Controversial Telcom Tower Plan Raises Questions And Concerns In Sandy Hook

By Andrew Gorosko

The Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) is considering a request for zoning variances to erect a 199-foot-tall commercial wireless telecommunications tower off Berkshire Road in Sandy Hook – a proposal that has drawn strong opposition from residents living near the site.

SBA Communications, Inc., a nationwide developer of telecommunications towers, is seeking several variances from the ZBA which, if granted, would then allow the company to apply to the ZBA for a “special exception” to the zoning regulations to erect a monopole-style steel tower at 249 Berkshire Road, also known as Route 34. The zoning variances concern tower setbacks and the tower’s proximity to residential buildings.

The property is the site of the Sandy Hook Volunteer Fire and Rescue Company’s substation firehouse. It lies just east of Berkshire Road’s intersection with Checkerberry Lane. The communications firm would lease space on the property from the fire company for the tower site.

By building a tower less than 200 feet tall, the applicant can avoid requirements for the installation of aerial navigation beacons on it. The company owns 1,800 towers nationwide.

Last fall, the Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) approved a new set of commercial telecommunications regulations concerning towers, antennas, and electronics buildings, which has resulted in SBA seeking zoning variances to those new regulations. SBA’s application is the first application subject to those new telecommunications rules. Newtown has seven other sites for wireless telecommunications, but none of those sites were subject to the new regulations.

Opponents Speak

Attorney Richard Emerson represents a group of residents living near the Sandy Hook fire substation who oppose tower construction there. About 20 people from the area attended an April 13 ZBA public hearing on the application.

SBA’s zoning variance application is grossly out of conformance with applicable zoning regulations and is a misleading application, Mr Emerson said. A variance application typically involves a small amount of non-conformity with the regulations, he said.

While SBA indicates that only one house is less than 500 feet from the site, seven houses actually are within 500 feet of the site, Mr Emerson said.

The Sandy Hook fire radio tower is not 100 feet tall as indicated by the applicant, Mr Emerson added. The fire radio facility consists of a 10-foot tower atop a 30-foot-tall building, he said.

The tower that SBA proposes could fall over onto Berkshire Road, blocking the street, he said.

“The applicant does not meet the legal hardship requirements” necessary to obtain zoning variances, he said. The ZBA does not have the basis to grant such variances, Mr Emerson added.

“They just want to [build] it here because they have a deal, and they’re in business, and they want to make money… This is going to make money for SBA and that’s why they’re here,” he said.

Mr Emerson said SBA approaches fire companies in Connecticut about placing towers on their properties. The firm trades on the goodwill the public has for fire companies in employing a political approach to building towers, he added.

“You do not have to accept whatever [SBA] wants to do,” he said.

The parcel on which SBA wants to build a tower is not large enough to meet the requirements of the zoning regulations, Mr Emerson said. There are other parcels in the area large enough to meet the regulations, he added.

Resident David Perkins of 257 Berkshire Road, who lives behind the site proposed for the tower, told ZBA members that the first application for a tower under the new zoning regulations is a “grievous departure” from the regulations. If the ZBA approves the application, it would invalidate those regulations and compromise the town’s ability to regulate the siting of telecommunications towers, he said.

Resident Robert Burch of 261 Berkshire Road said he fears that the electronic equipment on such a tower would become detached from it and be scattered through the area. The erection of a tower could damage nearby property values, he said. “We don’t need this type of structure going up in a completely residential area,” he said.

Resident Jay Klewicki of 34 Chestnut Hill Road said if the proposed tower were to fall over, it could hit the firehouse, depriving residents of the fire protection it provides.

 ZBA members did not act on the zoning variance application. The ZBA has until mid-June to act on the matter.

Proposal

Thomas Flynn, a zoning consultant in SBA’s Waterbury office, explained the firm’s proposal to ZBA members.

 SBA wants to build a tower to provide antenna placements for several federally licensed wireless telecommunications carriers, including Sprint and Nextel, as part of their analog and digital wireless telecommunications networks. SBA would own the tower and lease antenna space to the carriers.

The new tower regulations approved by the P&Z last November require that towers be set back from property boundary lines by a distance equal to the height of the tower, plus 25 feet, thus requiring a tower setback of 224 feet from all property lines in the SBA proposal.

 To get around that requirement, the applicant needs at least three setback variances. In one case, the applicant is asking that the distance from the base of the tower to an adjacent property line be only 77 feet. In two other cases, the applicant wants the ZBA to allow the distance from the tower to adjacent property lines to be 147 feet and 210 feet. The P&Z requires such setbacks around towers, known as “fall zones,” to prevent a tower from landing on adjacent properties in the event the tower falls over.

“It’s a substantial variance,” Mr Flynn said. But, he added, it is the minimum variance that telecommunications carriers need to provide adequate wireless coverage.

Mr Flynn pointed out he is not seeking a 300-foot-tall tower. Due to topographic conditions there is not one single tower site that would provide coverage for the whole community, so multiple towers are needed locally, he said.

Also, SBA Communications is asking the ZBA to grant a variance to the zoning regulation that requires a tower be at least 500 feet from all residential buildings. SBA is seeking to build the tower as close as 285 feet from a house.

In order to provide adequate wireless telecommunications service, carriers must meet criteria for antenna placements concerning ground elevations and antenna heights, Mr Flynn said. The telecommunications industry needs to place antennas in that area to create an electronic relay point for signals between Interstate-84 to the north and New Haven to the south, he said. “This is an ideal spot for this type of facility,” he said. An antenna placement at 249 Berkshire Road would create an electronic link with telecommunications towers near Stevenson Dam, and provide coverage along the length of Berkshire Road, Mr Flynn said.  

“This is the location we need to be in to provide the coverage to the [telecommunications] carriers,” he said.

It would be difficult to find a tower site in that area that is more than 500 feet from the nearest house, he said.

“It’s all residential zoning in the area that we’re seeking to locate,” he said. Although the new P&Z regulations state that residential areas are the least desirable areas for towers, residential zoning is what exists in the area where SBA wants to build a tower, Mr Flynn said.

Having a tower there also would help the town from a public safety standpoint, providing antenna placements for fire, police, and emergency communications at no cost to the town, Mr Flynn said.

“I don’t think we’re going to be a detriment to your public safety and welfare. I think we’re going to add to your public safety and welfare,” he said.

 SBA investigated building a tower in other locations in the area, but property owners were not willing to cooperate, he said. The volunteer fire department, though, was cooperative, he said.

The P&Z’s new telecommunications rules are intended to encourage the location of commercial wireless telecommunications towers and antennas away from residential neighborhoods and to protect natural and scenic vistas. The rules encourage the placement of facilities on non-residential buildings and structures. The regulations also encourage the joint use of new or existing towers and facilities. Through the rules, the P&Z hopes to minimize the adverse visual and operational effects of the facilities through careful design, siting, and screening, and hopes to protect historic aspects of the community from adverse effects.

The regulations are intended to reduce the number of towers and/or antennas needed in the future and to accommodate the need for such facilities, while regulating their location and number.