Greenburgh Antenna Review Board Meeting April 13, 2026
Greenburgh Antenna Review Board Meeting – April 13, 2026
The Greenburgh Antenna Review Board met on April 13, 2026, in the Lee F. Jackson Room to review two applications for antenna modifications. The board found both applications incomplete after detailed discussions and votes.
Discussion Items
- 313 Central Park Avenue Application (AT&T/Crown Castle): Presenter Stephen Bosk (Atlantic Site Development for ATZ) submitted the application. The board noted several deficiencies: missing signatures attesting to truth and completeness (required per 285-37A27A), incorrect zip code, incomplete affidavit of ownership, missing contact information for applicant, incomplete description of all work (needed to list removals and installations), missing certificate of completion for the monopole, incomplete antenna and frequency tables, incomplete near-field emission chart (needed to include all providers and distances to worst case), incorrect address on insurance certificates, missing sign image and specifications, and lack of start/end schedule. The board voted unanimously to deem the application incomplete.
- 280 North Central Avenue Application (AT&T): Presenter Stephen Tinty (Parishman Development) and Kate Weir (Buckingham Properties) represented the applicant. The board reviewed prior submissions and found that a requested rooftop radiation exposure map (showing spillage in colors) had not been provided despite previous requests. The applicant argued that ground-level compliance and signage were sufficient, but the board insisted on the rooftop map. The board offered a conditional complete with a 10‑day deadline for submission; however, the applicant's representative indicated that AT&T might argue that the request did not toll the shot clock. The board then voted to deem the application incomplete, stopping the shot clock.
Key Outcomes
- 313 Central Park Avenue: Motion to deem incomplete passed unanimously. Applicant to revise and resubmit full-size plans with all deficiencies addressed.
- 280 North Central Avenue: Motion to deem incomplete passed unanimously. The clock stopped. Applicant must provide the rooftop radiation mapping and correct minor language issues (e.g., "by" instead of "on" for annual certification date). The board will reconvene upon receipt of complete materials.
Meeting Transcript
Today is Monday, April 13th, 2026. This is the antenna review board gathered in a publicly accessible space at the town of Greenberg in the Lee F. Jackson room. We are here to review two applications, two submissions. Before we go ahead, I will take attendance. Diane Torstrop. Yeah. Catherine Letter of Lasquet. Together we have a quorum in a publicly accessible location. Francis Sheehan present. Can you introduce yourselves for the recording, please? Kim Neeson with Phillips Lightle. Stephen Tinty with uh Parishman Development. Kate Weir with Buckingham Properties. Okay. So we're going to start um, and I think Steve, can you hear us on Zoom fast? Yes, I can. We're starting with your submission. Um can you introduce yourself for the recording, please? Stephen Bosk, Atlantic Site Development on behalf of ATZ. So this was this is for 313 Central Park Avenue. This was submitted on the 6th of April today, 2026. Today is the 13th of April 2026, seven days later. We're meeting to review it. Um on your cover page, Steve, there is you have the wrong zip code. Um notice that after the fact that I apologize. Okay, no, no need to apologize just for the next when we get to it, just you'll just fix it. Um I don't know that we caught all of them throughout, but do a search to make sure that you catch them so that we don't have that problem down the road. Um in let's an A 285-37A27A, it asks for signatures attesting to the completeness, and to my eye, maybe someone else saw differently to my eye, I don't see a single signature with the statement attesting to the um truth and completeness of the information contained therein. Each person preparing the section for which they are that they are responsible needs to do that. Um it said application tab B has a in tab B. I'm not sure what we're looking for. You directed us to look at application has been compiled and um prepared by Stephen Bosch, then you give your information, but I don't know what is in tab B that tells us that. Uh it is a copy of the uh application for a building permit, which is signed uh by the contractor of record, uh United Network Communications myself, and it is sealed on the affidavit and construction of construction costs, as well as um description of work uh by the engineer of record Jeremy Keen. What we go through here is we go specifically to what they require, the law requires. So it says names, addresses, and qualifications of people preparing the report and his or her or their signatures attesting to the truth and completeness of the information contained therein. We don't do not extract from something nowhere in here. Will you find in 285-37827 a request for the building permit? All we look for is the things from A through V or one through, I think it's 22. Um, and we need exactly that name, address, and qualifications, the person preparing the report and his or her or their signature attesting to the truth and completeness of that information contained therein. I encourage you to wait to listen to the next review we do because the first part of that in there what they submitted is done that way. Okay, I have it. I'm sorry to interrupt. I do have all of them listed on the letter, which is tab J. I did not have them all sign the letter because I thought that them signing the application would have been sufficient, but I can get their uh signatures on that letter, which is tab J. I'm looking at tab J now, and I don't see I see. The plans are dead. What you sent in that was stamped April 6th that came in after Easter is the submission that I'm going by because that was what you submitted and we stamped in, correct? Yes. Okay.
openpublica.com