Sen. Stec pops into Adirondack Park Agency meeting to address spotty cell tower coverage
By Gwendolyn Craig
During the World University Games last winter, Verizon Wireless placed mobile cell towers around the park to increase its service coverage. After the games, they were gone.
State Sen. Dan Stec said constituents called him and complained. The transient towers, he said, were “a very public admission by the state government that we have poor cell service.” The mobile units were permitted by the Adirondack Park Agency. Stec said Verizon covered the costs.
The state has gone out of its way to impress visitors with state-of-the-art Olympic facilities, Stec said, but residents living without cell service feel like a “second fiddle.”
“It’s glaring,” Stec told the APA board. The Republican lawmaker from Queensbury made an unexpected appearance at the end of the agency’s meeting on Thursday. Chairman John Ernst joked that the board was not going to hold him to the 3-minute time limit for public comments, but then asked the senator to wrap up 20 minutes into his speech.
Stec outlined the issues: nearly half the park’s 6 million acres are forest preserve, constitutionally protected lands where communications towers may not be built. An added challenge for companies are the APA’s regulations on cell towers. Stec said Verizon, AT&T and others don’t want to complain to the regulator, “but they do continue to struggle.”
The APA oversees public and private development in the 6-million-acre patchwork of public and private lands. A policy passed in 2002 applies to telecommunications structures over 40 feet and requires that towers must have “substantial invisibility.” The term has been a headache for some, including APA board members tasked with permitting them.
The policy states that the towers should avoid mountaintops and ridge lines, co-locate where possible on existing towers, use vegetation to conceal or when all else fails, “camouflage in a scale with the surroundings.” Cell towers disguised as pine trees, nicknamed “Frankenpines,” have challenged some people’s interpretation of “substantial invisibility.”
Stec said he was not advocating for ridding “substantial invisibility” from the APA’s regulations. He thought it was good to minimize visual impacts.
However, he said there is room for compromise: “I’m telling you the vast majority want cell service in the Adirondacks,” he said. “I think the vast majority are willing to catch a glimpse of a cell tower, and it won’t ruin their day.”
He worried about the public safety ramifications of the lack of cell towers, citing nearly three-fourths of 911 calls are made with cell phones in area counties. Stec spoke about the killing of a Saratoga County woman, who was allegedly shot by a homeowner after a car she was in turned around in a driveway in rural Washington County. There was poor cell service in the area, delaying calls for help. The senator didn’t want to see a similar tragedy in the Adirondacks.
“I just don’t want to see our added layer of review and regulation be the reason why we don’t have adequate cell service in the park,” he said.
Ernst said he appreciated Stec coming “and making valid points.”
There is federal money available, but the North Country Republicans won’t ask for it. And, no cell tower application has ever been denied by APA. Obviously Stec doesn’t know what he is talking about.
That’s what happens when you have excessive regulations. Stealth deployed cell sites also are prone to service and interference issues due to their constrained deployments. As well as the substantial cost increase to deploy them. It isn’t worth it in the end to the cell companies.
The regulatory programs person addressed this in his report before the senator arrived. They approved 12 out of 12 applications in the last 4 months alone with an average review time of 15 days. There are only 3 new tower applications in front of the agency, 1 of which is about to be approved. What is he talking about? The APA doesn’t manifest cell towers out of thin air.
As if, this is something new to these so called politicians in this area. We have complained of coverage for years. Seems people here commenting know more about how to apply than Stec. Nothing knew.
There was a bill passed for this issue as the first commenter mentioned. Where was Stec during this?
The state needs to share their mountain top radio tower sites for the better of everyone. Outdated rules need to be changed so this can happen.
This article leave me a bit confused. Is Senator Stec suggesting that the only reason that the park is not already blanketed with cellular phone coverage is that the APA won’t let the cellular providers install more towers? The article does not clearly explain his position. The article also does not present any background information that would support (or not support) whatever position the Senator took during his presentation.
Hopefully the Explorer will follow up with a more complete and comprehensive article.
Minor tower modifications (addition of antennas) may be approved in 15 days, but new tower applications drag on for months. The US Forest Service regulates a lot fo Colorado, but cell coverage is so much better. Ski areas operating on USFS permitted land offer excellent coverage. The average hiker would rather see towers than have no emergency calling capability. This problem has improved little in the last 15 years.
Here is my suggestion to help improve coverage. At every Volunteer Fire Co in the Adirondacks place a cell tower at each one. This benefit would be twofold. The revenue from the cell tower placement could be used to assist local fire depts budgets and the cell tower would improve the cell signals in the surrounding communities. I realize this is not going to reach everyone but it’s a start. Just my 2¢ .
I called the Senator’s Albany office today (5/16/23) with the suggestion that cellular service antennas could be concealed within ersatz fire towers on mountains within the Adirondack Park. If the shelter at the top were made if fiberglass or some other radio transparent material, they would conceal the cellular antennas while presenting an iconic Adirondack appearance to the traveling public.
In one part of the reading ,it said. towers were put up before university games ,after the games they were gone.are they disconnected? ..their are thousands of motorcycles riding the Adirondacks every year.and better cell service would be useful
In Raquette Lake they have 2 cell towers and now they trying to put Lithium Battery Farm 300 feet behind it, within 800 feet of village residents.
Battery farm will be a big boost for the power system. Will be good once it is up and running!!
Politicians are so stuck on themselves that they risk exposing themselves as dumb. People have been complaining of poor cell coverage for years. Dave Wolff and AdkAction have been in the forefront of this fight for improved cell coverage since 2010. Dan Stec is Johnny Come Lately but he did garner 11 responses………… The use of fire towers used as a disguise for cell towers is brilliant. Our church in Southport, Ct. is doing the exact same thing with our steeple. But, of course, our steeple is easily accessible and well maintained. The fire towers are neither.
Want better cell coverage, Just put a tower up. Why does it need to be concealed or disguised??
Blah, blah, blah. Same with broadband: blah, blah, blah.
It becomes obvious reading the comments that the state and in particular the DEC and APA needs to educate the public regarding the rules of land classification and use. There are many official reasons you can’t use a fire tower or “just put up a tower” . Areas that are off limits to towers need to be well defined. After definition you may find there isn’t much left except existing towers. Companies like Verizon , generating revenue and profit are not allowed to build a tower in dead zones unless it’s on certain types of land classification. Short cell towers just means you need more towers which ups the geographic challenge. Your never going to solve this unless everyone understands the hurdles up front.