Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSouthold_Polling Presentation.9_9_25Town of Southold Wireless Communication Master Plan Poll Results Presentation September 9, 2025 Wireless Infrastructure Survey 2 The Survey: •Open to public from July 18, 2025 to August 14, 2025. •Input from residents, staff, elected officials and other community members regarding wireless facilities. •Thirty-five (35) questions and an open comment forum to encourage broad participation and feedback. •Explored mobile phone usage and experiences with wireless coverage at home, work, and while travelling. •Presented a visual preference poll to better understand the types of wireless infrastructure the community finds acceptable for future deployment. A total of 773* online and no paper responses (*not everyone answered every question) Part 1 Questions General Information •About the Responder and •Access to Wireless Networks 3 4 1) Please tell us a little about yourself. 771 Responses 5 2a) I use my personal wireless cell phone service for the following purposes: (check all that apply)(As a reminder we are not asking about home internet, fiber or broadband services): 772 Responses 6 2b) Please add any comments below that pertain to question 2a.: Summary: •Daily Inconveniences (22) •Respondents rely on cell phones for work, healthcare, and daily connectivity (social and personal) •Public Safety Concerns (22) •Lack of reliable service during emergencies, no landline backup in homes •Business Impact (8) •Reports of lost revenue and customer frustration •Service outages (internet & cell) bring operations to a halt •Concerns over professional image when calls drop with clients •Urgent Requests for Action (8) •Several called the issue “unacceptable in 2025” •Inadequate Cell Coverage (7) •No Support for Anymore Cell Towers (2) •Other Category (40)110 Responses 7 4) How many wireless devices are connected to your cell phone subscription? 752 responses: •The average is 3.5 (range is 0 to 16) Consolidated Wireless Provider Summary Wireless Provider Count Percentage Verizon 470 61% AT&T Wireless 181 23.5% T-Mobile/Sprint 114 14.8% DISH Wireless 2 0.3% Other 35 4.5% NA 3 0.3% Other includes prepaid services or resellers: •Consumer Cellular •Google Fi •Lively •Optimum •Spectrum •Starlink •Tracfone •Visible 34 indicate they subscribe to multiple service providers 3) My wireless cell phone service provider is: 770 Responses 8 5) Rate your wireless cell phone coverage inside your home in Southold. 786 Responses 9 6) If you live in Southold, do you use a network extender (booster) from your wireless provider to improve your cell phone service at home? 765 Responses 10 7) If you live in Southold, do you rely on Wi -Fi to improve your wireless cell phone service at home? 762 Responses 11 8) If you work in Southold, other than your residence, please rate your wireless cell phone network coverage at your workplace: 754 Responses 12 9) Do you rely on Wi-Fi to improve your wireless cell phone service at your place of employment in Southold? •The other 18 respondents provided detailed individual responses regarding their personal needs or experiences with using the wireless network. (282) (197) (180) (65) (18) 742 Responses 13 10) Rate your wireless cell phone coverage when traveling in and around Southold. 771 Responses 14 11) The quality of wireless cell phone service is important to me. 768 Responses 15 12) I would rely more on my mobile device(s) if the network service was better. 769 Responses 16 13) Are there specific areas of the Village where your service is poor? In Summary: The largest concentration of reported issues are as follows: •Southold itself, including the town center and Hamlett (246) •Main Road/Street (specific portions) (153) •Bayview, including area and peninsula (69) •Mattituck (59) •IGA store or parking lot (51) •Fishers Island (29) •Everywhere/All over town (30) •Unique specific area (253) •Many comments mentioned general inconsistency in coverage across the Town •A few respondents (5) stated they experienced no problems 636 Responses Part 2 Questions Visual Preferences •Wireless Facilities and •Coverage Maps 17 18 14) Which non-concealed tower facility do you prefer and could support being constructed at future sites in Southold? Check all that apply. 728 Responses 19 15) Which visual mitigation measures for towers do you prefer and could support for future tower sites in Southold? Check all that apply. 759 Responses 20 16) Existing Cell Phone Coverage For Southold. Do you have any questions about this map? In Summary: •61 - No/None •12 - Map Accuracy Issues •6 - Specific Location Comments • 3 - Requests for Clarity •One specific comment about the map being hard to read due to color blindness. •36 - Other comments with general remarks 118 Responses 21 17) Potential New Macro Cell Locations. Do you have any questions about this map? In Summary: •84 - No/None •25 - Specific Location Concerns •14 - Support for Better Coverage •4 - Concerns for Public Safety •2 - Map Clarity Issues •11 - Other Individual Comments 140 Responses 22 18a) What Type of Facility Would You Support On Fishers Island? Check All that Apply. 370 Responses In Summary: PM01 East End Fishers Island at Golf Course •134 - Non-concealed 100’ Tower •214 - Concealed 120’ Tower •64 - I Do Not Support a Tower Here PM02 West End Fishers Island at Fire Station •133 - Non-concealed 100’ Tower •232 - Concealed 120’ Tower •37 - I Do Not Support a Tower Here 23 18b) Looking at the images in questions 14 and 15, which (if any) tower design type(s) could you support on Fishers Island? In Summary: •57 - Any •10 - Do Not Care •8 - No Preference •58 - Concealed •27 - Monopine •20 - Any Concealed • 9 - Unipole • 2 - Painted •35 - Did Not Vote Because Do Not Live on Fishers Island •8 - Blend of concealed and non- concealed • 5 - Non-concealed •57 - Long Answer Comments or Mix of Preferences •2 - None/Neither 240 Responses 24 19a)What type of new wireless facility would you support at 63455 Main Road (Site S05)? In Summary: •260 - 120’ Replacement Non-Concealed Tower •464 -140’ Replacement Concealed Tower •40 - I Do Not Support A Replacement Tower 19b) Which Tower Design Could You Support at This Site? •95 - Concealed; 93 - Any/All; 51 - Non-Concealed; 9 - Coverage First; 5 - Other 567 Responses 253 Responses 25 20a) What Type of Facility Would You Support In Cutchogue? Check All that Apply. 571 Responses In Summary: PM04 Cutchogue (land zone Marine) •194 - Non-concealed 100’ Tower •333 - Concealed 120’ Tower •93 - Do not support a tower here PM05 Cutchogue Fire Department •274 - Non-concealed 160’ Tower •394 - Non-concealed 180’ Tower •46 - Do not support a tower here 26 20b) Looking at the images in questions 14 and 15, which (if any) tower design type(s) could you support on Cutchogue? 246 Responses In Summary: 122 - Any Tower Design •61 - Any •50 - All •7 - What works best 79 - Concealed •32 - General •25 - Monopine •16 - Unipole •6 - Painted 15 - Non-concealed 5 - None 3 - No Opinion 22 - Other responses 27 21a) What Type of Wireless Facility Would You Support in Mattituck and Laurel? Check all that apply. In Summary: PM06 Mattituck : •221 -Non-concealed 100’ Tower •415 - Concealed 120’ Tower •58 - I Do Not Support a Tower in this Vicinity PM07 Laurel: •196 - Non-concealed 100’ Tower •371 -Concealed 120’ Tower •36 - I Do Not Support a Tower in this Vicinity 538 Responses 28 21b) Looking at the images in questions 14 and 15, which (if any) tower design type(s) could you support in Mattituck and Laurel*? * Cutchogue was listed in the question title instead of Mattituck and Laurel Map. In Summary: •114 Any Tower Design •69 - Any •45 - All •10 - What Works Best •86 Concealed •39 General Concealed •28 Monopine •11 Unipole •8 Painted •23 (Non -concealed) •3 No Opinion •2 None •18 Other responses 246 Responses 29 22) Would You Support Replacing the Existing 145’ Lattice Tower at 165 Peconic Lane (aka 41405 Route 25) (Site S09) with a Taller 199’ Lattice Tower? In Summary: •524 - Yes, I Support Replacing the Existing 145’ Lattice Tower with a 199’ Tower •60 - No, I Do Not Support Replacing the Existing 145’ Lattice Tower with a 199’ Tower •17 - Other Related Comments 601 Responses 30 23) Small cell facilities can be concealed or non -concealed. Which small wireless facilities do you prefer? Check all that apply. 657 Responses 31 24a) If you support small cell facilities in the ROW, which do you prefer: 24b) Please provide any comments related to question 24a.: •28 - Coverage Improvements; 15 - Support Use of Existing Pole and Sharing Poles/Collocation; 8 - Specific gap areas; 6 - Opposition to small cells; 14 - Other 682 Responses 72 Responses 32 25) Which type of deployment do you prefer: 651 Responses 651 Responses 33 26) Overall, which macro cell tower design type do you prefer? 652 Responses 34 27) What is most important to you? 730 Responses 35 28a) Please select the locations where you would support new wireless infrastructure. 28b) Please provide any comments related to question 28a. •22 - Coverage Improvements; 15 - Maximize utility locations, train stations, public assets; 14 - Use concealment, wooded, non -residential & sensitive areas; 10 - Listed gaps; 3 - Survey Criticism; 14 - Other 718 Responses 78 Responses 36 29) Which of the following locations do you prefer most for new wireless infrastructure? 710 Responses 37 30) If you support using Borough-owned property for wireless infrastructure, which is more important to you? 698 Responses 38 31a) Would You Support Any of the Following? 31b) Please provide any comments related to question 31a. •Opposition to us of AG (15); Support better coverage (21); None of the above (6); Other (29) 634 Responses 71 Responses 39 33) Do you know of any private property that may be available for new wireless infrastructure? 42 - indicated ‘No’ 33) Do you want to receive further information about this project? 661 Responses 75 Responses 40 •Desire and Support for stronger coverage •Genuine concern about coverage gaps in emergency situations and the inability to call 9-1-1 from residents' places of residence or while driving. •Appreciation for process and participation •Many thanked the town for the survey and efforts to address/solve the issues discussed in the poll. •Southold Hamlet is frequently mentioned as a place with poor cell coverage. •Some residents expressed concerns about the visual impact and want better coverage while trying to conceal the infrastructure as much as possible. •Five comments were negative about the survey and said it was hard to understand. 164 Overall Comments and Suggestions 41 •Wireless Service & Usage •The majority (94%) indicate the quality of wireless cell phone service is important to them, and 69% indicate that coverage where they reside is poor or inconsistent. •Most (84%) rely on Wi-Fi to enhance their service, and most responders would use their mobile devices more if coverage improves. •Wireless Infrastructure Design •Many comments about coverage first over aesthetics(Question #27) and many comments about indicating no preference to tower type but when asked: •Visually mitigated (75.6%) is the highest rated for design type with the monopine being the most favored as a concealed tower. •Small Cell Sites: Designed for collocations are most preferred in street ROW. •Support for taller concealed towers over non-concealed tower •Location Preferences •Public-owned properties, street ROWs, and non-residential land uses, are the preferred locations with little support to use AG zoned lands for new cell towers. Summary Part 3 Next Steps Zoning 42 43 Existing Towers District Design Height # of Tenants S01: 233 Alpine Ave (Fishers Island)R-80 Concealed Base Station 49’1 S02: 40200 Main Rd (Orient)MII Unipole Tower 89’3 S03: 23300 Rte 25 (Orient)R-40 Unipole Tower (Semi*)99’5 S04: 9245 Main Rd (East Marion)R-40 Unipole Tower (Semi*)115’5 S05: 63455 Main Rd (Southold)R-80 Non-Concealed Base Station 80’1 S06: 61405 Main Rd (Southold)MII Unipole Tower (Semi*)150’3 S07: 55135 Route 25 HB Monopole Tower 59’1 S08: 1040B Horton Ln LI Unipole Tower 90’1 S09: 165 Peconic Lane R-80 Lattice Tower 145’5 S10: 21855 Country Rd LI Monopole Tower 112’4 S11: 31775 Main Rd B Monopole Tower 92’1 S12: 260 New Suffolk Rd HB Proposed Unipole 140’2 S13: 415 Elijahs Ln LI Monopole Tower 110’4 S14: 1000 Pike St HB Unipole Tower (Semi*)129’2 S15: 12585 Sound Ave LI Unipole Tower (Semi*)100’2 S16: 7055 Main Rd B Unipole Tower (Semi*)110’4 * Antennas Mounted On Outside of Tower 44 Observations Most Towers are Either Unipole (8) or Monopole (4) Designs The Majority of Towers Range Between 90’ to 129’ Several Towers Support Multiple Tenants (2-5) Existing Towers Are Located in a Variety of Districts (R-80, R-40, MII, LI, HB and B) Six of Eight Unipoles Are Semi Concealed Because They Have External Mounted Antennas 45 Comparison of Existing Code to Survey Results Article XVII. Wireless Communication Facilities Code Survey Results Emphasizes Aesthetics & Scenic Preservation Adds Priority of Coverage and Public Necessity for Safety Caps Height to 45’ and 80’ Depending on Zone Support for Taller Towers Promotes Monopoles with Interior Mount Antennas (Unipole) For Concealment Expand Acceptable Concealed Tower Design Type Options Special Exception Approval for All Towers Comments Support Getting Sites On Air Faster Both Code and Survey Results Support Collocation and Dissuade Lattice and Guy Type Towers 46 •Existing Code Updates Required To Meet Code of Federal Regulation • Recommended Revisions to Promote New Tower Development Article XVII. Wireless Communication Facilities Code of Federal Regulation to Address Other Recommendations New Definition For Base Staton Add Language to “Purpose” Promoting Coverage and Public Necessity for Safety Small Wireless Facilities Increase Allowable Tower Heights Eligible Facility Request Allow Other Concealment Design Types like Monopine (aka Faux Tree) Timelines for Approval Allow Concealed Towers by Right Subject up to 120’ and 150’ in Certain Zone Districts Subject to Specific Development Standards