T-Mobile’s Radio Frequency Expert Declares: ‘This is the Best Alternative’

“This is the best alternative,” T-Mobile’s radio frequency expert told the zoning board of adjustment during Tuesday’s continuation of the hearing on T-Mobile’s cell tower application.

The applicant, T-Mobile and the Green Knoll Volunteer Fire Company, is seeking a variance from the zoning board of adjustment to build a 125-foot tower on the fire company property in order to cover an estimated 1.7-mile gap in its coverage area, specifically areas on Foothill and Crim roads and North Bridge Street.

Richard Conroy, T-Mobile’s RF expert, testified and responded to questions posed by Hank Menkes of Menkes Associates, the board’s expert.

In almost three hours of testimony, Conroy explained that alternatives such as rotating the sectors, utilizing remote radio heads and other locations would not completely eliminate the coverage gap.

“The site is located within the ‘search ring’ and fills about 85 percent of the gap area," he said. "It meets the needs of the fire department [which wants to attach an antenna to provide dispatch coverage in case of outages]. It is the best method of providing a wide range of coverage. The alternatives did not seem to provide any better coverage or left other gaps.”

The alternatives, Conroy noted, had other challenges and trade-offs, including reliability and practicality. For example, there would need to be at least six remote radio heads on a pole and there would be roadblocks to telephone pole usage.

Rotating the existing sectors, Conroy noted, did not show any significant change in the coverage to the gap area.

In response to other locations suggested by zoning board members, T-Mobile attorney Gregory D. Meese of Price, Meese, Shulman and D’Arminio, said, “The board can’t make an applicant chase its tail to look at alternate sites.”

Conroy also suggested that, in order to provide complete coverage, “it may need to be a two-site solution at some point.”

Board member Carl Shulz reiterated, “So it’s a step at a time. This is a practical implementation approach for filling the gap.”

The public will be able to continue questioning Conroy at the June 21 meeting.

In related actions, board member Donald Sweeney removed himself from the hearing. Upon learning that Sweeney is employed by Alcatel-Lucent, Meese informed the board that he has been retained by Alcatel-Lucent and indicated he felt “uncomfortable” with Sweeney sitting on the case.

“It’s remote but, in terms of case law, I am concerned about the appearance of conflict of interest,” Meese said.

Board Attorney Lawrence Vastola agreed.

“Our courts have always been very, very cautious resolving conflict issues," he said. "They use that phrase ‘appearance.’”

Chairman William Vornehm suggested a compromise in which Sweeney would step down from Tuesday’s hearing and Meese would research legal precedents. If research does not support the appearance of a conflict of interest, Meese will supply Sweeney a transcript and he will be eligible to participate in the remainder of the hearings.