Greenburgh Antenna Review Board Meeting - November 10, 2025
Greenburgh Antenna Review Board Meeting - November 10, 2025
The Greenburgh Antenna Review Board met on November 10, 2025, at Town Hall to review two applications for modifications to wireless facilities. Present were Catherine Letter, Diane Torstrip, Frances Sheehan, and Michael Sheridan, constituting a quorum. The board examined each application against the town's requirements, identified numerous deficiencies, and voted unanimously to deem both applications incomplete.
Application for 609 Sawmill River Road
- General Issues: The radio frequency engineer's license number was missing; the address on drawings (609 North Central North Song River Road) differed from the application (609 Sawmill River Road); the property owner (Salmo Realty LLC) and pole owner were not clearly identified; the affidavit of authorization did not include the property owner granting permission to Verizon; and the relationship between Global Signal Acquisition and Crown was not established.
- Site Conditions: The board visited the site and observed multiple metal containers inside the fenced compound, fences of varying heights (5 to 7 feet), overgrown vegetation, and climbing spokes/steps on the pole—a prohibited attractive nuisance. The drawings did not reflect these conditions.
- RF Report and Drawings: The report's power density values at 50 feet showed inconsistent increments; the color key and identification of antennas were unclear; existing equipment labeled "ATT equipment" was not specific; and the locations of signs (including missing town-required signs) were not properly shown.
- Insurance: The certificate of liability insurance did not name the town as an additional insured.
- Vote: The board voted unanimously to deem the application incomplete, requiring corrections to credentials, addresses, ownership documents, site plan accuracy, sign identification, and insurance language.
Application for 313 Central Avenue
- Property Ownership Discrepancy: The application listed property owner as AP Wireless Investments LLC, while drawings showed Colonia Properties LLC. The pole owner (Crown Atlantic Company) needed to give Verizon explicit permission.
- Height Conflicts: The structural analysis report stated the monopole height as 96 feet, but drawings showed 97.6 feet for the existing pole and 98 feet for Verizon antenna centerline—these must be reconciled.
- Antenna Relocation: The description of work included relocating three antennas, but drawings did not clarify where they would be moved.
- Existing Equipment: The site had unidentified antennas (labeled "unknown") and abandoned ATT equipment that had not been removed per code.
- Fence and Site Details: The fence description was incomplete; the compound contained unlabeled equipment shelters (e.g., Sprint generator); drawings did not show existing overhead lines or signs; the color of appurtenant structures was missing; and climbing spokes were present on the pole.
- Insurance: The general liability insurance did not include the town as an additional insured, and the property insurance description was blank.
- Vote: The board voted unanimously to deem the application incomplete, requiring corrections to ownership documentation, height consistency, site plan accuracy, equipment identification, fence description, and insurance certificates.
Key Outcomes
- Both applications (609 Sawmill River Road and 313 Central Avenue) were unanimously deemed incomplete by the board.
- The board required the applicants to submit corrected materials addressing all listed deficiencies before re-submission.
- The board noted that existing town-required signs were missing at the 609 site and expressed concern that previous permit conditions were not complied with.
- The meeting was adjourned at 6:16 PM.
Meeting Transcript
Hi. This is the antenna review board meeting at the town of Greenberg on the ele on the 10th of November 2025 to review two applications. Before we proceed, let me take attendance. Catherine Letter of Flasquette, me present. Diane Torstrip. Present. That is a quorum in a public place, Town of Greenberg Town Hall. Let me take the um take the rest of attendance. Frances Sheehan. Present. Michael Sheridan. Present. Okay. So let's get started. This application was submitted on the 3rd of November 2025. It's today is the 10th of November 2025 that we are meeting to review it, so it is seven days later. If anyone sees, you know, has a different take on the what I what I see. Please interrupt me. A it says name, addresses, and qualifications of persons preparing the reports and his or her or their signatures attesting to the truth and completeness of the information contained therein. The there are two issues for me. The first one is the same issue that we had on Friday when we reviewed another application. Is there a license number for a license for the radio frequency engineer that is cited in number three under A. So I maybe were able to get that information from there's no there's no license number. He's not a PE, but they're um I spoke to him briefly, and I think similar to what the other RF consultant that provides as a report with that uh certification page that this is you're talking about I'm talking about page 42 and 6A for the report certification. He can do a similar similar certification page to that. You know, dealing with his how does it come that someone's called an engineer if they're not a he's not a P, he's not a professional engineer, it's just an RF. There's no I my understanding is there is no specific RF engineer. So that's just like with the title that people assume. Okay. So I understand. Yes, we would like the credentials then something that can the other issue that comes up and it comes up throughout is the address on the drawings is different than the address on everything else. This one says 609 North Central, North Song River Road, and other things say 609 Solmnow River Road. So we'll I'll highlight it at different points, but it needs to be one and the same. Let me just write here. Okay. Um the next one is B, and it says name, address, and phone number, cellular and landline of the property owner, operator, and applicant. You have the property owner 609 Sonal River or Salmo Realty LLC. Um I haven't checked whether it is indeed one word or two words, but then you have you don't have the owner of the poll here. You did have the owner of the poll and the application you provided on Friday, because I went back to see if we had looked for that. I think that's two global signal acquisition for but it says operator lease, or it doesn't say owner. Okay, I'll have a owner there, the owner as well. Which gets to another point of confusion later on when it's called crown and we don't have a connection drawn. So that's incomplete. Um C here reads the property the property postal address is 609 Solmo River Road. Um Cerees the property, the property postal address is six oh nine sawmill river road, so this goes to the issue of needing it to be the same. I have the address on the application versus drawing is different. So with um D is complete. Um there are two parts to this though. If the so if it says if the installation is present release agreement confirmation from the less order that the LEC is authorized to utilize the property, you send us to um exhibit D fifty-four, page fifty-four, it says enclosed here with this the affidavit of owner should be executed by the operator of the server, which authorizing the applicant to make this application. But again, it doesn't say owner, it says operator.
openpublica.com