East Lyme — AT&T is asking the state Siting Council to approve either a new alternative site at The Orchards development for a replacement cell tower — or a site it already identified at 351A Boston Post Road.

In a revised application to the state Siting Council, AT&T proposed a cell tower, which would be designed as "a faux silo tower and barn style equipment shelter" at 2 Arbor Crossing within The Orchards subdivision, as an alternative to the Boston Post Road site outlined in an earlier application.

In Connecticut, the Siting Council rules on the placement of cell towers in towns.

The state Siting Council will listen to public comments during a hearing, scheduled for 7 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. 1, at Town Hall, on the revised application for a "certificate of environmental compatibility and public need” from American Towers, a limited liability company, and New Cingular Wireless PCS LLC, doing business as AT&T.

AT&T is searching for a new spot to install a cell tower, as the lease for the existing 150-foot monopole tower in The Orchards subdivision will expire at the end of 2017, the application states. The cell tower would provide service for both AT&T and T-Mobile.

The proposed silo tower, about 240 feet from the existing tower, would be approximately 105 feet tall, with a 35-foot-by-50-foot equipment shelter, according to the application.

AT&T is asking the Siting Council to approve either the 194-foot-tall monopole cell tower proposed for the Boston Post Road site — identified in the company's fall 2015 application — or the faux silo tower at the Arbor Crossing site.

During a Siting Council public hearing in December of 2015, about a dozen residents had spoken against the Boston Post Road site.

In the application, AT&T states that it understands the silo tower would be the preferred solution based on comments made by intervenors and other parties, but it would have a "significantly greater capital and operational cost as compared with the Boston Post Road Facility."

"After considering the concerns and suggestions from The Town, neighbors, and homeowners we believe our amended application provides a great option that works well for everyone involved," Karen Twomey, a spokeswoman for AT&T, said in a written statement to The Day.

First Selectman Mark Nickerson said that the town's attorneys helped with negotiations to extend the lease at The Orchards, and called the revised application a "win-win for everybody."

A lawyer who has represented the developer of The Orchards did not have any comments on the revised application.

Craig Tooker, a contact person for BHSO Community Conservancy, an intervening party of neighbors in the application for the Boston Post Road site, said that, "In the amended application, AT&T has presented an attractive alternative which to us is more appealing than the 200 ft. tower previously proposed at 351 Boston Post Road."

Melanie Bachman, acting executive director and staff attorney for the Siting Council, said by email that the council is charged, under the Public Utility Environmental Standards Act, to balance the need for the cell tower "at the lowest reasonable cost to consumers with the need to protect the environment and ecology of the state."

"This includes, but is not limited to, evaluating the nature of the probable environmental impact of the facility alone and cumulatively with other existing facilities, impacts on and conflict with the policies of the state concerning the natural environment, ecological balance, public health and safety, scenic, historic and recreational values, forests and parks, air and water purity and fish, aquaculture and wildlife," she wrote.

In addition to Tuesday's 7 p.m. hearing, the Siting Council also will conduct a field review of the alternative site at 2 p.m. and a hearing at 3 p.m. at Town Hall with AT&T and intervenors in the application.

AT&T initially had considered other sites for a replacement cell tower, but ultimately decided against them.

When AT&T filed the application with the Siting Council for the Boston Post Road site in the fall of 2015, the company said it was ruling out a potential site on Ancient Highway that it had been considering. The Mohegan Tribal Historic Preservation Office said the placement of a cell tower on that site, as well as on the site of Gateway Commons, would have an adverse visual impact on ceremonial stone groupings on nearby land. 

In March, a state Superior Court judge dismissed a case brought by the owner of the Ancient Highway site, John Drabik, who was seeking a deposition of two members of the Mohegan Tribal Historic Preservation Office.

Victoria Mueller, a lawyer for Drabik, said he has appealed the decision to the state Appellate Court and also has filed a concurrent action, which seeks relief, in Mohegan Tribal Court. She said the parties have agreed to not file briefs in appellate court for at least six months, pending the outcome of the Mohegan Tribal Court case.

The Mohegan Tribe did not comment.

k.drelich@theday.com