Case Studies


Working all Heights of a Telecommunications Dispute

Seeking Full Coverage
Our client, a wireless telecommunications carrier, needed to place a wireless communications facility in a particular location within a community in Rhode Island to resolve a gap in its network coverage. To install a wireless communications facility, our client needed a zoning variance. However, the local zoning board denied its application for relief.

Luckily, We’re Not Afraid of Heights
Without the necessary zoning relief, our client would be unable to remedy the gap in its network coverage – a gap which resulted in dropped phone calls and a potential loss of customers. To understand why only the site at issue was feasible, we had to understand the constraints of providing wireless service to the targeted coverage area. We climbed onto rooftops and slogged up muddy hilltops visiting alternate locations for installations. We studied tree cover, topography, and morphology. We participated in drive tests with radio frequency engineers, and studied the complex algorithms to understand why this specific site was the only one that would remedy the existing gap in the client’s wireless network.

Can You Hear Me Now?
Once our field research was complete, we had a complete understanding of our client’s technology requirements for the targeted coverage area. Upon the municipality’s variance denial and decision, we brought the case to trial in federal court, where we convinced the judge not only that the carrier had a significant gap in its network coverage, but that the site it sought was the only feasible location to remedy the coverage gap. The court granted our client the relief it sought, allowing it to build a flagpole-style tower just where the carrier knew it needed to be placed.