PURA approves Crown Castle small cell on Bridgeport utility pole despite owner objection

Interim Chairman Tom Wheel and two other commissioners approved an application by Crown Castle Fiber LLC to attach a small cell wireless facility to utility pole No. 10189 in the public right of way adjacent to 776 Ryan Street in Bridgeport, overruling an objection by the adjoining property owner.

The authority found that Crown Castle’s application met statutory and procedural requirements and that predicted radio-frequency emissions would be below Federal Communications Commission limits. “I respectfully recommend adoption of the decision,” Attorney Bowman, presenting staff’s recommendation, told the panel before the vote.

Why it matters: The decision allows Crown Castle to install a facility the company says will improve availability and reliability of advanced wireless voice and data services, including access to emergency services, in an area the company identified as having insufficient capacity.

Application and objections: Crown Castle submitted the construction-plan application on Feb. 3, 2025, for a facility identified in the record as B G T E R W P 033 C T. The company requested permission to construct and attach the facility to pole No. 10189 in the right of way adjacent to 776 Ryan Street. Orlando Jean Francois, the owner of 776 Ryan Street, opposed the application on grounds that long-term exposure to 5G radio-frequency emissions could harm public and personal health and that Crown Castle had not adequately considered alternative sites or facility types.

Record and findings: The record includes the company’s initial filing and subsequent submissions and was developed through three in-person hearings and one remote session. PURA staff reported the application contained the required elements — location, detailed description, purpose and need, and public-protection plans for construction, operation and maintenance. The authority concluded Crown Castle demonstrated that predicted radio-frequency emissions would comply with applicable FCC regulations and that pole No. 10189 was a reasonable and prudent location selection.

Legal framework: In the decision, the authority relied on its statutory jurisdiction over placement of small cell facilities on utility poles in public rights of way under Conn. Gen. Stat. §16-234(f) and noted that federal law and FCC rules limit state regulation of facilities to the extent they meet federal emissions standards.

Vote and procedure: A motion to adopt staff’s decision was moved and seconded and passed on a roll call vote: Interim Chairman Tom Wheel — yes; Vice Chairman David Arconti — yes; Commissioner Michael Caron — yes. The decision includes orders and conditions the authority set forth for construction and operation.

What the decision does not say: The authority’s order approves construction subject to conditions in the written decision; it does not forecast deployment dates or broader permitting actions beyond the identified pole and plan, and it does not alter FCC standards or statewide siting policy outside the scope of the application.