Crown Castle Asks Court to End NY Town's 4-Year Delay Clearing DAS Apps
Crown Castle asked a federal court for summary judgment against a New York town that the wireless infrastructure provider says delayed its distributed antenna system (DAS) applications for four years. Hempstead’s "unreasonable fees, delays, and effective denial violate" Sections 253…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
and 332(c)(7)(B), Crown Castle said in a supporting memo (in Pacer, case 2:17-cv-03148) filed Friday at the U.S. District Court for Eastern New York. Crown Castle said the town’s third-party consultant frustrated review of 48 applications submitted in January 2017 “with his imposition of improper demands on Crown Castle for (i) unreasonable facility design changes based upon his arbitrary and unsupported findings of significant visual impact; and (ii) additional radio frequency data that is not required by the Town’s Code or federal law, to demonstrate the need for the DAS nodes.” Hempstead opposed (in Pacer) summary judgment in another filing posted Friday. Hempstead's requests to Crown Castle were consistent with the Telecom Act, "which preserves a municipality's authority to consider and evaluate the placement, construction and appearance of a wireless facility when reviewing an applicant's proposal.” Crown Castle "failed to consider, evaluate and/or even respond to the Town's suggested less visually intrusive alternatives,” it said.