Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Radio Coverage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Experts differ on whether proposed tower is least-intrusive way to fix Route 22 coverage gap
Summary
Applicant and consultants say the project fills a significant gap on Route 22 and requires a ~95-foot centerline; critics and an outside telecom attorney urged the board to demand empirical drive-test data and to consider alternative locations and lower heights.
The debate over whether the proposed telecom facility is the least-intrusive way to remedy a coverage gap was central to the hearing. The applicant and the board's consultants presented propagation maps and RF justifications indicating that a 95-foot centerline is needed for the carrier's objectives; the applicant emphasized low-band coverage improvements in select locations.
That technical assertion met direct challenge from outside counsel Andrew Campanelli, who told the board: "You don't have the data necessary to enable you to make an informed decision," arguing that a carrier-provided drive test is the proper evidentiary tool for locating gaps and assessing alternative sites. Board members asked Cityscape and the applicant to provide focused written clarifications, and scheduled a special meeting to consider whether additional empirical testing or refined maps are necessary before proceeding with a SEQRA significance finding.
