Good evening and welcome to the uh town board work session for March 10th, 2026.

So we have our Yorktown police department entering today.

If we would all stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, and if we could have uh Captain Justin Foley uh lead us off today.

To the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic, for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

And if we could all remain standing for a moment of silence, um Jennibel Castro, who uh worked for Matt Slater, her father-in-law had passed away.

Uh so if we could just uh keep uh Jenna's and Dan's family in our prayers.

Thank you.

Okay.

And uh we are going to change up the order of things a little bit.

Uh I see some people that I know are here for the uh decision on the cell tower, and I know one of the complaints was the uh the fact that you have families at home, and I want to sort of uh honor that and give it give an opportunity for those who want to get home to their family.

Uh we have a proposed decision to consider wetland stormwater and tree permit application submitted by Homeland Towers LLC for the uh proposed construction of telecommunications facility located at 62 Granite Springs Road.

Um I apologize because I thought that was in here and I did not bring my copy down.

Resolution Yeah, okay.

It's underneath.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Thank you.

It's on the board.

The resolution to be considered by the town board, uh, whereas Homeland Towers LLC Homeland is submitted a proposal to lease from the town of a portion of 62 Granite Springs Road, the parcel for the construction of a wireless telecommunications facility project.

And whereas the town board can convened and held a public hearing to consider homeland's application for various permits required for the proposed project, and whereas the applicant failed to establish the propriet of a wetland permit based on inaccurate wetland delineation, significant adverse ethic impacts, and insufficient protection of protected species of animals, among other reasons, and whereas cell tower location evidenced, often challenged due to inaccuracies, can be validated using specialized drive tests and other on-the-ground data, which maps actually signal strength and coverage at a specific location, and whereas the applicant failed to provide a drive test data, RSRP RSRQ, uh best servered uh dropped calls or any in-home data, i.e.

actual empirical data uh from Verizon systems demonstrating that its customers were suffering from a lack of service or drop calls in the area of uh purported gap in coverage, and whereas the applicant failed to demonstrate that the proposed support structure height is the minimum height necessary to provide licensed communication services, because the record reflects that a hundred and ten-foot uh monopole would provide acceptable coverage at the top height and potential others and potentially others, and whereas the applicant failed to submit construction drawings as requested by the town board, now therefore be it resolved that the town board finds for the foregoing reasons that the applicant is not established that the lease is in the best interest of the town from wetlands, whereas Homeland Towers LLC homeland has submitted an application for its wetland permit in connection with the desire to construct a wheel wireless telecommunication facility at or near 62 Granite Springs Road, and whereas a town board convened and held public hearing to consider homeland's application for the wetlands and other permits, and whereas in the natural state, wetlands serve a mired of values, ecological functions important to the public welfare, and whereas it is the intent of the town of Yorktown that activities in and around wetlands and watercourses conform with all applicable building codes and other regulations, and that such activities not threaten public safety or welfare, the natural environment, or cause nuisance.

To construct a wheel wireless telecommunication facility at or near 62 Granite Springs Road, and whereas a town board convened and held public hearing to consider homelands application for the wetlands and other permits, and whereas in the natural state, wetlands serve a mired of values, ecological functions important to the public welfare, and whereas it is the intent of the town of Yorktown that activities in and around wetlands and watercourses conform with all applicable building codes and other regulations, and that such activities not threaten public safety or welfare, the natural environment or cause nuisance, and whereas under the town code, activities in and around wetlands and watercourses should not destroy or damage aesthetic values, including significant public viewsheds and open space, and whereas boundaries of wetland ordinarily shall be determined by field investigation, flagging, and subsequent survey by a license land surveyor, and whereas no regulated activity shall be conducted in a wetland or wetland watercourse buffer without a written permit from the approval authority and full compliance with the terms of this chapter and other applicable regulations, and whereas mitigation is required for disturbance in a protected woodlands uh which is within a wetland and or wetland buffer, and whereas there was evidence in the record that the wetland delineation may not have been an accurate depiction of the wetland boundary and was not conducted during the growing season when plants, soils, and hydrologies are most identifiable, and whereas a proposed wetland buffer disturbance is at best at the edge of the wetland and possibly in the wetland if the flagging is done during the growing season, and whereas the applicant failed to conduct a wildlife survey to examine the potential impact on bog turtles, a federally threatened species and a New York State endangered species on other species habitats, and whereas the placement of the proposed access road almost fully eliminates the buffer on the southeast corner of the property, and whereas the proposed where the proposes of a wetland buffer are the filter pollutants, control erosion, and provide important wildlife corridors while minimizing disturbance to this important and increasingly rare ecosystem, and whereas the migration plan fails to replace to the greatest extent possible the functions of the original wetland buffer in terms of type uh ecological benefits, geographic location, uh, and setting and size, and whereas the revised EAF identifies that approximately sixty-five acres would be impacted by the project.

I'm sorry, point six five.

Thank you, Lonnie.

Uh acres would be impacted by the project, whereas the acreage of proposed wetland plantings in the site plan indicates an area of approximately 0.25 acres.

The mitigation proposed is essentially for the plantings of tree and shrubs, mainly to shield the adjacent neighbors' property and the plants identified for mitigation failed to include native wetland plants that are currently on the site and will be removed.

And whereas the visual assessment of the proposed facility consists of five photos taken at various vantage points to in the vicinity and the of the proposed tower, each photo is then still uh simulated uh in an undisguised monopole and a disguised monopole that simulates a con uh coniferous tree, and whereas the simulations show the tower to be visible from four of the locations in photos uh in photo one simulation, the tower is clearly visible and is not screened or buffered by intervening tree cover in leaf-off conditions, which account for six months of the year.

The tower is visible above the natural tree line and is exposed to approximately half its height.

And whereas photo two takes us from the nearest vantage point from the residential street, looking past several rev residences, the tower is visible through the tree cover in leaf-off conditions and relies on the tree cover to provide screening and buffering, any potential diminishment.

I might or something.

Tree cover would exp uh expose the tower in the leaf on conditions, and again, a significant portion of its total height would be exposed without buffering.

And whereas photo three is taken from a vantage point at the crest of the hill and from the roadway in the tower's uh town of Somers, it looks across a farm field at the site.

Again, the simulation relies on existing tree cover to provide buffering and screening.

Any diminishment of the cover would expose a tower, and whereas photo four is taken from the from near the low point of the Granite Springs Road near the proposed entrance drive to the site.

This is also reliant on existing tree cover for buffering and screening, and this area at the mouth of the proposed entry drive into the site would be subject to tree clearing in order to install the drive access to the proposed tower.

And whereas photo five is taken from Weatherby Street across the valley and containing wetlands.

The simulation again relies on the existing tree cover and vegetation for buffering and screening, and the tower is readily available uh readily visible in leaf off conditions, and half or more of its height is visible in screening, and any slight diminishment of this cover will render this view completely unbuffered or screened.

The loss of one tree could open an unobstructed viewshed.

Further, this view is is one narrow line of sight along a long stretch of residential uses positioned across the valley of wetlands from the site.

This configuration presents a condition in which visibility will be high along an approximately 15,000 1500 arc of uh degree arc of residences, which could easily be audience to the tower projecting above the natural tree line for half its height.

These residences may have to rely on a thin swatch of trees uphill from the Valley of Wetlands, as is similarly shown in photo five for six months of the year.

It will have a high degree of visibility even with some tree cover, and whereas the number of residents that form a semicircular arc about the uh around the site is approximately 50.

Many of these sit in the fashion to the rim of a bowl across on which the proposed tower sits and near equal position on the rim.

This renders the potential for significant visual effects at a high level.

Further, the other residences within the point five mile area of impact may be equally impacted depending on their sitting and intervening structures and elevation.

And whereas this work, this uh area is exclusively residential with a period of development from mid-century throughout nine through the nineteen seventies and early nineteen eighties.

It is a long-established residential neighborhood with an exclusive residential character.

It has not been in has not been encumbered or suffered any negative uh visual impacts from inception to present day introduction of this tower would induce a visual change and impediment to the character of the area that has not had uh since the neighborhood was developed, and whereas the location of the proposed cell tower facility on a residential lot and a residential neighborhood will adversely affect the nature, quality, and residential character of the area and destroy or damage the aesthetic values thereof.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that having considered the f the factors set forth in town code uh section 178-12, including the evidence offered at the public hearing, the town board finds the proposed struct uh action is not consistent with town code chapter 178, and the application for a wetland permit is denied.

Uh stormwater and tree permits, whereas Homeland Towers LC Homeland has submitted an application for a stormwater tree permit in connection with its desire to construct a wireless telecommunication facility at or near 62 Granite Springs Road, and whereas the town board convened to and held a public hearing to consider homeland's application for various permits required for the proposed project, and whereas the applicant failed to establish the propriety of a wetland permit based on inaccurate wetland delineation, significant adverse aesthetics impacts, and insufficient protection of protected species of animals, among other reasons, and whereas the applicant failed to establish the propriety of a lease with the town with the town, and whereas the applicant would not be authorized to move forward with the proposed project without the wetlands permit and lease authorization, and whereas no soil percolation data has been provided to deter determine the feasibility of the crushed stone infiltration system located to the monopole area, and whereas the applicant failed to demonstrate the water quality volume WQV associated with the proposed driveway will be captured and treated.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the application for stormwater and tree permits is denied.

Can I have a motion?

Uh I'd like to make a statement before.

Sure.

I just wanted to talk about uh home rule and why it's important here uh Toss in Yorktown.

Home rule is important because it gives local governments the authority to govern their own affairs and respond directly to the needs of their communities.

It allows municipalities to create charters, pass local laws, and address local issues without meeting state approval for every decision.

Functioning much like a local constitution and increasing local autonomy, in this case, home rule allowed us to listen to the needs, wants, and concerns of all the people of Yorktown, all of you out here tonight, all of the letters that you sent in.

By maintaining our local autonomy, we were able to make a decision regarding the cell tower construction that reflects the voices of our residents and addresses the needs of the entire community.

This is why home rule is critical and must be protected.

It has been on full display throughout this process, and it's very important.