Adjoining property owner objects to selected pole near driveway, urges Selco to consider alternatives

Adam Roberts, an adjoining property owner who lives near the proposed site, told the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority he objects to the pole's placement and asked the company to reconsider other poles on or near his property. Roberts said the selected pole sits "essentially feet from our driveway entrance" and argued the pole's lack of other equipment might be because of its proximity to a driveway: "this pole is without other equipment on it for a reason, essentially, because it's so close to a driveway."

Company witnesses responded that other poles in the area had features (primary power, risers or junction use) that disqualified them under utility‑owner requirements. Kristen Prentiss, Verizon's regulatory and real estate engineer, said the pole-selection criteria include that "the pole must not have primary power on it. It must not have risers. It also cannot be a junction pole," and that the selected pole was the only one in the area meeting those requirements. Prentiss added she could not speak to the utility's design choices but said she was not aware of any denials based solely on proximity to a driveway.

Roberts told the hearing he and his family would appreciate reconsideration of other nearby poles. The authority afforded Roberts the opportunity to give sworn testimony during the evidentiary hearing; he reiterated his concerns under oath. The record does not show that the company adopted any immediate alternative site, and the authority will consider the issue in post‑hearing filings and decision-making.