Thanks for this information. I wonder if the consulting firm spoke with any residents that live in area near the dpw about their experiences with service. We have used cellphones while living on orchard and have never had a poor signal. Also not sure who deems isotrope llc to be a consultancy firm as one of their main sources of revenue is in designing and constructing communication towers. It seems like the town should have hired an outside party with no stake in the results of the survey. Did the town specify that isotrope cannot bid on this work due to a conflict of interest in their findings? Sort of like taking your car to a mechanic and asking them if something wrong is with it. Are any residents in town dpw area complaining about their cellphone service? My neighbors are satisfied.

They never speak with area residents, They dont want to hear any opposition at all. so they just close their eyes and ears and make a positive recommendation,

The town already knew there were ‘soft’ spots at the Victory Field area and only a small other bunch of areas. The study itself states that Watertown has great coverage and only soft spots(as oppose to dead spots). The DPW currently has a booster for (I think Verizon) which solves this very issue! No real need for a large tower(especially approx 25ft from someone’s backyard(if placed at the existing DPW Antenna). The Federal government is finally officially starting to look back into the ‘possible’ health risks to consistent EMF. The study also promotes the Lowell School and Cunniff Schools as possible sites! A site at the very population(kids) who are at the highest risk(due to developing/thinner sculls than adults)..check out World Health Organization as long term studies are still in the works. Please read the study yourself at http://www.ci.watertown.ma.us/documentcenter/view/12247.

How much money could the town make? And what would be its purpose?

I live in the area and there is a soft spot there. I have to go outside my home to use my cell phone. Better to have the tower in the yard. Look around town, they are all over the place. On apartment buildings (orchard st across from Joes) on top of 462 Mt aburn st to name a few. pretty sure those are very close to residential areas. at least the DPW yard is away from most homes

zipzen, i have the strongest possible service walking up and down orchard on dpw side, at victory field, on common, spring. where exactly is the soft spot you reference? the town tries to justify tower need by telling residents that the dpw needs better cell service yet standing in the yard i have strong service. by the way, the dpw yard is not entirely in its own world...lots of single and multi family homes all around and not to mention it is right across from a primary school. driving through town and found a soft spot closer to king and carey, side streets off of warren. would make sense for the town to talk to residents and establish need before wasting money on consultants looking for new customers.

Why is this town wasting money on wants not needs. We'd LIKE to have good cell signals but we NEED infrastructure. Police, Fire, Schools, Roads. How much can they cut those necessities and justify new playgrounds and cell towers?

Fact: AT&T Service IS weak in that area. I drop AT&T calls all the time in my home (on York Ave) and often times the person on the other end cannot hear me.
Fact: Cell towers have not been proven to be dangerous.
Fact: I still oppose the tower, but it won't matter. While Verizon already has a booster there, AT&T does not. This means that in order to provide fair market competition to all providers, Watertown will be forced to put a new tower in. A few complaints wont stop anything. I've seen it happen in other towns, and it will happen here.

Boosters are not supplied by Verizon..anyone can purchase and configure to boost their specific service. So this is not something that DPW does only for Verizon ..no conflict. This would be true if they provided a carrier a specific tower or antenna, yes.