Residents in New York City rally against planned placement of a Verizon XLTE cell tower
Residents in the area are complaining that the tower would be built in between homes and is an eyesore. Some are upset that the tower would be the tallest structure in Laurelton, while others fear that they will be more likely to get cancer if Verizon gets its way. There is no proof that the signals generated by cell towers cause cancer, and even the American Cancer Society says that there is very little evidence to support that theory.
On June 5th, there will be a public hearing during which residents will take the opportunity to speak their minds. Those living in the area know that there is precedent on their side. In 2005, Nextel removed four small rooftop towers that were place on a building next to an elementary school after multiple rallies by residents.
Verizon's Samberg said that the towers are needed to bring the carrier's XLTE service to the area. Using a combination of AWS and the 700MHz spectrum, XLTE adds capacity in congested areas. The spokesman compares it to expanding a two lane highway and converting it into a four-lane expressway.
1. Reluctant_Human (Posts: 864; Member since: 28 Jun 2012)
Kind of stupid protest in my opinion but I don't live there so oh well.
2. alouden (Posts: 205; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
I used to live there (Can't believe that Duane reade is still there). We have a bit of history protesting against such things. My only issue with the protest is that these same folks will also complain about poor mobile service.
I believe the expression is NIMBY, short for "not in my back yard."
13. Armchair_Commentator (Posts: 204; Member since: 08 May 2014)
NIMBY is right, I'm sure they love enjoying the benefits of these types of infrastructure, but they just don't want to see it or hear it.
Out of sight out of mind I guess
15. Reluctant_Human (Posts: 864; Member since: 28 Jun 2012)
It's New York. There's a Duane Reade everywhere lol.
3. downbeat4 (Posts: 71; Member since: 03 Dec 2010)
They're in John LeGere's pockets. #guaranteed
14. wyrishman (Posts: 24; Member since: 11 May 2014)
Hahaha I love the idea of John LeGere secretly starting a protest about this in NY. I could see him forming some coup for that.
+1 for the idea
4. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)
If I were Verizon I would turn off all cell towers in that third-world neighborhood and let them switch to Sprint and then watch with delight as they b¡tch about not having service. These people should be elated that Verizon is willing to spend the money on upgrading the infrastructure that would directly improve their service: iNgrates!!
5. jphillips63 (Posts: 180; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Verizon is spending our money not there's. That's why those on Verizon's service pays more for service than any other carrier out there. Seems we pay more and get less. I'd much rather see Verizon focus on the fringe areas first before catering to areas that already has service.
7. PAPINYC (banned) (Posts: 2315; Member since: 30 Jul 2011)
Speak for yourself Mary, I "pays" less and 'gets' more since I have Unlimited Data. Verizon customers, overall, get better service than customers on those other so-called "carriers".
I'm not sure what part of the country you inhabit but, I actually live in Manhattan, service in Manhattan is the BOMB!!! And, now, with the deployment of XLTE, it's like the "A-BOMB!!!"
Those people in Laurelton, Queens, should consider themselves fortunate that Verizon would even consider to integrate them into their XLTE 4G coverage map; it's only more proof of Verizon's commitment to their network and customers. Especially since, Laurelton is the kind of place one would likely try to avoid going to and is so far from New York City proper that it could almost be considered not New York City by those who actually know any better.
10. alouden (Posts: 205; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)
I would take issue with your offensive comments, but you, know what they say about arguing with a fool....
16. rlopin (Posts: 1; Member since: 07 Oct 2014)
You said "Laurelton is the kind of place one would likely try to avoid going to"
What an incredibly pretentious comment that perpetuates the stereotype of Manhattanites as being elitist. Way to represent.
Not everyone can afford to or wants to live in Manhattan. Do you know anything about Laurelton? Are you a twenty or thirty something? Are you single? Do you have roommates? Do you have kids of school age? Do you own a car? There are many factors that determine where one chooses to live. Not everyone prefers the big city.
The citizens of Laurelton are certainly within their rights to ask for a more obfuscated solution. If it just isn't possible then it represents a trade-off their community can vote on. You shouldn't be so condescending to them just for taking a stand on something that is important to them.
12. downyjr (Posts: 6; Member since: 25 May 2014)
You pay roughly the same through Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint. There might be $5-$10 difference a month, but it is well worth it with Verizon's coverage, bandwith, and overall network. I used to work as an indirect dealer, carrying all three, and there was a reason 90% of our sales came from Verizon. You pay more, but you get more too. If you want to save a few bucks a month to get slower 4G and less coverage thats your call, but it is worth it for me.
8. drazwy (Posts: 139; Member since: 15 Jan 2014)
All carriers should just turn off and remove all towers servicing the town and let them enjoy their cell free zone! Give them what they want.
9. skymitch89 (Posts: 1081; Member since: 05 Nov 2010)
My question is why doesn't Verizon use a site setup in that area that's similar to the ones that Sprint uses on top of buildings in New York? Just put it on one of the flat roof buildings and call it good. I know, there might need to be some modifications to the building to make sure that the roof can hold the equipment, but that would at least make the people a bit more happy.
11. Augustine (Posts: 740; Member since: 28 Sep 2013)
Such a crappy neighborhood could seemingly benefit from a cell phone tower in it. At least it'd have the first new structure built since the 60s.
Besides, haven't carriers even disguised towers as palm trees to blend with the scenery? It seems that if the new tower were disguised as a crack house or a derelict building it would blend just as well in Laurelton.