Verizon’s proposal to construct a new cell tower near a recreational area in the town of Manchester has come up against widespread opposition from residents and town officials in recent months.
While residents say the cell tower would interfere with people’s enjoyment of natural and recreational resources, Verizon maintains that there are no other viable options for the tower’s location.
Last May, Verizon announced its intent to apply to the state’s Public Utility Commission for approval to build a cell tower on Hunter Park Road. In the months following, residents, town officials and the state’s Department of Public Service have all submitted a string of public comments to the commission, which regulates utilities, voicing objections to the plan.
On Tuesday, the commission released an order to begin further investigation into the matter, pointing to public comments that suggest the project “raises a significant issue with respect to compliance with the municipal plan.”
In the town of Manchester’s comments, the leading concern cited was that the tower would be in a mixed-use zoning area where cell towers are not permitted based on the town’s land use ordinance.
The proposed location is also near the Manchester Rail Trail and the Northshire Civic Center, which includes Riley Rink at Hunter Park. Both are popular spaces for recreation and gathering for the Manchester community all year round, according to Karen O’Neill Thomson, head of school at Red Fox Community School, which is less than a half-mile from the proposed site.
“The rail trail is a beautiful asset that winds through the woods. It’s being used all the time,” said O’Neill Thomson, who submitted a public comment to the commission opposing the cell tower. “The fields are used for lacrosse practice and football practice, and there’s all kinds of festivals that are in the fields, so it’s an incredible public resource.”
The proximity of the tower’s proposed location to those community assets and the potential visibility of the tower have all been concerns raised by residents, said Scott Murphy, Manchester’s town manager.
The proposal has also been “highly controversial” for residents because of potential health concerns of cell towers, Murphy said. But, he said the town cannot use that reason to object to the proposal because Verizon’s application meets the federal minimum health regulations for cell towers.
This is not the first time the town of Manchester has faced the prospect of a new cell tower, said Murphy. In 2023, AT&T initiated the first steps in the process to construct one, only to back out before submitting an application when residents objected.
The town of Manchester asked Tectonic Engineering to create a report to suggest other locations for Verizon’s cell tower, which was submitted to the commission in early January. Several other locations were proposed in the report, including a site in an office-industrial zone neighboring the current proposed location that was highly recommended.
Verizon’s lawyer, Cooper Hayes, declined to comment because the petition is still under consideration.
But, Verizon’s consolidated response to public comments — submitted to the commission on Dec. 31 and signed by Hayes — stated there are no other reasonable alternative locations for the proposed cell tower.
“Verizon cannot just ‘turn up the power’ at a distant site to provide coverage to a targeted area,” wrote Hayes in the document. “As customers move throughout the service area, the transmission from the phone or other device is automatically transferred to the Verizon facility with the best reception, without interruption in service, provided that there is overlapping coverage between the cells.”
Hunter Thompson, director of Telecommunications and Connectivity for the Vermont Department of Public Service, wrote in a statement emailed to VTDigger that the petition is inconsistent with the municipal plan and land use ordinance.
“The Department recommended the Commission reject the petition on orderly development grounds because approving the petition would not be consistent with giving substantial deference to the Town of Manchester,” Thompson wrote.
Murphy said the town is not opposed to a new cell tower. Indeed, he said during peak tourism times there have been problems with the limited bandwidth for service in the area. But, Murphy said, this particular cell tower and its proposed location would not comply with the town’s municipal plan and would be detrimental to resident’s experience of outdoor recreation in Manchester.
“Certainly, the town is in need of a new tower,” said Murphy. “We’re hoping that they could find a reasonable spot that covers their needs and also meets our zoning requirements.”
Read the story on VTDigger here: Regulators to take a closer look after Manchester cell tower proposal draws pushback.