Woodstock CT Café

by Julie Anderson

I do want to mention an issue that was the subject of a recent article in the Norwich Bulletin. The article discusses local concerns about a potential cell tower being sited on land owned by Mr. Fred Rich. Here’s a link to the article:

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/homepage/x1672016251/Woodstock-cell-tower-causing-dispute

I read some of the comments left under this article at the Norwich Bulletin website and it sounds as though some neighbors of Mr. Rich may have concerns about the use of his land as a potential cell tower site. Also, the news article mentions that the Woodstock Conservation Commission also has some concerns about the same potential site.

First, a little background.

Originally, Verizon had selected a potential cell tower site in East Woodstock on a parcel of land in the Prospect/Child Dome Road area. The residents of that neighborhood became concerned about the original site for the same reasons that Mr. Rich’s neighbors are concerned now, namely the risk of ruining a scenic viewshed and the safety concerns of living close to a cell tower. My advice to some of the neighbors of the original site choice was the same then as it is now to Mr. Rich’s neighbors and that is: try to find an alternate site that would work better for both Verizon and the townspeople. The neighbors in East Woodstock did that. They also did much more than that. There are past articles here at the Cafe discussing what they did but in summary, the neighbors of East Woodstock formed a group, led by Lisa Rapose, and that group mobilized to oppose the Child Dome Road site and urge the BOS to form the Telecommunications Task Force. In addition, some of the neighbors of that E. Woodstock group also went about canvassing other neighbors in search of an alternate site choice to present to Verizon. As I understand it, Mr. Rich was approached by these neighbors. Some of the comments left under this Norwich Bulletin article imply that he’s up to no good by trying to get a cell tower sited on his land. I’ve never met him personally and so cannot comment as to his motive but to the best of my knowledge, he was ASKED to offer his land to Verizon. Based on his comments in this article, the possibility of a cell tower apparently will help him as well, so it would seem that is why he agreed to get in touch with Verizon and offer his land when he was informed about all of this by other residents.

Now, some long-term Cafe readers might recall that I found myself in the same position not too long ago. I was an abutting property owner of a potential cell tower site targeted for the Old Turnpike Road/Route 198 area. Because of what I went through, I have nothing but sympathy for neighbors and abutting property owners of a potential cell tower site. Some of the comments left under the above article try to dismiss this as a NIMBY issue. I disagree. I feel that concerns about safety, scenic, environmental, and historical preservation, decreased property value - these are all legitimate concerns in my opinion and should not be dismissed so casually. My advice to Mr. Rich’s neighbors then, is the same advice that I gave to some of the East Woodstock residents. It is what I did when I was in the same situation: talk to your neighbors and try to find an alternate site. Stop into town hall and in Delia Fey’s office, there are topographical maps. Take a look at those and try to find land in Verizon’s target area, which is East Woodstock in this case. Look for other residents who own land at an equal or higher elevation than the currently proposed site. Delia has overlay maps that can help pinpoint who owns any other parcels of land that might make for alternative sites. Then approach those land owners and see if any of them might be interested. If they are, give them Verizon’s contact info. If anyone needs that info, it is available in the First Selectman’s office or from members of the Telecommunications Task Force. It’s probably also on the documentation pertaining to this application on the CT Siting Council’s website.

The CT Siting Council: http://www.ct.gov/csc/cwp/view.asp?a=962&q=451794

From my own personal experience with the Black Pond tower site that was re-sited to an alternative site on Sherman Road, and from observing how Verizon has worked with the neighbors in the Child Dome Road area, I can tell you that their team and their legal counsel are now open to working with residents to find a site that will benefit all involved parties. It has to work for Verizon from an RF perspective and as long as it does that, they seem willing to put it anywhere where the residents will be most satisfied with it.

I believe that Verizon is discovering that if they want local residents to remain their customers, as well as increasing their customer base among locals, it is in their best interest from a business standpoint to allow residents to guide the company toward cell tower sites that represent a compromise for all. At the end of the day, the law is on Verizon’s side and they can put a tower almost anywhere they wish to. Since they are open to working with neighbors and abutters, any who may be opposed to Mr. Rich’s land might want to give this avenue a try.

Here’s a link to the CT Siting Council website for anyone who would like additional info about this. When you get to their home page, in the blue box on the left, click on “Pending Proceedings”. When you get to the list of pending proceedings, click on “Docket No. 397?.