary from Mount Pleasant to Taunton Hill. When the current switchback road was built from West St. to Castle Hill in the 1800s, replacing the indirect route through the campground that Rochambeau used, the part of that original route to Taunton now known as Reservoir Rd. became redundant. But on an 1868 town map and topographic maps from 1892 and 1915, it looks like both routes were still maintained as roads. By the time of the 1934 aerial survey of CT, the connection to Mount Pleasant Rd. (maybe called Reservoir Rd. by then since the reservoir is visible) even had two outlets onto Castle Hill Rd. Since it is only shown as a partial dashed line on a 1953 topographic map, it may have stopped being maintained as a passable through road by then. But on a 1963 topographic map, where the section down to Knollwood Dr. had become a normal road again, the other end is shown as a dashed-line road, still with two connections to Castle Hill Rd., and a structure on the east side where one can still find remnants of a house today. Maybe a longtime resident can add comments about what it looked like in the 1950s and 1960s?

Clarity on Reservoir Road and the Rochambeau Trail

Please stop referring to your fellow Newtowners as the Mob. I was at the Legislative Council meeting where Mr. Pisani insulted the intelligence of a room full of Newtown voters; twice, and not in a satirical way. Plenty of new projects have been given the green light - the repurposing of the Taunton Press property is a welcome addition to Town, a new retail center is under construction on Church Hill Rd there are ongoing plans for the existing Fairfield Hills campus. Newtown is a wonderful place to live. Kudos to the Town officials who have managed to grow Newtown and maintain a small town feel, which may mean saying no to development more often than you would like. There will always be two sides to any proposal - different points of view are welcome and essential - name calling adds nothing to the conversation.

Who is Calling Newtowners Stupid?

<< Jul 2025 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
29	30	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31	1	2

Log In

The Cellphone Tower Quandary

Leave a Reply Cancel reply