The Hempstead Town Board unanimously approved new legislation to regulate where wireless equipment, including cell towers, can be placed within the Town of Hempstead. At a hearing on Tuesday, Republican town Supervisor Kate Murray told residents she was “proud of the legislation.

It is a one-two punch that will help to preserve the integrity of our neighborhoods.” The new ordinance will require wireless communication providers to document a need for new towers and antennas, and they will be encouraged to try to find a co-location or sharing of a site with another wireless provider.  If requesting a new tower, cell companies must furnish a written report to the town detailing meaningful efforts to co-locate. 

Wireless providers must also conduct a widely advertised balloon test, which offers the public a representation of the visual impact of a newly proposed tower using a large brightly colored balloon at the proposed tower  site.  The new ordinance also outlines the town’s preferences in the siting of wireless telecommunications equipment. “One” is the highest priority, placing equipment on an existing tower or other structure on town-owned or other publicly-owned property. 

Other preferred options include a new tower on industrial-zoned land, light manufacturing areas or other non-residential areas within the town. The least preferred option, number seven, would be the location of a new tower in areas zoned for residential use.  Other highlights of the legislation include no new cell towers or antennas being located closer than 1,500 feet to a residential home, house of worship, daycare center or school. 

Applicants proposing new cell towers must provide a report inventorying  existing towers and other suitable structures within two miles of a proposed cell tower site. Also, in justifying a request for a cell tower of any height, data must  be provided to document the effectiveness of a tower at a lower total height at the same locations.

Along with the new town ordinance, Hempstead Town has retained wireless telecommunications expert Richard Comi, who also helped draft the code, to review applications and provide objective testimony on wireless telecommunication applications that come before the Hempstead zoning Board of Appeals. Although the legislation was received favorably, residents urged the board to reserve decision in order to amend several sections of the new code. In particular, county Legislator David Denenberg, Democrat of Merrick, raised concerns about grandfathering existing cell equipment already in the town. 

He asked the Town Board to add a clause that would permit the town to request wireless providers to comply with the new code if they never applied for a permit under the old town code. He suggested that these providers be given a date of January 1, 2012, to comply with the new code. Claudia Borecky, a member of the Telecommunications Taskforce, and Joe Baker, president of the South Merrick Civic Association, echoed Legislator Denenberg’s sentiments. 

“This clause could be a death sentence to the law,” said Ms. Borecky. Mr. Baker first thanked the Town Board for creating the legislation, and then reminded them of his members’ concerns about the wireless equipment already in place in the community.  “Our concern is what’s in front of our homes and schools,” he said, referring to the cellular nodes, known as Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS) that are placed on telephone poles in residential areas.

There are 160 DAS in the Town of Hempstead. “There is the perception of a problem and we hope that some of the DAS antennas can be re-located,” said Mr. Baker. In an unforeseen twist, representatives from Verizon, NextG and the New York State Wireless Association also urged the town to reserve decision. Alfred Amato, representing Verizon, said the code “puts tremendous barriers on the provider,”  pointing to a map that shows that “99 percent of the Town of Hempstead would be prohibited from having cell towers if kept away from residential areas.

The Nassau County Planning Commission has said that this ordinance in effect prohibits the building of new facilities in the town.” Peter Heimdahl, representing NextG, urged the town to adopt an ordinance modeled after one written by the wireless industry. He also reminded the Town board that NextG “carefully negotiated a public right-of-way licensing agreement, which was adopted by town resolution in July, 2009.”

Finally, the president of the New York State Wireless Association urged more dialogue between stakeholders, including wireless providers, the town and residents, for an amicable compromise. Despite these concerns the town board voted to pass the ordinance. Charles Kovitt, senior deputy town attorney, said he believed Legislator Denenberg’s proposed provision on the grandfather clause would “lead to a bad result. We have a better framework with this, even though we know that we will face attack on this new law. We want positive results for our residents. The ordinance is excellent.” 

By Laura Schofer

Laura Schofer, staff writer for L&M Publications, has been recognized with several awards for many of her feature pieces published in Bellmore and Merrick Life, The Citizen and The Leader.