Politics & Government

Residents: We Don't Want to Lose Quality of Life

Residents speak out against the T-Mobile application during public comment.

For residents attending the continued T-Mobile hearing Tuesday for a 125-foot cell tower at the , the concerns about it were based on what it will do to the aesthetics of the neighborhood.

"I moved here because of the quality of life, convenience of services and good schools," said Overlook Drive resident Marvin Wimmer. "From my perspective, this is a neighborhood versus a corporate giant."

Testimony has been completed by T-Mobile for the tower proposed, and the board heard public comment about the application. A vote has been postponed until Feb. 21 because not all board members were present Tuesday, and because an expert commissioned by the residents will present testimony on how the tower could lower property values.

Find out what's happening in Bridgewaterwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Residents focused their concerns on what this tower could do to the neighborhood, and the fact that those T-Mobile workers commissioning it will not actually have to live near it.

"They do not care if a 125-foot lighted tower sits in our picturesque historic neighborhood," Wimmer said. "They just want uninterrupted service."

Find out what's happening in Bridgewaterwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

And several residents cited the fact that the proposed tower will not even cover all the coverage gaps, as T-Mobile representatives have said they will be back to request additional towers.

"T-Mobile has not demonstrated sufficient gaps in its coverage to show what might be achieved with the installation of this tower," said Adamsville Road resident Curtis Kraut. "I am very concerned about the precedent of this in a residential neighborhood. If it can be done here, it can be done anywhere."

Eddy Lane resident Gail Naughton said she is concerned that she will have difficulty selling her home with a cell tower about two miles away.

"The fact that cell towers can be going up and affecting any of our homes is a concern," she said.

For Hart Drive resident Al Ernst, the concern was mainly with light and noise pollution from the flag on top of the tower and lights required if the application continues to require a flag at the top. He said he lived near a similar flagpole cell tower in Edison, and constantly heard the flapping of the flag in the wind.

"Sometimes I would wake up hearing it, and it was very disturbing," he said. "On noisy nights when the wind was blowing, I could hear it."

"And I couldn't go out to look at the stars because the light would go nearly to zenith," he added. "I came to Bridgewater to avoid that, but I can see things are changing, and I'm disturbed with this going the way it has."

Steeplechase Lane resident Aleta Debevec said she had several suggestions for dealing with the idea that the Green Knoll Volunteer Fire Company will be benefiting from the tower while the residents suffer.

"I think zoning laws should be amended to have those living within a specific amount of miles of the tower get some of the compensation from it being there," she said. "And any entity receiving taxpayer funding should have it reduced by the amount paid to the entity by having a cell tower."

"Without this in place, I foresee other fire companies and churches seeking revenue from a cell tower," she added.

Tok Place resident Fran Hozeny, who does not live in the area near the cell tower, said she still wanted to support those residents who oppose it because she also does not want an approval setting a precedent in town.

"We have to keep the residential neighborhoods residential," she said to applause from those in attendance. "We have every right to protect our quality of life, and it is the responsiblity of the elected officials to assure us of this. The tower will be a significant detriment."

"I am concerned about what is happening to our landscape with the widening of country roads, cutting down of trees and noise pollution," she added. "I know that progress and change is inevitable, but I believe it should be controlled to the betterment of the residents."

Although public comment was completed at the meeting, the hearing is expected to continue with testimony from a witness appointed by the residents and a possible vote on Feb. 21.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here