Local Leaders Request Federal Intervention on 5G Towers Planned for Lower Manhattan
A coalition of elected officials representing Lower Manhattan is joining Community Board 1 (CB1) in asking the federal agency that regulates cellular phone towers to block the planned installation of fifth-generation (5G) wireless masts in the community. In an October 29 letter to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), CB1 chair Tammy Meltzer expresses to Garnet Hanly, who heads the Competition & Infrastructure Policy Division of the FCC’s Wireless Telecommunication Bureau, “our strong opposition to the proposed locations for Link5G cell towers in Lower Manhattan, particularly those sited within the 100-year floodplain, those sited in or alongside active major resiliency projects, and those sited in historic districts where the design does not align with community context.”
The poles, equipped with antennas and transmitters that will enable high-speed wireless connectivity, are part of the City’s controversial LinkNYC program, which began installing outdoor nine-foot-tall internet kiosks in Manhattan in 2015, mostly in locations formerly occupied by pay telephones. Two years ago, this rollout was reprised with the debut of 5G poles, which are designed to offer improved cellular service, free Wi-Fi, and enhanced options for in-home broadband internet access to residents whose homes are located near the towers.
The letter, co-signed by Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine, State Assembly member Charles Fall, and City Council member Christopher Marte, argues that the City’s Office of Technology and Information (OTI) and its private-sector franchisee, CityBridge, have violated multiple laws and regulations in formulating their plan to install seven towers in Lower Manhattan. The local sites of the planned 5G towers are on sidewalks in front of 95 Wall Street, 88 Pine Street, 75 South Street, 110 William Street, Eight Spruce Street, 66 Harrison Street, and 100 North Moore Street.
“Several proposed tower sites are located within the 100-year floodplain, yet we have not received any Environmental Assessments (EA) as required by FCC law 106,” Ms. Meltzer writes, in a reference to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, which requires federal agencies to consider the effect of federal undertakings on properties listed (or eligible for listing) in the National Register of Historic Places. FCC policy defines “undertaking” to include the installation of wireless towers. The agency says, “an applicant violates the FCC’s environmental rules if it begins constructing a facility… before ascertaining whether the facility may have a significant environmental impact.”
The letter also alleges that two of the proposed towers may conflict with the Battery Park City Authority’s North/West Resiliency Project, an initiative that reaches into Tribeca to implement flood mitigation measures.
Finally, Lower Manhattan leaders dispute a ruling by the State Historic Preservation Office that there are no adverse effects from siting a tower at 66 Harrison Street. “This location is within the Area of Potential Effect of the Tribeca West Historic District and will directly impact views of the landmarked 19th century federal style townhouses,” the letter states. “Moreover, the required excavation will affect the historic cobblestone street, which is a character-defining feature of the neighborhood.”
“Lower Manhattan is highly vulnerable to climate change impacts,” the letter concludes. “As numerous resiliency projects are underway in our area, including those by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, it is crucial that each proposed site in the floodplain undergo a rigorous Environmental Assessment.”