PLAINFIELD — The Zoning Board is considering a controversial cell tower project off Route 120 in Plainfield.
Atlantic Tower, a Massachusetts-based wireless infrastructure developer, applied in February for a special exception to place a 130-foot-high cell tower in a Rural Conservation II zoning district, where cell towers are typically not allowed due to development limitations set to preserve rural character.
The company seeks to resolve a gap in cellphone coverage along Route 120. But some neighbors have expressed concerns over the tower impeding on part of the town’s natural environment.
“Everybody wants it, but nobody wants it in their backyard,” Phil Greene, the owner of the proposed site, said Monday at his property.
In 2001, Greene purchased three parcels of land, amounting to around 70 acres off Route 120 in Plainfield. The 30-acre parcel off Old Stagecoach Road, which Atlantic Tower took interest in, once hosted an Elk farm about 20 years ago.
Greene, a paramedic for New London Hospital, entered into a 50-year rental agreement starting in March to surrender a 75-by-75 foot piece of land to Atlantic Tower to fill the gap in cell coverage, which he said he believes is essential in the event of an emergency outside the home.
In return, Greene would reap a small percentage of the tower’s revenue, which he recalled as less than 10%, possibly amounting to a couple hundred dollars per month.
“Whether it’s my property or somebody else’s property, it’s still gonna go in this area,” Greene said, adding that the tower company has already “deemed that it is necessary.”
Neighbors have written letters to the zoning board expressing their concerns. Route 120 resident Robert Healy wrote a March letter of disapproval stating that “periodic maintenance to the site could disrupt birds, pollinators and other wildlife.” He added that site preparation and construction could cause a similar disturbance.
Other neighbors, including Donn Cann, who owns the property beside Greene’s, pointed out visual concerns with the project, including the landscape view from his home.
“I feel the change will lessen the selling price of my property as it has been crafted to be a rural homestead,” Cann said in a letter to the zoning board.
Baynes Road resident James Tracy, however, expressed a similar sentiment as Greene in a letter of support for the cell tower, noting he once slid off the road due to black ice in the area and had to rely on a nearby resident’s landline to contact emergency services. Tracy added that he has also been unable to call for medical assistance while hiking nearby.
The zoning board is asking for more information and consideration of properties that might be less visible, but fill the same gap in coverage. The board is in a fact-finding stage of the consideration process, said Zoning Administrator Steve Halleran, who is also the town administrator.
The company noted that some nearby landowners were non-responsive, but multiple landowners reported having never been contacted about hosting a cell tower in the first place, according to a recording of the April 13 meeting.
Christopher Swiniarski, an attorney representing Atlantic Tower, wrote in the initial application that the tower shouldn’t have much of an impact on the neighborhood’s appearance, and that there is no lighting proposed for the tower.
Still, the application may not meet the requirements for a special exception. One rule prohibits cell towers in the area even for special exceptions. Another rule limits the tower from being over 10 feet above the tree line. The height of the proposed tower compared to the surrounding trees is pending results of the visual analysis.
“Who knows where this is going to go. It’s a very tall tower for Plainfield,” Halleran said, adding that it is proposed for an already elevated area.
There are currently four cell towers in town, an 80-foot tower on Beauty Hill Road; an 80-foot tower and an 87-foot tower on Freeman Road; and a 187-foot tower on Ladieu Road that predates zoning in town.
While the proposed tower may be considered an unwelcome presence to some neighbors nearby, the zoning board must consider the possibility of an appeal by the company if it denies the application.
Swiniarski noted in the application that town ordinance is preempted by federal law per the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
“Essentially, they’re going to play the federal government card and say, ‘You can’t prohibit this’,” said Halleran.
Lesley Pearson, who lives on Route 120, said that this act “does not require or guarantee automatic approval.”
A state or local government may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting access to personal wireless services in its zoning authority, according to a fact sheet by the Federal Communications Commission.
Last month, the applicant’s engineering firm conducted a balloon test by releasing a balloon from the proposed site to determine from where in town the tower would be visible.
During the test, some town officials drove around to see for themselves.
The balloon was evident from Methodist Hill Road, Croydon Turnpike Road, and along Route 120, Halleran said. He added it was most pronounced where Eaton Road intersects Croydon Turnpike Road.
“It’s always the case that they’re more visible from places that you don’t expect. The closer you are to the proposed site, the less likely you see it,” said Halleran.
The zoning board’s discussion of the application is scheduled to continue at the June 13 meeting at 7 p.m. in Meriden Town Hall, with a Zoom link available on the agenda. By then, the board anticipates results of the balloon test and the possibility of alternative locations.
“I think by the end of the summer, we’ll have an answer,” said Halleran.
