[Cambium]

New Milford cell tower bid raises ire - News - The Litchfield County Times

"NEW MILFORD—Area residents and conservationists are opposing AT&T’s proposal to erect a telecommunications tower on New Preston Hill Road, citing environmental, ecological, economic and other concerns

The facility, which would include a 134-foot monopole, would be installed at a 1,042-foot elevation, on a parcel of land leased from Maurice and Mary Grossenbacher.

“I can understand why Mr. Grossenbacher is doing this, but it’s a beautiful vista and has historical importance. We seem to be destroying landscape after landscape, and this is going to affect a lot of people,” said local resident MaryJane Lundgren, a member of the Town Council who lives in the vicinity. “I feel this is the last pristine area. Once something like this goes in and then the technology becomes antiquated later on, there is no provision to take it down, so it would just deteriorate and further destroy the landscape.”

[Tubeworm]

NIMBY much?

[Mike 75]

Good. Its absurd that its 2014 and the state is still not fully covered for wireless service.

[Csiko]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

Good. Its absurd that its 2014 and the state is still not fully covered for wireless service.

I'm with you on this one.

[Cambium]

I haven't had a landline phone since 2003 AND I didn't bid on a home because of poor cell service there so I'm not totally against it

BUT... maybe people buy homes in those places to get away from the constant changing civilization and they don't care about having just a landline.

And I believe Cable companies now offer it through their modem/service too.

Just goes to show how we're changing the landscape with even small things like a cell tower. It snowballs after that.

Vermonteers have an issue with it too.

[JayCT]

There has been a similar issue down in South Glastonbury where cell phone coverage is aweful. The residents keep fighting proposals even those that are not very intrusive. It is almost a safety issue now a days since you can't get service in portions of that section of town. I just hope it does not take a real tragedy to get people to some into the 21st century. Jay

[jdhall1]

There are proposals for 2 more in Danbury. One is in an area where cell phone service is terrible, but where they want to put the tower in is the public golf course! The other place they want to put up the tower is above a 4 story high rise condo building across fairly close to downtown but is a across the street for an elementary school. I don't think either one is going to get approved.

[Cambium]

Being its 2014 one would think we would only need a few of these around. What's the current radius of the signal and can't they figure out how to expand it? This way we don't have to touch undeveloped land. Maybe put it in the buisness sections of the towns.

[HeadedWest]

Originally Posted by Cambium

Being its 2014 one would think we would only need a few of these around. What's the current radius of the signal and can't they figure out how to expand it? This way we don't have to touch undeveloped land. Maybe put it in the buisness sections of the towns.

Tower separation distance is limited by transmission power (and terrain). You could make the tower transmitters more powerful[*], but increasing the transmit power of the handheld phone would make it bigger and heavier (it would need a lot more battery power).

[*] Making the towers more powerful would play into the hands of the tin-foil-hat anti radio wave types.

[basehead617]

New Preston Hill Rd is one of the most scenic roads in the state, so I can understand not wanting to spoil it. However, the New Milford side is really really woodsy - not too much to see. There's no possible way they could get it built in the Washington/New Preston side. Those people have endless pockets when it comes to fighting development like this.