Also at the April 18 public meeting, lawyers and representatives from Sprint Spectrum and the Village of Roslyn Board of Trustees continued their discussion of Sprint's plan to attach three eight-inch in width antennas to existing towers on property at Rallye Motors in Roslyn.

Lawrence Ray, an attorney for Sprint was seeking a vote on the matter from the BOT at the April 18 public meeting. During the discussion, he constantly invoked the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which, according to Mr. Ray, stipulates that local governing bodies must act expeditiously on such applications.

Local residents, especially those from the Village of East Hills, continued to express health concerns over the antenna additions. And once again, Mr. Ray noted that the Telecommunications Act denies the right of local municipalities to reject such applications over not just health-related concerns, but also over visual or property values matters. On the subject, Mr. Ray noted that the Town of Oyster Bay recently tried to deny the construction of a similar-sized antenna, only to be overruled by a U.S. District Court decision.

Sprint wants a special use permit to install three panel antennas to an existing transmission tower. They also are seeking to install public utility cabinets on the ground adjacent to the site. Mr. Ray said Sprint complied with the "seven factors" laid down by the village, including protecting residents in health matters and dealing with any adverse visual impact. Because of the latter development, Mr. Ray added that the proposal would have virtually no impact on property values.

However, problems have arisen with certain numbers, specifically the distance of the tower from actual residential properties. Mr. Ray said the tower stands 430 ft. from residential property lines and 470 ft. from the nearest residence in Roslyn. According to BOT members, David DeRienzis, the village's building inspector, measured the tower as standing 130 ft. from residential property in East Hills. Mr. Ray disputed that number, claiming that the tower stood 630 ft. from residential property in East Hills.

The possibility of an alternate site for the antennas was also discussed at the meeting. Linda Nathanson, a resident of East Hills and also a board of Trustee member in that village, preferred the site, located at Acura Motors, because it was further away from homes in her village than the Rallye site is.

But Mr. Ray said Sprint had already "considered and rejected" the alternate site. According to Jim Pantano, an architect for Sprint, the alternate site was not as high as the Rallye location. Sprint would have to construct a new pole on the site mentioned by Ms. Nathanson and others.

A disappointed Ms. Nathanson remarked that what was "convenient" for Sprint could prove to have adverse health effects on residents in East Hills. Speaking as a real estate agent, Ms. Nathanson added that prospective homebuyers do not like living near a cell tower. Mr. Ray countered that such residents are already living near a high-tension power line. Once again, he brought up the Telecommunications Act in response to both health and property value concerns.

Mr. Ray himself expressed disappointment that the BOT would not vote on the matter at the April 18 meeting, also noting that Sprint filed for the application in the spring of 1999 and that it had been two and-a-half months since he last had the chance to address the board. In that time, Mr. Ray said, no one had approached him with the idea of an alternate site.

But BOT members said they could make no decision yet, since there was now new information about the distance from the site to residential areas that dispute what Sprint has told the board. "Confusion over numbers" and the fact that Sprint is offering a "controversial application that needs to be cleared up" were given by Trustee Marshall Bernstein as reasons for a continued discussion on the issue. The next BOT meeting is Tuesday, May 16.