Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5408 • • APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS /1$I F SOUTy� Southold Town Hall •Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman t� $� • �p ; 53095 Main Road•P.O. Box 1179 Gerard P. Goehringer * * Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vincent Orlando : ca aeOffice Location: James Dinizio,Jr. ,O tt,, Town Annex/First Floor,North Fork Bank Michael A. Simon _�.JCOUWitp�� 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue) ,,,,•� Southold, NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS RECEIVED TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 01- P.M. Tel. (631)765-1809 • Fax(631)765-9064 APR 5. 2005 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION 67 _,e/. MEETING OF MARCH 31, 2005 (`�"" Southold Town Clerk Appl. No. 5408—ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT Zone District: R-80 Residential Property Location: 23300 Main Road (State Route 25)and Tabor Road, East Marion CTM 1000-18-5-13.8 SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type II category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's property consists of 4.355 acres, situated on the south side of the Main Road (NYS Route 25) and the east side of Tabor Road in East Marion. The property is improved with the following buildings and structures: (a) fire station with an existing antenna facility and (b) detached metal building. BASIS OF APPLICATION: The Building Department's April 23, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended September 22, 2004 and October 4, 2004, which states the following reasons: (1)the proposed tower does not meet the code requirements with a proposed height at 125 feet, (2)the tower is not permitted to be located within 300 feet of historic properties, CTM 18-5-15.1, 18-5-11.1 (3) the tower is not permitted on a nonconforming lot size, or on a lot containing less than a minimum lot area in a residential district of five (5) acres, and (4) Special Exception under 100-162A(3). FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on October 21, 2004, November 18, 2004, December 16, 2004, January 20, 2005, and February 3, 2005, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant: VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: The Applicant,the Orient Fire District(`OFD'), is seeking to construct a 120 ft. high wireless communications tower, for which Variances are requested under Zoning Code Sections 100-162A(3) and 100-165B. The requested Variances are based on the Building Inspector's April 23, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended September 22, 2004 and October 4, 2004,which states the following reasons: (1) the proposed tower does not meet the code requirements with a proposed height at 120 feet, (2) the tower is not permitted to be located within 300 feet of historic properties, CTM 18-5-15.1, 18-5-11.1, (3) the tower is not permitted on a nonconforming lot size, or on a lot containing less than a minimum lot area in a residential district of five(5) acres. Page 2—March 31,2005 • • Appl.No.5408—Orient Fire District 18.-5-13.8 at Orient SPECIAL DISTRICT TREATMENT REQUESTED: Based on the amended Notice of Disapproval dated October 4, 2005, the applicant, Orient Fire District, is also requesting approval as a permitted use on property in a special district under Section 100-162A(5) for wireless communications usage, with such use not requiring a Special Exception and subject only to the height restrictions listed in Section 100-162A (in lieu of a Special Exception). ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: The Orient Fire District has an existing antenna facility at the Orient Fire Station, also used by the Town Police Department to transmit and receive messages to and from its various mobile units, marine units and personnel patrolling the areas and adjacent waters. The purpose of the requested wireless communications facility (flagpole tower) is to provide improved emergency communication services for the entire area lying east of the East Marion causeway. The wireless communications tower facility is proposed by the Orient Fire District at the rear of the fire house, behind the metal building, on this 4.35-acre parcel. The tower is proposed to be located south of the fire department's metal building located in the rear yard, distant 145+-feet from the northerly property line at its closest point, 140+-feet from the easterly property line, 135+-feet from the southerly property line, and at least 315 feet from Tabor Road to the west. RELATED INFORMATION: The property has 341 linear feet along Tabor Road, a side street, 226 linear feet along the Main Road (State Route 25), 570.70 linear feet along the most southerly property line, and variables along the easterly property line of 169.30 and 287.60 linear feet. The fire house is closest to the Main Road, and the tower is proposed behind the OFD metal building in the south/east yard area. There is no question that the tower would be visible from adjacent areas, including residences, pedestrians, and while driving along the Main Road and along Tabor Road to the west. By application dated 6/27/03, the OFD states that an antenna height of at least 90 feet is mandated, to provide the coverage necessary to reach the furthest extent of the mainland Southold, on physical sciences governing public service radio communications. The OFD and Town Policy Public Safety indicate a height at 90 ft. AGL is required, with `low band' vertical whip antenna and future carrier antennas (see plans prepared by Michael Walker Design/Builder dated 10/5/04). At the top of the OFD's tower is a 9'6" dipole array to be externally mounted,2.5" in diameter. With an increase in the height to 120 feet, the applicant states that it will be possible to co-locate commercial telecommunication antennas within the same structure thereby not only passing the initial cost of construction onto commercial users, but also providing a continuing source of income for the Fire District to help offset its usual and ordinary costs Page 3—March 31,2005 • • Appl.No.5408—Orient Fire District 18:5-13.8 at Orient of operation. Additional antennas are shown for T-Mobile and AT & T or other carrier antennas above this 90 ft. height. During the hearings, the applicant offered expert testimony in support of the requested heights of 90 feet and 120 feet, and argued that 120 feet was necessary to achieve the industry standard of 90% efficiency. During the hearings, the Orient Association, and nearby residents and landowners expressed many concerns and disputed applicant's showing of need for the 120 ft. height in addition to the request for alternative relief, and questioned whether or not the fire district and its experts adequately investigated other alternative site locations in the necessary geographic areas for OFD's purposes and needs. Discussions were held during the hearings regarding the concerns raised, in addition to the question of whether or not alternative (lower) heights were adequately addressed by the applicant. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: On the basis of testimony presented, materials submitted and personal inspections,the Board makes the following findings: The applicant, Orient Fire District, is an established special district for emergency communications on at least 4.35 acres of land. The OFD maintains at its fire station an antenna tower for communication transmissions to and from this site, and the new wireless communications tower would be in place of its existing tower facility. A structure at 120 feet in height is not consistent with the surrounding rural character of this area and will be visible from various segments of the lands surrounding the tower site. The installation of this structure at 120 feet instead of 90 feet will create a distinctly commercial view interfering with the historical and rural vistas on the New York State designed Scenic Byway, and the Town of Southold's major east-west thoroughfare. In addressing visual concerns, the applicant has offered: a) a neutral color and flagpole design, and b) to locate the structure behind the existing OFD buildings as far south from the Main Road as feasibly possible. These measures do not satisfy the concerns about visibility, since the wireless communications tower will be visible particularly at the top half portion of the tower where the antennas are visible over the existing buildings and tree lines, and not screened from view. 1. The emergency, fire, police, ambulance companies and departments need of wireless mutual aid communication systems. Individual (private) ambulance, radio and other aid companies are involved with the mutual aid system. There are existing dispatch problems, problems in scene management, fire safety issues, and fire ground operation issues. The fire departments and other companies join together to assist as needed, with fundamental resources (low-band paging and radios). These systems clearly need to be improved and expanded and to provide for more effective long-range communications and Page 4—March 31,2005 • • Appl.No.5408—Orient Fire District 18.-5-13.8 at Orient senior managing during multiple fire ground and other emergencies. Because safety of citizens and fire personnel is of primary concern, an improved wireless communications facility is necessary and desirable. 2. The variance requested at 120 ft. height is substantial in relation to the code limitation of 60 feet in height. The applicant is proposing 100% increase in the code limitation of 60 ft. in height. So long as the height is not excessive, grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. It is the opinion of this Board that an alternative, with a 90 ft. in height,will be 50%greater than the code limitation of 60 ft.,which would be more conforming. 3. The demonstrated difficulty is not self-created insofar as the safety considerations the tower will address are the result of problems of inadequate communications based on the current state of the science of radio communication. 5. The Orient Fire Department's testifying expert presented credible testimony to the effect that a wireless communications tower at the requested height of 120 feet will meet the needs required to be addressed. However, that expert did not respond adequately to questions raised concerning the effectiveness of a tower of lesser height. In particular, the expert was unable (or unwilling) to demonstrate that a height of 90 feet would be inadequate to meet the stated communication needs. 6. Other experts, including that of members of the Orient community, gave unrebutted testimony that effective coverage of the subject area can be provided by a communications tower of 90 feet or less. In addition, as discussed above, questions about results of field testing were raised, and the applicant's expert was unable (or unwilling) to demonstrate that a height of 90 feet would be inadequate to meet the stated needs. 7. While safety is the primary concern, other values, such as aesthetic considerations, character of the neighborhood, and preservation of the scenic nature of the State- designed Scenic Byways Corridor must be heeded to the extent that they do not compromise the tower's effectiveness in the locale it is designed to serve. The 120 ft. height requested is excessive, and grant the requested relief will produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. In addressing visual concerns, the applicant has offered: a) a neutral color and flagpole design, and b) to locate the structure behind the existing OFD buildings as far south from the Main Road as feasibly possible. These measures do not satisfy the concerns about visibility, since the tower will be visible particularly at the top half portion of the tower where the antennas are visible over the existing buildings and tree lines and not screened from view. A tower structure at 120 feet in height compromises the scenic and historic surroundings along the State designated Scenic Highway Corridor and is not consistent with the surrounding rural character of this area, with clear visibility from various segments of the lands surrounding the tower site. The installation of this structure at 120 feet instead of 90 feet will create a distinctly commercial view interfering with the historical • • Page 5—March 31,2005 • Appl.No.5408—Orient Fire District 18.5-13.8 at Orient and rural vistas on the New York State designed Scenic Byway, and the Town of Southold's major east-west thoroughfare. It is the opinion of this Board that a 90 ft. high tower would be a reasonable alternative, and would be more conforming to the code limitation for 60 ft. height. 8. At the public hearings, the Board asked the applicant whether the tower could be reduced in height. No proof was offered to show whether a lower structure was in good faith planned and constructed at any other locations, for any periods of times, with alternative designs or at an alternative, lower height. The applicant did not present detailed evidence as to which sites could be or may have been considered in its analysis. There has been no evidence introduced that would demonstrate the grant of the alternative relief of a lesser height will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 9. Also, after considering the heights of the existing towers in Mattituck and Southold, and the police request for a 90 ft. high AGL system, it is the Board's determination that a 90 ft. tower by the OFD is the minimum necessary to be sufficient for the purposes requested. 10. Grant of the alternative relief, at 90 feet in height, is the minimum action necessary and adequate to enable construction of a communications tower, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. 11. Grant of the area variance related to the code required five acres will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The OFD does not own any other property other than the subject parcel, and the benefit cannot be sought by some method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance for the requested minor relief, or 14% reduction from five acres to 4.35 acres, at the existing communications site. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Chairwoman Oliva, seconded by Member Orlando, and duly carried, to DENY the variance related to the requested 120 ft. height of the tower and to GRANT ALTERNATIVE RELIEF for a 90 ft. high tower, with required screening around the equipment shelter structures; to GRANT the lot size variance for this 4.35 acre site; to • GRANT zoning approval under Section 100-162A, for a public safety, wireless communications tower use by the Orient Fire District, confirmed as a special district; and to Page 6—March 31,2005 Appl.No.5408—Orient Fire District 18.-5-13.8 at Orient CONFIRM that the Board of Appeals is without authority under Section 100- 162A(3), pursuant to the Board of Appeals Interpretation rendered November 6, 2003 under Appeal No. 5357, and that, in any event, pursuant to Section 100- 162A(5) the restrictions regarding proximity to landmark properties are not applicable to properties within a special district. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), Goehringer, Orlando, and Simon. Nay: Member Dinizio. This resolution was duly adopted (4-1). Ruth D. Oliva 4/44/05 Approved for Filing a ?ad-142 e 14 A y1s 4 fir a„7 te-1- (24 7/.342 (a) All RE ` `1 D �f),� AMENDMENT OF APPLICATION JUL 3 0 2004 ^,6v" TO THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS These documents constitute an amendment to the previously filed Application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals filed by the Orient Fire District on June 27, 2003 for the construction of a communications antenna on property owned by the Fire District at 23300 Main Road, Orient. This Amendment is made necessary by substantial changes in the technology to be employed by the Fire District to provide adequate public safety communications in the easternmost area of Southold Town, and also by the proposed co-location of several telecommunications tenants on the antenna structure whose presence will provide needed revenue to offset what would otherwise be a substantial cost of antenna construction and maintenance borne solely by the taxpayers of the Orient Fire District. These several alterations to the original design are addressed in the revised plans prepared by Michael Walker, LLC, dated 4/30/04, entitled "IMPROVED PUBLIC SAFETY AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON REPLACEMENT FLAGPOLE STRUCTURE," which plans are appended to and submitted as part of this Amendment to Application. These revised plans have been submitted to the Southold Town Building Department and have resulted in an Amended Notice of Disapproval dated June 3, 2004, which Amended Notice of Disapproval is enclosed herewith. In summary of the alterations to the original Application, the total height of the antenna to be constructed has been increased from 120' to 125' and the appearance of the structure has, of necessity, been modified from a "flagpole" to that of a traditional monopole antenna. These changes are occasioned by the Fire District's intention to utilize Ultra High Frequency radio equipment to provide coverage throughout the furthest reaches of the District, which Ultra High Frequency radio requires a minimum antenna height of 120' feet at its base point and extends to 125' at its highest point. By raising the Fire District's antenna to the highest position on the structure, several additional internal locations become available allowing the co-location of cellular tenants at the 115', 105', 95' and 85' levels, and indeed three of these four locations have been secured thereby assuring the viability of the project relative to the offset of taxpayer expense. To provide greatly enhanced communication capability on the Fire District's present "low band" radio and for the Southold Town Police Department on their "high band," two external antennas will be placed on the tower at the 90' level. As cited in the Notice of Disapproval, the plans submitted by the Fire District require several distinct approvals from the Board of Appeals: 1) Special Exception based on the fact that the antenna structure is located 1111 in a Residential R-80 District. 2) Variance to allow construction of an antenna complex which will be measure 125' above ground level at its highest point, which height is in excess of that permitted by Southold Town Code. 3) Resolution of the issue that the tower will be sited within 300 feet of certain properties alleged to be "historic" in nature. 4) An area variance as the premises owned by the Fire District consists of 4.4 acres while the Southold Town Code requires a minimum of 5 acres. Having completed an exhaustive review of its telecommunications options, the Orient Fire District has decided that the implementation of an Ultra High Frequency radio system is the only method available to provide adequate communications throughout the District, which communications are necessary for public safety and for the personal safety of firefighters responding to emergencies. As such, the Fire District intends to vigorously prosecute this Appeal so that the vastly improved public safety communications system may be installed as soon as possible. • C EIV ED JUL 3 0 2004 Page 2a-Appeal Application ZONING POARO OF APPEALS Part A: AREA VARIANCE REASONS By this application, the Orient Fire District is seeking to construct a 125' telecommunications monopole antenna on approximately 4.4 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Route 25 and Tabor Road in the hamlet of Orient, which land presently supports the Orient firehouse and an accessory building. The decision to construct a new communications antenna serving the far East end of Southold Town is not one that has been rendered lightly by the Commissioners of the Orient Fire District, but one that has been the subject of examination and cross examination for many months until it became not only obvious, but imperative that such an antenna needs to be constructed. As is well know, the Orient Fire District through the Orient Fire Department provides emergency fire, rescue and ambulance service for the entire area lying East of the East Marion causeway. Perhaps less well known is the fact that the Southold Police Department employs an antenna sited on the existing Orient Fire District tower to transmit and receive messages to and from its various mobile units, marine units and personnel patrolling that area and the adjacent waters. By the very nature of its geography, the Orient Fire District is a difficult area to adequately service with existing telecommunication tools. The construction of a new antenna would not only be a major step forward but is, in fact, the only available option for providing efficient and effective emergency communications to the area. The physical sciences governing Ultra High Frequency radio communication mandate an antenna placement at a minimum of 120' above ground level to reach the furthest portions of the Fire District. This antenna is itself a 5' unit making the total height of the structure 125'. To construct and maintain an antenna of that height would be an enormous cost for the Orient Fire District and one that would burden the taxpayers of that District for years to come. By providing for the co-location of commercial telecommunications antennas within the same structure, the Fire District has executed a lease for the tower site which will not only pass the initial cost of construction on to the commercial users, but will also provide a continuing source of income for the Fire District to help offset its usual and ordinary costs of operation. In making this application, the Fire District is well aware of some opposition that exists within the Orient community, which opposition should not be ignored. Through informal meetings and samplings of the community, this opposition seems to center largely, if not entirely, on the matter of esthetics. Granted, a 125' monopole antenna situated in the middle of a field where nothing now exists may be offensive to some, but it is equally offensive and defiant of common sense to allow such feelings to preclude effective and efficient emergency communications which serve only to benefit all the residents of Orient. • • Since the last time a telecommunications tower was proposed for Orient, vast strides have been made, not only in the area of technology but in the public acceptance and understanding of wireless communication. What at one time may have been considered a toy to be enjoyed by the elite has now become a staple of our daily lives. Many questions of safety have been studied, addressed and dismissed by the Federal Government and there now exists a broad public mandate for the establishment of a wireless telecommunications system to serve all of our citizens. Similarly, major advances have been made in the area of communications technology. Where once an antenna rising to a height of 125' would require an ugly latticework, the the antenna proposed for Orient will be of a monopole design bearing two external antennas at the 90' level providing for Southold Police high band and Fire District low band communications. At a total height of 125', this antenna is exempt from aircraft visual reminders such as alternating red and white striping and warning lights, which measures are reserved for structures of much greater height. In examining the reasons for the instant application to the Board of Appeals, the disapproval of the Building Department appears fourfold: a) a requirement for a special exception due to R-80 zoning of the premises; b) the 125' height of the antenna which is in excess of that allowed by Town Code; c) the fact that the antenna is to be sited within 300 feet of properties reputed to be "historic"; and d) the fact that the Orient Fire District occupies 4.4 acres whereas the Town Code requires 5 acres for a cellular telephone tower. Misinformation to the contrary notwithstanding, using present technology it is impossible for an antenna height of less than 125' to provide sufficient coverage for the Ultra High Frequency emergency communication needs of the Orient Fire District. Accordingly, if these public safety demands are to be met the antenna itself will exceed the existing height guidelines for an R-40 zone. By utilizing the space on the antenna structure below the 120' level for the co-location of commercial telecommunication antennas, what would be a substantial economic burden for the taxpayers of the Orient Fire District will be turned into a source of Fire District revenue for years to come and the residents of the Orient community will benefit from enhanced modern cellular communications on a daily basis. Similarly, as the Orient Fire District can not change or invent technology to allow for a lesser antenna height, it can not change its physical location on State Route 25, an historic corridor, nor the size of its lot. While every attempt will be made to minimize the visual impact of the antenna, it remains a fact that the antenna's mere existence will be an annoyance to some. The 4.4 acres owned by the District allow the flagpole antenna to be sited well away from adjoining properties so that neighborhood safety is not an issue; it is only a question of esthetics. In applying the mandated "balancing of public interests approach" to this question, we have the Orient Fire District applying for permission to construct a new antenna that is crucial to fulfilling its public service obligations and those of the Southold Town Police; it will provided needed revenue for the Fire District and will serve to vastly improve the quality of wireless communications for everyone in the Est End of Southold Town.. Opposed are some residents 0. who object to the esthetics of a monopole antenna in their community, but are unable to offer any viable alternatives that will allow for the necessary public service communications or provide for the public demand for effective wireless communications. In such a dispute, public safety and uniform access for all to wireless service must prevail over esthetics and the Orient Fire District should be granted permission to construct a new antenna as required. /y othr,tjL J 73,-c? D13300 /1'111.0 �� Oef6kIr blice- ✓.4em-sur sho-r5/2- /d&)G4-7-- Fier 'bI57,U Tu�,e-tThAe-CommO.v,GA7/006 /0 42110 ' HI 1P104. /&J/Ce/$; I/&v/aS 02/3/4{ Ai 3/3//60t- 1977 L/EP c 2 9d ` 1,7 ALSO 5'EE L5TO - 6E.. -podL is o—T k USE- 4 3/3o 46 1lL5o be"e 63 OF. f E,o e457: 1/3/D6 DLO d , ) OM-- 7/30 `� APPLICATION TO THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS For Office Use Only Fee: ,'6 - Filed Bv: ScallgyarExc. Date Assigned/Assignment No. 5-440 t_4Q _. IIS Office Notes: Parcel Location: House No.23300Street Main Road • Hamlet Orient SCTM 1000 Section 18 Block 5 Lot(s) 13 . BLot Size 4 . 35a Zone District R-40 • I (WE) APPEAL THE WRITTEN DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSI'EC'TOR DATED: April 23, 2003 ; renewed July 11, 2003 aeze.n,q�,� Ti o y Applicant/Owner(s): Orient Fire District 191104 Mailing Address: 23300 Main Road, Orient, New York, 11957 Telephone: NOTE: If applicant is nut the owner,state if applicant is owner's ntlonity,agent,architect,builder,Cunliac t.end er. rto. Authorized Representative: Edward J . Boyd, Esq . Address: 54655 Main Road, Box 1468, Southold , New York, 11971 Telephone: 765-1555 Fax: 765-5969 Please specify who you wish correspondence to be mailed to, from the above listed names: 0 Applicant/Owner(s) a Authorized Representative Cl Other: WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED April 2, 20C. IrDld: 25Building Permit 0 Certificate of Occupancy 0 Pre-Certificate of Occupancy ❑ Change of Use HI Permit for As-Built Construction Other: Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. Indicate Article, Section, ,Subsection and par er:Hi of Zoning Ordinance by numbers. Do not quote the code. Article XVI Section 100- 162 Subsection A( 3 ) Type of :appeal, An Appeal is made for: M A Variance to the Zoning Code or Zoning Map, A Variance due to lack of access required by New York To)eu Lass-Section 'SU-A. 0 Interpretation of the Town Code, Article Section -- ------------- XReversalorOther Special Exception to construct telecommunications tower A prior appeal 0 has has not been made with respect to this property UNDER Appeal No. Year 4111 Page 2 of 3 - Appeal Application Part A: AREA VARIANCE REASONS (attach extra sheet as needed): (1) An undesirable change will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties, If granted, because: (2) The benefit sought by the applicant CANNOT be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: (3) The amount of relief requested is not substantial because: (4) The variance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district because: (5) Has the variance been self-created? ( ) Yes, or (X ) No. If not, is the construction existing, as built? ( ) Yes, or (X) No. (6) Additional Information about the surrounding topography and building areas that relate to the difficulty In meeting the code requirements: (attach extra sheet as needed) This Is the MINIMUM that Is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserves and protects the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. ( ) Check this box and complete PART B, Questions on next page to apply USE VARIANCE STANDARDS. (Please consult your attorney.) Otherwise, please proceed to the signature and notary area below. Signature of Apb-eflant or Authorized Agent Swor o before me this /CrI (Agent must submit Authorization from Owner) • of "S"...)-r‘ 2003. (Notary Public) EDWARD JOHN BOYD 5th Notary Public State of New York LBB App sU u: 02600376625 Suffolk County • Commission Expires April 30, 200 0 r Page 2a-Appeal Application Part A: AREA VARIANCE REASONS By this application, the Orient Fire District is seeking to construct a 120' telecommunications flagpole antenna on approximately 4.3 acres of land located at the southeast corner of Route 25 and Tabor Road in the hamlet of Orient, which land presently supports the Orient firehouse and an accessory building. The decision to construct a new communications antenna serving the far East end of Southold Town is not one that has been rendered lightly by the Commissioners of the Orient Fire District, but one that has been the subject of examination and cross examination for many months until it became not only obvious, but imperative that such an antenna be constructed. As is well know, the Orient Fire District through the Orient Fire Department provides emergency fire, rescue and ambulance service for the entire area lying East of the East Marion causeway. Perhaps less well known is the fact that the Southold Police Department employs an antenna sited on the existing Orient Fire District tower to transmit and receive messages to and from its various mobile units, marine units and personnel patrolling that area and the adjacent waters. By the very nature of its geography, the Orient Fire District is a difficult area to adequately service with existing telecommunication tools. The construction of a new antenna would not only be a major step forward but is, in fact, the only available option for providing efficient and effective emergency communications to the area. The physical sciences governing public service radio communication mandate an antenna height of at least 90' to provide the coverage necessary to reach the furthest extent of the mainland Southold. To construct an antenna of that height would be an enormous cost for the Orient Fire District and one that would burden the taxpayers of that District for years to come. By increasing that antenna's height to 120' feet, the Commissioners have been advised that it will be possible to co-locate commercial telecommunications antennas within the same structure thereby not only passing the initial cost of construction on to such commercial users, but also providing a continuing source of income for the Fire District to help offset its usual and ordinary costs of operation. In making this application, the Commissioners are well aware of certain opposition that exists within the Orient community, which opposition was demonstrated some 10 years ago when the issue of a cellular telephone tower was last proposed. Through informal meetings and a sampling of the community, this opposition seems to center largely, if not entirely, on the matter of esthetics. Granted, a 120' flagpole antenna situated in the middle of a field where nothing now exists may be offensive to some, but it is equally offensive and defiant of common sense to allow such feelings to preclude effective and efficient emergency communications which serve only to benefit all the residents of Orient. S Since the last time a telecommunications tower was proposed for Orient, vast strides have been made, not only in the area of technology but in the public acceptance and understanding of wireless communication. What at one time may have been considered a toy to be enjoyed by the elite has now become a staple of our daily lives. Many questions of safety have been studied, addressed and dismissed by the Federal Government and there now exists a broad public mandate for the establishment of a wireless telecommunications system to serve all of our citizens. Similarly, major advances have been made in the area of communications technology. Where once an antenna rising to a height of 120' would require an ugly latticework abounding with projections on all sides, modern antennas are disguised as all sorts of common object. The antenna proposed for Orient will be of a monopole design appearing as a flagpole. Its white color, finial and yardarm will be indistinguishable from the many large flagpoles with which we are all familiar. By limiting its height to 120' it is exempt from aircraft safety measures such as alternating red and white striping and warning lights. In examining the reasons for the instant application to the Board of Appeals, the disapproval of the Building Department appears threefold: a) a requirement for a special exception; b) the height of the antenna; and c) an antenna sited within 300 feet of historic properties. Arguments to the contrary notwithstanding, using present technology it is impossible for an antenna height of less than 90' to provide sufficient coverage for the emergency communication needs of the Orient Fire District and the Southold Town Police Department. Accordingly, if these needs are to be met any antenna must exceed the existing height guidelines for an R-40 zone. By extending the antenna another 30' what would be a substantial economic burden for the taxpayers of the Orient Fire District can be turned into a source of revenue for years to come and the residents of the Orient community can benefit from modern cellular communications on a daily basis. Similarly, as the Orient Fire District can not change or invent technology to allow for a lesser antenna height, it can not change its physical location on State Route 25, an historic corridor. While every attempt has been made to minimize the visual impact of the antenna, it remains a fact that the antenna's mere existence will be an annoyance to some. The 4.3 acres owned by the District allow the flagpole antenna to be sited well away from adjoining properties so that neighborhood safety is not an issue; it is only a question of appearance. In applying the mandated "balancing of public interests approach"to this question, there is the Orient Fire District on the one hand applying for permission to construct a new antenna that is crucial to fulfilling its public service obligations and that will serve to vastly improve the quality of wireless communications for everyone in the area.. On the other hand are some residents who object to the visual aspects of a flagpole antenna in their community, but are unable to offer any viable alternatives that will allow for the necessary public service communications or provide for the public demand for effective wireless communications. In such a dispute, public safety and uniform access for all to wireless service must prevail over esthetics and the Orient Fire District should be granted permission to construct a new antenna as required.. - TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK SEP 1 7 2003 APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION//� 8 n/ � 5 4-1)2o Application No. 7U � r " Date Filed: 9,/7-43 TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, SOUTHOLD, NEW YO I (We) , ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT of 23300 Main Road (Residence, House No. and Street Orient, New York, 11957 (Hamlet, State, Zip Code, Telephone Number) hereby apply to THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS for a SPECIAL EXCEPTION in accordance with the ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE XVI , SECTION 100-162 , SUBSECTION A( 3) for the below-described property for the following uses and purposes (and as shown on the attached plan drawn to scale) : Special exception to construct telecommunications tower A. Statement of Ownership and Interest. Orient Fire District is(are) the owner(s) of property known and referred to as 23300 Main Road, Orient, New York (House No. , Street, Hamlet) identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 18 , Block 5 , Lot(s) 13. 8 , which (is) on a subdivision Map (Filed "Map of Minor Subdivision made for Schriever " Filed Map No. and has been approved by the Southold Town Planning Board on as a [Minor] [*flak] Subdivision) . The above-described property was acquired by the owner on November 11, 1985 B. The applicant alleges that the approval of this exception would be in harmony with the intent and purpose of said zoning ordinance and that the proposed use conforms to the standards prescribed therefor in said ordinance and would not be detrimental to property or persons in the neighborhood for the following reasons: See attached application C. The property which is the subject of this application is zoned R-40 and [x ] is consistent with the use(s) described in the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith. I/"o-tattatt-t4_gk [ ] is not consistent wit the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith for the following reason(s) : [ ] is vacant land. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) STATE OF NEW YORK) ss. : cy/ � • �y -(Sig ature) Swor a before me this 10tlrlay of September , lac 2003 . Notary Public) EDWARD JOHN BOYD 5th Z62 (rev. 2/6/86) Notary Public State of New York 02800376625 Suffolk County Commission Expires April 30, 20Qf. • S SEP 1 7 2003 TRANSMITTAL WITHOUT COVER LETTER _ 3 =is- � DELIVERED 7 //7 /2003 TO ZBA OFFICE SEP ,x2003 FROM: EL/ s36-t of RE: CILt�e_zt ✓ ./� .[,�1'Ccc.t -# c t dr— a3 Atk_ (Pn4 / )L & Z3 d p. kJ . 1 a; c _ cnnyrittto4 7 a.r t5 D r 444)-70 Old 71 C& ,4 J iti .6 tu-LbU y3. P a ; rt Oc )Ob3 • s RECE ' Fi ADDENDUM TO TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AUG 1 6 2004 APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION ZONING '±GA,^r? p;, ;.;;Pr,LS Applicants: Orient Fire District; Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Inc.; Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless; and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC Premises: 23300 Main Road Orient,New York Section 18, Block 5, Lot 13.8 Application Signature Page As to Co-applicant: AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSOCIATES, INC. d/b/a BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT By: • Vincent Cannuscio, President Swim to •- ores},'a this •Afrof /�;L, 2004 iec r O ARY PUBLIC LINDA M.WELL Notary Public,Ste Of New 1IWM No.01 W4747372.Suffolk Term Expires October 81. Page 1 of 3 • • • AUG 1 6 2004 ADDENDUM TO TOWN OF SOUTHOLD APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION ZONING 92AFI) :7L rjr._iL5 Applicants: Orient Fire District; Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Inc.; Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless; and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC Premises: 23300 Main Road Orient, New York Section 18, Block 5, Lot 13.8 Application Signature Page As to Co-applicant: OMNIPOINT FACILITIES NETWORK 2, LLC By`— `'iU1 Mary Mo n, Real Estate Manager Sworn to before me this 30th • . /of July, 2004 111 Ar' PUBLIC LAWRENCE C. Re Notary Public,State of New York No. 52-4799664 Qualified in Suffolk Cou�r Commission Expires May 311,12 Page 2 of 3 • RETE t ADDENDUM TO TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AUG 1 6 2004 APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION I Applicants: Orient Fire District; Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Inc.; Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless; and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC Premises: 23300 Main Road Orient, New York Section 18, Block 5, Lot 13.8 Application Signature Page As to Co-applicant: CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a AT&T WIRE - r By: � s //1; __i L.—antic-n� Itftt?rylC.1t 5 �in Dev // j anT Maiitiems-: Sworn to before a this 011 day of (� , 2004 660710-U1 NOTARY LIC Y MORRIS NOTARY PUBLIC MYCOMMISSION EXPIRES DEC 31,2008 Page 3 of 3 • EDWARD JOHN BOYD V • ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW 54655 MAIN ROAD P.O.BOX 1468 AL- u U4 SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK 11971 (631)765-1555 FACSIMILE:(631)765-5969 <<' `" n�'tr 'p7r$- E-MAIL:ejb@elilaw.net FT:k.44\ 1257 EAST MAIN STREET RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK 11901 AUG 1 6 2004 (931)727-1010 FACSIMILE:1931)727.5524 EMAIL:aj9b�ee9Mw.nat ZONING OUrVir OF APLALS, August 16, 2004 Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT Tax Map No.1000-18-5-13.8 Greetings: Enclosed please find three (3) signature pages to be included with the Amended Application as filed with your Office on July 30, 2004. These pages have been fully executed by the co-applicants, Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC, and Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT & T Wireless, and are to be made a part of the Amended Application. Thanking you for your anticipated prompt and courteous attention to this matter, I am, Very truly yours, Edward John Boyd V EJB/bv COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STEVE LEVY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING THOMAS ISLES, AICP DIRECTOR OF PLANNING June 3, 2005 Ms. Ruth Oliva, Chair Town of Southold ZBA 53085 Main Rd., P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Sir: Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Orient Fire District 5408 Very truly yours, Thomas Isles,AICP Director of Planning S/s Christopher S. Wrede Planning Aide CSW:cc GACCHORNY\ZONING\ZONING\W ORKING\CHRISLO W PR\BR#11.APR LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H.LEE DENNISON BLDG.-4TH FLOOR • P,O.BOX 6100 • (516)853-5190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE,NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER(516)853-4044 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDIN ' ERMIT APPLICATION CHECI:LIST BUILDING DEPARTMENT • our have or need the following, before applying' TOWN HALL Board of Health _ SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 3 sets.of Building Plans TEL: (631) 765-1802 Planning Board approval FAX: (631) 765-9502 Survey www. northfork.net/Southold/ PERMIT NO. Check Septic Form N.Y.S.D.E.C. Trustees Examined , 20 Contact: Approved , 20 Mail to: Edward J . Boyd , Esc] . Disapproved ale Box 1468, Southold, NY Phone: 765-1555 Expiration 20 —_- ---- Building Inspector APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Date April 2 7003 INSTRUCTIONS a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what so ever until the Building Inspector issues a Certificate of Occupancy. E Every building permit shall expire if the work authorized has not commenced within 12 months after the date of issuance or has not been completed within 18 months from such date. If no zoning amendments or othearegulations affecting the property have been enacted in the interim, the Building Inspector may authorize, in writing, the extension of the permit for an addition six months. Thereafter, a new permit shall be required. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housin code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. lP t Fire District b (Signature of applicant or name, if a corporation) 23300 Main Road, Orient, NY 11957 (Mailing address of applicant) • State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder Owner Name of owner of premises Orient Fire District • (As on the tax roll or latest deed) I f applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer (Name and title of corporate officer) Builders License No. Plumbers License No. Electricians License No. Other Trade's License No, I- Location of land on which proposed work will be done: 23300 Main Road Orient I louse Number Street Hamlet County Tax Map No, 1000 Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13 . 8 Subdivision Filed Map No. Lot (Name) 2. State existing use and occupancOpremises and intended use and occupy of proposed construction: • a. Existing use and occupancy Municipal Government - Public Safety b. Intended use and occupancy Municipal Government - Public Safety 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building x Addition Alteration Repair Removal Demolition Other Work Communications Tower _ (Description) 4. Estimated Cost $ 150, 000/$ 200,000 Fee Exempt (To be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units 0 Number of dwelling units on each floor 0 If garage, number of cars 0 6. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use. N/A 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front FR-80,A-40 Rear FH-43,A-40 Depth FH-110LA-80 Height FH-30,A-25 Number of Stories FH-1,A-1 ( FH = Fire House; A = Accessory Building) Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front Unchanged Rear Unchanaec! Depth Unchanged Height Unchanged Number of Stories Unchanged 8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front T-4,S-16 Rear T-4,S-16 Depth T-4, s-20 Height 1T-120,5-10 Number of Stories T-N/A.s-1 (T = Tower; S = Shelter for electronics) 9. Size of lot: Front 226 Rear 570 Depth 341 10. Date of Purchase 11/14/85 Name of Former Owner Barbara Dwight Schriever I I . Zone or use district in which premises are situated R-80 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation? YES x NO 13. Will lot be re-graded? YES_NO x Will excess fill be removed from premises? YES NO x Orient 23300 Main Rd . d 14. Names of Owner of premises Fire District Address Orient, NY Phone No. Name of Architect Michael Walker Address'S . Dartmouth,MwPhoneNo( 508) 287-4313 Name of Contractor Vantage AssociatesAddress Nyack NY Phone No. 15 a. Is this property within 100 feet of a tidal wetland or a freshwater wetland? *YES NO x * IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES & D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. b. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? * YES NO X * IF YES, D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 feet or below, must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF SUFF0L4 Edward J . Boyd being duly sworn, deposes and says that (s)he is the applicant (Name of individual signing contract) above named, (S)He is the Attorney/Agent (Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and tile this application: that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. Sworn to before me this ___ day of ii2 April 2p03 / Z Nptary Public Signature of Applicant • PATRICIA CORWIN Notary Public,State of New York No.01C05017852 Qualified in Suffolk County emission Expires Sept.13,2003 • APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICANT: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT 23300 MAIN ROAD ORIENT, NY 11957-1102 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION: PRIMARY/PRINCIPAL USE: The Orient Fire District and the Southold Town Police need to improve coverage for Fire and Police Communications. It is recognized by former and current police and emergency workers, that current communications are inadequate. ( 'hief Cochran, of the Southold Town Police Department has determined that Southold Police communications must be improved and that emergency communications can be 'enhanced by locating antennas at a height of 90 feet at the site of the Orient Fire District Chief Cochran strongly states in his letter: "Pursuant to our prior conversations this is to officially inform you that there is a need to improve the police radio system receive site at your firehouse. Just this week there were two officers trying to communicate on portable radios in the East Marion-Orient area and were unable to communicate with each other until they returned to their vehicles. This poses an officer safety issue." I would request that when the Orient Fire District erects a communications tower that our antenna height be increased to (90) feet. The ninety (90) foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town."4 /Former Chief Stanley Droskoski has provided a letter of support for the current project in which he eloquently states: "For these units to have inadequate communications is incomprehensible. Clear and concise communications is absolutely essential in protecting life and property when dispatching emergency units to the needs of the populace. At present, communications in this area are less than adequate, but could be rectified by the construction of a cellular tower. Presently, emergency response units must rely on relays from other units to receive messages, as some messages lack clarity A situation of this nature certainly could endanger lives and it is imperative that_it_be rectified." The Southold Town Fire Chiefs representing the eight Fire Departments within Southold Township, who answered over three thousand emergency calls in the past year, support the Orient Fire Department request. • • The Orient Fire District in order to improve public safety in Orient and throughout the Town of Southold proposes to construct a 120 foot structure in the design of a FLAG POLE, with yardarm. Public Safety antennas will be placed at a height of ninety (90) feet. The design, financing and construction of the FLAG POLE will be accomplished by Beacon Wireless Management. There will be NO cost to either the Orient Fire District or • the Southold Town Police for placement of antennas on the flag pole. Beacon Wireless Management will lease space "within the shell of the flag pole" to wireless carriers ACCESSORY USE: As an accessory use, Beacon Wireless Management will lease antenna space on the interior of the flag pole to wireless carriers. This design is called "stealth technology." NO wireless carrier antennas or cables will be exposed or visible from surrounding areas. Electronic equipment will be located in a storage shed which will be constructed of materials similar to the existing storage building. The storage shed for the electronics and the Flag Pole will be located behind the existing fire house storage building. COMPARABLE SITUATION: SOUTHOLD POLICE STATION COMMUNICATIONS TOWER We bring to the attention of the Building Department a comparable public safety initiative by the Southold Town Police. The Southold Town Police have allowed to be erected on their property on Main Road, a 140 foot communications tower that enables placement of public safety antennas and the antennas and electronics equipment of Sprint wireless. We believe that the work was performed by a private firm, at no cost to the Southold Town and that the construction was exempt from zoning. That situation is most similar to this application. We The Orient Fire District, respectfully request similar and equal treatment. We believe that this application should be exempt from zoning because the primary or principal use for the construction of the tower is to provide enhanced public safety communications for the The Southold Town Police and The Orient Fire District and EMS and cellular phone users. Use by wireless carriers is accessory and incidental, merely requiring an additional thirty feet to allow the project to be economically feasible. The project cannot proceed at a lower height with the flag pole design. • • EXEMPTION FROM ZONING ORDINANCE We believe the construction and uses_pr�osed by the Orient Fire District should be exempt from Town of Southold Zoning_per the following memorandum. Historically, New York courts have recognized that certain political subdivisions are entitled to absolute immunity from zoning regulations, including the federal government; state government; state urban development corporation; and public schools. These entities are not required to comply with local land use regulations. Other governmental entities, such as towns, villages, cities, counties and fire districts, are accorded only a limited immunity and may be subject to local zoning regulations. In making a determination as to whether the actions of a fire department are exempt from local zoning regulations as a political subdivision, the New York Court of Appeals established a new method for resolving inter-governmental land use disputes using the "balancing of public interests" analytical approach. In the Matter of County of Monroe r. ( 'ity ofRochester, 72 N.Y.2d 338, 533 N.Y.S.2d 702 (1988), the Court rejected the former test for determining the application of local zoning regulations to activity by political subdivisions. Under the former test, such entities were not subject to local regulations when they were performing "governmental" functions and were subject to local regulations when they were performing "proprietary" functions. In County of Monroe, (supra), the court recognized that this distinction was outmoded and difficult to apply and replaced it with a "balancing.of public interest" approach. A decade later, the State Supreme Court in Nanuet Fire Company No.1, Inc., rc Amster as Charirnat of the Town of Clarkstown Zoning Board of Appeals, 177 Misc2d 296, 6786 N Y S.2d 890 (1988), determined that construction of a firehouse in a municipality was subject to the balancing of interests test set forth in Monroe. The petitioner in the case was a private, not-for-profit fire company. As such, it had its own board of directors, lacked taxing authority, and could not be considered as a separate unit of government as would be the case for a city, town, village or fire district. Under these circumstances, it • • could be concluded that the Fire Company was fully subject to the Town's zoning, as would be true for any other not for profit organization conducting its business in town However, the court concluded that the construction of a fire house by a not for profit fire company is subject to the Monroe balancing of interests test rather than to the unqualified application of the Town's zoning, and returned the matter to the Town to conduct the balancing of interests test. After the balancing was conducted by the Town, it was determined that public safety and other factors warranted the construction to proceed. Therefore, with the establishment of both ('aunty of Monroe and Nanuet, the proper approach is to employ the "balancing of public interests" test. There are nine (9) factors to be addressed and they are as follows: The nature and scope of the instrumentality seeking immunity; 2. The encroaching government's legislative grant of authority; 3. The kind of function or land use involved; 4. The effect local land use regulation would have upon the enterprise concerned; 5. Alternative locations for the facility in less restrictive zoning areas; 6. The impact upon legitimate local interests; 7. Alternative methods of providing the proposed improvements; 8 The extent of the public interest to be served by the improvements; and 9. Intergovernmental participation in the project development process and an opportunity to be heard. The application of the Orient Fire District is most similar to the Nanuet Fire Company case and more clearly entitled to the exemption due to the fact that the Orient Fire District has taxing authority and is a separate unit of Southold Town government, We ask you to apply the "Balancing of Public Interests" analytical approach, and in doing so conclude that this application by the Orient Fire District for a building permit to construct a personal wireless facility is exempt from operation of the Southold zoning code. BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY: The Orient Fire District specifically will • receive the following benefits from the proposed construction: A. No Capital expenditure for the "structure" needed to locate public safety antennab This will save the Orient Fire District approximately $150,000. B. Improved Public Safety. There is a current need to improve public safety communications for the Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services. Locating the antennas, at no cost to the community, will improve public safety communications. C. The Orient Fire District, and by extension, the Orient Community, have the capacity to earn more than $3,000,000 (million dollars) over the life of the agreement. D. The Orient Fire District may elect to own the flag pole structure after 7 years. E. Improved Wireless Communications which will lead to improved public safety Statistics clearly show that approximately 40% of E-911 calls emanate from Wireless phones, substantially reducing the time it takes emergency personnel to respond. F. Enhanced Wireless Services will enable Public Safety personnel to pinpoint the location of emergency calls within a fifty foot radius, thus improving emergency response. G. Improved wireless communications from and to Plum Island. H. Co-location of Public Safety and wireless communications on one structuie, will effectively reduce the number of"towers" constructed in Southold Towne S S NOTES TO BUILDING PERMIT These notes are provided as an explanatory addendum to the Application for a Building Permit as space does not allow a full explanation of the work proposed. Item #2 a. Existing use and occupancy. The subject land contains two buildings (A) Orient Fire Station (B) Storage Building. b. Intended use and occupancy. The proposal is to construct a 120 Foot Flag Pole structure that as a principal use will support public safety antennas at a height of 90 feet and as an accessory use support wireless antennas. The Flag Pole will be located in a fenced compound with space also utilized to store electronics equipment. Item #6 "If business, commercial or mixed use occupancy, specify nature and Extent of each type of use." Description: The Orient Fire District, in an effort to improve Public Safety communications in Orient and throughout Southold Town, have entered into an agreement with Beacon Wireless Management will construct the facility whereby the following will be accomplished: A. Principal/Primary Use. The Orient Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services, in an ethort to improve public safety communications, will locate communications equipment (antennas and other devices), on the exterior of the Flag Pole at a height of ninety (90) feet There is a clear and present need by both the Orient Fire District and Southold Town Police to build a structure to improve communications, whether or not wireless carriers locate on the facility. The Orient Fire District, in a very business like manner, is attempting to complete the project at no cost to tax payer, improve public safety, co-locate wireless carriers and earn substantial income for the Southold community. The Southold Chief of Police, Carlisle E. Cochran, Jr_ has unequivocally stated that "when the Orient Fire District erects a • • communication tower that ourantanna height be increased to ninety (90) feet. The ninety (90) foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town " B. Accessory Use. The Flag Pole structure is designed to accommodate the antennas of upto four wireless carriers within the "interior" of the structure. No antennas will be visible from adjoining vantage points. • ltem#7 Dimensions of existing structures. A. Fire Station. Front: Approximately 80 Feet Depth: Approximately 115 Feet Height: Approximately 35 Feet B. Metal Storage Building Front: Approximately 40 Feet Depth: Approximately 80 Feet Height: Approximately 25 Feet Item#8 Dimensions of entire new structure: Flag Pole: 120 Feet, Base to Top Width at Base 48" Width at Top 24" Shelter: Front: 16 Feet Depth: 20 Feet Height: 10 Feet Note: The original shelter will house T-Mobile. When other wireless carriers locate at the site, it will be necessary to enlarge the size of the shelter Item#9 Size of Lot: Front: Main Road: 226 Feet Tabor Road 116.75 Feet Rear: From Main Road: 570.70 Feet From Tabor Road: 287.60 Feet Side Yards: (1) 169.30 Feet (2) 224.52 Feet 1111 9OLIO DEPARTMEI`T TOWN Or &OUTtIOLD CARLISLE r COCHRAN, R. ChirJ of I of cc Telephone Emergency Dial 911 July 9, 2002 • Commissioner Robert Hicks Orient Fire District 1275 Lands End Road Orient, NY 11957 Dear Commissioner Hicks: Pursuant to our prior conversation, this is to officially inform you that there is a need to improve the police radio system receive site at your firehouse. Just this weekend there were two officers trying to communicate on portable radios in the East Marion-Orient area and were unable to communicate with each other until they returned to their vehicles. This poses an officer safety issue. I would request that when the Orient Fire District erects a communication tower that our antenna.height be increased to ninety(90) feet. The ninety (90)Loot-mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town. I look forward to working with you on this project. If you have any further questions, please call,me. Very truly yours, arhsle E. Cochran, Jr. Chief of Police CEC:pg 41405 Route 25 • P.O. Box 911 • Peconic, N.Y. 11958 Administrative (631 ) 765-2600/2601 • Fax (631) 765-2715 • • To whom it may concern: August 16, 2002 I'm writing this letter to express my great concern in regards to needs of a cellular tower in Orient. As for introduction, I want to state that I have been a lifelong (69 years) resident of the Hamlet of Orient. During this time I have also had the opportunity to serve this community and the Town of Southold as the Chief of Police. My concerns are two-fold. Primarily, my concern is with the inadequate communications that are available to our emergency response units in our community. This would include the police department, fire department and rescue units. For these units to have inadequate communications is incomprehensible. Clear and concise communications is absolutely essential in protecting life and property when dispatching emergency units to the needs of the populace. At present, communications in this area are less than adequate, but could be rectified by the construction of a cellular tower. I personally don't feel that esthetics, or any other reason, should obstruct the placement of a tower that would better serve the residents of the area. Presently, emergency response units must rely on relays from other units to receive messages, as some messages lack clarity. A situation of this nature certainly could endanger lives and it is imperative that it be rectified My other concern is more of a personal nature. I am a cellular phone owner and find that it is of little use in the Orient and East Marion areas. I have traveled up and down the east coast of the United States and was able to make calls whenever and wherever we happened to be. The calls went through quickly and with clarity. We men returned to our community to find it is probably the only area in the Country where we were unable to receive a signal adequate enough to make calls that could be completed in entirety. This situation also calls for a cellular tower to give our community the same capabilities that others enjoy. My last point is the location of a cellular tower. As a resident of Orient and where the need for a stronger signal would alleviate my aforementioned concerns, I would support the construction of such a tower on the property of the Orient Fire Department. This would serve two purposes. First it would be centrally located and benefit the emergency services and secondly, any monetary remuneration the tower would generate would go to the District and lessen the taxes assessed to all resident taxpayers. All would benefit. That certainly would De a plus for the community. Thank you for the opportunity to express my concerns as I'm sure I speak for many others who feel the same Sincere G� �� - l2 C6Saturday,August 17,2002 America Online:Stashdl Page: 1 SOUTHOLD TOWN FIRE CHIEFS COUNCIL President. Tom Watkins Sec T M Martin 1st VP Tom Shalvey Jr _ Box 637 2nd VP. Tim McGowan New Suffolk,N Y 11956 4Jan02 Sprint PCS Attn: Ms Diane Enright 275 Highland Road Montclair, N.J07043 Dear Ms Enright: The Southold Town Fire Chiefs Council represents the eight Fire Departments within the Township. These Departments answered over three thousand emergency calls in the past year. At the regular meeting of the Council held at the Greenport Firehouse a unanimous resolution was adopted supporting the Orient Fire Departments request to be a Sprint cell phone antennae site. The Council believes that the public is best served with.the antennae on public property. Anything you can do to have the Orient Fire Department site used by Sprint would be appreciated. Truly yours, C��\ Vim'\U-��•.___ T.M. Martin Secretary 14/- (L(- C_ 4/(C C SCC 10/01/2004 15:30 6314254104 MUNLEYMEAD PAGE 02 111/ MUNLSYj MEA'DII SSTIELSEN & RE AttoRntty AT LAW It n.x To: 0 BBPLT To: 100 AADDLB Mos Rosa 30 Drown.N6w.Toss A%rtn Oman NBmy NEW room 11021 Rvrrrwmon,NAM,YORK 11748 (010)467-6500 (631)426-4100 TwLBDOPrew "rBLLConBR (510)487-6539 (631)425-4104 • I , October 1,2004 VIA FACSIMILE • i Ms.Linda Kowalski Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold P.O.Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 , RE: Application of Orient Fire District, Affordable Housing Associates,Inc. cyb/a Beacon Wireless Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless, And Omnipoint Facilities Network 2,LLC Z$A No.5408 Premises: 23300 Main Road,O>iient,New York Section 18,Block 5,Lot 13.8 Dear Ms.Kowalski: Further to your telephone conversation today. with Dorothy Belard, of our firm, regarding the captioned matter, we contacted Edward J. Boyd V,iEsq., the attorney for the Orient Fire District, and have obtained authorization to act on his behalf in providing your office with a copy of the Amended Notice of Disapproval, dated September 22, 2004, issued by the Southold Building Department. We are, therefore, enclosing a copy of said Amended Disapproval and hereby amend the captioned Application accordingly. Thanking you for your courtesies,we remain Very truly yours, MUNLEY,MEADE,NIELSEN&RE By: .0 iwizefN,G e. lW Lawrence C.R8 LCR:db Enclosure V" FORM NO. 3 �Q, � NOTICE OF DISAPPR®VAL OCT 5 2004 i �b�� DATE: April 23, 2003 AMENDED: May 2,2003 AMENDED: June 3,2004 AMENDED: September 22, 2004 AMENDED: October 4, 2004 TO: Edward John Boyd A/C Orient Fire District PO Box 1468 Southold, NY 11971 OCT 5 2004 Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equipment structure at Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient,NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is not permitted,pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100-162,which states, "No wireless communication facility shall be used, erected or altered in the Town of Southold except as follows: A. In Residential and Marine Districts including AC,R80, R40, R120,R200, R400 AHD, HD,RR,RO, MI and MII, a wireless communication facility is subject to site plan approval and must meet the following requirements. (1) Wireless communication facilities on buildings shall require a special exception approval pursuant to this article. Applicant may apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals for special exception approval and The Planning Board for site plan approval. This Notice of Disapproval was amended on May 2,2003,on June 3, 2004, to correct errors and to make clarifications and on September 22, 2004,to clarify code sections for the ZBA and on October 4,200• : remove references to specific special exception requirements. b Opp Ono inga' 4 S-ac+-e, A.2D a 114ua-,ca Aut, crazed Signature 2 - t o.fr itot-witsue,:t.d row— .04:12 —_-x•d . >.41 . fC tact ,ane )uulr Zclf A Id 411°4`17`kt rt.-141-4' QLl (0/510 41 IO:CO A.m. FORM NO. 3 VIS` NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: April 23, 2003 AMENDED: May 2, 2003 AMENDED: June 3, 2004 AMENDED: September 22,2004 TO: Edward John Boyd A/C Orient Fire District PO Box 1468 Southold,NY 11971 Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equipment structure at Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient,NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is permitted,per special exception,pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100- 162A(3). In addition, the proposed tower does not meet the requirements of Article XVI, Section 100-162A(3), which states; "Wireless communication facilities on telecommunication towers shall require special exception approval pursuant to this article and shall not project higher than 10 feet above the average height of buildings (excluding signs, fences and walls)within 300 feet of the facility or, if there are no buildings within 300 feet, these facilities shall not project higher than 10 feet above the average tree canopy height in that radius measured from ground level. If there are no buildings within 300 feet of the proposed facility site, all telecommunication towers shall be surrounded by dense tree growth to screen views of the facility in all directions. The base of the tower shall be located at least 100 feet from the nearest property line and 300 feet from a landmark property or district listed by federal, state or town agencies." The proposed tower measures 125 feet in height and is within 300 feet of historic properties (18-5- 15.1, 18-5-11.1). Furthermore,pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100-165,B.,which states, "The minimum lot size for the siting of a telecommunication tower shall be in accordance with the following. No tower can be built on a lot which is nonconforming in size to the requirements set forth below: minimum lot area in residential district is 5 acres." The property is 4.4 acres. t S S This Notice of Disapproval was amended on May 2, 2003, on June 3, 2004,to correct errors and to make clarifications and on September 22, 2004, to clarify code sections for the ZBA. i l Autho • -d Signature Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Z.B.A. • .04 iD I FORM NO. 3 JUL 1 1 2003 NjJTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: April 23, 2003 AMENDED: May 2, 2003 RENEWED: July 11, 2003 TO: Edward John Boyd A/C Orient Fire District PO Box 1468 Southold,NY 11971 Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equipment structure at Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient,NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is permitted, per special exception, pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100- 162A(3). L addition, the proposed tower does not meet the requirements of Article XVI, Section 100-162A(3). The proposed tower measures 120 feet in height and is within 300 feet of historic properties (18-5- 15.1, 18-5-11.1). T ' Notice o Disa royal was amended on Ma 2 2003 to correct a e-o. A._ Ardlir- -erut riz S nature Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Z.B.A. ' 4/p 4 lei‘ FORM NO. 3 1Tc kir i p NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL ACtr 7 DATE: April 23, 2003 AMENDED: May 2, 2003 TO: Edward John Boyd NC Orient Fire District 1111-t. /��/p3 /LID PO Box 1468 Southold, NY 11971 Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equipment structure at Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient,NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is permitted, per special exception, pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100-162A(3). In addition, the proposed tower does not meet the requirements of Article XVI, Section 100- 162A(3). The proposed tower measures 120 feet in height and is within 300 feet of historic properties (18- 5-15.1, 18-5-11.1).0Th' • 4 • 4 isapproval was amended on May 2, 2003 to correct a type-o. L i rr uth. zed •ignature Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Z.B.A. (Wo in..c., ) • FORM NO. 3 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL C 5-P-/ eri D zji DATE: April 23, 2003 4- 1 in/05 AID TO: Edward John Boyd A/C Orient Fire District PO Box 1468 Southold, NY 11971 RECEIVED Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 APR 2 8 2003 For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equipment stru moth BOARD OF APPEALS Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient,NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is permitted,per special exception,pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100- 162A(3). In addition, the proposed tower does not meet the requirements of Article XVI, Section 100-162A(3). The proposed tower measures 120 feet in height and is within 300 feet of historic properties (18-5- 15.1, 18-5-111). slim- 41. ut onz=• igna-u Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Z.B.A. • EDWARD JOHN BOYD V ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW 54655 MAIN ROAD P.O.BOX 1468 SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK 11971 (631)765-1555 FACSIMILE:(631)765-5969 E-MAIL:ejb@elilaw.net 1287 EAST MAIN STREET RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK 11901 (831)727-1010 FACSIMLE:(8311727.8824 pkSN pRw EMAII: ejb@olllaw.net April 2, 2003 Michael J. Verity, Principal Building Inspector Town of Southold Town Hall - Route 25 Southold, New York 11971 Re: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT 1000 - 18 -5 -13.8 Dear Mr. Verity: Enclosed please find an Application For Building Permit to construct a 120 foot flag pole structure that will as its principal use support public safety radio antennas at a height of 90 feet and will also support antennas and related equipment for wireless communications carriers. As attachments to the Application please find enclosed: 1) Survey of property dated March 24, 2003 by Peconic Surveyors, P.C. 2) Site plan dated February 21, 2003 by Michael Walker Design/Builder, LLC, including plot plan, elevations, planting plan and foundation plan. Since the standard Application For Building Permit does not provide sufficient space for explanations and notes relative to this project, we are also submitting a position paper that includes sections as follow: 1) Primary/Principal Use 2) Comparable Situations - Southold Police Station Tower 3) Exemption from Zoning Ordinance 4) Benefits to the Community 5) Notes to Building Permit Application 6) Letters of Support Michael J. Verity, Principal Building Inspector April 2, 2003 Page 2 of 2 Please note that this Application is being filed by the Orient Fire District, as owner, together with Beacon Wireless Management, as site developer. Construction will be accomplished by experienced licensed and insured firms specializing in the construction of communications facilities. I respectfully request the opportunity to meet with you before your Department makes a final determination with respect to this Application For Building Permit. 77v ry truly yours, C Edward John Boyd V EJB/bv Encs. • • APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICANT: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT 23300 MAIN ROAD ORIENT, NY 11957-1102 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION: PRIMARY/PRINCIPAL USE: The Orient Fire District and the Southold Town Police need to improve coverage for Fire and Police Communications. It is recognized by former and current police and emergency workers, that current communications are inadequate. Chief Cochran. of the Southold Town Police Department has determined that Southold Police communications must be improved and that emergency communications can be •enhanced by locating antennas at a height of 90 feet at the site of the Orient Fire District Chief Cochran strongly states in his letter: "Pursuant to our prior conversations this is to officially inform you that there is a need to improve the police radio system receive site at your firehouse. Just this week there were two officers trying to communicate on portable radios in the East Marion-Orient area and were unable to communicate with each other until they returned to their vehicles. This poses an officer safety issue." "I would request that when the Orient Fire District erects a communications tower that our antenna height be increased to (90) feet. The ninety (90) foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town." Former Chief Stanley Droskoski has provided a letter of support for the current project in which he eloquently states: "For these units to have inadequate communications is incomprehensible. Clear and concise communications is absolutely essential in protecting life and property when dispatching emergency units to the needs of the populace. At presents communications in this area are less than adequate, but could be rectified by the construction of a cellular tower. Presently, emergency response units must rely on relays from other units to receive messages, as some messages lack clarity A situation of this nature certainly could endanger lives and it is imperative that it be rectified." The Southold Town Fire Chiefs representing the eight Fire Departments within Southold Township, who answered over three thousand emergency calls in the past year, support the Orient Fire Department request. The Orient Fire District in order to improve public safety in Orient and throughout the Town of Southold proposes to construct a 120 foot structure in the design of a FLAG POLE, with yardarm. Public Safety antennas will be placed at a height of ninety (90) feet. The design, financing and construction of the FLAG POLE will be accomplished by Beacon Wireless Management. There will be NO cost to either the Orient Fire District or the Southold Town Police for placement of antennas on the flag pole. Beacon Wireless Management will lease space "within the shell of the flag pole" to wireless carriers. ACCESSORY USE: As an accessory use, Beacon Wireless Management will lease antenna space on the interior of the flag pole to wireless carriers. This design is called "stealth technology." NO wireless carrier antennas or cables will be exposed or visible from surrounding areas. Electronic equipment will be located in a storage shed which will be constructed of materials similar to the existing storage building. The storage shed for the electronics and the Flag Pole will be located behind the existing fire house storage building. COMPARABLE SITUATION: SOUTHOLD POLICE STATION COMMUNICATIONS TOWER We bring to the attention of the Building Department a comparable public safety initiative by the Southold Town Police. The Southold Town Police have allowed to be erected on their property on Main Road, a 140 foot communications tower that enables placement of public safety antennas and the antennas and electronics equipment of Sprint wireless. We believe that the work was performed by a private firm, at no cost to the Southold Town and that the construction was exempt from zoning. That situation is most similar to this application. We The Orient Fire District, respectfully request similar and equal treatment. We believe that this application should be exempt from zoning because the primary or principal use for the construction of the tower is to provide enhanced public safety communications for the The Southold Town Police and The Orient Fire District and EMS and cellular phone users. Use by wireless carriers is accessory and incidental, merely requiring an additional thirty feet to allow the project to be economically feasible. The project cannot proceed at a lower height with the flag pole design. EXEMPTION FROM ZONING ORDINANCE We believe the construction and uses proposed by the Orient Fire District should be exempt from Town of Southold Zoning per the following memorandum. Historically, New York courts have recognized that certain political subdivisions are entitled to absolute immunity from zoning regulations, including the federal government; state government; state urban development corporation; and public schools. These entities are not required to comply with local land use regulations. Other governmental entities, such as towns, villages, cities, counties and fire districts, are accorded only a limited immunity and may be subject to local zoning regulations. In making a determination as to whether the actions of a fire department are exempt from local zoning regulations as a political subdivision, the New York Court of Appeals established a new method for resolving inter-governmental land use disputes using the "balancing of public interests" analytical approach. In the Matter of County of Monroe iv. City of Rochester, 72 N.Y.2d 338, 533 N.Y.S.2d 702 (1988), the Court rejected the former test for determining the application of local zoning regulations to activity by political subdivisions. Under the former test, such entities were not subject to local regulations when they were performing "governmental" functions and were subject to local regulations when they were performing "proprietary" functions. In County of Monroe, (supra), the court recognized that this distinction was outmoded and difficult to apply and replaced it with a "balancing of public interest" approach. A decade later, the State Supreme Court in Nanuet Fire Company No.I, Inc., v. Amster as Chant-min of the Town of Clarkstown Zoning Board of Appeals, 177 Misc2d 296, 6786 N.Y.S.2d 890 (1988), determined that construction ofa firehouse in a municipality was subject to the balancing of interests test set forth in Monroe. The petitioner in the case was a private, not-for-profit fire company. As such, it had its own board of directors, lacked taxing authority, and could not be considered as a separate unit of government as would be the case for a city, town, village or fire district. Under these circumstances, it could be concluded that the Fire Company was fully subject to the Town's zoning, as would be true for any other not for profit organization conducting its business in town. However, the court concluded that the construction of a fire house by a not for profit fire company is subject to the Monroe balancing of interests test rather than to the unqualified application of the Town's zoning, and returned the matter to the Town to conduct the balancing of interests test. After the balancing was conducted by the Town, it was determined that public safety and other factors warranted the construction to proceed. Therefore, with the establishment of both County of Monroe and Manuel, the proper approach is to employ the "balancing of public interests" test. There are nine (9) factors to be addressed and they are as follows: 1. The nature and scope of the instrumentality seeking immunity; 2. The encroaching government's legislative grant of authority; 3. The kind of function or land use involved; 4. The effect local land use regulation would have upon the enterprise concerned; 5 Alternative locations for the facility in less restrictive zoning areas; 6. The impact upon legitimate local interests; 7. Alternative methods of providing the proposed improvements; 8. The extent of the public interest to be served by the improvements; and 9. Intergovernmental participation in the project development process and an opportunity to be heard. The application of the Orient Fire District is most similar to the Nanuet Fire Company case and more clearly entitled to the exemption due to the fact that the Orient Fire District has taxing authority and is a separate unit of Southold Town government, We ask you to apply the "Balancing of Public Interests" analytical approach, and in doing so conclude that this application by the Orient Fire District for a building permit to construct a personal wireless facility is exempt from operation of the Southold zoning code. BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY: The Orient Fire District specifically will receive the following benefits from the proposed construction: A. No Capital expenditure for the "structure" needed to locate public safety antennas This will save the Orient Fire District approximately $150,000. B. Improved Public Safety. There is a current need to improve public safety communications for the Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services. Locating the antennas, at no cost to the community, will improve public safety communications. C. The Orient Fire District, and by extension, the Orient Community, have the capacity to earn more than $3,000,000 (million dollars) over the life of the agreement. D. The Orient Fire District may elect to own the flag pole structure after 7 years E. Improved Wireless Communications which will lead to improved public safety. Statistics clearly show that approximately 40% of E-911 calls emanate from Wireless phones, substantially reducing the time it takes emergency personnel to respond. F. Enhanced Wireless Services will enable Public Safety personnel to pinpoint the location of emergency calls within a fifty foot radius, thus improving emergency response. G. Improved wireless communications from and to Plum Island. H. Co-location of Public Safety and wireless communications on one structure, will effectively reduce the number of"towers" constructed in Southold Town. NOTES TO BUILDING PERMIT These notes are provided as an explanatory addendum to the Application for a Building Permit as space does not allow a full explanation of the work proposed. Item #2 a. Existing use and occupancy. The subject land contains two buildings: (A) Orient Fire Station (B) Storage Building. b. Intended use and occupancy. The proposal is to construct a 120 Foot Flag Pole structure that as a principal use will support public safety antennas at a height of 90 feet and as an accessory use support wireless antennas. The Flag Pole will be located in a fenced compound with space also utilized to store electronics equipment. Item #6 "If business, commercial or mixed use occupancy, specify nature and Extent of each type of use." Description: The Orient Fire District, in an effort to improve Public Safety communications in Orient and throughout Southold Town, have entered into an agreement with Beacon Wireless Management will construct the facility whereby the following will be accomplished: A. Principal/Primary Use. The Orient Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services, in an effort to improve public safety communications, will locate communications equipment (antennas and other devices), on the exterior of the Flag Pole at a height of ninety (90) feet There is a clear and present need by both the Orient Fire District and Southold Town Police to build a structure to improve communications, whether or not wireless carriers locate on the facility. The Orient Fire District, in a very business like manner, is attempting to complete the project at no cost to tax payer, improve public safety, co-locate wireless carriers and earn substantial income for the Southold community. The Southold Chief of Police, Carlisle E. Cochran Jr. has unequivocally stated that "when the Orient Fire District erects a communication tower that our an_tanna height be increased to ninety (90) feet. The ninety (90) foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town." B. Accessory Use. The Flag Pole structure is designed to accommodate the antennas of upto four wireless carriers within the "interior" of the structure. No antennas will be visible from adjoining vantage points. Item#7 Dimensions of existing structures. A. Fire Station. Front: Approximately 80 Feet Depth: Approximately 115 Feet Height: Approximately 35 Feet B. Metal Storage Building Front: Approximately 40 Feet Depth: Approximately 80 Feet Height: Approximately 25 Feet •Item#8 Dimensions of entire new structure: Flag Pole: 120 Feet, Base to Top Width at Base 48" Width at Top 24" Shelter: Front: 16 Feet Depth: 20 Feet Height: 10 Feet Note: The original shelter will house T-Mobile. When other wireless carriers locate at the site, it will be necessary to enlarge the size of the shelter. Item#9 Size of Lot: Front: Main Road: 226 Feet Tabor Road: 116.75 Feet Rear: From Main Road: 570.70 Feet From Tabor Road: 287.60 Feet Side Yards: (1) 169.30 Feet (2) 224.52 Feet ?OLICE DEPARTMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CARLISLE E. COCHRAN, JR. Chief of Police Telephone Emergency Dial 911 July 9, 2002 Commissioner Robert Hicks Orient Fire District 1275 Lands End Road Orient, NY 11957 Dear Commissioner Hicks: Pursuant to our prior conversation, this is to officially inform you that there is a need to improve the police radio system receive site at your firehouse. Just this weekend there were two officers trying to communicate on portable radios in the East Marion-Orient area and were unable to communicate with each other until they returned to their vehicles. This poses an officer safety issue. I would request that when the Orient Fire District erects a communication tower that our antenna height be increased to ninety (90) feet. The ninety(90)foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town. I look forward to working with you on this project. If you have any further questions, please call,me. Very truly yours, arlisle E. Cochran, Jr. Chief of Police CEC:pg 41405 Route 25 • P.O. Box 911 • Peconic, N.Y. 11958 Administrative (631) 765-2600/2601 • Fax (631) 765-2715 To whom it may concern: August 16, 2002 I'm writing this letter to express my great concern in regards to needs of a cellular tower in Orient. As for introduction, I want to state that I have been a lifelong (69 years) resident of the Hamlet of Orient. During this time I have also had the opportunity to serve this community and the Town of Southold as the Chief of Police. My concerns are two-fold. Primarily, my concern is with the inadequate communications that are available to our emergency response units in our community. This would include the police department, fire department and rescue units. For these units to have inadequate communications is incomprehensible. Clear and concise communications is absolutely essential in protecting life and property when dispatching emergency units to the needs of the populace. At present, communications in this area are less than adequate, but could be rectified by the construction of a cellular tower. I personally don't feel that esthetics, or any other reason, should obstruct the placement of a tower that would better serve the residents of the area. Presently, emergency response units must rely on relays from other units to receive messages, as some messages lack clarity. A situation of this nature certainly could endanger lives and itis imperative that it be rectified. My other concern is more of a personal nature. I am a cellular phone owner and find that it is of little use in the Orient and East Marion areas. I have traveled up and down the east coast of the United States and was able to make calls whenever and wherever we happened to be. The calls went through quickly and with clarity. We then returned to our community to find it is probably the only area in the Country where we were unable to receive a signal adequate enough to make calls that could be completed in entirety. This situation also calls for a cellular tower to give our community the same capabilities that others enjoy. My last point is the location of a cellular tower. As a resident of Orient and where the need for a stronger signal would alleviate my aforementioned concerns, I would support the construction of such a tower on the property of the Orient Fire Department. This would serve two purposes. First it would be centrally located and benefit the emergency services and sacondly, any monetary remuneration the tower would generate would go to the District and lessen the taxes assessed to all resident taxpayers. All would benefit. That certainly would be a plus for the community. Thank you for the opportunity to express my concerns as I'm sure I speak for many others who feel the same. Sincere fric.-4 •4932j • Saturday,August 17,2002 America Online:Stashdl Page: 1 SOUTHOLD TOWN FIRE CHIEFS COUNCIL President Tom Watkins Sec T M Martin 1st VP. Tom Shalvey Jr Box 637 2nd VP: Tim McGowan . New Suffolk,N Y 11956 4Jan02 Sprint PCS Attn: Ms Diane Enright 275 Highland Road Montclair, N.J07043 Dear Ms Enright: The Southold Town Fire Chiefs Council represents the eight Fire Departments within the Township. These Departments answered over three thousand emergency calls in the past year. At the regular meeting of the Council held at the Greenport Firehouse a unanimous resolution was adopted supporting the Orient Fire Departments request to be a Sprint cell phone antennae site: The Council believes that the public is best served withthe antennae on public property. Anything you can do to have the Orient Fire Department site used by Sprint would be appreciated. . Truly yours, T.M. Martin Secretary C • e f . TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD - S - ( 3,8 Vkcp __ OWNER STREET e --a-30 0 VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOTS t o r -P 4 c-I "at i .2 .1DWI25 ) . a FORMER OWNER NL;: M E_., .f ACR. M _ CS UH k_d ` eYe�; T .1CYe'crec— et 4.3S Y I V'ci -- rice_1EOuSQ S p+��y 1. W--� r TYPE OF BUILDING c-4-4r-- RES. n , . lit`d tcoVF�Y SC: I Y:, W 1;1 LE,t I%c:)6id Cocoa I ' 1 RES. SEAS. VL. I FARM COMM. CB. MICS. Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL I DATE REMARKS ( .;r`e _pt r, \aoc / ed, l0.446 -I-99(`x'? ES . -n...- Sp1 C p F.. 33oo'�ev 23, 50o 2cQ) SOO 5/ 12 /00 Fla/g9—3P11 \ 234-o - Cnns$a P';-ekouse - '#7.S7i, onn . Tillable FRONTAGE ON WATER Woodland 3. x`57 50CD I (a79 FRONTAGE ON ROAD Meadowland DEPTH House Plot i A 1 (Goo i is p BULKHEAD Total 32 'I eleamaigea a{ 1 ht 9 53 (p3 I — - ' illi ma H l 1 pa S2 9 c?c yc zQ Po - M. Bldg. IK Foundation -Q,C ` Bath — Extension ��11 43 x g2_ 35 -�t,� 3 '�2 12. 34 i Basement Npe Floors Extension Ext. Walls `in',rV-- Interior Finish , Extensio(j t1 k,L) Fire Place ucN..a . Heat FP h eLA ata. 53 K 33 -_` 1744 9 J� I i I 08 6x27 = 135 6 14 K2-7 -- 37g z_ Porch -7 )(7 '-f 9' \ 1-714- 150 87 Pool r Attic Deck 5 X 25 '" 121; 7- Patio Rooms 1st Floor Breezeway Driveway Rooms 2nd Floor Garage O. B. ---------------- _ Z-3)c36V90 • TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION CHECKLIST BUILDING DEPARTMENT Do you have or need the following,before applying? TOWN HALL Board of Health SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 - 3 sets of Building Plans TEL: (631) 765-1802 .'YL. ..J Planning Board approval FAX: (631) 765-9502 Survey www. northfork.net/Southold/ PERMIT NO. Check Septic Form N.Y.S.D.E.C. Trustees Examined ,20 Contact: Approved , 20 Mail to: Edward J. Boyd, Esq. Disapproved a/c Box 1468, Southold, NY Phone: 765—155 5 Expiration ,20 Building Inspector APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT DISAPPROVALDate April 2 2003 INSTRUCTIONS a. This application MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what so ever until the Building Inspector issues a Certificate of Occupancy. f. Every building permit shall expire if the work authorized has not commenced within 12 months after the date of issuance or has not been completed within 18 months from such date. If no zoning amendments or other regulations affecting the property have been enacted in the interim,the Building Inspector may authorize, in writing,the extension of the permit for an addition six months. Thereafter, a new permit shall be required. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County,New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housi code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. i Fire District b -------....____ • (Signature of applicant or name,if a corporation) 23300 Main Road, Orient, NY 11957 (Mailing address of applicant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder Owner Name of owner of premises Orient Fire District • (As on the tax roll or latest deed) If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer • (Name and title of corporate officer) Builders License No. Plumbers License No. Electricians License No. Other Trade's License No. 1. Location of land on which proposed work will be done: 23300 Main Road Orient House Number Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 18 Block 5 • Lot 13.8 Subdivision Filed Map No. Lot (Name) 2. State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy Municipal Government - Public Safety b. Intended use and occupancy Municipal Government - Public Safety 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building x Addition Alteration Repair Removal Demolition Other Work Communications Tower (Description) 4. Estimated Cost $150,0004 200,000 Fee Exempt (To be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units 0 Number of dwelling units on each floor 0 If garage, number of cars 0 6. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use. N/A 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front FH-80,A-40 Rear FH-43,A-40 Depth FH-110,A-80 Height FH-30,A-25 Number of Stories FH-1,A-1 (FH = Fire House; A = Accessory Building) Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front unchanged Rear Unchanged Depth Unchanged Height Unchanged Number of Stories - Unc apged , „, 8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front T-4,S-16 Rear T-4,S-16 Depth T-4,s-20 Height T-120,s-10 Number of Stories T-N/A,s-1 (T = Tower; S = Shelter for electronics) 9. Size of lot: Front 226 Rear 570 Depth 341 10. Date of Purchase 11/14/85 Name of Former Owner Barbara Dwight Schriever 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated R-80 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation? YES x NO 13. Will lot be re-graded?YES NO x Will excess fill be removed from premises? YES NO x Orient 23300 Main Rd. 14. Names of Owner of premises Fire District Address Orient, NY Phone No. Name of Architect Michael Walker Address S . Dartmouth,M4PhoneNo( 508) 287-4313 Name of Contractor Vantage AssociatesAddress Nyack NY Phone No. 15 a. Is this property within 100 feet of a tidal wetland or a freshwater wetland? *YES NO x * IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES& D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. b. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? * YES NO X * IF YES, D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 feet or below,must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Edward J . Boyd being duly sworn, deposes and says that(s)he is the applicant (Name of individual signing contract)above named, (S)He is the Attorney/Agent (Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. Sworn to before me this �— day ofApril 2003 4: Wary Public Signature of Applicant PAM%COMM Notn PublicaltestIMIttk No.01C05011852 Commissio t]ualifined in Suffah Count Expires Soft 13,�r7S FORM NO. 3 1101, tr- NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL JUL 3 0 2004 APPEALS DATE: April23,2003 -- AMENDED: AMENDED: May 2, 2003 AMENDED: June 3, 2004 TO: Edward John Boyd A/C Orient Fire District PO Box 1468 / p Southold, NY 11971 glp/c l P Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equipment structure at Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient, NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is permitted, per special exception, pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100- 162A(3). In addition, the proposed tower does not meet the requirements of Article XVI, Section 100-162A(3). The proposed tower measures 125 feet in height and is within 300 feet of historic properties (18-5- 15.1, 18-5-11.1). Furthermore, pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100-165, B., which states "The minimum lot size for the siting of a telecommunication tower shall be in accordance with the following. No tower can be built on a lot which is nonconforming in size to the requirements set forth below: minimum lot area in residential district is 5 acres." The property is 4.4 acres. This Notice of Disapproval was amended on May 2, 2003 and June 3, 2004, to correct errors and to make clarili is . / a • uthorideo' ignature Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. . , ® • • FORM NO. 3 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: April 23, 2003 AMENDED: May 2, 2003 AMENDED: June 3,2004 AMENDED: September 22, 2004 TO: Edward John Boyd A/C Orient Fire District PO Box 1468 Southold,NY 11971 Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equipment structure at Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient,NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is permitted,per special exception,pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100- 162A(3). In addition, the proposed tower does not meet the requirements of Article XVI. Section 100-162A(3), which states; "Wireless communication facilities on telecommunication towers shall require special exception approval pursuant to this article and shall not project higher than 10 feet above the average height of buildings(excluding signs, fences and walls) within 300 feet of the facility or. if there are no buildings within 300 feet.these facilities shall not project higher than 10 feet above the average tree canopy height in that radius measured from ground level. If there are no buildings within 300 feet of the proposed facijity site,all telecommunication towers shall be surrounded by dense tree growth to screen views of the facility in all directions. The base of the tower shall be located at least 100 feet from the nearest property line and 300 feet from a landmark property or district listed by federal, state or town agencies." The proposed tower measures 125 feet in height and is within 300 feet of historic properties (18-5- 15.1. 18-5-11.1). Furthermore,pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100-165, B.,which states, "The minimum lot size for the siting of a telecommunication tower shall be in accordance with the following. No tower can be built on a lot which is nonconforming in size to the requirements set forth below: minimum lot area in residential district is 5 acres." The property is 4.4 acres. i • • 'This Notice of Disapproval was amended on May 2, 2003, on June 3, 2004,to correct errors and to make clarifications and on September 22,2004,to clarify code sections for the ZBA. ear Autho ' -d Signature Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Z.B.A. • • • LEGAL NOTICE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2004 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following public hearing will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179, Southold, New York 11971-0959, on THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2004, at the time noted below: 1:05 PM AT&T WIRELESS, OMNIPOINT FACILITIES NETWORK 2, LLC. AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSOCIATES, INC. D/B/A BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT, ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT #5408. Location of Property: Orient Firehouse Parcel, 23300 Main Road, Orient; CTM 18-5-13.8; Zone District: R-80. Requests for: (1) Variances under Sections 100-162A(3) and 100-165B, based on the Building Inspector's April 23, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, last amended September 22, 2004, concerning a proposed telecommunications tower at 125 ft. height with antenna, and related equipment. The reasons stated for disapproval are that the telecommunications tower: (1) does not meet the code requirements with a proposed height at 125 feet, (2) is not permitted to be located within 300 feet of historic properties, CTM 18-5-15.1, 18-5-11.1, and (3) is not permitted on a nonconforming lot size, or lot containing less than a minimum lot area in a residential district of five (5) acres. (2) Special Exception under Section 100-162A(3) to construct telecommunications tower. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representatives, desiring to be heard at each hearing, and/or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each hearing. Each hearing will not start earlier than designated above. Files are available for review during regular business hours. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: October 1, 2004. BOARD OF APPEALS RUTH D. OLIVA, CHAIRWOMAN By Linda Kowalski P .so�. n� �Pr� 43 Orient Fire District Board of Fire Commissioners Martin Trent,Chairman Lloyd A.Kahn Robert Hicks Joseph Wysocki Gary Tabor Edward Loper, Sec/Treasurer To: All members, Retirees, Residents of the Orient Fire Dist ', From: Orient Fire District Re: Application to construct a 120 Foot Pole Struct' support public safety antennas at a height of 90 feet and equipment for wireless carriers. We have completed and are submitting the Town of Southold ' titled: Application for Building Permit. As the form does not explanation and notes, we are also providing the following Description of the Proposed Construction Statements of BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY PLANS PREPARED BY MICHAEL WALKER, LICENSED SHOWN (PARTIAL) A. PLOT PLAN v ' B. COMPOUND LAYOUT yy C. ELEVATION LETTERS OF SUPPORT FORM A. CHIEF OF POLICE CARISLE COCHRAN, JR. B. FORMER CHIEF OF POLICE STANLEY DROSKOSKI C. SOUTHOLD TOWN FIRE CHIEFS COUNCIL "An Analysis of the Orient Fire Department's Existing Radio Frequency Coverage and Recommendations for improving Communications". Please note the application is filed by the Orient Fire District, as owner along with Beacon Wireless Management, as site developer. Construction will be by licensed and insured firms specializing in construction of communication facilities. APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICANT: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT 23300 MAIN ROAD ORIENT,NY 11957 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION: PRIMARY/PRINCIPAL USE: The Orient Fire District and the Southold Town Police need to improve coverage for Fire and Police Communications. It is recognized by former and current police and emergency workers, that current communications are inadequate. Chief Cochran of the Southold Town Police Department has determined that Southold Police communications must be improved and that emergency communications can be enhanced by locating antennas at a height of 90 feet at the site of the Orient Fire District. Chief Cochran strongly states in his letter: "Pursuant to our prior conversations, this is to officially inform you that there is a need to improve the police radio system receive site at your firehouse. Just this week there were two officers trying to communicate on portable radios in the East Marion-Orient area and were unable to communicate with each other until they returned to their vehicles. This poses an officer safety issue." "I would request that when the Orient Fire District erects a communications tower that our antenna height be increased to (90) feet. The ninety (90) foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town." Former Chief Stanley Droskoski has provided a letter of support for the current project in which he eloquently states: "For these units to have inadequate communications is incomprehensible. Clear and concise communications is absolutely essential in protecting life and property when dispatching emergency units to the needs of the populace. At present, communications in this area are less than adequate, but could be rectified by the construction of a cellular tower. Presently, emergency response units must rely on relays from other-Units to receive messages, as some messages lack clarity. A situation of this nature certainly could endanger lives and it is imperative that it be rectified." The Southold Town Fire Chief's representing the eight Fire Departments within the Southold Township, who answered, "over three thousand emergency calls in the past year, support the Orient Fire District request. The Orient Fire District in order to improve public safety in Orient and throughout the Town of Southold proposes to construct a 120-foot structure in the design of a FLAG POLE, with yardarm. Public Safety antennas will be placed at a height of ninety(90) feet. YO~ NMBAYD APP@A LSA ' 62003 . . - "An Analysis of the Orient Fire District's Existing Radio Frequency Coverage and Recommendations for Improving Communications" Report, dated February 23, 2003, is included with this application. It was prepared by Mr. David Weyhreter, MSEE. The report states in part: "Based on the results of an extensive predictive coverage analysis utilizing industry tested techniques an increase in antenna height to 90' (feet) AGL is suggested." The design, financing and construction of the FLAGPOLE will be accomplished by Beacon Wireless Management. There will be NO cost to either the Orient Fire District or the Southold Town Police for placement of antennas on the flagpole. Beacon Wireless Management will lease space "within the shell of the flagpole"to wireless carriers. ACCESSORY USE: As an accessory use, Beacon Wireless Management will lease antenna space on the interior of the flagpole to wireless carriers. This design is called "stealth technology." NO wireless carrier antennas or cables will be exposed or visible from surrounding areas. Electronic equipment will be located in a storage shed, which will be constructed of material similar to the existing storage building. The storage shed for the electronics and the Flagpole will be located behind the existing firehouse storage building. Use by wireless carriers is accessory and incidental, merely requiring an additional thirty feet to allow the project to be economically feasible. The project cannot proceed at a lower height with the flagpole design. BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY: The Orient Fire District specifically will receive the following benefits from the proposed construction: A. No Capital expenditure for the "structure" needed to locate public safety antennas. This will save the Orient Fire District approximately $150,000. B. Improved Public Safety. There is a current need to improve public safety communications for the Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services. Locating the antennas, at no cost to the community, will improve public safety communications. C. The Orient Fire District, and by extension, the Orient Community, have the capacity to earn more than$3,000,000 (million dollars) over the life of the agreement (30 years). D. The Orient Fire District may elect to own the flagpole structure after 7 years. E. Improved Wireless Communications which will lead to improved public safety. Static's clearly show that approximately 40% of E-911 calls emanate from Wireless phones; substantially reducing the time it takes emergency personnel to respond. - • . F. Enhanced Wireless Services will enable Public Safety personnel to pinpoint the location of emergency calls within a fifty-foot radius, thus improving emergency response. NOTES TO BUILDING PERMIT These notes are provided, as an explanatory addendum to the Application for a Building Permit as spaces does not allow a full explanation of the work proposed. a. Existing use and occupancy. The subject land contains two buildings; I. Orient Fire Station 2. Storage Building b. Intended use and occupancy. The proposal is to construct a 120-foot Flagpole structure that as a principal use will support public safety antennas at a height of 90 feet and as an accessory use support wireless antenna. The Flagpole will be located in a fenced compound with space also utilized to store electronic equipment. "If business, commercial or mixed use occupancy, specify nature and Extend of each type of use." Description: The Orient Fire District, in an effort to improve Public Safety communications in Orient and throughout Southold Town, have entered into an agreement with Beacon Wireless will construct the facility whereby the following will be accomplished: A. Principal/Primary Use. The Orient Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services, in an effort to improve public safety communications, will locate communications antennas on the exterior of the flagpole at a height of ninety(90) feet. There is a clear and present need by both the Orient Fire District and the Southold Town Police to build a structure to improve communications, whether or not wireless carriers locate on the facility. The Orient Fire District, in a very business like manner, is attempting to complete the project at no cost to the tax payer, improve public safety, co- locate wireless carriers and earn substantial income for the Orient community. The Southold Town Chief of Police, Carlisle E. Cochran, Jr. has unequivocally stated, "When the Orient Fire District erects a communications tower that our antenna height be increased to ninety(90) feet. The ninety(90) foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town." B. Accessory Use. The Flagpole structure is designed to accommodate the antennas of up to four wireless carriers within the "interior" of the structure. No antennas will be visible from adjoining vantage points. 1 ;' D N tn Wo A y \ \ ' ,FIVE® \ MAY AY 2003 N 87'47'30' E 77 224.52 'ence tai Zssr rr a' P 80o f 5 d'eEp W r ✓pEA1... e.giahnf CoNC v[« U$W 1 iO0' q° �, V� GAS Z rE 111 I,NP 5ra^K N c ayrs{.n9) vii Dimensions of existing structures. A. Fire Station Front: Approximately 80 feet Depth: Approximately 115 feet Height: Approximately 35 feet B. Metal Storage Building Front: Approximately 40 feet Depth: Approximately 80 feet Height: Approximately 25 feet Dimension of entire new structure: Flagpole: 120 feet, Base to Top Width at Base 48" Width at Top 24" Shelter: Front: 16 feet Depth: 20 feet Height: 10 feet With other carriers 50 feet to 60 feet as shown Size of lot: Front: Main Road: 226 feet Tabor Road: 116.75 feet Rear: From Main Road: 570.70 feet From Tabor Road: 287.60 feet Side Yards: (1) 169.30 feet (2) 224.52 feet Additional Notes: All structures will have appropriate Certificates of Occupancy or Compliance. i s ii6r I� ' • OCT 1 2 2004 TRANSMITTAL WITHOUT COVER LETTER DELIVERED kc, / /2004 TO ZBA OFFICE FROM: -(Owflab o cD , yy . RE: oII\\ Z`C-.n. _knee 3 -rt.d , Cr Al. -(AC,tED P�£ASC Twb CC.1E...2 '"C) Co:iCs 2Co 1ytb tLfQAT,oa DA-CM 0cTJ,SiL ':, 2� e ;; BEACONWIRELESS ______________ BEACON WIRELESS MGMT. I \ STP \ A I V E : BEACON MANAGEMENTLESS CONTRACTOR'S NOTES PM. BOX 303 ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT /,PP l\2 i& HAMPTON HAFaxM 6 °za554s NY 11946 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL GIVE ALL NOTICES AND COMPLY WITH ALL LAWS, ORDINANCES, RULES, REGULATIONS AND LAWFUL ORDERS OF ANY PUBLIC AUTHORITY, MUNICIPAL AND UTILITY COMPANY 7 3 3 C C VAIN ROAD ( S . R . 2 5 ) OCT 1 2 2001 SPECIFICATIONS, AND LOCALALAND STATE JURISDICTIONAL CODES BEARING ON THE PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THE WORK PERFORMED ON THE PROJECT AND THE MATERIALS INSTALLED SHALL M BE IN STRICT ACCORDANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES, )11 ESI Sid Il D B REGULATIONS, AND ORDINANCES. 0 1 E N T , NY 1 1 9 5 7 2. THE ARCHITECT/ENGINEER HAS MADE EVERY EFFORT TO SET FORTHMICHAEL WALKER IN THE CONSTRUCTION AND CONTRACT DOCUMENTS THE COMPLETE C Ir SCOPEEVEOF WORK. THE CONTRACTORHTIBIDDINGMTHE JOB IS E S 1T1 DI- S C R I DTI O N : DESIGN/BUILDER, IIC NEVERTHELESS CAUTIONED THAT MINOR OMISSIONS OR ERRORS IN THE DRAWINGS AND OR SPECIFICATIONS SHALL NOT EXCUSE HIM FROM COMPLETING THE PROJECT AND IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT COORDINATES 500 Horseneck Road IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INTENT OF THESE DOCUMENTS. Dartmouth, MA 02748 3. THE CONTRACTOR OR BIDDER SHALL BEAR THE RESPONSIBILITY OF IMPROVED PUBLIC SAFETY AND WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS Tel: (508) 287-4313 NOTIFYING (IN WRITING) BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT OF ANY 08(5 300-6051 x: Fa5 CONFLICTS, ERRORS, OR OMISSIONS PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF Fa CONTRACTOR'S PROPOSAL OR PERFORMANCE OF WORK. IN THE EVENT LATITUDE: N 41' 8.579 (NAD 83) E— a®camcost.net OF DISCREPANCIES THE CONTRACTORNLESHALL IRE PRICE THEWMORE FACILITY ON REPLACEMENT STRUCTURE COSTLY OR EXTENSIVE WORK, UNLESS DIRECTED IN WRITING OTHERWISE. LONGTITUDE: W 72' 17.981 (NAD 83) PROJECT NO: MWDB.ORIENT 4. THEQUI SCOPE WORK SHALL INCLUDE FURNISHINGIALS ALL MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, LABOR AND ALL OTHER MATERIALS AND LABOR DEEMED GROUND ELEV.: AMSL (NAVD 88) NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE WORK/PROJECT AS DESCRIBED HEREIN. DRAWN BY: MW 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE JOB SITE PRIOR TO THE SUBMISSION OF BIDS OR PERFORMING WORK TO FAMILIARIZE HIMSELF VICINITY MAP NO SCALE PROJECT SUMMARY WITH THE FIELD CONDITIONS AND TO VERIFY THAT THE PROJECT CAN CHECKED BY: BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. I SHEET INDEX 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH SITE CAD FILE: ORIENT.T1 CONSTRUCTION PRIOR TO STARTING WORK ON ANY ITEM NOT CASCADE NO: CLEARLY DEFINED BY THE CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS / CONTRACT TO RIVERHEAD ' TO ORIENT POINT SHT. REV. SUBMITTALS DOCUMENTS. r— MAIN RO . -.R.25I — DESCRIPTION 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ALL EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS I SITE NAME: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT NO. NO. ACCORDING TO THE MANUFACTURER'S / VENDOR'S SPECIFICATIONS UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE OR WHERE LOCAL CODES OR ORDINANCES PROPERTY LOCATION T-1 TITLE PAGE 4 TAKE PRECEDENCE. -4 23 MAIN RD \ SITE ADDRESS: 23300 MAIN ROAD (S.R. 25) ,y ORIENT FIREOIBTRIOT ORIENT, NY, 11957-1102 4 10-5-04 ANT REVS 8. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A FULL SET OF CONSTRUCTION 8 A-1 PLOT P' AN, ELEVATION, CMPND. PLAN 5 3 4/30/04 Al REV DOCUMENTS AT THE SITE UPDATED WITH THE LATEST REVISIONS AND ASSESSORS MAP: SECTION 018 BLOCK: 5 2 3/17/04 LANDSCAPE ADDENDUMS OR CLARIFICATIONS AVAILABLE FOR THE USE BY ALL PERSONNEL INVOLVED WITH THE PROJECT. PARCEL IDENTIFICATION: LOT: 13.8 1 2/21/03 ADD 51.1 & A1.2 9. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUPERVISE AND DIRECT THE PROJECT A-2 PLANTING PLAN & SHELTER ELEVS. 1 00 02/05/03 FOR ZONING DESCRIBED HEREIN. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION MEANS, METHODS, DEED BOOK/PAGE: BOOK: PAGE: TECHNIQUES, SEQUTHEEW AND PROCEDURES AND FOR COORDINATING THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS S-1 FOUNDATION PLAN & DETAILS 1 SET OF DOCUMENTS IS PROPRIETARY GOVERNING BY NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE 10. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALLTOWN OF SOUTHOLD OTHER THAN THAT WHICH RELATES TO PERMITS AND INSPECTIONS WHICH MAY BE REQUIRED FOR THE WORK JURISDICTION: BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT IS BY THE ARCHITECT/ENGINEER, THE STATE, COUNTY OR LOCAL / STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF THIS DRAWING \ GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY. CURRENT ZONING: IS NOT 24"x36", IT IS NOT TO SCALE. 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE NECESSARY PROVISIONS TO PROTECT NORTH PROFESSIONAL SEAL EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS, EASEMENTS, PAVING, CURBING, ETC. GOVERNING CODE: N.Y.STATE BLDG. CODE DURING CONSTRUCTION. UPON COMPLETION OF WORK, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR ANY DAMAGE THAT MAY HAVE OCCURRED DUE TO CONSTRUCTION ON OR ABOUT THE PROPERTY. CONSTRUCTION ANTENNA ARRAY — USE GROUP U 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP THE GENERAL WORK AREA CLEAN DRIVING DIRECTIONS CLASSIFICATION: AND HAZARD FREE DURING CONSTRUCTION AND DISPOSE OF ALL DIRT, DEBRIS, RUBBISH AND REMOVE EQUIPMENT NOT SPECIFIED AS REMAINING ON THE PROPERTY. PREMISES SHALL BE LEFT IN CLEAN PROPERTY OWNER'S ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT CONDITION AND FREE FROM PAINT SPOTS, DUST, OR SMUDGES OF NAME AND ADDRESS: 23300 MAIN ROAD ANY KIND. ORIENT NY 11957-1102 13. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL OSHA REQUIREMENTS RT. 25 EAST FROM RIVERHEAD TOWARD (631 ) 323-3888 AS THEY APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. ORIENT POINT FERRY. CONTACT NAME: ROBERT HICKS 14. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT FIRE STATION IS ON RIGHT IN ORIENT. PHONE NUMBER: (631 ) 323-3888 WHERE A CONFLICT OCCURS ON ANY OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. BUILDING DEPT. NOTES THE CONTRACTOR IS NOT TO ORDER MATERIAL OR CONSTRUCT ANY PORTION OF THE WORK THAT IS IN CONFLICT UNTIL CONFLICT APPLICANT'S NAME ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT IS RESOLVED BY BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT. & ADDRESS: 23300 MAIN ROAD 15. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS, SOUTHOLD NY 11957 1 . THIS TOWER INSTALLATION AND ASSOCIATED TELECOMMUNICATION PROPERTY LINES, ETC. ON THE JOB. , CONTACT NAME: ROBERT HICKS SHELTERS AND EQUIPMENT ARE UNMANNED AND A SECURED 16. ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITY INFORMATION WAS DETERMINED FROM PHONE NUMBER: (631 ) 323-3888 EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION. EACH FACILITY IS MONITORED FROM A SITE SURFACE INVESTIGATIONS AND EXISTING PLANS OF RECORD. REMOTE LOCATION. EACH FACILITY IS ONLY ACCESSED BY TRAINED ORIENT THE CONTRACTOR SHALL LOCATE ALL UNDERGROUND UTILITIES TECHNICIANS EVERY 4 TO 6 WEEKS. THEREFORE, THE COMPOUND IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO ANY SITE WORK. PROJECT SUMMARY ARCHITECT/ENGINEER'S MICHAEL WALKER DESIGN/BUILDER, LLC DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY WATER AND WILL NOT GENERATE ANY FIRE DISTRICT NAME & ADDRESS: 500 HORSENECK ROAD SEWAGE EFFLUENT OR OTHER TRASH WASTE. SOUTH DARTMOUTHIAA 02748 23300 MAIN ROAD GEN CONTRACTOR'S CONTACT NAME: MICHAEL WALKER, AIA 2. THE ESTIMATED VEHICLE TRIP GENERATION CREATED BY THE ORIENT DIG SAFE NAME & ADDRESS: PHONE NUMBER: (508) 287-4313 INSTALLATION OF THIS COMPOUND IS 6 TRIPS PER MONTH COMBINED. N.Y. 11957 THE AVERAGE DAILY TRIP GENERATION RATE (ADT) IS .2 TRIPS PER 3 WORKING DAYS CONTACT NAME: MONTH. SHEET TITLE PHONE NUMBER: POWER PROVIDER: LONG ISLAND POWER AUTHORITY Ar-V4. ��0�� CONTACTNAME: 3. THIS TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPOUND IS NOT GOVERNED BY TITLE PAGE NAME ,�� y+ ELEC. CONTRACTOR'S PHONE NUMBER: AREACODE—PHONENUMBER REGULATIONS REQUIRING PUBLIC ACCESS PER ADA REQUIREMENTS. tip 'Al BEFORE YOU DIG NAME & ADDRESS: CONTACT NAME: TELEPHONE PROVIDER: NAME 4. THE INSTALLATION OF THIS TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPOUND CALL TOLL FREE 888 - DIG - SAFE PHONE NUMBER: CONTACT NAME: NAME REQUIRES NOT ADDITIONAL PARKING SPACE(S). PHONE NUMBER: AREACODE—PHONENUMBER SHEET NUVIBER UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT T- 1 ELECTRICAL TRANS 4-GANG METER BOARD AND VAULT\ & DISCONNECT S BEACONWIRELESS --- ___c_rol 10' X 20' T-MOBILE SHELTER X '-!- X`—'X — X .— X — X — X — X 7- X —/X X — X — X — X — \ x ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT ORIENTIOARRAY ITO B 9 6 �\ EXTERNALLY MOUNTED 1 61 x PUBLIC SAFETY, ULTRA HIGH 050 TELCO I . �c<. . (Th S " FREQUENCY--120' AGL1. / so AREA, 2 s" DIA / � x 1 STRONGWELL BOX ' � 1� Ik/ I� Ik 120' TOP OF TONER \ \ - T-MOBILE CONCEALi-U & COVER II II II C x 30" NOMINAL TOP DIA. I ANTENNAS 000 IIr BEACON WIRELESS 1 x 20' SHELTER AREA d s' CENTER OF \ MANAGEMENT 12 FT. ACCESS Ia. 24' LEASE AREA GATE .. o a W I x CONGEALMENT P.O. BOX 303 1 U w II AT & T CONCEALED ANTENNAS '^" P - HAMPTON BAYS, NY 11946 e x 12'-6" VHF VERTICAL WHIP 3" WEED BLOCS ,,� e..-�\ -- ANTENNA ® 0 DEG (DB-222) Fax: 6311 72 8 5546 PAVING WITH WEED BLOCK \ FABRIC UNDERLAYMENT x - + ly ` C10111 ,. 05' GENTER OF \ STANDARD NUDD DISH CONGEALMENT I PORT WITH BOOT 60' X 60' COMPOUND x x .I LEASE AREA mN � AOPPROX LINE 10'-6" "LOWBAND" VERTICAL M W WHIP ANTENNA O 190 DEC D x m: (RFS-1142) SPREAD FTG 6' BLACK VINYL I �"i FOR MONOPOLE COMPOUND FENCE x b0 I_ x SOUTHOLD TOWN POLICE m ORIENT MICHAEL WALKER E a , PUBLIC SAFETY--90' AGL \ CNI i FIRE DISTRICT --90' AGL DESIGN/BUILDER, Ilc . of 500 Horseneck Road ,—_ 12' x 2B' SHELTER INI 411, 4110 �I Dartmouth, MA 02748 te'x 32' LEASE AREA NERIZON) x VERIZON CONCEALED ANTENNAS Tel: (508) 287-4313 ' Fax: (508) 300-6051 x x I E-mail: 80' CENTER OF \ 1 N mwdb@comcost.net � 120' FLUSH STYLE CONGEALMENT / 6' MIN ' ' 1 ' FUTURE CARRIER (NEXTEL) I CONCEALED ANTENNAS MONOPOLE WITH (2) SIDEARMS I b ..I PROJECT NO: MWDB.ORIENT CONC DOOR PAD - TYP. x >c— x — x — x — x — x — x — x — x — X — x — X — x — X — x — I DRAWN BY: MW 10' GENTER OF \ MAIN POAD (STATE ROAD 25) COMPOUND PLAN CONGEALMENT 1 CHECKED BY: N 80--31'-30" E 226.00' 1/8" = 1'-0 I 4 i CAD FILE: ORIENT.A1 0 AI iN - SUBM TTALS Im 5 10-5-04 ANT INTERF ADJUST ti 4 4/30/04 XARM-HI-FI-FLUSH � I m rn 3 3/17/04 FLUTED POLE CI li'';;y,5a.,,; , � Iw CI z; 4' /. � ;'; 0/ 0 2 12/os/0. 60X60 l'^�;' 1 S, �/ 'm 1 2/21/03 1201,SHELTER,PLANT ,,.//;,„01::: :;:;77.,/ ; %// ,/4, ID m 0 02/05/0.- FOR CONSTRUCTION „ �„ STY' HIGH FLUSH POLE y�' / /'4, ItEliSTYLE MONOPOLEw : "%.%'CV" /�„.<:;),/:' WITH FLUTED THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS I-w Q j':" . /�' '''/ Io CONTOUR SET OF DOCUMENTS IS PROPRIETARY LJ O '%r I BY NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE OTHER THAN THAT WHICH RELATES TO �,/ Ct I :0::://i� BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT IS ' � STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF THIS DRAWING LCt i / / IS NOT 24"x36", IT IS NOT TO SCALE. z �''' / LN 87 CC) P .',4,:::.:"�: : ----.-__:.:47•_30„ E Q m I ' i. 'i%; 224 52' POLE TO BE PROFESSIONAL SEAL I '' PAINTED WHITE I _ ` I (E) PAVEMENT & PARK G AREA(s) 77/1{„7:14:1V ri i , EQUIPMENT & EQUIPMENT SHELTER(S) � / /'a i/': i ----- - -.._.--.„, , •;44/7/4.///1//2".4../ . : —�R2 b / 6'-0" HIGH CHAIN ����`` 1 j LINK FENCE I / — UE m In O I N Q UT �' - Q7 b .p. .I .,.p` / 360 a ';.. , 1 ' \ m ♦3• \ FI I.H CR ALL • • • • SITE 1 N v, v' vw ORIENT - LAWN - 1 m �� k. ;c ;< w x/ N% A,i ,N��%'<�' ��',,c,- FIRE DISTRICT / \ 23300N YORIEN MAIN ROAD N. 1 FOUNDATION 1957 / N (BY OTHERS) NEW 120' FLUSH TYPE MONOPOLE I 1 II NEW 60'X60' FENCED COMPOUND -01 .,, SHEET TITLE L__ ,, NN. PLOT PLAN 1 �1 FLUSH MONOPOLE ELEVATION ELEVATION & — — — — \ 1/6„ — 1 -0 COMPOUND PLAN PLOT P�4N S 83-03'-50" W - - - - - - - 3 570.70' - - / 1" = 40' - SHEET NUMBER __________\ PLOT PLAN INFORMATION TAKEN FROM SURVEY PREPARED A-1 BY PECONIC SURVEYORS, P.C., P O. BOX 909, SOUTHOLD N Y TITLED SURVEY OF PROPERTY FOR ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT AT ORIENT, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD DATED JULY 2, 2002 // / / i ;: BEACON WIRELESS EXfIKC METgL STf� fAcE & I-LD NG/ / j / ' / /% 4 0 12( ,4140_ �� EDGE OF EXISTING CONCRETE/BITUMINOUS ' zi PARKING LOT/APRON w ., BEACON WIRELESS 4 CCa MANAGEMENT a 0 z Q P.O. BOX 303 4 HAMPTON BAYS, NY 11946 4 Z PROPOSED SCREEN PLANTINGS Tel: 631.484.5445 ., p ( 11) EA--6' ARBORVITE 8' O.C. WITH , Fax: 631.728.5546 e '� MULCHED PLANTING BEDS 4 4X A4 W Cr TRANSFORMER AND PAD 4 , , A „ PROPOSED T-MOBILE /,§<.,:,,,,, \.,: ,- 10 X 20 EQUIPMENT SHELTER D B :•��;- ` '.\=�':':': "- '''''`} MAIN ELECTRICAL PANEL MICHAEL WALKER ,+\;'. ;:;'/: :'.:' , * :':' ':::' I '';:::.:; DESIGN/BUILDER, Ilc I In �n 500 Horseneck Road = „ . .:::;'.'.';'.'.' u u Dartmouth, MA 02748 _-t11,,' pX — X X —•X, — X — X — X — X — X — X — X — X — X — X ,'.N.1' . Tel: (506) 287-4313 4” LAYER OF STONE PAVffTTG OVER '-' '' ' / Fax: (508) 300-6051 :.t�I :.:, WEED BLOCK FABRIC ON-1COMPACTEDEARTH BASE E-mail: EXISTING CRASS - %\` ❑ ' mwdb®comcast.net \. . ',:,: AREA , . - '�X I� P, j� % X �// ,; ; �� / % ::'; ��I' PROJECT N0: MWDB.ORIENT g, ' : j b'/e * SH C/ IN, ' : 'H- '''7 /� :;/;;;,'<.'r" / , , DRAWN BY: MW TELEPHONE / / / //01,-;- -. 23/421.�� ;iv::: CHECKED BY: di , , . . CABINET �.I AI `' /A\�� CAD FILE: A1 .2 /1 'ea�;` a< %/ ��''/ ;LP,, i ' �� /i�1 �iN SUBMITTALS X11' '�////i , %i \ t j X 0W / /0 //;<:- .,:0/ / ;., ,.,, X11 ;,: >,',:,;47,,-,t/ ,i . X ;+. , ,: i :;<, ,;i CROSS-ARM ABOVE .el f % I :�1r-`: xV %/J- ��� �0�/ 01 3/17/04 49 TREES 1/4' i , x '','- 00 02/21/03 FOR CONSTRUCTION V° '. I / / � 42. ,,,,,,/,,,,,,":,, " '„,,,,:,/,,;";;;;;;,<.<:,772:7/ !/�, , x THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS ,,:7:1 ;;N/// �init 41 i % ; SET OF DOCUMENTS IS PROPRIETARY .01/7.:1:1".1-:11, 2%/H7 AO. 37 'g9� �kg j r /L '� BY NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE ` ` ` ` `: % ;i, v , ::,,/;,2,A1:":;1,11;:1"1 /��� j x OTHER THAN THAT WHICH RELATES TO BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT IS -` �/� j//ice -� /i i� • STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF THIS DRAWING ♦. , ;- IS NOT 241.x36", IT IS NOT TO SCALE. METAL LAP SEAM ROOF '' ' ',''' x �:' ' ' ' ' PROFESSIONAL SEAL MTL SIDING TO TO MATCH ROOF OF (E) METAL vL� '-:':::': : x — ;'; MATCH(E) METAL STORAGE STORAGE BLDG — x — x — x — x — x — x — x — x — x — x — x — x — x - x -� :; %:,; BUILDING 3' X 4-6" LOUVERS 3070 PASS DOOR ,:.4Y ::.AIS : ::: E'I.,: :;T \. ::::::_+/+ ,0 ':::::::: :::: 1;1::::::+:,;I v I'I�,I'I,I„ I"I"I (ROPOSED SCREEN PLANTING+ S 111! i 40) EA--6' ARBORVITE8' O.C. WITH LIa, '(■(.IMULCHEDPLANTINGBEDS= - - C PLANTING/_ANDSCAPE P_AN IIIIIIIII 1 1/8" = 1'_0- SITE ORIENT b 111 FIRE DISTRICT II 1 111111 "'I011 26 GA. PAINTED GALV. METAL PANEL FOR WALLS & ROOF 23300MAIN RR CI ' N.Y. 11957 10' X 20' X 14" REINFORCED CONCRETE EQUIPMENT AND SHELTER PAD 10' 20' SHEEI TITLE OVER 1' LAYER WASHED STONE / / / / PLANTING PLAN AND SHELTER ELEVATIONS © SHELTER ELEVATIONS--TYP. 1/4" = 1'-0' SHEET NUMBER A-2 I FOUNDATION NOTES 1 . TOWER DESIGN CONFORMS TO NYSBC SEC. 3108. STANDARD EIA/TIA-222-F FOR 85 MPH FASTEST-MILE BASIC WIND SPEED WITH j" RADIAL ICE WITH LOAD DUE TO WIND REDUCED BY 25% WHEN CONSIDERED SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH ICE. TOWER DESIGN CONFORMS TO 23' jj BEACON WIRELESS STANDARD EIA/TIA-222-F FOR 85 MPH FASTEST-MILE BASIC WIND SPEED WITH NO ICE. TOWER DESIGN CONFORMS TO / / EIA/TIA-222-F FOR 120 MPH 3-SECOND GUST FACTOR. 2. NO TWIST AND SWAY LIMITATIONS SPECIFIED OR USED FOR THIS TOWER. I #4 HORIZONTAL TIES @ 6" 0.C. 3. MATERIAL: VERTICALLY A) PIPE TO ASTM A500 GRADE B. 2 PIECES REQUIRED B) STEEL PLATES TO ASTM A36. C) REINFORCING STEEL BAR TO ASTM A615 GRADE 60. \ D) CONNECTION BOLTS TO ASTM A325 OR ASTM A449 (Fu=12OKSI AND Fy=92KS1) AND ANCHOR BOLTS TO I / #8 VERTICAL REBAR WITH STANDARD HOOK--32 PIECES REQUIRED ASTM A687 (Fu=150 KSI AND Fy=105 KSI). EQUALLY SPACED 8" ON CENTER I , 4. REMOVE FOUNDATION TEMPLATE PRIOR TO ERECTING TOWER. INSTALL BASE SECTION OF TOWER WITH A MINIMUM OF 2" CLEARANCE INSIDE HORIZONTAL TIES I 11 ABOVE CONCRETE. PACK NON-SHRINK STRUCTURAL GROUT UNDER BASE SECTION AFTER LEVELING TOWER. BEACON WIRELESS 5. TOWER FOUNDATION BASE ON GRANULAR, CLEAN DENSE AND MODERATELY CONSOLIDATED SOIL (SAND). A SOIL BEARING VALUE MANAGEMENT OF (SBV) OF 1 .5 TON PER SQUARE FOOT (TSF) IS UTILIZED FOR UNDISTURBED NATURAL SOIL AT ELEVATION ±8'-6" FEET BELOW k GRADE. P.O. BOX 303 6. CONCRETE TO BE 3000 PSI @28 DAYS. CONCRETE INSTALLATION TO CONFORM TO ACI-318 BUILDING REQUIREMENTS FOR CENTERLINE OF FOUNDATION HAMPTON BAYS, NY 11946 REINFORCED CONCRETE. ALL CONCRETE TO BE PLACED AGAINST UNDISTURBED EARTH FREE OF WATER AND ALL FOREIGN OBJECTS AND CENTERLINE OF TOWER Tel: 631.484.5445 D MATERIALS. A MINIMUM OF 3" OF CONCRETE SHALL COVER ALL REINFORCEMENT. WELDING OF REBAR IS NOT PERMITTED. Fax: 631.728.5546 7. A COLD JOINT IS PERMISSIBLE UPON CONSULTATION WITH THE ARCHITECT. ALL COLD JOINTS SHALL BE COATED WITH BONDINGI 3" MIN- 51,_ AGENTS PRIOR TO SECOND POUR. 8. FILL AND BACKFILL SHALL BE PLACED IN LOOSE LEVEL LIFTS OF NOT MORE THAN 12 INCH LAYERS. FILL MATERIALS SHALL BE ; /•;'• M W CLEAN AND FREE OR ORGANIC AND FROZEN MATERIALS OR ANY OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIALS. COMPACT LAYERS OF FILL TO 98% N, - - --- I\ -1 o - ,D•1 B OF MODIFIED PROCTOR MAXIMUM DRY DENSITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM D1557. 9. BENDING, STRAIGHTENING OR REALIGNING (HOT OR COLD) OF ANCHOR BOLTS BY ANY METHOD IS PROHIBITED. = MICHAEL WALKER En 10. CROWN TOP OF FOUNDATION FOR PROPER DRAINAGE. (1" IN 5 FEET). DESIGN/BUILDER, LIC Emu 11 . THE TOWER FOUNDATION MUST BEAR ON NATURAL UNDISTURBED EARTH. A QUALIFIED ON-SITE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER MUST Man 500 Horseneck Road ■■■■■■ INSPECT THE BEARING SURFACE TO ENSURE THAT THE CAPACITY MEETS OR EXCEED THE FOUNDATION DESIGN PERAMETERS. I Dartmouth, MA 02748 ■■■■■■■ 9 REBA - 35 PIECES EA WA 12. DUE TO DISTURBANCE CASUED BY EXCAVATION, THE SUBGRADE SOILS MUST BE RECOMPACTED USING A VIBRATORY COMPACTOR ■■■■■■■■■ # Tel: (508) 287-4313 APPROVED BY THE ON-SITE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER. ANY SOFT OR UNSTABLE SUBGRADE SOILS DETECTED DURING THE EXCAVATION ■■■■■■■■■■ TOP AND BOTTOM Fax: (508) 300-6051 OR COMPACTION ACTIVITIES MUST BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH COMPACTED GRAVEL. Il ■■ ■ ■■■ ■■ ■■ E-mail: mwd8®Comcast.net 13. OVER EXCAVATION MAY BE REQUIRED DUE TO SLOUGHING SAND SOILS AT THIS SITE. FORMWORK MAY BE REQUIRED TO PLACE ■■■■■■■■■■■■ I ANCHOR BOLTS- 12 REQUIRED CONCRETE. ALL FORMWORK MUST BE REMOVED PRIOR TO ANY BACKFILL OPERATIONS. ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ANCHOR BOLTS MUST ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ z BE SET WITH TOWER MFGRS TEMPLATE I PROJECT NO: MWDB.ORIENT I ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ PROVIDE SUFFICIENT SPACE BENEATH2 MIN ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■� ( ) 3" MIN 6" ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ TO PERMIT FINISHING OF CONCRETE Sc TO I DRAWN BY: MW I \ FACILITATE TEMPLATE REMOVAL PRIOR TO TOWER �A /- \ I ERECTION I i � 4„ I CHECKED BY: UNE OF SHELTER 1 1111111111111=111.417r ‘4_ 28' .. II 8" LAYER OF ■ / / CAD FILE: S1 .1I \ — — — , "� COMPACTED \Y" "' �` CENTERLINE #3 TIES ® 10" SUBMITTALS POROUS FILL r el% ----N‘ rat COMPACTED NATURAL bf 6-#5 EQ. SPACED EARTH ; � � I ANCHOR BOLTS-12 REQUIRED to' MIN. 3500 PSI CONC TOP OF FOUNDATION PILASTER / ANCHO" BDIOX 5' LONG WITH 8- 1 /2" / PAD WITH (2) /// EXPOSED THREAD: ANCHOR BOLTS MUST 01 04/30/0 CONI LAYERS 6X6 NO.W REBAR PLAN BE SET WITH TOWER MFGRS TEMPLATE \ W.W.MESH OR (6) l;�A�G�jy����ysss.,,,.• CONC. PIER SECTION 3" MIN THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS 4' 6" X #4 v'� �`i��� � FINISH �=tii SET INODOCUMENTS IS PROPRIETARY ° REBAR EACH WAY GRADE —I n — — n IFBY NATURE. ANY USE OR DISCLOSURE 95% COMPACTED SUBGRADE _ OTHER THAN THAT WHICH RELATES TO 1 0" O.C. l I I1 11 111 I1 I I II BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT IS OF NATURAL EARTH Z COMPACTED EARTH BACKFILL STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF THIS DRAWING zo 1 I1-1 11—IP1- IS NOT 24"x36", IT IS NOT TO SCALE. In a / TYP. PIER DETAIL 21-0 111=-71, 1 ,111-_7111E-:Q 2 — = #9 REBAR 35 PIECES EA 3/4" = 1'-0" °C 11=1 = - WAY TOP AND BOTTOM PROFESSIONAL SEAL a BROOM FINISH i��.— 3" T Ij. S 1III al —111- °° a CONC SLAB ON " ---_�—_,1I1,;,LI \ GROUND IIl 11I111111 ' Il itll�Intl LI-1I1=111=111- z \ #9 REBAR - 35 PIECES EA WAY WITH TOOLED EDGE TOP AND BOTTOM ALL AROUND H OK L @) TYP. DOOR PAD 1/2 = 1 -0 UNDISTURBED NATURAL 28' SQUARE EARTH-COMPACTED. LINE OF SHELTER WHEN EMPLOYED FOUNDATION CONTRACTOR NOTE! 3'-6" (TVP.) FOUNDATION' CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE H FOR VERIFYIING THAT THE ANCHOR BOLTS #4 @ 18" 0.0. EACH WAY o AT CENTER OF SLAB AREINSTALLED COR CTLY TO ACCEPT THE _ , TOWER BASE PLATE. SITE VERIFY THE PART NUMBERS, SIZE AND ORIENT A NUMBER OF ANCHOR BOLTS AND OTHER FIRE DISTRICTY 0.10,014:4$4040,141#4444:141.44044.403 ..'. r . r . ',• , , . COMPONENTS IF THERE ARE _* j1���i'�ri�.'�i�+'i��f��;i�'��'ir'��i'��r' �r'��'fir•`i�r'��ri�r' �r'�r'} r'i�+!i�'� r'`i�r"i�'ri�ri�40.g. ' ��+'�}: �!���� �- FOUNDATION PLAN & SECTION �� .&•• ADISCREPANCIES NOTIFY ARCHITECT AND !G.!j%yj/j .G.� ` .tY1Yl • eS��cti' ..�' �> tics@�eS+av�1^�J' `��;t 1R+ c.S@.fi .414t. 23300 MAIN ROAD � ♦ 1��. 1ip.• "!•OssOs�Qs!� G �1s>lJl�/l�fpLjpp Cy'•.% N. �J 1/4" = 1'-0" TOWER MANUFACTURER PRIOR TO ORIENT ly-y INSTALLATION! N.Y. 1 1957 8" MIN. 98% COMPACTED !✓14tst.t4t4t#�' #3 AT 18" O.C. (2AN) 4 AT BOTTOMTOP GRAVEL FILL A ��� � �•� � SHEET TITLE 95% COMPACTED SUBGRADE OF NATURAL EARTH TOWER NOTES• FOUNDATION 1. REFER TO CONCRETE AND REINFORCING STEEL GENERAL NOTES. 2. GRAVEL SHALL BE NATURAL OR PROCESSED CRUSHED GRAVEL & CONCRETE WITH 100 PERCENT PASSING 1 INCH SIEVE. 3. SLAB SHALL BE FINISHED WITH A "BROOM" FINISH SHEET NUMBER EYP. CONC. PAD DETAIL S_ 1 1/4" = 11-0" APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS oi#��OF SUUryO Southold Town Hall Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman �� 1p 53095 Main Road•P.O.Box 1179 Gerard P. Goehringer 4i; Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vincent Orlando Office Location: James Dinizio,Jr. . ,/% Town Annex/First Floor,North Fork Bank Michael A. Simon .�4C®U �� 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue) ii ,s"' Southold,NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631)765-1809 •Fax(631)765-9064 April 5, 2005 By Regular Mail and Fax Transmission Edward J. Boyd V, Esq. P.O. Box 1468 Southold, NY 11971 Re: ZB Ref. 5408 — Orient Fire District Tower Dear Mr. Boyd: Please find enclosed a copy of the determination rendered by the Zoning Board of Appeals at its March 31, 2005 Meeting. Please be sure to contact the Building Department (765-1802) regarding the next step in the building and zoning review process. You may want to furnish an extra copy of the enclosed determination when submitting any other documents or amendments to these departments for final reviews. Thank you. Very truly yours, Linda Kowalski Enclosure Copies of Decision 4/5/05 to: Building Department Planning Department P. Edward Reale, Esq. (for Orient Assoc) '� tl Zs7° ( a dos Pi� d' id EMERGENCY COMMUNICATION (e_au,d) FOR THE ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT Prepared By WILLIAM F. SCHEIBEL, JR. EASTERN LONG ISLAND ELECTRONICS INTRODUCTION This analysis was conducted at the request of the Orient Fire District relative to the existing emergency communications system presently utilized; to identify shortcomings within that system and to propose solutions that would serve the Orient Fire District within the district and in line with its role as an active participant in the Suffolk County Mutual Aid Agreement. EXISTING SYSTEM The Orient Fire District currently uses a conventional low-band transceiver operating in the 46 MHz band, which equipment is similar to that as has been historically used by fire districts throughout Suffolk County for the past 40 years. Coverage provided by this system is greatly limited by the height of the omni-directional antenna (approximately 48') and that antenna's Effective Radiated Power (ERP) of 30 Watts, as well as problems that are inherent to the 46 MHz band. EXISTING LICENSE The FCC license issued to the Orient Fire District allows for communications on three low-band frequencies, to wit: 46.46 (Dispatch), 46.34 (Sector) and 46.38 , (Mutual Aid), each limited to a maximum of 30 Watts for both base and mobile stations. The FCC call sign assigned to this license is KDZ352 STANDARDS FOR ANALYSIS For reasons of personnel safety, the Orient Fire District requires effective communications for its members at all locations within the District as well as throughout neighboring districts to the East and West where its firefighters are most likely to be summoned to provide mutual aid. Effective communications are provided when a radio message is able to be transmitted and received with clarity 90% of the time. Additional standards mandated by the district are security of the antenna site, effective and economical linkage of the antenna site to the base station located at the Orient Fire House, and a reliable source of stand-by electric power to assure communications in case of a LIPA systems failure. These factors dictate an antenna site in close proximity to the fire house. RESULTS OF ANALYSIS Due to the topography of the Orient Fire District and adjacent areas, interference from the myriad of electronic devices now in use by the public, and the concerted lack of technical support and service offered by the manufacturers, effective emergency communications for the Orient Fire District can not be maintained solely through the use of low-band 46MHz equipment. As has been discovered by fire districts throughout Suffolk County, the effective solution to present communications problems lies in adding Ultra High Frequency (UHF) capability to the system. Firefighters at an emergency scene using UHF hand-held radios would be able to transmit their messages directly to the base station located at the Orient Fire House. Outgoing messages from the base station would be transmitted via UHF and received by the UHF hand-held radios used by the firefighters. From propagation studies conducted by Eastern Long Island Electronics using industry accepted communications techniques and software, the required antenna height for an antenna located in the immediate vicinity of the Orient Fire House would be 120' AGL. The addition of UHF capability to the Orient Fire District communications would require a UHF repeater at the Fire House, new mobile radios with antennas for each of the district's vehicles, hand-held radios for the firefighters and several in-vehicle repeaters allowing for cross band as well UHF to low-band transmission. SUMMARY The emergency communications problems faced by the Orient Fire District are not unique from the standpoint of technology, but do present some unusual difficulties n S N occasioned by the topography of the district, non-central location of its fire house and the need to provide for the safety of its firefighters when operating in remote locations. In providing for solutions to these problems, budgetary constraints as well as reliability and security issues must be considered. Available technology provides solutions to these problems as is demonstrated by the change from low-band to UHF that is being implemented by many fire districts in Suffolk County. ADDENDUM Though outside the scope of this analysis, it must be noted that through an antenna co-location on the Orient Fire District tower at a greatly increased height, a substantial improvement will be provided to the communications system utilized by the Southold Town Police Department in the easternmost part of Southold Town. zz ial� ®� ®/J . ,),) 3 Communications Requirements Study for Orient Fire District Table of Contents' Executive Summary 1 Background 1 Existing.System 2 Current System Limitation 3 Coverage Study 4 Solution 4 Recommendation 5 Next Step 6 Copyright 03/01/04 Eastern Long Island Electronics by WFS Executive Summary Eastern was commissioned to evaluate the existing operation of the - current radio system and make a recommendation as to an upgrade strategy that would not only address current system failures, but also provide a system that brought communications up to date based on current trends. Background Eastern Long Islands Electronics is the East End's premier radio communications solutions provider. We are a full line Motorola Dealer as well as a Manufacturer's representative, a Motorola preferred subcontractor and National Service Supplier (MSS). What this means to our customers is that you will be working with a factory authorized dealer, as well as a recognized solutions provider. Eastern sells radios just like many other companies, but more importantly, provides solutions for our customer problems. For example, Eastern holds the exclusive contract with,Motorola providing 24x7 service and support of the County's E-911 system, the same system you rely on every time you pick up the phone and dial 911 ! Page 1 Copyright 03/01/04 Eastern Long Island Electronics by WFS Existing System The current system is a low band T4 R4 Midland base station with a "home brew" re-page panel based on Southold PD dispatch generating a two-tone page followed by DTMF tones that activates the resend of the two tone page, verifying for the dispatch point that the page was heard and dispatch narrative can begin. Further detail is available in David Weyhreter's report of 2/23/03. The Orient Fire Department members respond based on the hearing of the page and location of the scene. All communication at that point is on simplex Low band. Fire ground, as well as contact with dispatch and Suffolk County Fire Rescue. being handled on the legacy Low band system on 46 Megahertz simplex. Subscriber equipment is a mix of mobiles and 4-watt hand-helds. Most equipment is well over 15 years old. With the current system, (based on observation via a monitoring station) there is approximately a 70% chance of communications subscriber-to-subscriber, subscriber-to-base and, subscriber-to- dispatch. This means that upon initial key-up, three out of ten communications fail on the first attempt. The Orient Fire Department would like to see an improvement to 90% districtwide. FCC limitations as well as existing licenses are well addressed in David Weyhreter's report of 2/23/03. Page 2 • Copyright 03/01/04 Eastern Long Island Electronics by WFS Current System Limitations Low band VHF communications is fundamentally susceptible to a number of limitations. 1) Man-made noise in the low band frequencies is a natural out pouring of our electronic age. Home computers, microwave ovens, cell phones, Nextel walkie-talkies and other marvels of technology all interfere with low band communications by their very nature. Electronic clocks used in the computers of these devices, all directly or indirectly contribute to the overall noise level heard on low band. These signals are in direct competition for the receiver the department uses to manage fire communications on as well as the pager your fire fighters listen with. 2) Low band communications are more susceptible to interference from geographically remote stations on the same frequency simply because lower frequencies are naturally more susceptible to atmospheric and stratospheric phenomenon than higher frequencies. Simply stated, low frequencies get more interference than high frequencies. 3) Low band is a simplex medium. You talk radio to radio without the assistance of today's electronics. Frequency modulation is used not only in public safety but in most communications systems today as a line of site based system. The radio must, for all intents and purposes, be able to see the other user. Low . band cannot use a duplex repeated system because the FCC will not allow it. 4) Low band equipment, because of all the reasons stated above, is out of favor with manufacturers. With increased large scale integration electronics, higher frequency radios are easier, as well as more profitable, to build. Page 3 Copyright 03/01/04 Eastern Long Island Electronics by WFS Coverage Study Eastern used, as David did, the Longley Rice modeling algorithm in all our studies. Our goal was to add to David's existing data and to show the coverage an alternative to low band would provide. The added data captured was Low band talk in, not the ability for a person at headquarters to be heard but the ability of dispatch to hear that user. Furthermore, we found no propagation model that could adequately predict the ability of a handheld to be heard radio-to-radio districtwide or a handheld to be heard by County or Southold PD dispatch. The short answer is that based on the fundamental deficiencies of low band stated earlier, THERE IS NO LOW BAND SOLUTION TO RESOLVING RELIABLE UNIT TO UNIT COMMUNICATION DISTRICT WIDE. Solution This brings•us to how do we ensure unreliable communications and fire service communications district wide? This is a two-fold answer. In order to better warrant the reception of a page and fire dispatch we need to improve low band talk out. The simple way to do this is to insure pager activation. Raising the height of the Low band antenna at the fire house and improving the radiated power will insure this. An increase of low band antenna to 120 feet improves talk out significantly. (see attached diagram). The movement of scene management and Dispatch to scene communication to UHF(high band) virtually eliminates all current issues associated with Low band communications. However to implement a UHF system requires a much higher antenna, located Page 4at the firehouse. This is due to the fact that there is no reliable mechanism to build out a reliable dispatch system except Page 4 Copyright 03/01/04 Eastern Long Island Electronics by WFS the location of that dispatch system at the dispatch point of control. Simply put, the department needs to control their system if they are to be able to rely on it — the safety of your firemen depends upon that fact. Recommendation Raise tower height to a minimum of 120 feet (preferred 190) and implement a new low band base station with re-page capability at that elevation. This will improve low band talk out (and therefore pager activation a minimum of 50+%). Implement a UHF repeated system for district-wide hand held coverage, with two additional high band frequencies, one for Scene Management (fire ground) and one for Vehicular repeater use so a UHF hand held can communicate directly with either Southold dispatch, Suffolk County Fire Rescue or another department for mutual aide. Page 5 Copyright 03/01/04 Eastern Long Island Electronics by WFS f •////Iii o ��' SUFFO(,� APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ��� • ®�� oe Southold Town Hall Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman a yr► : 53095 Main Road Gerard P. Goehriner g P.O. Box 1179 - Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vincent Orlando \ #4fr ! /� Tel. (631) 765-1809 James Dinizio,Jr. ' 1 $,.'� Fax (631)765-9064 Michael A. Simon """"'' • http.//southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Prep. 1/31 AGENDA ZBA SPECIAL MEETING THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 3,2005 6:00 PM Place of Meeting: Southold Town Meeting Hall Call to Order by Chairwoman Oliva. I. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEWS: (pending reviews/new submissions). II. POSSIBLE DELIBERATIONS/DECISIONS on the following applications: Possible Deliberations/Decisions(hearings concluded): CONSTANCE BEEBE #5637. Request for Variances under Section 100-32, based on the Building Department's September 8,2004 Notice of Disapproval,concerning Lots 1 and 2,as proposed in this lot line change, will measure less than 80,000 sq. ft. and less than 175 feet of lot width. Location: 24925 Main Road, Cutchogue; CTM 109-1-18, 19,and 20.1. Zone District: R80 Residential. JON and KATHLEEN MARINO#5652. Request for a Variance under Section 100-244, based on the Building Department's December 3, 2004 Notice of Disapproval concerning a proposed porch and second-story addition at less than 35 feet from the front lot line, and lot coverage exceeding 2003.60 sq. ft. (20% of 10,018 sq. ft. lot size). Location of Property: 10105 Soundview Avenue, Southold; CTM 54-8-5. RICHARD and ELEANOR COFFEY #5645. Request for a Special Exception to establish Accessory Bed and Breakfast, accessory and incidental to the owner's occupancy in this single-family dwelling, with up to four (4) bedrooms for lodging and serving of breakfast to not more than eight (8) casual,transient roomers,at 5705 Main Road, East Marion; CTM 35-2-16.1. BARRY and KATE GRAYSON #5640. Request for a Variance under Section 100-33, based on the Building Department's September 3, 2004 Notice of Disapproval concerning an as built accessory shed located at less than 5 feet from the rear lot line,at 5270 Nassau Point Road,Cutchogue; 111-8-18. JAMES LEYDON #5649. Request for a Variance under Section 100-33, based on the Building Department's November 5, 2004 Notice of Disapproval concerning proposed deck construction partly in a side yard instead of entirely in rear yard,at 450 Parson Boulevard, East Marion; 37-1-18. DOUGLAS and KARIN CONSTANT#5642. Request for a Variance under Sections 100-242A and 100-244, based.on the Building Department's November 12, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, concerning a proposed addition enclosing deck which is less than 10 feet from a single side yard, at 555 Village Lane,Orient; CTM 25-2-5.4. 1J Page 2—Agenda February 3,2005 Special Meeting-- Southold eeting-Southold Town Board of Appeals Possible Deliberations/Decisions(PHs concluded 1/20), continued: MARK and ELLIE GORDON #5644. Request for a Variance under Section 100-239.4A.1 , based on the Building Department's November 5, 2004 Notice of Disapproval concerning a proposed swimming pool with decks and upper level porch, with setbacks at less than 100 feet from top of LI Sound bluff,at 63165 C.R. 48 a/k/a North Road (or Middle Road), Greenport; 40-1-14. PETER COSOLA#5648. Request for a Variance under Sec. 100-242A and 100-244, based on the Building Department's November 23, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, concerning a second-story addition and alterations to the dwelling, which will constitute an increase in the degree of nonconformance with front setbacks at less than 35 feet,at 425 Opechee Avenue,Southold; 87-3-30. EUGENE and AGNES KOEHLER #5647. Request for a Variance under Section 100-239.4B, based on the Building Department's October 14, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, concerning a proposed deck addition at less than 75.feet from the existing stone riprap, at 1595 Bay Shore Road, Greenport; 53-4-5. ALAN and TERESA SUCHER #5639. Request for Variances under Sections 100-239.4B, 100- 242A and '100-244, based on the Building Department's November 5, 2004 Notice of Disapproval concerning an as built garage addition and proposed additions and alterations to a dwelling. All construction will exceed the code limitation for 20% lot coverage and will not meet the code required 35 feet from the front lot line, 35 feet from the rear lot line, 10 feet on a single side yard, and 75 feet from the bulkhead are requested. Location: 60 Fishermen's Beach Road, Cutchogue; CTM 111-1-6. CD•REITERS/OLD BARGE RESTAURANT#5626. Request for a Special Exception under Article XII, Section 100-1216(1), concerning construction of a proposed second-story addition, or upper level (mezzanine), to an existing restaurant located in the Marine 11 Zone District. Also requested is, a Variance under Sections 100-242A, 100-22 Bulk Schedule,based on the Building Department's August 6, 2004 Notice of Disapproval concerning a setback at less than 25 feet from the rear lot line. Location of Property: 750 Old Main Road, N.Y.S. Route 25,Southold; CTM 56-6-8.7. III. PUBLIC HEARING (carryover from 1/20 PH): 6:30 PM ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT#5408. Location of Property: Orient Firehouse Parcel,23300 Main Road, Orient; CTM 18-5-13:8;Zone District: R-80. Requests for: (1) Variances under Sections 100-162A(3) and 100-165B, based on the Building Inspector's April 23,2004 Notice of Disapproval, amended September 22, 2004 and October 4, 2004, concerning a proposed telecommunications tower at 125 ft. height with antenna, and related equipment. The reasons stated for disapproval are that the tower: (1) does not meet the code requirements with a proposed height at 125 feet, (2) is not permitted to be located within 300 feet of historic properties, CTM 18-5-15.1, 18-5-11.1, and (3) is not permitted on a nonconforming lot size, or lot containing less than a minimum lot area in a residential district of five(5)acres;and (2) Special Exception under Section 100-162A(3)to construct telecommunications tower. M Page 3—Agenda February 3,2005 Special Meeting Southold Town Board of Appeals IV. POSSIBLE DELIBERATIONS/DECISION (continued,from above). V. OTHER RESOLUTIONS/UPDATED REVIEWS/OTHER: A. Resolution to authorize new advertising of complete applications for 3/3/05 hearings. B. New business (t/b/d). C. VI. POSSIBLE EXECUTIVE SESSION (t/b/d; litigation). •11 OFFOitt Office Location: /4b\, ® Mailing Address: Town Annex/First Floor,North Fork Bank _ 53095 Main Road 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue) - ft, I P.O.Box 1179 %Southold,NY 11971 5 y . ����I��� Southold,NY 11971-09 ;00 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631)765-1809 Fax(631) 765-9064 December 28, 2004 Mr. Edward J. Boyd V, Esq. P.O. Box 1468 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Orient Fire District File Ref. #5408 Dear Mr. Boyd: As requested by your office, the public hearing was adjourned from the December 16, 2004 calendar to January 20, 2005 at 1:25 PM. A new legal notice is proposed to be re-published for the January 20, 2005 public hearing, which would confirm the areas requested by the applicant for consideration by the Board of Appeals. For this reason, an update is requested in behalf of the applicant, in writing, to confirm the area of the code for which the Orient Fire District is requesting consideration. Thank you. Sincerely yours, anda miackh Linda Kowalski OMNIPOINT' Town of . , 40,% of , . , , k v' _ VSSouthold • �,t a �Sf , , 4 / N ail 354 B ' +�i �� ��� I Subject Site On Air Sites a -L-. •., . . 039- • / :1‘ i • -� iii Coverage from subject co ca site Wloi, a (-84 dBm In vehicle) �ro&ayi i�,w Sound DC �a\rFZa U O Or qv Coverage from existing sites D (-84 dBm In vehicle) � 13162C .5 P ' mm c P f 77 �N • �� N� ?CA\� LI13547B N N has e d 3 Carou e�Ln x�. 40 _ Map 2 .c ccn Men :, Oe Rd �� C...ettsIlLi..... Map Scale 1"= 1.016 mi `� • . liiiir October 20,2004 St Ln ,_.,,,.- n en\neO ■ .;�' d :z ''V Prepared by Se:P �, 1 • '`r.�"' =PCo■Sohl ..• 1OMMPOINT Town . ► a of s k 'v'!,, Southold th Id . 1 .14.4 gig m. , ' 4 A•uav-, �� ' 354, B / 410 4ipir 'L� O Subject Site • aP e �S;,♦/1 On Air Sites M .7; • CO J d L ¢aim Bad/6w Sound Or VW\?-d v O Or Coverage from existing , ➢ sites �� (-84 dBm In vehicle) 13162C �� -4 f\`� N p° L113547B 111 ` 2' � Carou el Ln iza Mendden Ln Map1 P Oe ' .• �, ' �. •-' Cgbf{etts Map Scale 1"= 1.016 mi Rd sNlitAk October 20, 2004 stLn1%.- 19"116 TJ i • •,t, d �r ;..� , E: + Prepared by .. ` �' _ PlerCon SolTBniis r o -\ o4 p4, A5`to li,t3 i _ ., .. Village of Orient Point �, ou Fire District • Proposed coverage @ 110 ft. Iv; yr No ��\e�Or emsr. ° 4" `typt C (�vc, 4-00Oen -0 •' .a �0� x f,, r y° ` �■• � id C L co tr o jitiro:tr6s,i,o, � '�'a4ONak\i° Ave A` j rchard Sf dfo O die R Q' 9`O.(, King St oao, /a o o o 11144 giEji -pci4 4, , . ILL I- • 7_ n 2 00 3 v6 ,a_10 e l'y t R'' OMNIPOINT Town . % a/ of o. !. �, Southold , . -Iiii�r�s s�,s� V:� o- di,co 0 gyp, 4 N M.70 O.11354B ' a. -9 (/ Vl i I Subject Site r M o, q ae i, •: L On Air Sites JI ! Coverage from subject _ _, v . site w Q 4,- (-84 dBm In vehicle) Qi eahlewOf, So"lld Dc VIarFza U O J Coverage from existing sites D (-84 dBm In vehicle) 4 (]1.33162C , c tE5 70n 3 N Po\�`� L113547B Q -'<-4 e D'• Caron - ,a 3 Map 2 r �r Men - rn N`' C.. setts Map Scale 1"= 1.016 mi kt...._ Rd V' October 20,2004 .est Ln ��� VA . 111 7cSetPe-\\\e•C • *Is- am" / ,� .. Prepared by 1. N '„ mu PierCenSolotiniic -5 t\-2-2 0\)Abdc PP) ii - O,MNPOINeT' Town $ % 0 of s .v1„11 Southold • III ` '` 354, = 4 - , dr '6� O) Subject Site • apse' kt;•"e11, A On Air Sites W J . — Q am`Ba Sound Dr Ma�r�d U O Or I Coverage from existing sites D (-84 dBm In vehicle) b-�13162C 3`co i v0 co 0, E P��r`�� L113547B N ha ,eCaron_ 1 iii Map1 s �r Men : ,P AgarjI% . Oe .'" Map Scale 1"= 1.016 mi s.; C..setts' ;Rd .'\� V !: October 20,2004 ast Ln , j1%. .1.111P— `.\ e O; • ,�' d vs.: ,.„ Prepared by a colSe<pe. ` CC ` . . -9 1, iris' ■ �' • R+ �" PierCanSeiotbiii .....e.tio . ,,, a we m IIIIIIIII Village of Orient Point . soy Fire District Proposed coverage @ 110 ft. - A 1. ��■ e, rur lb oc ■ \Aockr . (4,.. p.- litt ,, • ' Sy,;/ 1 tiai ' 'Qa 0S d�a� .11000 o �a as 1 C ' ��C\c�T, 0 ��S cr ' *11 Z y 435 /a o f o Z CI- j ,3 Haryoke Ave • o O., Orchara St _ A c`o moi`% Q a9 6)A King St n °aa o o� B do8 I 0 o 1,0,...,4 A a1� Sc� „9 ,, :,. 1,.. .. . . .. . .: y • V. ._ O -73 Village of Orient Point soul Fire District = Proposed coverage @ 110 ft. ,o °fy cdo. r VC e��� r' ililiktriiaijs. \1 cs0I0 ems° rest R ��e N `moo Sti%ii 'S, 6'cc",-,.. 'Qa O/d -, 1 `Os id .11 I 4111.1 II o ao �a ? �� a a N° ,o �. o c .1735 de`,Q o • EZ a .o �� 1a Na\oce me z �` Orchard St n Gel, O ‘",p -o_ ,o (i7 ( L� a?% �Vaf0R P� r 9°� King St L B„ti°e 2 �a o o tillii-) ti,..ii It- • - Village of Orient Point - sou. Fire District _ ,,,,01. , %\ro t 0 . _ Proposed coverage @ 110 ft. 1., . , 4, Lse oCul &,: • I too\Ot .41 Pr okk , 11)1pillii 'Po. i s t'' 4 . °/6, �' . �� Ned ' �a ( < y 1, _> I d c � A . I �. .:— "lir a c Alk- it a4ic,•:-.- 4 ?o t{aiyoke Aye " . A•>L cr O� , ���hard St 0 .. /74, 2 o :� ate t 9e� King St a Z. .8 �L Q- ts) a X40 a <' OJT ems, ain �_ Ilikk6)0I 144 gia illiP .... .9 1, . J.... )16 ., , L • . p } 01P �� �l 1 7i Nicholas Balzano PierCon Solutions, LLC 63 Beaver Brook Road, Suite 201 Lincoln.Park, NJ 07035 (973)628-9330 SUMMARY Nicholas Balzano has more than 14 years of experience in the wireless communications industry with a specific concentration in GSM platforms. Currently, Mr. Balzano is responsible for long and short-term system design plans and optimization plans, the development of traffic statistics formulas, site antenna design, implementation and optimization of cell site parameters and the development of initial grid and frequency plans. Prior to his position at PierCon Solutions,this expert was employed at Italtel S.P.A.where he utilized his talent in the areas of site acquisition and optimization. EDUCATION B.S. Electrical & Industrial Electronics Engineering Technical State Institute"M. Panetti," Bari, Italy STRENGTHS • GSM RF Design &Optimization • Cell Site Testing &Planning • Zoning requirements and hearings testimony • Tools: RF Prediction-Excalibur, Odyssey, Comsite; OptPCS. • Optimization/Network Performance—Metrica—Metrica KingFisher- AIMS, TEMS; Mapinfo. • Technical Platforms: S12000 S8000-S2000 (Nortel) PCS Digital EXPERIENCE Senior RF Engineer PierCon Solutions L.L C, (January 2000—September 2001) Provided contract RF engineering design&optimization services to T-Mobile USA Responsibilities included the RF expansion design for Brooklyn, Queens and Long Island, NY. Accomplishments include successful design & optimization responsibility for over 45 sites; results include a 35-point improvement in health index(HI)from an average HI of 50 to a HI of 80 over a two(2) month period. • Responsible for overall RF engineering design and system performance of Region 4(Brooklyn &Queens)and Regions 12—13 (Suffolk&Nassau Counties, Long Island). • Accountable for design of cell split project for the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens PierCon Solutions L.L.C, (September 2001—present) Evaluated, designed and implemented state-of-the-art wireless networks— Responsible for the RF design, implementation and project management of a new municipal Police&Fire two-way communication system and dispatch center. Additional responsibilities include RF designs for new PCS and Cellular communications networks. Managed all phases of cellular system design and implementation. Determined RF coverage capacity and interference designs. Involved with cell site need determination, site search, site evaluation and engineering; cell site acquisition support and cell site approval, site construction support, regulatory compliance, installation and commissioning of cell site equipment. Managed all phases of zoning ;• 2 E1 e Pd DI 111 I° requirements and hearings testimony for T-Mobile USA in many Municipalities in NY& NJ (Nassau—Suffolk—Westchester—Middlesex) Cell Planner/Radio Network Optimization Specialist Italtel Sistemi S.P.A., Milan, Italy (1995— 1999) Site acquisition support,analyzing propagation model data and field-test data Designing site antenna configuration and site equipment requirements. Implementing and optimizing frequency plan, power levels and system parameters to insure cell site inter-working and minimizing adjacent co-channel interferences. Ongoing statistical analysis. Systems: • CMS 88(Ericsson)Analog Cellular System • BTS 902 E-F(Italtel)Pan European Digital Cellular System GSM • SBS 3.7-4.0(Siemens)DCS 1800. Radio Monitoring Supervisor Italtel Sistemi S.P.A., Milan, Italy(1992— 1994) Programmed and coordinated radio-monitoring activities. Developed acquired data System • CMS 88(Ericsson)Analog Cellular System Field Engineer Italtel Sistemi S.P.A., Milan, Italy(1989— 1991) BTS Installation supervision BSS/MSC Commissioning Integration. Technical support and assistance to installation and testing teams. Systems: • CMS 88(Ericsson)Analog Cellular System R C Petersek ,_).ssociates LLC Consulting— Wireless Safety \tiM o No\.)A *5 January 2004 CURRICULUM VITAE R. C.Petersen Birthdate: April 26,1937 Birthplace: New York City,New York Marital Status: Marred Children: 1 Address: R.C.Petersen 170 Fairview Drive PO Box 386 Bedminster,NJ 07921 Education: 1954— 1958 Various US Navy radar and communication systems schools including Aviation Electronics Technician School, (NAS Memphis),while on active duty in the US Marine Corps 1958— 1960 RCA Institutes,T-3 Course 1964— 1968 Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn,Department of Electrical Engineering:BSEE(summa cum laude) 1968— 1970 Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn,Department of Electrophysics:MSEP Positions Held: 1954—1958 Aviation Electronics Technician,US Marine Corps 1958— 1960 Laboratory Technician,RCA institutes,New York,NY 1960— 1962 Technical Aide,AT&T Bell Laboratories Solid State Device Development Laboratory (Travelling-wave maser development) 1962— 1967 Senior Technical Aide,AT&T Bell Laboratories Solid State Device Development Area. (Wide-band,base-band amplifier design) 1967—1970 Member of Technical Staff,AT&T Bell Laboratories Solid State Device Development Area. (Picturephone®camera tube development while participating in the Local University Part-Time Graduate Studies Program) 1970—1996 Nonionizing Radiation Protection Manager/Consulting Engineer,AT&T Bell Laboratories,Radiation Protection and Product Safety Department,Environmental Health and Safety Center 1996— 1997 Nonionizing Radiation Protection Manager/Consulting Engineer,Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs,Radiation Protection Department,Environmental Health and Safety Center 1997—2001 Manager,Lucent Technologies/Bell Labs—Wireless and Optical Technologies Safety Dept. 2001— President,R C Petersen Associates LLC—Consulting,Wireless Safety. 170 FAIRVIEW DRIVE, PO BOX 386, BEDMINSTER,NJ 07921-0386 January 2004 i Society Memberships: 1980— Bioelectromagnetics Society(BEMS) 1990— Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers(IEEE)—Senior Member(1997)— Fellow(2000) 1990— IEEE Microwave Theory and Techniques Society 1997— IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society 1997— NY Academy of Science 1993— Laser Institute of America(LIA)—Senior Member(1997)—Fellow(2000) Committee Memberships: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers(IEEE)Committees IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee SCC-28 on Radio Frequency Radiation Hazards (Formerly ANSI C95 Committee now ICES—International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety) 1974— SCC-28 (Executive Secretary: 1996—2003; Chairman 2004— ) 1974— SCC-28 Subcommittee I"Techniques,Procedures Instrumentation and computation" (Secretary: 1981 — ) 1990— SCC-28 Subcommittee II"Terminology,Umts of Measurements and Hazard Communication" 1990— SCC-28 Subcommittee III"Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure,0-3 kHz" 1974— SCC-28 Subcommittee IV"Safety Levels and/or Tolerances with Respect to Personnel" (Secretary: 1992— ) 1986— Risk Assessment Working Group 1995— Engineering Evaluation Working Group Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers(IEEE)Standards Coordinating Committee SCC-34 on Product Performance Standards Relative to the Safe Use of RF Energy 1995— IEEE SCC-34(Chairman, 1995— ) 1997— SCC-34 Subcommittee 2"Certification of Wireless Handsets" Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers(IEEE)Standards Board Committees 1995— 1998 New Opportunities in Standards Committee(NOSCom) 1998—2001 Procedures Committee(ProCom) 2000—2001 New Engineering Standards Committee(NESCom) 2002— Audit Committee(AudCom) Other IEEE Committees 1984— 1990 IEEE Working Group P1140, "Near-Field Electric and Magnetic Strength Measurements" 1992— IEEE Committee on Man and Radiation(COMAR) January 2004 i Other Committees Accredited Standards Committee ASC Z136 for the Safe Use of Lasers(Formerly ANSI Z136) 1976— ASC Z136. (Vice-Chairman: 1997—2000; Chairman:2000—) 1988— Subcommittee 3, "Measurements and Instrumentation"(Co-Chairman: 1988—1994) 1984— Subcommittee 2, "Safe Use of Lasers in Telecommunications Applications"(Chairman: 1984— ) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements(NCRP) 1976—1982 Consultant to SC-39,"Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields,Properties,Quantities and Units,Biophysical Interaction, and Measurements" 1984— 1995 Scientific Committee SC-78, "Evaluation of Human Exposures to Radiofrequency Radiation". 1996—2001 Nominating Committee 2000— Scientific Committee SC-89, "Non-Ionizing Radiation,"(Chairman) 2002— Publications Committee International Electrotechnical Commission,Technical Committee 76(IEC TC76),"Laser Safety" 1988—2001 US National Committee 1988—2001 Working Group 5,"Fiber Optics Safety" International Electrotechnical Commission,Technical Committee 106(IEC TC106),"Assessment of Human Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields" (Chairman 2000— . ) 2000— US National Committee 2002— Working Groups 3 and 4(RF generic and product standards) Electromagnetic Energy Association(EEA) 1984—2001 Science and Technology Committee. (Chairman 1995— 1998) Center for Office Technology(COT) 1979—1990 Science and Technology Committee Appointments: 1975— Advisory Committee on Nonionizing Radiation to the New Jersey Commission on Radiation Protection. 1982— 1996 Visiting Lecturer,Rutgers University(Non-Ionizing Radiation—Dept of Radiation Sciences Graduate Study Program) 1987— 1989 New Jersey Department of Health. (NJDOH) Science Advisory Panel—Vernon Valley Satellite Earth Station Health Study) 1989— 1990 Science Advisory Panel,National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health:Radiation Section,Physical Agents Effects Branch. (RF Dielectric Heater Study) 1990— Board of Health,Bedminster Township,NJ 3 January 2004 1992—2001 Associate Editor(Radiated Hazards),IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility. 1993— National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements: Council Member 1997— Advisory Panel, City of Stamford,CT,Department of Health 1998— National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements:Board of Directors 1998—2001 Electromagnetic Energy Association:President,Board of Directors 1998—2001 IEEE Standards Board 2004— IEEE Standards Association Standards Board 1998— Cellular Advisory Committee to the City Council of Summit,NJ 2000— NCRP, Scientific Vice President—Non-Ionizing Radiation 2000— IEC TC106,Chairman 2001 — USAF Human Effectiveness Directorate Science Advisory Board Patents: IEDAP A method for combining discrete or integrated RF transistors to increase bandwidth. Awards: 1997 IEEE Standards Medallion for Outstanding Achievement through Standards. 1997 Bell Labs Advanced Technologies Excellence Award. 1998 Lucent Technologies Award to Teams Achieving High Performance 2000 Lucent Technologies Standards Award 2003 IEEE-Standards Association International Award Publications: Weiss,M.M.,Petersen,R. C., "Electromagnetic Radiation Emitted from Video Computer Terminals,"Am. Ind.Hyg.Assoc J. (40)April 1979. Petersen,R.C., "Levels of Electromagnetic Energy in the Immediate Vicinity of Representative Microwave Radio Relay Towers,"International Conference on Communications(ICC) Conference Record, June 1979. Petersen,R. C., "Electromagnetic Radiation from Selected Telecommunications Systems,"Proceedings of the IEEE,Vol. 68,No. 1,January 1980. Petersen,R. C.,Weiss,M.M.,Minneci, G., "Nonionizing Electromagnetic Radiation Associated with Video-Display Terminals," Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers(SPIE),Vol.229, 1980. Petersen,R. C., "Bioeffects of Microwaves:A Review of Current Knowledge,"Journal of Occupational Medicine,Vol. 25,No. 2,February 1983. Petersen,R. C., "Radiofrequency/Microwave Measurements," The Industrial Environment-It's Evaluation and Control, Chapter 28,(1987). Petersen,R. C., "Evaluating Radiofrequency and microwave Hazards,"Proceedings of the DOE/DOD Contractors Occupational Safety and Health Conference,September 11-13, 1984. 4 i January 2004 I Huggins,R.G.,Testagrossa,P.A.,Petersen,R.C.,Philen,D.L. and Turnipseed,J.M., "Nonionizing Radiation Aspects of Optical Glass Fiber Manufacturing,"Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J.,Vol.45,No. 12, December 1984. Petersen,R. C., Sliney,D.A., "Toward the Development of Laser Safety Standards for Fiber-Optic Communication Systems,"Applied Optics,Vol.25,No. 7,April 1, 1986. Philen,D.L.,Petersen,R. C., "Hazards of Lasers Used in Telecommunications," The National Utility Contractor,August 15, 1986. Philen,D.L.,Petersen,R. C.,Wakefoose A.,and Edwards,J., "Safety and Liability Issues in Optical Fiber Communications," Telephony,October 13, 1986. Philen,D.L.,Petersen,R. C.,Wakefoose,A. and Edwards,J., "Safety and Liability Issues in Optical Fiber Communications,"Right of Way,October 1986. Petersen,R. C.,Philen,D.L., "Safety Issues Concerning Diode Lasers Used m Telecommunications Systems,"Proceedings of the 35th International Wire and Cable Symposium,Nov. 17-20, 1986. Petersen,R. C., "Laser Safety Associated with Manufacturing and Use of Laser Diodes," Proceedings of the International Laser Safety Conference,November 27-30, 1990. Petersen,R. C., "Radiofrequency/Microwave Protection Guides," Health Physics, Vol. 61, No. 1, July 1991. Petersen,R. C.,and Testagrossa,P.A. "Radiofrequency Fields Associated with Cellular-Radio Cell-Site Antennas,"Bioelectromagnetics,Vol 13,No. 6, 1992. Crawford,W.W.,Green,D.,Knolle,W.R.,Marcos,H.M.,Mosovsky,J.A.,Petersen,R. C.,Testagrossa, P.A.,and Zeman,G.H.,"60 Hz Magnetic Field Exposure in Semiconductor Cleanrooms",in:Hazard Assessment and Control Technology in Semiconductor Manufacturing II, Chapter 8,American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists,Inc. Cincinnati, 1993. Osepchuk,J.M.,Petersen,R.C., "Past May Help Solve Electromagnetic Issue,"Forum(For Applied Research and Public Policy),Vol. 9,No.2, Summer 1994. Bassen,H.I.,Conover,D.L., Cohen,J.,Durney,C.H.,Petersen,R. C.,and Tell,R.A.,A Practical Guide to the Determination of Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Fields,NCRP Report No. 119. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,Bethesda,MD, 1994. Balzano, Q.,Bergeron,J.A.,Cohen,J.,Osepchuk,J.M.,Petersen R. C.,and Roszyk,L. "Measurement of Equivalent Power Density and RF Energy Deposition in the Immediate Vicinity of a 24 GHz Traffic Radar Antenna,"IEEE Trans. on Electromagnetic Compatibility,Vol.37,No.2,May 1995. Petersen R. C., "New IEEE Measurement Standards," in:Radio-Frequency Radiation Standards; Biological Effects,Dosimetry, Epidemiology and Public Health Policy,Klauenberg, Grandolfo and Erwin, eds,Plenum Press,(1995). Rainer,D.,Keramidas,E.,Petersen,R. C.,and Dalal, S. "An ELF Exposure Measurement Study for the Telecommunications Industry."Submitted to Health Physics(1999). Chou, C.K.,Bassen,H., Osepchuk,J.,Balzano, Q.,Petersen,R.C.,Meltz,M.,Cleveland,R.,Lin,J. C. and Heymck,L., "Experimental Radiofrequency Exposure Dosimetry:A Tutorial,"Bioelectromagnetics. 17:195-208(1996) Petersen,R.C.,"American National Standard for the Safe Use of Optical Fiber Communications Systems Utilizing Laser Diodes and LED Sources",Proceedings of the 3rd International Laser Safety Conference, Orlando,FL,March 1998. Petersen,R.C., "Radiofrequency Dosimetry:Wireless Handsets,"The International Journal of Toxicology, Vol. 17, Supplement 3,pp. 11-41,August 1998. 5 • January 2004 Petersen,R.C.,Fahy-Elwood,A.K.,Testagrossa,P.A.,Zeman, G.H.,"Wireless Telecommunications Part A:Technology and RF Safety Issues"in:Nonionizing Radiation:An Overview of the Physics and Biology, Hardy,Meltz and Glickman,eds.,Medical Physics Publishing,Madison,WI(1997). Fahy-Elwood,A.K.,Petersen,R.C.,Zeman,G.H.,"Wireless Telecommunications Part B: Communicating With the Public About RF Safety Issues"in:Nonionizing Radiation: An Overview of the Physics and Biology, Hardy,Meltz and Glickman,eds.,Medical Physics Publishing,Madison,WI(1997). Osepchuk,J.M. and Petersen,R.C. ,Comments on"Resonance Effect of Millimeter Waves in the Power Range from 10-19 to 3 x 10-3 W/cm2 on Escherichia Coli. Cells at Different Concentrations,"by Belyaev, I.Y.,et al.,Bioelectromagnetics, 17:312-321 (1996),Bioelectromagnetics 18:527-528 (1997). Brusick,D.,Albertmi,R.McRee,D.Petersen,R.,Williams, G.,Hanawalt,P. and Preston,J. "Genotoxicity of Radiofrequency Radiation,"Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis,Vol.3,No. 1,pp. 1-16(1998) Petersen,R.C. "RF/Microwave Standards Activities m the United States",Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine, Bersani Ed.Plenum Press,pp.761-764(1999) Petersen,R. C.,Fahy-Elwood,A.K.and Testagrossa,P.A. "Personal Wireless Communications:Potential Exposure Levels in the Vicinity of Typical Base-Station Installations,"Proceedings of the International Seminar on EMF Health Effects and Standards,Beijing,China,May 4-5, 1999. Osepchuk,J.M. and Petersen,R. C. "A Critical Review of the"Energy" Concept in the Classical Literature on Electrostimulation,"Proceedings of the 6th Annual Michaelson Research Conference,Cloudcroft,NM, August 14-16, 1999. Petersen,R. C. "Assessment of the Exposure to RF Energy in the Vicinity of Antennas Used for Personal Wireless Communications Services,"Proceedings of the XXVIth General Assembly of the International Union of Radio Science, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada,August 13-21, 1999. (Abstract) Osepchuk,J.M. and Petersen,R. C. "Safety and Environmental Issues,"Safety and environmental issues. In: The RF and Microwave Handbook,M. Collo,ed., CRC Press LLC,Boca Raton,FL,pp.3.28-3.43, 2001 Osepchuk,J.M. and Petersen,R. C. "Safety Standards for Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields,"IEEE Microwave Magazine,Vol.2,No.2,pp. 57-69,June 2001. Adair,E.R. and Petersen,R. C.,"Biological Effects of Radio Frequency/Microwave Radiation,"50th Anniversary Volume—IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques,Vol. 50,No. 3,pp. 953- 962,March,2002. Mason,P.A.,Murphy,M.R. and Petersen,R. C.,"IEEE EMF Health and Safety Standards,"Presented at: WHO Meeting on EMF Biological Effects and Standards Harmonization in Asia and Oceania—October 22-14,2001, (2001). Osepchuk,J. M. and Petersen,R. C.,"Comments on Non-Thermal Effects' of Extremely High-Frequency Microwaves on Chromatin Conformation in Cells in vitro—Dependence on Physical,Physiological, and Genetic Factors,"IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques,Vol. 50,No.7,pp. 1856,July 2002. Osepchuk,J.M. and Petersen,R. C.,"Historical Review of RF Exposure Standards and the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety(ICES),"Bioelectromagnetics, Vol 24,No. S6,pp. S7-S16. (2003) Chou,C-K.,D'Andrea,J.A.,Tell,R.A., Sheppard,A.R.,Heynick,L.N., Swicord,M.L. and Petersen, R. C.,"Progress of the C95.1-1991 RF Safety Standard Revision,"Meeting Abstract—Presented at: "The 3rd International Seminar on Electromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects,"Guilin,China, October, 2003. Adair,E.R., Osepchuk,J:M.,Bodemann,R.,Petersen,R. C.,Varanelli,A. G.,and McManus,T. "Radiation Misinformation"IEEE Spectrum,December 2002. 6 i January 2004 Petersen,R. C., "An Overview of ELF and RF Exposure Standards,"Abstract: (Presented at the Asia- Pacific EMF Conference,Bangkok,Thailand—January 27,2004). 7 I e _ OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email: Linda.KowalskiATown.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-9064 Z 3 3) J COVER SHEET FOR TRANSMITTAL ATTN: A o d Oa S 11.&12.-\_ DATE: It / 40 /2004 SUBJECT: 61A_L .tea J&-upeitJ MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information: P-eey, 24LP aGorpe, Please call us at j765-1809 if you did not receive all sheets. Thank you. Pages attached: , EDWARD JOHN BOYD V ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW 54655 MAIN ROAD P.O.BOX 1468 SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK 11971 • (831)7851555 FACSIMILE:(631)765-5969 E-MAIL:ejb( elilaw.net �] 1207 EAST MAIN STRE7 RIVERHEAD,NEW YO LK 11901 "®V •� 6qq (631)731.1010 2OO`F FACSIMILE:(03 t)727.5524 E-MAIL:e)4el1l9w.nei November 15,2004 Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 Re: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT Tax Map No.1000-18-5-13.8 Greetings: The Orient Fire District strongly opposes any adjournment of the scheduled November 18th hearing relative to its application to construct a communications tower at the Orient Fire Department headquarters located at the corner of State Route 25 and Tabor Road,Orient,New York. Since the District's application to construct this tower has been pending for many months, during which time any interested parties might have conducted any review they saw fit, and considering the fact that the Commissioners of the Fire District have for the past several years discussed the need for improved public safety communications at their own regularly scheduled monthly meetings where the public is invited to question and comment, and further considering that the Commissioners have conducted and have appeared at special informational meetings in the community where any concerns about the tower have been voiced and answered,there appears to be no good reason to now delay the hearing in order to review information that has been available in the public arena for some considerable time. vR truly yours, Edward John Boyd V EJB/bv l S0:9T PO, ST noN Tad 880 083 GAOR f a n:3 696SS9LT29 t . itAp laeipywAzI. al/(0/o y gA1. 12 them are a full two stories. 13 BOARD MEMBER TORTORA: Is there anyone in 14 the audience that would like to speak on this 15 application? 16 BOARD MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I'll make the 17 motion to close the hearing. 18 (See minutes for resolution. ) 19 20 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Next application 21 5408, Orient Fire District, both attorneys 22 defending both people have requested an 23 adjournment to January 20, 2005 at 1:15. But we 24 will take comments and statements from anyone here 25 who would like to speak on their behalf, sir? December 16, 2004 113 1 2 MR. SCHRIEVER: Yes, my name is William 3 Schriever, I live in Orient on the Main Road near 4 the park there, East Marion, Orient Park 5 District. I want to speak about this proposed 6 tower on the fire department property. As you 7 know, my wife held that fire department property 8 for about a generation, then we sold it to the 9 fire department, and they took what they wanted, 10 and we sold the other parcels as lots, two acre 11 house lots at the time. They were they were half 12 acre lots when we bought the property, so we took 13 a punishment for holding that property. 14 But anyway, I plan to be in Orient. My 15 wife and I have a lot in the cemetery that's just 16 south of this property, so I'm going to be there 17 even after I'm dead so my concern is that maybe 18 the issues that are being talked about are not the 19 real issues, so I just want to give you my view of 20 the thing. 21 As far as the fire department's concerned, 22 and I was a member for 16 years, if they need the 23 antenna, then they should get the antenna. I 24 mean, I can't imagine that that would be denied. 25 Maybe there's no way you can deny it. But at any December 16, 2004 114 1 2 rate, I want to speak on that issue. I'm in favor 3 of that. If the town police need an antenna, then 4 they should get it. 5 What I'm really here to speak about is the 6 cell phone aspect of this thing which originally 7 was incorporated into the application, and I don't 8 understand what the objection is. I had an 9 objection about the them putting a flag up there 10 because of the noise of the thing flapping around. 11 I don't know if you go to Peconic Landing and 12 listen to the flag out in front of the 13 administrative building there in the wind, I mean 14 it's terribly noisy, and I noticed in the last 15 time I heard them present the thing they said they 16 weren't going to put that up there except on 17 special occasions, which was my request. So that 18 was my objection. 19 The thing that concerns me is I don't 20 understand why people want to run this thing out 21 of town, which apparently is what they want to do. 22 The cell phone technology is such that you need a 23 tower every two miles because the range of one of 24 those towers is about a mile. So they showed here 25 a couple times ago, that when you put the cell December 16, 2004 115 1 2 phone antenna in Greenport that you reach about 3 the Orient, East Marion Park District, you don't 4 quite get to my house. So we need something in 5 Orient if we're going to have cell phones in 6 Orient, in fact, we need two towers. We need one 7 on the west end and one on the east end. And I 8 heard somewhere that there was an offer by the 9 Ferry District to allow one to go up there. So 10 I'm just trying to anticipate the future here. I 11 hope that you will allow these towers to be built 12 because we desperately need them. 13 Now, as far as the cell phone technology 14 is concerned, this technology is spreading all 15 over the world and a lot of countries are 16 developing without land-line phones, they're doing 17 it on cell phones. So this is very important. r C 18 And I heard that there's about one cell phone for 19 every two people living in the United States, 20 which seems incredible, but anyway, there's a lot 21 of cell phones, and it's here to stay. They're 22 going to be three companies, three major 23 companies. There have been some mergers recently 24 and Sprint is one of the ones that's going to 25 survive, and they have a tower in the church so December 16, 2004 116 1 2 there would be two more needed in Orient, and I 3 don't see why they couldn't go in this tower as 4 proposed originally. I guess they were thinking 5 about there might be three in there, but I doubt 6 it now with these mergers. So we need to make 7 provision for two more antennas in the west end of 8 Orient, and it seems to me this is the logical 9 place to put them. We need the tower anyway, 10 you're not going to see them except for the 11 hardware that goes at the base of the antenna. I 12 have a Verizon cell phone and the service is 13 barely acceptable. I have to go to my second 14 floor to get reliable communication, or I have to 15 go outside. I can't sit in myself living room and 16 use the cell phone, which is amazing. I have an 17 apartment on Peconic Landing, and that's a steel 18 building. Believe it or not, the cell phone will 19 work inside that steel building and it won't work 20 in my living room. It's because you're so much f r 21 closer to the source, and that's what we need in 22 Orient. We need a cell phone antenna, we need two 23 of them actually. 24 So, I have reached the age of irrelevancy 25 already, but, you know, please try to help us get December 16, 2004 117 1 2 the technology we need so we can live in the 3 modern world. Thank you very much. 4 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Thank you, sir. Is 5 there anybody else who would like to speak on 6 behalf of the Orient Point cell tower? If not 7 I'll make a motion to adjourn this application to 8 January 20th at 1:15 p.m. 9 (1!OAR4 (See minutes for resolution.) 10 MEMBER ORLANDO: That would be the 11 end of our pub 'c hearing ) 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 i . , \ W- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) . i vtal 0 STEVE LEVY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING THOMAS ISLES, AICP DIRECTOR OF PLANNING June 3,2005 Ms. Ruth Oliva, Chair Town of Southold ZBA 53085 Main Rd.,P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Dear Sir: Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s)submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Orient Fire District 5408 Very truly yours, Thomas Isles,AICP Director of Planning • S/s Christopher S. Wrede Planning Aide CSW:cc G\CCHORNYIZONING\ZONING\WORKING\CHRISLDIAPR\BR#11 APR LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H.LEE DENNISON BLDG -4TH FLOOR P.O.BOX 6100 • (516) 853-5190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE,NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER (516)853-4044 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ��i'10)F S0045,' Southold Town Hall Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman �'I 4 1p 53095 Main Road•P.O. Box 1179 Gerard P. Goehringer , * * , Southold,NY 11971-0959 Vincent Orlando G � Office Location: James Dinizio,Jr. : 'mac► COQ►►► Town Annex/First Floor,North Fork Bank Michael A. Simon �lyeoU vai'i� 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue) Southold,NY 11971 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631)765-1809•Fax(631)765-9064 May 19, 2005 Mr. Thomas Isles, Director of Planning Suffolk County Department of Planning P.O. Box 6100 Hauppauge, NY 11788-0099 Dear Mr. Isles: Please find enclosed the following application with related documents for review pursuant to Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code: Appl. No. 5408 (Orient Fire District) Action Requested: Construct Wireless Tower; Height and Lot Area Variance Within 500 feet of: ( x ) State or County Road ( )Waterway (Bay, Sound, or Estuary) ( ) Boundary of Existing or Proposed County, State, Federal land. If any other information is needed, please do not hesitate to call us. Thank you. Very truly yours, Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman By: Enclosures JA010 zi6 2!---721-614-2 /95- /6 iLd 61O4Jon A. Turner, Ph.D. L 1095 Village Lane PO Box 300 Orient, NY 11957 t/f 631 323 3990 February 1, 2005 Zoning Board of Appeals PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11979 Dear Chairwoman Olivia, I am writing concerning the request by the OFD/AHA/Beacon Wireless to seek a height variance in order to erect a 120' flagpole communications antenna adjacent to the Fire House in Orient. The Orient Association wants the OFD to have the best emergency communications possible and we are prepared to recommend to the community that special funding be provided to OFD for this purpose. But we are unwilling to accept OFD' s statement of an emergency communications need without proper substantiation, review and a reasonable set of checks and balances being in place. I will address, briefly, four technical issues : The extent to which OFD has provided the technical information we requested from them in a timely, manner, the quality of OFD' s current emergency communications, whether a 120' antenna is needed, and whether OFD has explored reasonable alternatives to the 120' antenna as required by law. 1 . OA's information requests: I requested quite specific information from Mr. Boyd in a message of December 28, 2004 . He replied on January 18, 2005, two days before the last ZBA meeting. That reply was non-responsive in three areas : it did not provide the legend for the coverage plots making them unintelligible, it did not provide coverage plots for alternate antenna heights of 90' , 75' and 60' at the OF House that would allow us to understand the reduction in coverage for lower antenna heights, and it did not provide information on reasonable alternatives, namely, using the 300' Greenport Public Safety Antenna or a distributed antenna system (Mesh) . On January 27, 2005 I sent Mr. Boyd a second message clarifying the information we needed. He responded on January 28, 2005 . Again, his reply was non-responsive in the same three areas I have mentioned above (while writing this letter on February 1, 2005, I received the legend for the coverage plots in an email from Mr. Scheibel) . The information we requested is n / 00 M necessary in order to evaluate the OFD request and it has not been provided in a timely manner. 2 . Quality of OFD current emergency communications: After talking with a number of people in Orient (Police, Fire, EMS, etc. ) who use the present low-band emergency communications system, there is general agreement that, while there are some gaps in coverage, it performs adequately. No studies were done by OFD of communications failures or of actual received signal strength, so the actual performance of the current emergency communications system has not been quantified. The main problems seem to be the age of the equipment, and occasional man-made interference or congestion. One should note that Orient, because it is surrounded by water, has less mad-made interference than communities further west. I conclude that current emergency communication, in Orient, is not facing a crisis and that it is not likely to collapse in the short term. That said, it is in the best interest of the Orient community to move to high-band emergency communications system in a planned and coordinated manner (with adjacent districts and dependent services) , that is, over the next 3-5 years. 3 . Is a 120' antenna necessary at the OF House? Part of the design brief given to Mr.Scheibel by OFD was that the area of coverage should be 90% or better for the OFD and for one mutual aid fire district west and east. This requirement is overly restrictive. Including one mutual aid district to the west (East Marion) is reasonable. But including one district to the east (Plum Island) is a new requirement that approximately doubles the area to be covered. Plum Island has its own fire department and emergency communications equipment. And coverage of Plum Island was not included in the original Weyhreter Report (Feb 23, 2003, prepared for OFD) so it was not part of OFD coverage at that time. Thus, it appears to have been added since then. If coverage were only for OFD and EMFD, then a lower height antenna would suffice (maybe 75' , but I would need the coverage plots in order to verify) . However, there are other approaches that would reduce antenna height even further (see below) . 4 . Has OFD explored reasonable alternatives to the 120' antenna? The second design requirement given Mr. Scheibel was that all equipment should be on OFD property. This effectively precludes exploring the two most likely alternatives to the 120' antenna: 1) use of the 300' Public Service Antenna in Greenport, or 2) designing a system using multiple distributed antennas (Mesh) . Repeated requests to Mr. Boyd that OFD explore these alternatives have produced no response. Orient plumber Ed King, for 2 Qf � r example, uses a high-band pager from the 120' antenna in the Greenport Shipyard with good coverage in all of Orient. My understanding of the regulations governing requests for height variances is that reasonable alternatives must be explored in writing. OFD has not provided this information. On this basis I urge the Southold ZBA to not grant the request by the OFD for a 120' variance in height. Certainly, reasonable alternatives must be explored and reported before any variance is granted. I do not believe that this request by the OFD for a height variance is driven by a real emergency communications need. The evidence is just not there to support the current system being in crisis . Furthermore, OFD has not been forthcoming in investigating alternatives, and the Orient Fire Department is split in its support of this initiative. This would not be the case if the primary issue were emergency communications . Rather, I believe that emergency communications is being used because the OFD has been enticed with the possibility of gaining an independent income stream by Mr. Cannusico/AHA/Beacon Wireless . I understand that East Marion is proposing to erect an 120' antenna at their fire house. Rather than having these towers every few miles (and the ZBA having to deal with separately with each request) , wouldn't it make more sense to treat them as a group and consider the design of a distributed antenna system for all of Southold that could handle both emergency and cellular communications? The costs could be shared with the cellular companies and such a system could accommodate future technological change much easier than stand-alone antenna towers. Such an initiative would be more consistent with the desire to place power lines underground and generally maintain the appearance of Southold. I will be attending the Thursday, February 1, 2005, ZBA meeting and I would welcome the opportunity to speak to the Board and also answer any questions the Board may have. Sincerely, Jon A. Turner' 1 For the past 26 years I have been a Professor of Information Technology at New York University. Prior to that I spent 10 years designing Command, Control and Communications systems for the Department of Defense. My degrees are in Electrical Engineering) and Computer Science/Operations Research. In the early 80s, I completed a study for the NYPD of their SPRINT system (the emergency dispatching system known as '911') . The results of my study lead to changes in both the equipment used and in NYPD operational procedures 3 .5-1-144-6) ..t(ki-o(,_.L/3/ Kowalski, Linda -- From: Walter Millis [wmillis@optonline.net] Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 2:12 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: Opposition to Orient Tower Alison and I urge the ZBA to DENY a variance to the Orient Fire Department to construct a 120 foot tower. It is painfully obvious that the Orient Fire Department could improve its communications with a tower of considerably less height and improved radios. There is no need to visually blight the community by putting up something thirty feet higher than the spire of the Congregational Church, which has been the tallest thing on the Orient skyline since 1844. It is also painfully obvious that the real purpose of the tower is as a commercial venture to offer antenna space for cell phones. Consider how it was presented: First, the OFD trumpeted the construction of a 120 foot flagpole, a patriotic gesture which, almost incidentally, would hold cell phone antennas. An outcry followed, so the OFD brought in a letter from Ty Cochran saying that such a tower would improve the Town Police communications by enabling officers when out of their cars to communicate more readily than with the present system. Fire department communications ere mentioned only in passing. It was not until the outcry continued and the matter came before the ZBA that the original cell-phone carrying tower became essential for the improvement of OFD communications. Please, do not allow the OFD to go into the commercial communications tower business at the needless blighting of the village. 1 Page 1 of 1 Kowalski, Linda From: GreerNolan@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 5:38 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: Cell Phone tower As an Orient homeowner, I am concerned about the Fire Department's proposal to build a twelve story tower there. An upgrade to Orient's emergency communications may be needed, this 120 foot tower is excessive and unsightly. Members of the Orient Association have requested technical information regarding alternatives to this eyesore from the Fire Commisssioner for 18 months. But only in December of 2004 did they meet with technical experts. Still no independently verifiable information has been made available to the Community. The Fire Department serves the Community and the Community wholeheartedly supports the Department and cares for the safety of its members. But enabling them to use a massive structure to rent out to cell phone compaiesis not part of a relationship of trust and service. _ thank you for taing this into consideration. Caroline Greer Nolan 225 King St. Orient, N.Y 2/3/05 Kowalski, Linda From: MS4153@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 6:20 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: ORIENT DOES NOT NEED A TOWER! I find it unacceptable that the Orient Fire Department should attempt to erect an unsightly tower that would be useless to the Orient community. I find it unacceptable that the Orient Fire Department would try to impose a 120-foot tower on the community without even giving technical information to the Orient Association and the residents of Orient. I think it would be remiss of the Zoning Board to grant the Orient Fire Department's request for this 120-foot tower without full disclosure to the Orient Association. Maureen Sanders 2125 Pete's Hill Road (PO Box 166) Orient, NY 11957 1 Message Page 1 of 1 Kowalski, Linda From: Newlin, Philippe (CALYON) [philippe newlin@us.calyon.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 4:21 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: Tower Dear ZBA board members, I live at 1425 Orchard Street in Orient. On the cell tower variance issue, do we really need it? I know that folks who work in the area every day use exisiting infrastructure such as the PBS Antenna in Greenport to ensure stable communication. I'm against spending money, the taxpayer's or anyone else's to duplicate efforts when real solutions are being used by folks now. respectfully, the Newlin family 1425 Orchard Street Orient *** Calyon **************************************************** This message and/or any attachments (the "message") is intended for the sole use of its addressee. If you are not the addressee,please immediately notify the sender and then destroy the message. The unauthorized disclosure, use, dissemination or copying (either whole or partial) of this e-mail, or any information it contains, is prohibited. E-mails are susceptible to alteration and their integrity cannot be guaranteed. As this message and/or any attachments may have been altered without our knowledge, its content is not legally binding on CALYON Corporate and Investment Bank. All rights reserved. 2/3/05 Kowalski, Linda From: Black, Harvey[Harvey.Black@lehman.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 3:46 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: Request for variance for communications tower by OFD Ruth Oliva Chairperson Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Dear Ruth and members of the Southold ZBA, I own property at 645 Village Lane, in Orient. Now before your eyes start glazing over I am not going to berate you about how this tower would violate the bucolic nature of Orient, create a lasting eyesore, hurt property values etc. etc. . Though I believe some of these points are valid I imagine you have received plenty of letters to that effect. • With the help of others in the community I have tried to keep up as best I can on this issue. I understand there are several opposing constituencies in this matter and I do not envy your position. I do believe though that the most important determinant in making any good decision is to have the best information possible. I also realize that decisions need to be made and we could analyze this problem for many years to come without making a decision. However there seem to be so many holes in the information available at the present time that the only reasonable course of action is to turn down this variance application until a more thorough study can be made. The two most basic questions as to Need and potential Solutions to my knowledge remain unanswered (If I am incorrect I apologize but please note the OFD is supposed to serve us not the other way around and if I am wrong this begs the question, "Why have the facts not been made available to me?") Has the OFD made a convincing case as to their specific emergency _ communication needs beyond "hearsay" and generalities? (I understand that their prior statement of having to cover Plum Island has now been determined to be incorrect) What are the alternatives to a 120 ' tower? a shorter one? A MESH System like some towns in the area? Utilize the PBS antenna in Greenport? Erect an antenna at an alternative location? etc. . In closing, I support the Orient Association in its mission and in its efforts to investigate and inform the citizens of the Village of Orient as to the facts surrounding this variance application. I also support you the ZBA in your difficult task of arbitrating these disputes. I repeat though that at the present time that the only reasonable course of action in my mind is to turn down this variance application and table the issue until a more thorough collection of the facts can be made. There is a huge amount at stake here and a wrong decision I fear will be irreversible and have a far reaching detrimental effect on our community. With sincerest regards, Harvey N. Black III 1 :,--Air,,,q, �[ emote prom e _� bi'J �, ) �. ,,, 36 � Gertrude Reeves /z g/ ��/ L�1��14 ) h } Mr.and Mrs.Hiller Kahn q ��. : A,"`t"Kk 255 THREE Waters Ln 6 flJ7if/I r Orient,NY 11957.1539 ` 61- 1 /1/(/)1_, - iif `,� W .'; yyy 3'hi T-0 j x. j� 5 5 - dd , tra4rIA'-/ritr .' V--6--1-1-447-7L'' . d 0X- rAf %/?//1--- _14,, -, 7_,„ a F p -, ..c/c)-e/ t- '.. , trN-1/ ofrT_Fak ic, .e9b/ 9_7:77 , E /,,4-y�6�2-&', ori� N (1; : ' 1 .M0 Ikl.641- V 1 4 4 //4/1 l/l '. I 41 / �` `. LTt � ' ` __At - zi,e4e2e ,..74,t,vie,,,i,A,Id, . 7't 4- /7..."41.- . 6—'4 14111/17- • tie.„--01-eafra--, ;-cf.3-...- - i "7 iY -110 6-A-7 _( �` � -P /`ems4. • ` A , 3 77 , n rr At VA* '" '^' s+J' ` :°, 4 .4�Y. a t'I :Ai '2 Nj7,w} ev V/ 14,7 fit6 !/c�✓�.— K a k f SI ' " , � TOM MANGELSEN/NATUREPL COM •a-"' 3� yr ,,`x �"7 g '' e l .wG�kt:c.,a.,,w ..,ti ,, ,, t,,,,,,,,,,4.,x,,,,‘ __ ' A"proud sup,porter of World-Wildlife Fund - .T �" OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Office Location: NFB Building, First Floor, 54375 Main Road at Youngs Avenue Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 (ext. 5011 during recording) fax (631) 765-9064 TRANSMITTAL SHEET )Zc 76C- 5- 67 TO: vf oL i r zo FROM: or DATE: oZ/ N.3 /2005 RE: o?_I 3 /05 Agenda )41N FL MESSAGE: ( ) Correspondence or related attached regarding the above for your information, PI— P 0-6 r7,( au_A_QA) d.,11 los- -kb ze • el'Yz-6L-LY_S ott-Z. c2-/a/ ' //14t,,1 .�-L.GLO� /� �.C�7' / `D . Thank you. Pages attached: 0 0, i, A ote Prom 0 Gertrude Reeves /_-g/�, ^7.5-e7 �f /J -, (i A) q'_ 6 3 2 S, 7 T /y _� �/M I �en IA J / ' Vit/0- ` f . d9 ill 4/ k r v f-/'-(>7' ',.ex) til? A --,i1- WU, th 1.:k 66 ! —zelam / �/(� t�.v / " ' / -'' J � 13","46("4-;� (A_0 vt-witez.--,_,, .e(- -e-- ,,:,.z.,,,.,. „. 411110 P',' . 102-Atigeal't;v4,,N,6i;-!, TOM MANGELSEN/NATUREPL COM ,r T" ," .. -. ',:•-1 ` A proud supporter of Worlc(Wildlife Fund a4-() ' [zL-P/Lub-ki `�Yi ,/+ LTO MMr and Mrs.Hiller Kahn Y 255 THREE Waters Ln S Onenr,NY 11957-1"9 i ` - FES; - _ 1005 W /sH )4 -/?-== 5 00/I— 171V,:1 �� � � V4 /� , 'b 01 -I po 111111111 Pag ta2- kef Kowalski, Linda I From: John Drieger@suffolk.lib ny.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 6:11 AM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: tower My thoughts are that if a tower is necessary it should be located in an industrial area and not in a residential community area! My vote is NO. John R.Rieger 590 Willow Terrace Orient 2/2/05 OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Office Location: NFB Building, First Floor, 54375 Main Road at Youngs Avenue Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 (ext. 5011 during recording) fax (631) 765-9064 TRANSMITTAL SHEET � c - 6~76 TO: C C ‘i of t/ r � U FROM: X/4/ �1 Z44affi,09 DATE: c2-1 '=2) /2005 RE: _I 3 /05 Agenda (or MESSAGE: (y)Correspondence or related attached regarding the above for your information, CV Thank you. Pages attached: 1/ . .7 / r-- Page 1 of 2 PP Kowalski, Linda From: Jon Turner[turner@nyu.edu] Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 3.08.PM To: Kowalski, Linda Cc: anne hopkins Subject: ZBA-OFD Variance Dear Ms. Kowalski, Below is a copy of the message I sent Mr. Boyd,yesterday, concerning the information the OA is seeking from him concerning the construction of a 120' tower in Orient. It is my understanding that the Board wants to be kept informed of our efforts to obtain information from the OFD. Would you kindly see that the message is distributed to the ZBA members. Many thanks, Jon Turner Begin forwarded message: From: Jon Turner<turner@nyu.edu> Date: January 27, 2005 1:38:51 PM EST To: Edward Boyd<elilaw@earthlink.net> Cc: bills@necat.net Subject: OFD Outstanding Items Mr Boyd, I wanted to be sure there was no misunderstanding about the information we need from you and Bill Scheibel prior to the upcoming ZBA hearing on February 3, 2005. 1. Shortly before (on January 19, 2005)the last ZBA hearing, I asked you for information that would allow me to interpret the plots you provided several days earlier(see copy of my message, below). To date, I have not received this information. 2. Also, I understand that you have some additional plots for me. I have not received them. 3. In my message of 12/28/04, I asked for coverage plots for antenna heights of 60', 75', 90', and 120' at the OFH (item 3). I have not received these. I do not understand your response in item 3 of your January 18 message ("The OFD only had me do coverage from the firehouse and nowhere else ..."). I am asking that the antenna hight be varied, not the location of the antenna. Without these coverage plots for lower antenna heights at the OFH, it is difficult for me to know by how much performance would be curtailed if an antenna height lower than 120' were used. 4. ZBA procedures for matters of this nature require that reasonable alternatives be explored. The one alternative to a 120' antenna at the OFH would be mounting an antenna on the 300' Public Service Tower in Greenport,placing a lower height antenna at the OFH, and linking the two. Items 4 and 5 in my message of 12/28/04 were intended to explore this alternative. Your answer to my items 4 and 5 in your January 18 message ("The OFD does not intend to place the repeater at any location other than at the firehouse.") is not responsive to my request. Suppose OFD was able to place an antenna on the 300' Greenport Public Service Tower, what would its coverage be, what approvals would be required, and what equipment would be needed at the tower and at the OFH to 2/2/05 Page 2 of 2 accommodate this alternative r 5. Another alternative is to use several lower height antennas in Orient(one at the OFH, one on Brown's Hills) - a mesh design. Assume 60' antennas were used at both locations and the BH antenna was located near the crest on private property. What equipment would be needed at both sites, to link the sites, to coordinate the sites, and roughly what would it cost?What would the coverage of such a system be? If any of this is unclear, or you do not understand what I am trying to learn, I would be happy to explain it further. I look forward to hearing from you. ...Jon... January 19, 2005 Ed, In order for me to make sense out of Orient 1 (talk-in) and Orient 4 (talk-out)polar plots you sent me yesterday, I need to know from Bill Scheibel exactly what they represent. In addition, I need to know the parameters he used in generating them. For example, what power level was used and what was the antenna hight? In addition, I need to know what is being measured and what the different colors mean. It is normal to provide this information when sending this type of graphical material. (This corresponds to items 2 and 3 in my message of 12/28/04 which were not satisfied in your message of yesterday - 1-18-05.) Thanks, ...Jon... 2/2/05 , Kowalski, Linda - -- From: Freddie Wachsberger[fwachsbe@suffolk.lib.ny.us] Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 1:08 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: Fw: OFD Outstanding Items Original Message From: "Jon Turner" <turner@nyu.edu> To: "Edward Boyd" <elilaw@earthlink.net> Cc: <bills@necat.net> Sent: Thursday, January 27, 2005 1:38 PM Subject: OFD Outstanding Items > Mr Boyd, > > I wanted to be sure there was no misunderstanding about the information > we need from you and Bill Scheibel prior to the upcoming ZBA hearing on > February 3, 2005. > > 1. Shortly before (on January 19, 2005) the last ZBA hearing, I asked > you for information that would allow me to interpret the plots you > provided several days earlier (see copy of my message, below) . To date, > I have not received this information. > 2 . Also, I understand that you have some additional plots for me. I > have not received them. > 3 . In my message of 12/28/04, I asked for coverage plots for antenna > heights of 60' , 75 ' , 90' , and 120' at the OFH (item 3) . I have not > received these. I do not understand your response in item 3 of your > January 18 message ("The OFD only had me do coverage from the firehouse > and nowhere else . . . ") . I am asking that the antenna bight be varied, > not the location of the antenna. Without these coverage plots for lower > antenna heights at the OFH, it is difficult for me to know by how much > performance would be curtailed if an antenna height lower than 120 ' > were used. > 4. ZBA procedures for matters of this nature require that reasonable > alternatives be explored. The one alternative to a 120 ' antenna at the > OFH would be mounting an antenna on the 300 ' Public Service Tower in > Greenport, placing a lower height antenna at the OFH, and linking the > two. Items 4 and 5 in my message of 12/28/04 were intended to explore > this alternative. Your answer to my items 4 and 5 in your January 18 > message ("The OFD does not intend to place the repeater at any location > other than at the firehouse. ") is not responsive to my request. Suppose > OFD was able to place an antenna on the 300 ' Greenport Public Service > Tower, what would its coverage be, what approvals would be required, > and what equipment would be needed at the tower and at the OFH to > accommodate this alternative? > 5. Another alternative is to use several lower height antennas in > Orient (one at the OFH, one on Brown's Hills) - a mesh design. Assume > 60 ' antennas were used at both locations and the BH antenna was located > near the crest on private property. What equipment would be needed at > both sites, to link the sites, to coordinate the sites, and roughly > what would it cost? What would the coverage of such a system be? > > If any of this is unclear, or you do not understand what I am trying to > learn, I would be happy to explain it further. > > I look forward to hearing from you. > > . . .Jon. . . > > > > > 1 > > January 19, 2005 > > . > > Ed, > > > > In order for me to make sense out of Orient 1 (talk-in) and Orient 4 > > (talk-out) polar plots you sent me yesterday, I need to know from Bill > > Scheibel exactly what they represent. In addition, I need to know the > > parameters he used in generating them. For example, what power level > > was used and what was the antenna hight? In addition, I need to know > > what is being measured and what the different colors mean. > > > > It is normal to provide this information when sending this type of > > graphical material. > > > > (This corresponds to items 2 and 3 in my message of 12/28/04 which > > were not satisfied in your message of yesterday - 1-18-05.) > > > > Thanks, > > > > . . .Jon. . . > > > > 2 P.O.Box 473, Orient,New York 11957 January 27, 2005 - � 'MN 2 8 2005 "J I Ruth Oliva, Chairman Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals Town Hall, Southold,New York Dear Chairman and Members of the Board, After so many adjournments,I fear that the context of the Orient Association's concern to find a compromise which would fill the Fire Department's needs, and at the same time avoid a 120'tower on Fire Department property,might be lost. I believe that the discussion generated by an attempt to put a cell tower on the Phillips property in 1997 will therefore be useful; as you know,it was this application which generated the moratorium and subsequent legislation,which was particularly concerned with the protection of residential areas and the historic and rural environment, concerns emphasized by the Town consultants' report to the Planning Board. While the present application is not in an agricultural field, it is one block closer to the historic district and in approximately the same relationship to the Main Road,which has, since that time,been declared a Scenic Byway. I believe all the concerns expressed by the consultants in 1997 are equally valid for the present application: land use conflicts,visual impact,historic resources, and cumulative effect. (An application now to place a cell tower on the East Marion Fire Department property illustrates the risk of setting a precedent and the potential for the sprouting of a rash of towers,which are probably going to be made obsolete by new technology within a matter of years.)The point was made that the effect of the placement of a cell tower in the rural/agricultural environment is antithetical to the expressed goals of Southold Town's Master Plan. I would like to emphasize that a concern for the aesthetic(or,more simply,visual)impact is not frivolous but has been routinely the major reason for opposition to these towers and the reason for the denial of applications;it directly influences property values, and the concern for it is essential for the preservation of a sense of place. This is of great concern in the rural and historic setting of Orient. I am appending exerpts of the 1997 consultants' reports re the tower application and re the proposed legislation,which I believe are strong statements for the context in which the Fire Department application should be considered. I am also appending a 1997 memo from Valerie Scopaz on the implications for the Scenic Byways initiative. Sincerely, fr Freddie Wachsberger For the Orient Association ( e : ) 1 4-DDp-cr,),Qc rb 11 1 October 29, 1997 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman Members of the Planning Board Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: EAF:Bell Atlantic Application SCTM No.1000-018-6-5 Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Planning Board, My understanding is that your decision on November 3 will be limited to a determination of status under SEQRA of the application for a cellular tower in Orient. The Orient Association agrees with the conclusion of your consultants, Nelson, Pope and Voorhees, which states in part "The_loF ition of the monopole as proposed will rresult in significant land use. historical, and visual impacts.,..some mitigation is possible.. (but)Impacts will remain which cannot be mitigated, spch as the loss of the agricultural vistas from Platt Road and NYS 25, and the crea- tion of a precedent for location of such structures within rural residential areas..if the Town feels that these represent substantial impacts, a positive declaration should be considered,and a -1 hi h .lute_ ,i . 1 ,1 i . -ij tiv i . 11_ sl -s public need. The Orient Association urges you to make a positive declaration for the following reasons: 1. Potential Land Use Conflict: as stated in the review by Nelson, Pope, and Voorhees, "the location of a tall communication tower within an agricultural field located in an historic, rural area does represent an inherent land use conflict". 2. Visual Impact: This is of the most profound importance, and impacts not only the neighboring community, whose property values would be severely damaged, but the quality of • environment to which Southold Town professes to be dedicated, as documented in the goals of the Master Plan, in the Scenic Byways initiative, and in the acquisition of development rights in the preservation of farmland. (See Scopaz report to ZBA, May 7; among the purposes of the R-8 district is to 'provide the open rural environment so highly valued by year-round residents and those persons who support the Town of Southold's recreation, resort and second home economy'). As your consultants report indicates, the tower would be visible from all of Platt Road and from Route 25. It would also be visible from Narrow River Road, which with Route 25 will be a "Scenic Byway" in Orient. Your consultants also indicate that mitigation will not eliminate the negative impact, and, indeed, it is obvious that even at maturity trees will rise to no more than half the height of the projected tower. Even with a reduction of height and plant- ing lanting of vegetation, "the agricultural vista across the property will be significantly altered." The applicant admits a potentially large impact: " potential conflict with rural character of town" (EAF part 2, 19). As your consultants point out, the scope of SEQRA "clearly includes impacts to the character of a project area and con- formance to municipal land use goals"; this project is inappropriate to both. 3. Historical Resources: FCC regulation(7 CFR Ch.1 (10-1-95) includes as actions which may have a significant environmental effect(1.1307 (4)) Facilites that may affect dis- tricts sitec bu gs. structures or nbiects...that are listed, or are eligible for listing, in the Nations Register of Historic Placgs,_Village Lane and adjoining streets, two blocks west of the site of the proposed tower, is on the National Register; the consultants' report cites two houses on Platt Road recommended for inclusion on the State and Federal registers (the Hop- kins House is indeed on the west side, SCTM 1000-018-20), and the Price house immediately in front of the tower site is early 19th century and included in the SPLIA list, as are several other houses on Rte. 25 in the immediate vicinity. 4. Cumulative Impact: In the applicant's EAF part 2{19) it is acknowledged that the proposed action will set an important precedent for future projects; in part 3, cumulative 1 impact is denied; but any denial is completely disingenuous, given the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which prohibits discrimination among providers. This is the first application for a cellular tower in a rural, agricultural/residential location in Southold Town; the granting of permission of this application would enable both the erection of similar towers in residential zones elsewhere in Southold, and the erection of additional towers by competing providers in Orient. The fact that this application is being processed while new legislation governing cellular towers is being processed puts a particular burden on the Board. Any action which would have the effect of enabling the execution of this project as proposed would, because of the non-discrimination regulations in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, render meaningless the new legislation. I am given to understand that when the new legislation is passed, the environmental review of this application will probably not be repeated. If that is the case, it is essential to examine it most stringently now. That means that the Board should render a positive declaration. In all their reports, Nelson, Pope and Voorhis emphasize the inappropriateness of the proposed site for this facility. "A site with more adequate screening, existiag buildings or trees, or more compatible with adjacent uses would be preferable...The location of the monopole as proposed will result in significant land use, historical and visual impacts...the project site is not a suitable location due to the open nature of the site and high potential for visual impacts". The consultants are equally consistent in their assertion of the Town's interest in determining a more appropriate site. They recommend that the Town independently assess the documentation of need, and, with a positive declaration, have "a Draft EIS prepared which includes an analysis of alternative sites and more fully discusses public need. Ideally, the project sponsor and the Town should work together to identify a site which would minimize the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project".. the Town has a clear interest in regulating the location of telecommunication towers and in helping to identify optimal sites". The consultants' reports, therefore, give the Planning Board solid and substantial reasons for making a positive determination. I append an article from the West Hempstead LIF . There, Bell Atlantic prepared a several- hundred page Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a proposed 84 foot monopole in a cloverleaf on the Southern State Parkway. The cellular tower issue is extremely serious for the Town, and other towns and municipalities across the country are taking it very seriously. If a tower in a cloverleaf in Hempstead war- rents a positive declaration, surely a tower in a farm field in Orient or elsewhere in Southold warrants no less. 3 Cl `4 : • c�`t I BUFFO( k j0�•✓/L .-,,,,„, ,e,- 4, .:. . . , VALERIE SCOPAZ .<‘ Town Hai ,53095 Main Road TOWN PLANNER *? P.O. Box 1179 • Southold,New York 119 oy* ' s% Fax(516) 765-3136 1 Ag 1. -G' Telephone(516)765-1938 SOP - OFFICE OF THE TOWN PLANNER ' G g TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals From: Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Re: Bell Atlantic NYNEX Mobile . Applications #4446SE and #4446V located on a parcel on the south side of SR 25, approximately 375 feet east of Platt Road, Orient, NY SCTM # 1000-018-6-5 Date: May 7, 1997 On April 15, ' 1997, the Zoning Board requested the preparation of "a brief report identifying existing and proposed land use issues relevant to the district and adjacent districts thereto, of the proposed NYNEX Cellular Telephone Tower site at 24850 Main Road, Orient." The following is submitted in response to your request. ` Zoning and the Goals and Objectives of Master Plan: The subject property is zoned Low-Density Residential R-80, a' two-acre, residential zoning district. The purpose of this district, as defined by the Zoning Code (Section 100-30) is "to reasonably control and, to the extent possible, prevent the unnecessary loss of those currently open lands within the town containing large and contiguous areas of prime agricultural soils which • are the basis for a significant portion of the town's economy and those areas with sensitive environmental features, including aquifer recharge areas and bluffs. In addition, these areas provide the open rural environment so highly valued by year-round ,residents and those persons who support the Town of Sottthold's . . , 0. . • olir.ii* 450 # P--- ...p,Iv , S0_14)-2_ recreation, resort and second-home economy. The economic, social and aesthetic benefits which can be obtained for all citizens by limiting loss of such areas are well documented and have inspired a host of governmental programs designed, varying degrees of success, to achieve this result. For its part, the town is expending larAge ums t the same ofmoney too protect existing farm acreage. the town has an obligation to exercise its authority to reasonably regulate the subdivision and development of this land to further the same purposes while honoring the legitimate interests of farmers and other farmland owners." permits as ofde In keeping with this statement, the Zoning Co detached right • the following uses: family dwellings, agricultural operations includegw aeries uctures owned or operated by the Town or its school, park and fire districts. The Code also permits by Special Exception: "Public tiiinstallat ons necessary well as sary toserveas areas and other within the town, subject to such conditions as the Board of Appeals may impose in order to protect and promote the health, safety, appearance and general welfare of the community and the character , of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed." The purpose of this district Town'tas s 1 omprehensivened in the dMaster Planwhich the goals and objectives of th is perhaps best expressed plant this a Summary. ent on Vel Ralymond,ng goals found in the Mas Parish, Pine, & Weiner, Inc. April 1985. Page 3.) : "Maximize the Town's natural assets, including its coastal location and agricultural base and achieve a compatibility between the natural environment and development." The Stewardship Task Force's Final Report of 1994 refined this concept further. The Report stressed the importance of preserving the scenic rural and agricultural qualities of the Town's landscape a dscape not only to preserve the high quality of life enjoyedby 7 residents, but also to protect the underpinnings of the tourist industry. Tourism, along with agriculture and maritime industries, is a significant and growing part of the local economy. "The tourist industry depends in large part on preserving and improving;the physical beauty of the Town:,{, (Final Report: Executive Summary. July 1994: ..Page 4.) In keeping with this observation; the Report recommended the adoption'of sceniccorridors=,and-the placement of recreational trails throughout the 7 (39 Surrounding Land Uses: The area surrounding the subject property is a mix of residences, a residence fer eldehouse, an elementaryand,school, a landscapers yard and automobile service - station, a fire hous , with storage facilities. All of s propertyis 1(the ser vice stationtand the exception of two B BusinessP storage facility) . For your reference, attached is the 1995 Land Use Map produced by the Suffolk County Department of Planning and the 1993 aerial photograph of the area. The property is bordered on the east by farmland from which development rights have been purare included within Agricultural ased. Several agricultural properties within the Orient area District # 1. One of six such districts with Suffolk County, property owners within the d i tni f �o� special dist eive ret leviesdandlue (and property taxes) , exemp _protection by right to farm legislation in return for which they commit themselves to farming the property second time.r eeht years.att attached map for # 1 was renewed in 1995 for further details. Existin and Future Plans and Programs: Since 1995 the Town's Transportation Committe has designed and begun implementing the Seaview Trails aforementioned map includes the location of two of these trails in the Orient-area. The Committee is working with the Highway Superintendent to install trail signs in the near future. In March of 1997 the Town of Southold received permission to begin work on its Scenic Byway Corridor Management Plan. Grant funds in the amount of S55,000 have been designated to develop.an innovative model within a corridor management framework for the protection of scenic byway corridors and viewsheds, tourism development 'and recreation. The planning is being .done under the aegis of the State, Department of Transportation and in accordance with the federal scenic byways program. The funding.is coining through the federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) . A Request for Proposal was sent Out to prospective consulting firms in April. A pre-submission conference is scheduled next week. A key feature of this Byway Corridor Management Plan is that it will inventory scenic, agricultural, cultural, historical, natural, recreational and archeological resources throughout the town. While the 'historic state (SR25) and county roads (CR48) and the railroad right-of-way are the main corridors, the plan will incorporate the entire' viewshed visible from these and other road or trail corridors. Technical documentation about the Scenic Byways Corridor Management Plan is available in the Transportation Committee's files CV 6-ds 4-2 in the Town Clerk's office. Key,documents are also available in my office. Finally, the Orient Historic District is located to the west of this site. Since information pertaining to this District has already been submitted to your record, I will simply reference it here. z, ^/ If additional documentation about the trails or byways program is needed, please let me know. A I l ig-AI DC A . Page 1 of 1 ei,„. - 42,1--lt, Kowalski, Linda From: James Haag [jamesfhaag@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 10:47 AM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: Feb 3 Hearing on Orient Cell Tower Linda, This is being sent to you to add to the opposition of constructing a 120 foot "public safety antenna" in Orient. I am writing on behalf of two Orient residents and taxpayers. We do not want a varience to be granted. James F. Haag, Jr., 4725 Orchard Street(P.O. Box 28) Michael Lopez 3780 Orchard Street We are both unable to attend the meeting on February 3, but wanted our voices heard. No independently verifiable information on its need has been made available to this community so we could prepare viable alternatives or thoughts to this application. Other towns in the northeast have faced this problem and have solved it in different ways. Given the sensitive nature of our hamlet, its landmark status as "historic", and the overall opposition to it from the community, other alternatives need to be explored before something like this intrudes to the town's essential character. Thank you for adding these two voices to the opposition on February 3. Please note that we appreciate the good work of the Orient Fire Department and value its role in the community, as well as the selfless dedication of the volunteers. We will look for other ways to support their work and dedication. Jim Haag Michael Lopez Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search presents - Jib Jab's 'Second Term' 1/31/05 OFFICE OF - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Office Location: NFB Building, First Floor, 54375 Main Road at Youngs Avenue Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 (ext. 5011 during recording) _ fax (631) 765-9064 TRANSMITTAL SHEET ' 4 - 5c (0 TO: EoQ i@c9- 1 VI too_ 7 - Lam . FROM: l� W-t j'�} C�¢J �' DATE: I I 3/ /2005 RE: °_ / 3 /05 Agenda (or PA CQ-.v-,ii- ' 40-bo,br MESSAGE: (}7y.Cor-r�espondence or related attached regarding the above for your information, T/' /1 . daab urry_ I 00 6, ,,,36 Thank you. W' Pages attached: '1 . o. tA 6-A % + � \J - • Ronnie Soffer 25100 Maui Road Ilk ' 3f k - " Orient,NY te 11957-1105 z a - ,Q Phone:631-323-0109 January 30, 2005 "W2rdliC . r e6;61) Vik Ctil ' ,\PV;Mi _-__ e r Dear Linda Kowalski JAN 1 2005 $tr ZBA PO Box 1179 xokuP _ ,,,,E= 1,7'PE L, Southhold,NY 11971 I am writing this letter to protest the OFD's request to erect a 120 foot tower in Orient. Can OFD promise everyone here that electromagnetic waves will not harm us and will not increase diseases such as cancer, birth defects, leukemia, cataracts, etc...? However there are many studies over the past few years showing and proving that EM Radiation is harmful to the health of human beings, especially to residents near such towers. Attached some studies by doctors that prove that electromagnetic waves causes cancer and imbalances to the human body. There are many books scientific data proving that such towers are deter mental to our health and well being. Plum Island is a government facility. If they need better communication, well let the Federal Govt. subsidize their project,the same way they are funding The War in Iraq. I refuse to have my taxes raised for a harmful cause, or have such insensitive bureaucratic issue of how beneficial this hideous tower will improve our lives and the communities in general. A tower in Orient Village is an ugly eye sore to a historical town. Perhaps they should explore the possibility of building such a tower in the Sound. But who shall speak on behalf of the WILD ENVIRONMENT and I mean the fish, the Crabs and other living things. Sincere / 6M,/_,eL*C Il---- Seel Ronnie Soffer and Janice c abe-Soffer l / C Radiation Harmful Page 1 of 4 4 • - ; �..r .wr �,y 'c r ,. '" - t .ir �y7+.„-.n L3-�,���yy�� _y 9-� - Fr 31,x••"'C'=i ,�„� '`i},'r`� :F T' �i' `e`: r. S 'F`74:Li:'cini•' ..7.s;+'14',- »�', �'.,� fs�a r i, � iajell:. . 'yaH . a2.tAarmf • " yr: n,. � ` M1 ::;:4‹cY4� .N: .<S b.;- '= �Rr�°4�F' r�es x r.•,'4t;i=,}`"''= ?Z_ - .�t ,r ,YS Home Company Radiation is a disturbance of the ether (energy matrix of the universe) traveling at Frequently Asked Questions the velocity of light. The ranges of radiations are determined by their frequency andBioelectrical Universe Cells Work Electrically the number of oscillations per second. These elements are controlled by the Polarizer Products wavelength, the distance covered bytheper second of travel. What are Polarizers? wave What do Polarizers do? How to use Polarizers EMF radiation from man-made and solar sources is accelerating at an unprecedented How To Test Polarizers rate. New electrical devices, computers, business machines, satellites and cellular Life Field Polanzer phones are fillingour environment with incredible amounts of non-ionizingradiation. Personal Polarizer Necklace Polarize_r Some scientists believe this continuous, incoherent low-level radiation is the final Car Polarizer "straw"that breaks the"camel's back" of our delicate immune systems, already Radiation Harmful Microbes Dangerous weakened by chemicals, drugs, and poisons in the air, water and food. Spanish Flu 1918 Man-made EMF Most people have learned too late the damaging effects of solar radiation. Those now Geopathic Radiators battlingmelanoma, skin cancers and pre-cancerous cells are now realizingtheir Kirlian Photography Books beautiful tans in the past created consequences they never imagined. Scientists are continuing to discover just how damaging the sun's rays can be to our cells. It breaks down DNA and RNA molecules, creating abnormal cells and aberrant cellular activity. This weakens our immune systems. Dr. Gerber, M.D., in his book'Vibrational Medicine"clearly shows that human life processes are the result of a series of interacting multi-dimensional subtle-energy systems. If these systems become imbalanced, there may be resulting pathological symptoms that manifest on the physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual planes. When the energy systems of human beings are weakened or are out of balance, the body's energy fields oscillate at a different or less harmonic frequency. The energy fields must be balanced and the source of interference counteracted or eliminated for the body to return to a high level of health and vitality. Researcher Georges Lakhovsky, in the book, "The Secret of Life," presented the idea that solar and cosmic radiation contributed to the formation of abnormal cells in geographical areas where the soil possessed electrically conductive properties. Water filled clay soils are premier conductors of EMF radiation and therefore create barriers against all solar and cosmic radiation being absorbed harmlessly into the earth. This causes the radiation to reflect off the soil to create secondary interference fields that disrupt the oscillatory equilibrium of the cells. Lakhovsky believed all types of radiation effected living systems, especially cosmic and solar radiation. This radiation maintains the natural oscillation of healthy cells by neutralizing antagonistic radiations through resonance and interference if there is no secondary radiation caused by water-filled clay or iron ore laden soils. Any thing that created variations in the field of cosmic and solar radiation would cause a state of disequilibrium in living cells. Once this happens, they can no longer oscillate according to their natural frequency. The ultimate result would be a breakdown in health and a manifestation of disease. Lakhovsky looked upon sunspots as an important source of cosmic radiation and sun energy reaching the earth. He noticed increased sunspot activity correlated with abundant rainfall and crop growth in the tropics and increases in diseases and epidemics. He believed that all diseases, especially cancer, were the result of oscillatory disequilibrium in cells. In his research, he discovered that the geological nature of the soil modifies the field of cosmic radiation at the earth's surface. Soils permeable to the cosmic and solar http://www.bewisepolarize.com/radiation%20harmful.hhn 1/30/2005 Radiation Harmful Page 2 of 4 rays such as sand, sandstone, gravel, limestone, etc. absorbed external radiations to great depth. They did not create the secondary radiations produced by soils impermeable to the rays. Areas where clays, soils•with excessive water content and mineral ores were abundant had the greatest incidence of cancer. Power lines, transformers, appliances, radars, televisions, microwaves, copiers, computers, automobile engines, cellular phones and all other devices which use man- made energy to operate produce electromagnetic fields that are suspected of being dangerous to your mental and physical health. Your office and home are filled with electrical wiring, devices, and machines which create EMF radiation. These unnatural energy fields, especially those produced by alternating currents operating at 60 cycles per second, are suspected of causing depression, suicides, cancer, leukemia, psychosis, cataracts, and other physical and mental problems in unsuspecting individuals. In the article, "The Menace of Electric Smog, author Lowell Ponte said, "At issue is electromagnetic pollution, electric smog, the unseen energy waves that spread outward like ripples in a pond around every electrical device we use. And we use many. The United States is wired with 500,000 miles of high-voltage power lines. Industry, government, and the military depend on 250,000 microwave relay links. Airliners see and are seen via radar. 9,000,000 broadcasting transmitters and microwave relay stations, and 30,000,000 CB radios flood our airways. Industry employs 35,000,000 electromagnetic devices. As a result, a typical American now gets a daily dosage of electromagnetic radiation up to 200 million times more intense than what his ancestors took in from the sun, stars, and other natural sources." Dr. Becker.,..one-ot_the most respected research_scientists in_the.worldstated,_':We now-live in a sea of electromagnetic_radiation that we cannot sense_and that never before existed on this earth. New evidence suggests that this-massive radiation may ,_be producing stress, disease and other harmful effects all over the world by interfering with the most basic levels of brain function." In.his_book,."The Body Electric," he says, "Three dangers overshadow all others. The first has been_ conclusively proven: ELF (extremely low frequency) electromagnetic field vibrations at about 30 to 100,Hz,even,if they're weaker than the earth's_field, interfere with the cues that keep our biological"cycles properly timed; chronic stress.and impaired disease resistance result. Secondly, the available evidence strongly suggests that regulationof cellular growth. processes is impaired by electropollutioU. The danger is immediate and overwhelming. In the long run, however, I believe the ultimate weapon is manipulation of our electromagnetic.environrnent,_because its-imperceptibly_subtle and'strikes at the core of life itself:_rr We're dealing here with the most important scientific discovery ever---the nature of life. Even if we survive the chemical and atomic threats to our existence, there's a strong possibility that increasing,electropollution could set in motion irreversible changes leading to our extinction before were even aware,of_them, All life pulsates in time to the earth, and our artificial fields,cause abnormal reactions in_all organisms. Magnetic reversals.may have produced the"great dying"of the-past by disrupting the biocycles so as to cause stress, sterility, birth defects, malignancies, and impairedbrain function: Human activities may well have duplicated in three decades what otherwise would - have taken five thousand years to develop during the next reversal... Somehow these dangers must be brought into the open so forcefully that the entire population of the world is made aware of them. ,>Since our civilization.is irreversibly dependent on.electronics,.,abolitiomof4 http://www.bewisepolarize.com/radiation%20harmful.htm 1/30/2005 306irS i ) Radiation Harmful 1110 Page 3 of 4 • electromagnetic-radiation.is-out of_the_question..However-as-a_first-step in_avertipg disaster, we-must-halt the introduction-of new-sources of_electromagnetic.energy, while we investigate the biohazards of those we already have with completeness and honesty that have so far been in short supply." (page 328) Recent studies of mice:exposed for-30 days to 60 cycle electromagnetictields-whose ' strength was similar to those found near high;voltage_tr-ansmission_lines revealed changes in hormone patterns;`bodji;weight andbloodchemistries, producing all the signs-of chronic stress, but also-a-steady.incr-ease in-degenerative.disease-- particularly-those-re latedto a-decreased cornpetencyof the immune system,.such,as ,' cancer.- Manfred Kohnlechner, a German medical doctor, in his book"Man Does not Die in August" described the effects of the installation of a modern communications system � on the health of the inhabitants of a rural area in Bavaria. Up to the time of the installation, the health of the residents was incredible, comparing favorably to the Pkert-e-- � `F f health and longevity of the Hunza people. Within six months of the introduction�Z ,/ 1- g Y P P n roduction of 7" the electrical lines and microwave towers essential for telephone, TV and radio fralyk communication, these previously healthy people began to die of cancer, heart attacks, and to have cavities in their teeth, conditions unheard of in the past. Over the last ten years, there has been scattered media coverage about the danger ®/L of EMF pollution. Many researchers and scientists in this field were persecuted and / ridiculed for their dire warnings of the dangerous affects of EMF radiation on living creatures. In 1989, news broadcasts, radio programs, television specials, magazines, and newspapers covered the topic of EMF radiation and the affects on human beings. The "New Yorker,""People,""Infoworld,""Newsweek," and"Discover magazines carried articles exposing the frightening results of recent scientific studies. They addressed newfound fears about the harmful affects of EMF pollution created by powerlines, transformers, appliances, machines, and computers. In the December 1989 issue of"People Magazine," Paul Brodeur, author of the "Zapping of America" and"Currents of Death" discussed the alleged dangers posed by )(c2 , EMF radiation generated by high-current powerlines, electric blankets, and computer video display terminals (VDTS). He said, "Anyone who lives or works in an electromagnetic field is at risk. VDTs first came under suspicion in the late 1970's and early 80's, when a dozen or so unexplained clusters of miscarriages and birth defects were found in groups of women who worked with computers. In one group of computer operators at Sears in Dallas, eight out of 12 pregnancies ended in miscarriage or neonatal death. In 1988 the Kaiser Permanente Medical Care Program did a study of 1,583 California women who worked 20 hours or more in a week with VDTs stood an 80 percent greater chance of miscarrying than women who did similar work without VDT's. In the July/August 86 issue of"American Health," Nancy Shute talked about a study done in Colorado by Nancy Wertheimer that linked high current powerlines and f/ transformers to cancer in children. She talked about a study by the Maryland / - Department of Health and Hygiene which found an unusually high percentage of electricians, electronics engineers and utility repairmen among 951 men who died of brain tumors. In the December 89 issue of"Discover Magazine" David Noland explored updates in Wertheimer's research which indicated that the homes most affected were those )(i closest to the transformers serving the largest numbers of people. He found that Mrs. Wertheimer believed that the more power being drawn, the greater the EMF and incidence of disease. http://www.bewisepolarize.com/radiation%20harmful.htm 1/30/2005 Radiation Harmful Page 4 of 4 Automobiles, planes, buses, motorcycles, and other machines which use spark plugs produce very powerful EMF radiation every time a spark plug fires. They are now being recognized as generators and receivers of EMF pollution. The metal bodies of vehicles are powerful antennas that pick up EMF radiation from microwave and radar transmitters, CB radios, cellular phones, radar guns, overhead powerlines and transformers. Its no wonder people feel exhausted during and after long trips in automobiles, buses, and planes. Many health experts now realize that the loss of vitality precedes the loss of health. Individuals lose vitality because of various stresses that adversely affect the functioning of biological systems that operate electrically in an electric wave universe. Man-made electromagnetic pollution interferes with basic electrical function, shuts down vitality, and finally produces disease symptoms. Telephone Numbers: 951-696-2030 Address:PO Box 893490,Temecula,CA 92591 Company: ear@bewiseoolarize.com Webmaster:www.aolishoower.com • http://www.bewisepolarize.com/radiation%20harmful.htm 1/30/2005 OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Office Location: NFB Building, First Floor, 54375 Main Road at Youngs Avenue Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 (ext. 5011 during recording) fax (631) 765-9064 TRANSMITTAL SHEET • TO: 66 4rl_ kec7 . FROM: (7 Ld' L) DATE: o ) /2005 RE: 2/ 3 /05 Agenda (ep MESSAGE: ( Correspondence or related attached regarding the above for your information, /Vitai t--rp to/ ems► (>Pr • Thank you. Pages attached: ,ick)Sdk �\' OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Office Location: North Fork Bank Building—First Floor, 54375 Main Road at Youngs Avenue Mailing address: 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net Email: Linda.KowalskiATown.Southold.ny.us (631) 765-1809 (ext. 5011 during recording) fax (631) 765-9064 TRANSMITTAL SHEET 7 5-9(09 TO: Ed 4.4Lipt U 2Q. DATE: f / o? F/2005 RE: II 3 /05 Agenda Item /Qiva„r;/- d .i l/a4A MESSAGE: (`4 Correspondence or related attached regarding the above for your information, 9_zLei . d7, 01..06 .s-- a et,4 ii.i. 4 ..e.,,,tzza,_eazz.44.azze &C,2, aJc1. Thank you. Pages attached: 9 . Iv' David R. Weyhreter 5 Prospect St. Glen Head, NY 11545 October 20th, 2004 Mr, Vincent Cannuscio Beacon Wireless Management 27 Oak Lane Hampton Bays,NY 11946 Dear Vince, As requested I have reviewed my report titled"An Analysis of the Orient Point Fire Department's Existing Radiofrequency Coverage and Recommendations for Improving Communications"written for the Orient Point Fire Department, submitted to you in 2003, The report was generated on the premise that the department wanted to improve coverage within their service area while having little to no impact on their legacy radio electronics (low-band base/mobile/portable equipment), and operating frequencies, The report provided a viable recommendation in light of this approach. The approach currently favored by the department, to utilize modem UHF equipment to supplement the department's service will provide much needed service improvements - and will significantly improve communication reliability while providing added functionality not currently available. As the new equipment will be operating at higher frequencies (460/465 MHz) the path loss characteristics will be significantly different, Higher path losses can be anticipated resulting in a reduced coverage footprint. To provide acceptable coverage within the department's service area, antenna height should need to-be increased beyond the 90t recommended in my report for low-band equipment. incerely, • • David R, We •ter / 1Z� 2d >, 2 • s ORIENT ASSOCIATION BOX 282 . ORIENT• NY 11957 Ms. Ruth Oliva, Chairwoman Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals PObox 1179 Southold, NY 11979 Dear Ruth, At the request of the Orient Association committee that has been working on the issue of the proposed Fire Department antenna and our lawyer, I am sending you several documents and e-mail messages relating to their work. As these documents indicate, there are many questions relating to the communication needs of the Fire Department that have not been answered. Without this information, we do not feel that either the Orient community or the ZBA can determine if the 125'tower for which a variance is being requested is necessary or if such a tower will solve the Fire Department's communications problems. Sincerely, -10 i P Anne Hopkins, President 0 11. Below is a copy of the message I sent to Bill Scheibel (cc: Ed Boyd) on 12/28/04. There was no letter; only my email message. From:Jon Turner<turner@nyu.edu> Date: December 28, 2004 6:59:42 PM EST To: bills@necat.net Cc: Ellen McNeilly<ejmcneilly@earthlink.net>, Reale Ed<ereale@suffolklaw.com>, Freddie Wachsberger<fwachsbe@suffolk.lib.ny.us>, ejb@elilaw.net, Anne Hopkins <a.s.hopkins @worldnet.att.net> Subject: Open OFD Information Questions Hi Bill, Hope you have had a good Holiday Season. The following is the information we need from you concerning the emergency communications studies you have done for OFD . This information was discussed in detail at the OFD meeting of 12/15/04. 1. Provide a brief description of the emergency communications system (high band)that you are proposing for OFD (that is, the equipment and its location including base stations, mobil equipment, repeaters, pagers, handsets and any land-lines, links, or other communications paths, etc). 2. Describe the metric you are using to determine receipt of an acceptable(inbound) signal at the OFH (for example, a certain signal level, 80% of the time). Show that this is an acceptable metric for studies of this type (that it is/has been used elsewhere). 3. Run coverage plots at high band (-546Mh)for antenna heights at the OFHouse of 60, 75, 90 and 120'. State all of the assumptions used in the coverage model (that is, the values for any parameters used in the model). 4. Explore whether there is space available on the Greenport public safety antenna (if so, at what hight) and how much it would cost OFD to place an antenna there (including copper or microwave to OFHouse). Is this a practical alternative? 5. Run the coverage plots for 4. 6. Repeat 4.&5. for the antenna in the Greenport ship yard (with the assistance of Rich Suess who has details about the antenna). Is this a practical alternative? 7. Identify the pluses and minuses of options 4-6. Compare options 4-6 with option 1/3. 8. What additions/changes/updates do you plan to make to the existing OFD 46.46 (low band) communications equipment in order to improve performance until the high band equipment is up and-running (probably a couple of years at best). Once the high band system is installed, will OFD use both the low band and high band emergency communication systems or will the low band system be phased out? I understand from Ed that I may need special software in order to print the coverage plots. One way we might get around this if for you to print the plots, scan them, and then use Photoshop or another similar program to output a PDF. Alternatively, if the modeling program can output a JEPEG of TIFF file, I can read them, too. As a fallback, just print the output and send it to me in NY (155 E 78th Street, NY, NY 10021). If any of this provides difficult, shoot me an email and we will figure a way around it. Ed: a question for you. Would it be possible to separate the issue of whether OFD needs an emergency communications upgrade from the issue of how it is to be funded? My sense is that the Orient community would be open to a reasonable emergency communications upgrade at the OFH, once it is demonstrated that it is needed -the above g 1119 11011 information- and even prepared to participate in its funding, but that they want nothing to do with Cannuscio or the increased risk the OFD would take on with him. I am here through Sunday and then beck in NY. I can come out for a meeting if necessary with a little notice. Below is my followup message to Ed Boyd (cc: Bill Scheibel) sent on 1/10/05 (and repeated at the bottom of this set of messages). From: Jon Turner<turner@nyu.edu> Date: January 10, 2005 2:04:07 PM EST To: ejb@elilaw.net Cc: bills@necat.net Subject: Open OFD Information Questions Hi Mr Boyd, I called Bill Scheibel the afternoon you called me (Tues, Jan 4, 2005). He was out. I left word to have him call me. So far I have not heard anything back from him. Would it be possible for you to have him call me at: 212 288 3334 so we can discuss the OA information questions that I put forward in my message of Dec 28, 2004. I am concerned that time is moving on and we have not gotten closer to getting the information we need. Regards, ...Jon... I tried again to call Bill Scheibel this morning without success. I left my name, number and the message that Ed Boyd asked me to call him. At this point my opinion is that Scheibel is unlikely to call (although I can not figure out why as we were agreeing with them, in general). So, Ed, what should we do now? We have done everything possible to get the information we need to make a reasoned judgement, but nothing has been forthcoming from the other side. V 0 0 12/15/2004 Meeting at Orient Fire District fire house, ii:ooAM Attending: representing OFD Ed Boyd Bob Hicks Bill Scheibel, RF consultant Representing OA Ed Reale Jon Turner Richard Suess, RF consultant The meeting started without Msrs. Scheibel and Suess, who arrived about 15 minutes later. Initial comments from Mr. Boyd expressed frustration and irritation at the need for the meeting, stating that he was sure the informational meeting of 9/10/03 and the presentation by Mr. Scheibel on March 16, 2004 covered all the information that was required for the Distrct taxpayers. Mr. Turner responded that we at the Orient Association had had no response to our previous requests for detailed operational information, and still needed the information, even more urgently and specifically, now that the ZBA had separated the applications. Mr. Turner also stated that he had not found the 9/10/03 meeting informative, as it was not about the OFD's needs but rather a "show and tell" by Vincent Cannuscio on the proposed cell tower, with OFD's needs neither clarified nor specified in detail. He stated that he did not attend the meeting where Mr. Scheibel had presented, although this was challenged by Mr. Hicks. Mr. Turner then proceeded to ask some simple questions about how 911 calls were received by OFD and what communications followed. Mr. Boyd told him that pager tone signals came in from Southold PD, on the 46.46 County wide low frequency band used by emergency services. This was a tone signal (different for each community). This one-way signal was relayed to the pagers of the officers of the OFD., who then call-the firehouse to find out what is happening. There was no percentage of failure reported for the tone signal. He reported that the signal from the PD was relayed via the 370' +/- tower in Greenport, owned by the Village. Mr.Tuner asked what kind of equipment was used by the officers, and what equipment was in the mobile units. Ms. McNeilly said that, at one point, the OFD had forwarded the FCC license to OA, showing what equipment was used by OFD, but that it couldn't be located, hence the detailed question was necessary for our understanding of problems and issues. Mr. Boyd replied that the officers use handheld radios (Motorola MT 500, MT 750 and MT 'moo's) described as relics, with which Mr. Turner agreed. [NB.This is the 25 year old equipment referred to in the Weyhreter Report]. The handheld MT's are rated at 4-5 watts, whereas the mobile (vehicle) radios are either 25 or 65 watts (Mr. Boyd was not clear on this point). 6 • 0 Mr. Turner asked about percentages of call failure on the various equipment, and was told by Mr. Boyd and Mr. Scheibel, now attending, that the FD to mobile link sometimes failed, depending upon mobile location, but gave no percentage of failure, suggesting that data was not kept. Mr. Boyd reported that the 5 watt handhelds were more problematic; sometimes the officers can't talk to the dispatcher because of interference with the 4646 low band signal. [JT, BS and EB all concurred that this was a common problem with 4646 low band communications, and not specific to Orient. As Suffolk County uses this frequency across the board,and are not likely to change it in the near future, capacity to receive signals in this band must be retained by OFD, so they need an antenna and equipment to receive it, and will retain current, even if out-dated, equipment,to do so.] The main difficulty seems to be handheld to handheld. Mr,. Boyd also reported the difficulty with handheld to handheld communications between officers, between chiefs and officers as being the most problematic, with no specific causes being stated. Mr.Turner: could be age, could be battery, could be orientation so that unit does not operate at rated wattage, but most likely would be interference on the channel. He asked if signals went handheld to handheld, or handheld to repeater to`handheld, which is more reliable, as repeated has higher wattage to push out signal. Mr. Boyd: Only handheld to handheld, and need wide area coverage in order to work. Mr. Scheibe) stated that a low band signal cannot be"repeated"so they have to communicate handheld to handheld. He stated that there is only one talk channel within each sector, administered by the county, and that can get crowded. Note: If the problem is interference on a channel, increasing the antenna height at OFD headquarters will not improve matters. {NB: there are io sectors within Suffolk County. The whole Town of Southold is sector 8. } Mr. Scheibe) stated that the OFD had asked him to devise a system with the following parameters: >had to be on OFD property (no other place, due to"security") >had to work for Plum Island >had to incorporate existing equipment (lowband??) Mr. Scheibel said that he has not yet completed the design of the communications system for the OFD, and that he does not yet know costs. He has not prepared a proposal. The system Mr. Scheibe) has recommended consists of three channels: >fireground channel (for operational control during incidents) >repeater channel (at FD itself) for improving handheld to handhel communications >cross band repeater channel (low band to high band) so could distribute 4646 to high band new equipment at 46oMhz M. Turner asked why current tower height was considered inadequate, given that the area to be covered was so small, it being only 6 to 7 miles to Plum Island and not very wide, and a 45'tower with a i5'WIP antenna should be more than adequate. There followed some folderol back and forth about curvature of the earth and signals, etc. relative to antenna height, which devolved into a more serious discussion of FCC output 0 limits on transmitters, mobile units and handhelds, all of which seem currently to be at their limits (3o watts ERP transmitter, mobile 2_5 watts, handhelds 4-5 watts). The bottom line here is that Mr. Scheibel needs to share the details of his design, and its performance analysis. There then followed a discussion of antenna placement. 1T/EM asked if there could be a zoning compliant tower at the FD with auxiliary antennas, w/ or w/out repeaters, at Browns' Hills or the Plum Island parking lot. The initial response was that no, this was not practical, even though Mr. Schebel described a "mesh"that was set up in Southampton, as a way of covering an area with variable terrain, such as Orient. They have 4 towers, all linked a comparator (not sure where this is located), but such an arrangement is expensive. Mr. Scheibel suggested the utility of comparators as part of the equipment that could be added. These units compare and receive inputs, and then route the strongest signal, reducing signal interference. A problem is synchronizing them. Remote antennas: They have to be physically connected to the transmitter, and this is either by copper wire (could be"land line") or microwave. Msrs. Scheibel and Boyd noted that all of these suggestions are"expensive", indicating that it would likely be beyond the means of the community. Ms. McNeilly replied that alternatives are what the community needs, with associated costs. She noted that the community had, in the past,floated a million dollar bond issue to pay for the OFD building and property, and, given new circumstances, would likely be willing to consider such a bond issue again, if the suggested alternatives were lucidly presented for their vote. It was hard to predict what might be approved, and for anyone to limit choice by presumption was inappropriate. We might all be pleasantly surprised. Mr. Scheibel stated need to go to 46oMhz, other Fire Departments (Mattituck, Cutchogue, and Greenport) are considering doing. This matter is in discussion with the Southold Town Fire Chiefs Association (and another Association whose name I cannot recall). It was about at this point that Mr.Turner and Ms. McNeilly unequivocally stated, to the surprise of the OFD representatives, that we were completely in accord with the need for the OFD to migrate their emergency communications to 46oMHz. It was clear from their reaction that this support was completely unexpected, as they had thought us to be opposed to any suggestions to upgrade their equipment. We pointed out that the Orient Association was unequivocally opposed to the proposal put forth by Mr. Cannuscio. Given the nature of the proposal and the contract relative to it, we thought that the community and OFD itself were put at unnecessary risk, primarily for his benefit. Further, the proposal did not contain sufficient information about the needs of OFD and how the proposal planned to meet them for us to be in accord with it, which is why we had continually sought information from the OFD about their problems and needs. Mr. Hicks jumped in with a strongly worded demurral, stating that he had made a presentation to the Orient Association in June, and had stated the needs of the OFD at that meeting. That there had been an informational meeting in September, and a presentation by Mr. Scheibel in March. He chastised OA for not attending any of the Commissioners monthly meetings, where the needs and difficulties were discussed at length. I responded that I had come to two of the meetings, at which not much was discussed about the proposals, that Ms. Wachsberger and Mr. McLinskey had attended Mr. Scheibel's presentation, but, linked as it was with Mr. Cannuscio's, and failing the presence of persons lJ • 0 0 7 , knowledgeable in radio communications, intelligent questions, such as Mr. Turner's probing, were unlikely to have been able to be asked. Mr. Turner also stated that he had not found the 9/10/03 meeting informative, as it was not about the OFD's needs but rather a "show and tell" by Vincent Cannuscio on the proposed cell tower, with OFD's needs neither clarified nor specified in detail. He stated that he did not attend the meeting where Mr. Scheibel had presented, although this was challenged by Mr. Hicks, who was certain that he had attended (To my certain knowledge, he had not; only FW and JMcL, attended, due to weather and short notice). Mr. Reale noted that the enveloping of the OFDs needs into the umbrella of Mr. Cannuscio's proposals had blinded the community to all but Mr. Cannuscio, raising the suspiscions of Orienter's that the OFD statement of need was only a front for the desire for income from Mr. Cannuscio's proposal, rather than indicative of any real need on OFDs part for a new tower, no new equipment having been proposed nor specified. Mr. Reale reiterated that Orienters had left both the June OA meeting and the 9/10 informational meeting enraged by Mr. Cannuscio, and deeply suspicious of the factualness of OFD's statements. Mr. Cannuscio had poisoned the atmosphere within which any reasonable conversation could take place. This seemed to resonate with Mr. Boyd and Mr. Hicks. Mr. Scheibel acknowledged that he had personally had similar experiences when trying to devise systems for other fire departments when there had been any attempt to combine FD's needs with Mr. Cannuscio's cell tower desires. Mr. Turner again stated that the committee of which he was a member and I the chair were completely in accord with the desire and the need of the Orient Fire District to upgrade to 46oMhz; that we had thought so before this meeting, based on our researches, and the information so far obtained in this meeting had only validated our thoughts with the required facts that were previously unavailable. Because of our conviction, the only questions were: >What was the minimum height of an antenna at the District firehouse necessary to provide coverage? >What were the practical alternatives to a high antenna at the firehouse, and the pluses and minuses assoociated with them? Mr. Scheibe) stated that a bi-directional antenna (E/W) as suggested by Weyhreter, was not good for Orient because the resulting increased gain might create interference for other stations. Further, he said that Weyhreter's study, while accurate, was inappropriate for the issue at hand. Mr. Turner asked about the propagation of a signal at 6o'(current antenna is 45'), and said that the math indicates that is usually sufficient to cover a 12 mile radius. Mr. Scheibe) said that he had run his program, with the topography plotted in, at 60'and it failed; at 75'and it failed,and that at azo', it only achieved 8o%. Mr. Scheibel said the OFD was asking for a 90% success rate. He did not really answer the question for a 90' height, which was the originally proposed tower height (the initial application for a building permit proposed a 9o'tower.) There followed a lengthly discussion of the metric used by Mr. Scheibe) to determine success or failure. He semed to be using recipt of a certain signal strength 8o% of the time. This metric needs to be clarified, and we need to be assured that it is a commonly used and appropriate one. 0 0 41. Mr. Turner asked if there was a commonly accepted public safety standard, and, if so, what was it and by whom was it established. No answer. It was also suggested that designing a "mesh"antenna system, perhaps including East Marion and even Greenport would alleviate this. Mr. Scheibe) said that East Marion was looking at 46oMhz, but could not currently afford it. Greenport was currently looking at this as well, and might well proceed. {Mr. Suess is working with the Village on this proposal.} A question was raised as to whether the Greenport Village tower could be used to broadcast the signals, which would reach all the way to Plum Island and perhaps also avoid the terrain shadowing, but the political complications between Southold Town and Greenport were brought up as distinctly negative factors which might work against this. However, Mr. Scheibe) will investigate this option in more detail (available antenna space, security, etc.). We got the impression that there may be political and cost problems in using the high Greenport tower, but this option needs to be explored further. {Aside: it might be possible to work out something here, relative to Plum Island, as ELIH is the nearest medical center in the event of a disaster, and Greenport is the nearest rail head. Perhaps it might, in light of recent events, be sensible for the Town and the Village to work together here. Also, they have a more reliable source of power than the rest of the Town and are thus logical for redundant backup, or even original power. This is also where Homeland Security might well be a positive factor.} Mr. Turner asked if another design (for antennas, for example, using repeaters) might work. Mr. Scheibel stated that, at a minimum, the requirements were: >direct connectivity, either land line (with phone co. issues) or microwave >microwave is better but expensive -needs to be rigid (can't move more than 1.5 degrees) -more secure -needs a reliable power supply (Greenport more reliable than LIPA) >can get a free engineering study for a landline link from Verizon (but their service not reliable in Orient (nor is electrical) Mr. Scheibel stated that although remote sites are primarily receivers , they need to be connected in some manner to the firehouse (either by copper or by a microwave link) and these need power and backup batteries. He also stated that security was a major issue for remote sites. Antennas cannot be able to be tampered with or vandalized, which is why being at the OFD headquarters is important. Remote sites are considered vulnerable. A discussion followed of space required to protect an antenna (fencing, etc.), if such space and security requirements could be met at Browns' Hills or Hillcrest Estates, and whether the Plum Island parking lot would be considered a "secure"site. Mr. Scheibe) stated that, in working with the Southold Town Fire Chiefs Association that what needed to happen for a Town-wide 46oMhz public safety frequency was: >a memorandum of understanding that each hamlet have its own channel >that the chief makes the decision as to how an emergency scene is going to be handled (which channel will they use) Mr.Turner then raised the question of Emergency Medical Services. How did they fit in? Mr. Scheibe) stated that 6 . l 0 • J >two-way communications were mandated >two-way paging was required >response time had to be -- loggable, and thus data could be obtained for continued personnel and unit certification. > system subject to high band talkback interference >countywide Medcom system at 800Mhz, and that it is mobile (vehicle), not handheld >problems: - 3o%-4o% want to call Eastern Long Island Hospital • because of the low band intereference , OFD uses 154-155Mhz instead • failing that working, they use cell phones >cell phones have to be used -to discuss items of a private nature (degree of injury, name, mental status) -instead of emergency communications because of their open nature: . 800Mhz has 22 channels, so is relatively private, because no one scans thru that many channels (could be like a tv channel flipper) . 155Mhz, anyone can listen Mr. Turner and Mr. Scheibel discussed the possibility of a 60' tower (antenna, like now, 15' higher) being adequate. BS: >46oMhz requires a more powerful transmitter, and the FCC might not allow a higher ERP on a tower of that height (need to verify and get all specs, if there are such — R. Suess?) >talk back (reverse link from handheld to FD) with the handhelds might still be a problem >ERP from radio would be at line of sight, therefore height is important >OFD wanted go% performance on receipt of calls and additional communication >OFD wanted coverage for one district in each direction (E Marion and ?? At that performance metric?? Who established that metric as needed for certification?? >Fed. Govt will mandate narrow band broadcasting by 2013, may get extended to 2018 >concern about technological life of equipment with the speed of change in technology (analog ->->-> digital) (JT: digital communications are the solution) EM: That is going to happen anyway; there will be a good period of overlap; we need to do it sooner rather than later; Orient might likely bond it {met with skepticism from Mr. Boyd and Mr. Hicks). NB. OFD has to take,go,000 out of their budget for 2005 and on (get copy from OFD) and should, as a result, reduce taxes. If they didn't(with taxpayer permission), they could setup a bond to pay for. . 10-year period(or less) 0 a r 0 0 lower rate of interest than recent bond amount to be determined by best cost/benefit analysis of proposals and presentation to community at OA meeting and mailing Mr. Boyd then pointedly asked if the Orient Association would support their request for a tower and for improved communications technology. EM replied that the committee would certainly recommend for it, but could not speak for the taxpayers, who would likely have to vote. We (EM/JT/ER) totally support the move to 46oMhz, and completely support OFD in its needs for it. We would recommend to OA and the taxpayers in the fire district implementation of 46oMhz based on height/benefit (visual/success %) analysis of a tower and cost/benefit analysis of implementation of complete system based on that selection. Mr. Reale said that the OFD had done a horrible job of public relations, and that there is a great deal of animosity towards Mr. Cannuscio, and hence their proposal. He stated that we have our work cut out for us in making do with this, that the ZBA gave us both an opportunity to do so, that we were willing to work with them, and asked them to agree to a postponement, at least until January to provide time to deal with the antenna height issue and alternatives in more detail. EM replied that the committee would certainly recommend for it (communications upgrade), but could not speak for the taxpayers, who would likely have to vote. We (EM/JT/ER) support the OFD's move to 46oMhz. We would recommend implementation of 46oMhz based on a more detailed analysis of various tower heights, and an exploration of alternatives (primarily Grenport) . At that point, Mr. Boyd and Mr. Hicks left the room for a discussion, returning saying this was an acceptable way to move forward. Mr. Reale asked for a postponement to the January ZBA meeting, to give time for some research to be done. Mr. Hicks and Mr. Boyd eventually agreed, after some discussion with Mr. Turner and Mr. Scheible, but said that Mr. Reale would have to ask the ZBA for this one. At which point, Mr. Turner gave Mr. Boyd his cell phone (no signal on Mr. Boyd's!), and a call was made to the ZBA, with Mr. Reale taking the phone and asking for the postponement, that both parties were in accord on the postponement, and some research needed to be done. Mr. Scheibel was open about what he was proposing and agreed that the work to be done is for him to detail this and explore alternatives of antenna height at OFD and the implications of the Greenport alternative. Mr. Scheibe! needs and has agreed to 1. describe the metric he is using for determining an acceptable signal (a certain signal level in electron volts 8o% of the time) and show that this is an acceptable metric for these studies (that it is used elsewhere) 2.. run coverage plots at high band (-546Mh) for antenna hights of 6o, 75, 90 and 120' at the OFHouse and he needs to tell us the assumptions he used in the model (that is, the values for any other parameters used in the model). 3. explore whether there is space available on the Greenport public safety antenna (what height) and how much it would cost OFD to place an antenna there (including coper or microwave to OFHouse). 4. run the coverage plots for 3. !a n,J 5. do 3.&4. for the Greenport antenna in the ship yard (with the assistance of Rich Suess). 6. identify the pluses and minuses of options 3-5. John feels that with this information he thinks we can tell 1) what is the minimum height of a high band antenna at'OFD firehouse, and 2) whether there are viable alternatives. Respectfully submitted Ellen McNeilly Ed Reale notes: "By the way, upon reflection after the meeting, it seems that the question of what is an acceptable signal level is significant. I am still not certain that the height was not set by Cannusico for his needs and the acceptable signal level set to justify the height. One question we did not seem to cover when E Boyd asked us if OA would'support their need for improved communications and tower is whether the OFD was still committed to Cannuscio." Ooops. John notes: As for the point you raised, Ed, which is a good one, we could negotiate with Boyd that, in order to get OA support they drop Cannusico. But, then, we need to deliver OA's support for a bond to pay for the communications upgrade or some other method of funding. Ellen notes: I don't see that there would be that much of a problem getting the OA membership to support a bond for the communications upgrade if Cannuscio were out of the picture. But I do think we would have to present alternative solutions &their costs to the Association and then the taxpayers, and that could be very interesting. By the way, it is still not clear to people, even after the Suffolk Times article, reporting on the ZBA action in separating the applications, that we are no longer talking about a cell tower. That could be the trickiest part, but also a real wedge with the ZBA at the nest meeting. 1 Below is a copy of the message I sent to Bill Scheibe! (cc: Ed Boyd) on 12/28/04. There was no letter; only my email message. From: Jon Turner<turner@nyu.edu> Date: December 28, 2004 6:59:42 PM EST To: bills@necat.net Cc: Ellen McNeilly<ejmcneilly@earthlink.net>, Reale Ed<ereale@suffolklaw.com>, Freddie Wachsberger<fwachsbe@suffolk.lib.ny.us>, ejb@elilaw.net, Anne Hopkins <a.s.hopkins@worldnet.att.nem Subject: Open OFD Information Questions Hi Bill, Hope you have had a good Holiday Season. The following is the information we need from you concerning the emergency communications studies you have done for OFD . This information was discussed in detail at the OFD meeting of 12/15/04. 1. Provide a brief description of the emergency communications system (high band)that you are proposing for OFD (that is, the equipment and its location including base stations, mobil equipment, repeaters, pagers, handsets and any land-lines, links, or other communications paths, etc). 2. Describe the metric you are using to determine receipt of an acceptable (inbound) signal at the OFH (for example, a certain signal level, 80% of the time). Show that this is an acceptable metric for studies of this type (that it is/has been used elsewhere). 3. Run coverage plots at high band (-546Mh) for antenna heights at the OFHouse of 60, 75, 90 and 120. State all of the assumptions used in the coverage model (that is, the values for any parameters used in the model). 4. Explore whether there is space available on the Greenport public safety antenna (if so, at what hight) and how much it would cost OFD to place an antenna there (including copper or microwave to OFHouse). Is this a practical alternative? 5. Run the coverage plots for 4. 6. Repeat 4.&5. for the antenna in the Greenport ship yard (with the assistance of Rich Suess who has details about the antenna). Is this a practical alternative? 7. Identify the pluses and minuses of options 4-6. Compare options 4-6 with option 1/3. 8. What additions/changes/updates do you plan to make to the existing OFD 46.46 (low band) communications equipment in order to improve performance until the high band equipment is up and running (probably a couple of years at best). Once the high band system is installed, will OFD use both the low band and high band emergency communication systems or will the low band system be phased out? I understand from Ed that I may need special software in order to print the coverage plots. One way we might get around this if for you to print the plots, scan them, and then use Photoshop or another similar program to output a PDF. Alternatively, if the modeling program can output a JEPEG of TIFF file, I can read them, too. As a fallback,just print the output and send it to me in NY (155 E 78th Street, NY, NY 10021). If any of this provides difficult, shoot me an email and we will figure a way around it. Ed: a question for you. Would it be possible to separate the issue of whether OFD needs an emergency communications upgrade from the issue of how it is to be funded? My sense is that the Orient community would be open to a reasonable emergency communications upgrade at the OFH, once it is demonstrated that it is needed -the above fZ 0 • information -and even prepared to participate in its funding, but that they want nothing to do with Cannuscio or the increased risk the OFD would take on with him. I am here through Sunday and then beck in NY. I can come out for a meeting if necessary with a little notice. Below is my followup message to Ed Boyd (cc: Bill Scheibel) sent on 1/10/05 (and repeated at the bottom of this set of messages). From:Jon Turner<turner@nyu.edu> Date: January 10, 2005 2:04:07 PM EST To: ejb@elilaw.net Cc: bills@necat.net Subject: Open OFD Information Questions Hi Mr Boyd, I called Bill Scheibel the afternoon you called me (Tues, Jan 4, 2005). He was out. I left word to have him call me. So far I have not heard anything back from him. Would it be possible for you to have him call me at: 212 288 3334 so we can discuss the OA information questions that I put forward in my message of Dec 28, 2004. I am concerned that time is moving on and we have not gotten closer to getting the information we need. Regards, ...Jon... I tried again to call Bill Scheibel this morning without success. I left my name, number and the message that Ed Boyd asked me to call him. At this point my opinion is that Scheibel is unlikely to call (although I can not figure out why as we were agreeing with them, in general). So, Ed, what should we do now?We have done everything possible to get the information we need to make a reasoned judgement, but nothing has been forthcoming from the other side. TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME : 01/18/2005 03:40 NAME : ZBA FAX : 6317659064 TEL : 6317651809 SER.# : BROJ3J726019 DATE,TIME 01/18 03:27 FAX NO./NAME 97655969 DURATION 00:09:13 PAGE(S) 14 RESULT OK MODE STANDARD ECM OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 1197.1 . Email addresses: Linda.KowalskiATown.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# `� 3 3-76 q ATTN: G ,1lc.c..-14. DATE: / / 18 /2004 SUBJECT: _Qy%7Vi MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information. Please feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: /.3. • • ,• I 1 i, r \ A,Lii 17:7----i,,,,f,;:i?..1:44,-.-A,---x -,:-F.-.,..--_-.',-;,.7,-..._.....s...,- ..:.--*, 3--,_, ,,,-....,..., § „_ 1,11..i..;61, • [ ii*,Y44S.*:,1:0$7,..than, fqegi-xlcatis9p• 1- :13.0.4ck'p,i,,,_ Ise.40:gtp;x:01,, , 1.:*.d60744iY';:ir.V.,-5,!;A:,411,74:*t.I.Xi110e.,---,:„..-T„z-10:0AyllopivA,c,991 .15,618:k 1-tkfia,m410,',C3R21.,.243gLI'',-7-3"::,--..t.',*:!::''-'1;;660-Igiiepp.-),.R.F004m-,0*0‘i-1-#•• , 44-5'AliiiiirenA011.4r,@'&":5Y3-'!ttaV:ifeloal.t-1-4f1(41,0;11**':4,4.011?.41..- Ottrar i drctc,$lcinr co „ 6 4-pf-4,,,,,,s ,,-,(,--4. :--- 01:,41i-1:4-t14§:04fikieti‘g -,53470,:- ''Ff.iiiiir f405'i'? .....41iih6-10g.i.,,cf,p*m4t.:t-:., so-ptnpttijoo-e--4,24-:rge, LRcd-ewoiotSr.eita141Ali*aqort 0.04 Z :-R86.R*16,1iiiWA*trAT-I,W!?01 On;g1„. 4IckAir,cfc•F--,41044:1,04,::'0,,A '''iiia-%'tWast4aea;'tik'irgci.!10Ij:01:*l,,.f.iMA:46i-lr4:Alfgtia474qof,'1,T.ot'#'9i' i - Ri.--ti601= -- apr,,IIMP,. _1-;_,_; , •:_teacaty F•-f1 .,; -,,nry''''.11-''''''''Wtlii 1-'' '1) 'yilt.,''amended November,40• ' ;_o-.4',9..nsr a....,_oupecypp,,a mg e-,-,•.:0ppn? ,_.,_ t ,,, n [ Vil01:46,:if-E,:i-k-M .--- ' 'a‘fliiilkiii,64iiiiiaitti uji;i67flirf(4))v.4- f;$,2004;tlIkaliilic4nb!kreCLufstirig -7.11: Wi'§ 41*--71M2%-„,, >11. .J •,,,,ik; _ •.. ,........,1 F9cio-F,4),,vo,-ro:n7,4:.:si*AilItAct:';'-rv.,weatp_miittn,gr,19tPaht.31.1r!'. 1 'stJantt 154' 4i2ng,§19k,... 9,-dlytryjpty,:rz, -,,,:•takiOhnot,:miorplhan,e!g9M,cittlal,- keeci,:.nacrg_,,r,-411.46., _041.10974, due RrnArqN giqd0 cZenina-Cod-6,001x, ' '"tr 78%5 ik 't-Z6 aii'• if' '--7-`Iii-Vaiaihijovittetlidqirst 164, *10,nsientgoorger§„4,-.. ,t, aiN,. ,_ ,,.--,3. .Fic9.1175-1 .?,:-._ . --!: - 6.W-10 c 04- ..=. Viii5-9f7 'igtOiht NIrowingzubly.. 41EgNI'dgdiZeThli,ASIY-1'6'04.-:?..,:w”,,ai- 1983attaffeatt.orAci' 3*Oivjii 'We4k1g,Afillt,t1,1V-rilig4faLb- AV'-411 A ,",-='.-4.C4OZ'l '=‘,-24r4iiR.1 ::14.,;-4KAfE ,:-:84kgfig.si:ig4N77,aifo****-04.,si O'bri1c05-4tOvr4Vo4tw::zit . -,GPA,js N,,0-5§4P,,,,,',4.90.9.0-17121;=Pa,- -.1909:,76;04:.za._.0014?::TupstiY4sqii - 1 Apyros,.:-AtK.ithe,,,TcicynH411,:,'5309....5 , --.:\rair 7iiiitlA,SeXibjf2,100371.5bI§e4- ;,1007-7cr,-,..,:pa.„`:::7_.,i,L-2..,:f.:,%-y;,,p iMairilawa-di-,AV-irp441199gSpAtholi ,'.:0..,41',iiW:t4334144tePs'2,1130:41illiki:-._ii.-, ,-1):',OR0(-94,•sePJ reAti4,4911'4,43 , 1 :WItleSikli4M-419-60:-A)lit;YhifitAye. ..-461-6106V*:,-.2404,4N6tie&i-1-,:ottlf:.":-45bsecl:46puie,c4ar-*Y(in-didove4Vtli, , 'Iiiiti*t Arfq206'5'Vkei_iiitttiiii--4-GZIM-- -•,',plialiiiiiaZi'44&•4-gazif:AilIffi::--:-'f*apA-*.biaifoiq' ,:-,iii;.-drAt;:c6;7•_0 4 acc l2g4'i',V i,t,,---.ii-,-.Cepi..Iif- ----"2-.-`,•,---k-,,.l,,•-1,-4,--.--V-----g- ift,-=,- a-.i.---t----:-l'.wi,-,:----,f,Fii,..r...„-,.-. e-'r5T--",:.);,.,&'''-4'4,'-1ftaig,me•----,--,_f._.ie,s4Ii,10•,,fi,t-..15.,icfe-1d-,.4,...C,ln,TOUeWrrfie-.-4ft4-Al,iieeVq1'rci,rV10_-4r,r106.,.'„T78,-^.44-693-.„•-tfrom' '.i.; 51&+ tv4 = f:f44-4vP1410Vll<Act q01 &1 ,9t-tiFITI3M91t'A,ft;41t 24f4644105t§10kAgtEpoirifizoO;dii6blikixo803; ni4500g i6r7f(r 801$40kiA6Wafgee3441I , . 44,4kg14b05639 . ./4 . i:7904,iij4 §gti06004g4aditgdaMOW ' i&iait§Tok-aiWiiTatfiigi-1010 - ifttte•i&kkwiitty:#5653 iiV,iitnelfSdptWattiAgAi ± ittlk! 44-tttqii, dirintcaryorirapnIy' OT3Orlov4ZcpWeetimpfotsq140i56aigi_4-V6tenfei -ioltqii.g- 4-ir * ClItrIE21oti ,aKPeOifrkb*Jql- Pit040- ,,- , 4 ?FDiafiimtsieefthpgiimedAkey_REstAuRANp118&26,(64- 74W05104ess;iff4n1QPeaMfPpad0eac4constOliotpori,y-nv. .n„.v10rysvernapp --99$45-3,41;q5',fQeC.911,91A4.1th=3PPt-Tn. Aiig-4,224faifp--':;P4-3;aitt l40 Cl 41-gitsk-a,gtoiafk6iipleii6it-td' I s-fgeloweify_litgolciia-0-4R-6-dath -',;,-:--k:-Asfeej.3::a-'e-eewd,-,ew.§Na3-ofg,-;Ticj*:mi'wfrgiwf'gpfiffijsAtfo*iitoV6A' tl*,04614fAliaN006400"' - ;97401gAMINE„WWIPPP ,Mgegilikft#40100a ,i, '„-1 kt1:1-72.ol?pigliTel:1-R8ORes'idditalATi FIRE-,TiOliT.I&vr-P.PudtAslk44-,lit**Ii7M4-4141'bRIRIF --pbtoRipx , W5VNIvt,--''4°14-4,4ncimAniElEFA:a _-..-Iegili.:§104-:..40.gaz4.etwe'Tsgito14-40546$43•0%itiati-ApAike*foiltajt. . f-44v11,I.,„ kij,t-rds.:;Weetiat- fti-V VoTiNAAiicgilSgliiiii •a1424*.114-:-1. 140-0t-WeliZlip6riSiii,*:4d,i ----,-A-3-1,.A.--1-, i. _,t, 0a.l'ickiiiiell-Seektork,J00-rzA14ba-sW.-, flubb;a37-56.1i'srd3Zilgtge7;-133iildlialUdifejire;,tt*fp:'5,44,g,zolitkj5Aiiiidv ,- •,,,,,-.,,,,f", k..t.i.-,..„,5:. yit1.,-,;% Ift7r7.73'ar'i7fill-t4ii-647.,i,,,..--.I.= ,-t_ ..., gcinl.*:114.179,-;4B:uildtp_s,,,,a,..t..44gp„_ rne2i, „,..4 ,,t-,„,11epartiO,p,,s,4o.._.,,..,.s.,,.,,,,._,._..,/....„u-4,i,,44.12:70-Requests,fonr-a..,,, ,-..,4,-,a,.:,,,..,',.•, 1 2 c4NSTiiib 4 ZaTil_ti5,2 0-021N°7-3igOtilftif-P= .„7,N6t14-5_,==6eAwa-Fp-f-e,y-if-,A-.6-iforniftkT..0,0:-.,s,..,*,,,,0,,,Nfiar,griz,tritt.,,,,,Iiiiiir. ijr V t.ojeq,--,Art.,j.,,,s14!'erti4,1 r.--.ZA,.. ,ti-{ -',' ,..1,-,'::,-., deck,,,,-.,, „ka-ii'dt,l,V.77,W7- under,.x ".._,, ...;.,:i'l.b... ,TE, PIJUP,110. 462X(314filfigioo=xbw,,,kaseg rtqr,:thd- -;,24PR,RIVAV7T9-941,PA:R9-449,1, ,, tpor#7a4dipegopt stery-,addiva5gle04 l'anVICOtrfrtit'ilk-SUffititg;wk....c.), Q T---T,' 03'60- ''Ir' t'flprop cOdditioencloaing SiNgiMPV:kif Kirig#5,41.41_40;-4'f-aiiiiiiiitiiivetwit...4.41Aviii'64)64' riiff514,:;grt'sc41.1.ikedf-40:q.1:4$14-,&WATiAVZ4-15Miairaigigilii62714, .cos-g-,5,Cia''i':_•.ei.P,1.6'.16-i,f1t*-..2..3,,.:.-4•••stl --6-164--vi4V--,!'4664)-7-atiCs?,:dzItigii•i,:4,1. Mb cnecage,,,eicceejnot A -: isoli,.jo I t......,t..,,,, ,,_, -..,'L. - o2.41-045-'y AM-,hirAriki,AiitEitrodiotiffu.4-44....p4,-„,:to,;„,,,4,,,,,,..,,,,,,.. -,:g.,47 4 0.,]2,018 scie,•419M,p),4,,odgiond • -J,_•:-. „.,t - , ,,r1I,,...,2 42. onceminvaroppsea,telecom-u i:TiriPro ofJOi tpc-, 4-+,7,r.-.. '.. ..-t1-7A4'' 0,9W*41Atizidelt-jor:=iii_ ''attanc6mex-....----,-A-tw- •e----------3- ..,,,,7,ii,---,-h ,c, 1 lain'''''blegge'gab;;Inkiiii-,Ifir#4-444asVq.-04C-'114711-thil3`447eVa4tOd'-7:141.p4irieVitf Ta SoutholdTT414-k8;5:_i'74=01_tig.ltifil ,t,..--.,•-.,-...--,.-,--- --,-,,-,,,..to.F...,-=', -Pr.:-apte a,-, -- •11,59:40FAIWITtf..4iag/T4W.M.:WIAS'i,4 yyfifo,13.#11,4ini-R9Pr.-8011.4°Y-Sl3.,e€0? -1141461'414"3iaraiviKalm'eilig 54.7:4:0.44-006.)00a40-04iil :,:igaig:Roffai',Of Disapproval eriinCemin A;,- roy,_,c?,;--- --,-- --":,-----t- ' ^..- A gap ades,-nWiiieef yie.evcre „-,..,- ...,,7,...,.,...., 1-..--..yzf-'Atil,rrtt0';',Sr10WU . VpaiiltOfV4-2-M*.ricri:1_6641,42(5:67n- ' rfAys9A9§- 1,W1-F-KTeP99-?1-41f.",, g-',/NequiteliiJiiis iViitir-4-4:itopbiedAtbiglfrag' "-.iiiiiii`g-lpitlib§ c'r kdaftga-Vici-aligt, 6'.4.9x0PgriqvglifliTeh;Ty'rjar:Otba , , CKS"at', - ,,--'...--;' --1-,--1--,,,-1,•'''.4-‘t.--en, . 425 /(2.5 ''1 permitted to-Delocat3 -------"-- - ' fs6iiiia- , -, feet , J.s„IW-PRM11-,, .,,,..,..,L 'eviSoiii-AiWaifie'lliiroggfovikoirifl "ie-olaid000-fwo-niApg of.1:17 ,. ed W`ithin-,300-,:regii Of ilistihc16-th-Ortiti': a.--.4i-yrifil'84,11diieager gidi,is,7,41,V,Ite: '''Wli*ittf-'-'.06r'ete,748=--ijcifar-ROith ' -,- • -- -----,: ,- ---i-:4:_„--ii: - ,..-:,1 . -,-,.: . .,,sc,-- - --.CT1V1-1.8,-5._-1-5if-,-qi5111 -, 4n 41,),,,4„&- afe-741ataUl'Agithili`Aq-40tAli4A61-- '4-0-ack,',(°-K.--°'°41-';.'it-.1#(.1Y;;ZPT-9%.P9-fk- -nOr: i;Iliiic-Foiii'-'a-`liithiaiiii-giiiiiiis'Icif ' =:•..--;,:-_-,--:,:,= -.--r. 419v,,,,,,_4-....;,-;,-,,, I-:,,7:'-'.;:f,-..:_-,:-_.. 7..".`--'.7",,-_-:--'.----_,_-..,,,,,,,'-,,-'----,-- -,'-i'•F,-.1-"r,::-t'-O,r14;`g•,l,_"1%--'---`,-0-*•--v,-,,-.,.,4'.,,4,1,-A-,.-".4f:"..,L:-,'-,.,.,,Il1,,rtc,-iii,z---,,-,-,A4'•4-ti-,:-.,',-gzs:,=;4,',4,,-;,,=,,_P,:.:,.,,a,.-.,--,),.,i..rt,,,•.-7,-,'--'-;v;-1.,---A..-21,r-:-!='S--;4*:-.-.a--,-`,Ylg---:r-'-j--,q-i-t---Y-:-•9f.-•--fi,,--tOi;,-q'V•,gi..--i,„gl-.4,,,APPWt,vit",',t;:-a,-'-r-i-.mini' 1616'AfifAVEpli -poii - tWbV0Eir §5V, uotZtieiti-iiratRA6ideftiaaiifi6raf Sections ey .0),4CreS toP'24? 14se45p.th44 .P41TakttiatTWOjiat4iiaetSection construct liai acatN1 -42516tr4pigatpiow,6%gaiiiVipt2,, - . - IT943sffcta,fi9?r.llaT!.eatiltFT0p:pgo;6Pto.amrwilt4e1;m atict$ixwIqr4uY ;,_ i4ar:les0tkap,40fiigoig*47fhggi$*g6ithttieg desii ' ' y;,, !.:.: k'retrogroilikliiihizoiliaai,1-YsNdaii4.-1Wq.-Pt 1.1%a!#:-#CV9IINIrt,51 .dic!ri ,ni,-mg,.,.-•cti4 3--if.1112,i,fei-:-,, FZIggirine,to`-tifitiniii,*ritietlistAt6,ii*,nt* , ,,..„..,Lane;,, -,, opk,-,, , „_7, 71 ,: c,. .1- c ,ti-i.,....,11,. t Catoto3Mi...yEt*.C-OSON'05621.V.47,4'.?!..9TeSt_thi-,,,gR94,sivej..,,elpejir14,,, imkes,,t 4igy..9.911.-g*ill,,,n9 .11.11rA:tOtptit44,A., , >•••F:.*:telaAiriii.:,' Aiigfi'e'grtiiidgif!Sicl f60-2.242`0,4ir..loo244i.b-pfe*iiiriii-'67-3,Acs0,Pt:M.41740;,.•:.,g,414,7..ay,A131..-14, ''iiiii1004,0A=4:diNi;.-AiOf-,tii1'67,-ge$174itiAl. 1:eig. '-'1?-1t1,..=.614.Fs':g Notice-206-44 l a blkaiiiitiwal-_'ariediiiiii,,v:kir'41,4&e,Nu.,9§PRR-,04,,,m!on',1?°!hi,'4 4-6,e5614,7_,,w.,,,ialesti,c11,,b-ranIlitr_aireiarroilikti,,,,;14 te,:jps94 a11,I ,.4q5J.t),94,4,4t,,c,-.71.-„,,,..,i. igt.fiVUoirliejliii.'61ivii-dbilaitilii%-4,2plal5C.01arltle.,41;`2-995,1t.- ._:... ...._.,....„_-„-_, ,,t, , ....-,,,,..f.-,--,--_::7=--_-,I-17... L:-.irzr:ft13.1.7,0 ti4,,,opr, --ilagms _e--,7ilnFtpq:;,pii.„,egfee,,9rT,p,mcp,40N,,,,,, ,,d,---,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,, ,,-- ,,./4,...- ' 10.-di-0;4,iig4iiiiiityiiirldigieWielat,'::,:gfti„01%„1,114-....9-119.4P OF APPEALS . 64*-1',8,,;',Ta4;:i..4ii,42 ,,0p-gi;-e'ilwiticti :,,z-i;,:::i'-04.4,,,,:'!Aoyoj,,,OK 'qt.tgiqL4 sfiiiitiOia;-,qr0o:119:-3T---j,t4M 44,..{41; RuNft,i?,,f0a*,',01ATRwbmAg I 1,-fiiitifzb -46Pgratislit4i,:tivihO--,-,, --;:':-: -,,11- ? :: ..,,L,B))-1,:lia Kovialskil --416:*r{E-B048-6-43R-eMr,t7gki-;,:':7-285-17F11/6-5.FJ.,-.1:_i ., .. _ . (//7/6 r ''' i-7) #7285 STATE OF NEW YORK) ) SS: • COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Joan Ann Weber of Mattituck, in said county, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly newspaper, published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of.Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly published in said Newspaper once each week for 1 weeks, successively, commencing on the 6th day of January , 2005 • Principal Clerk Sworn to before me this Q day of 40/ 2005 UCtOVIU CHRISTINA VOLINSKI NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK No. 01-VO6105050 Qualified In Suffolk County Commission Expires February 28, 2008 I p Page 1 of 2 ir 1'" 4/-6-Lc amu_ 10\,- ,� 44, Kowalski, Linda From: Freddie Wachsberger[fwachsbe@suffolk lib.ny.us] Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 10:09 AM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: cell tower From Freddie Wachsberger Read at meeting of October 21, 2004 Several of you participated, as I did,throughout a long, hot summer, with the Code Committee in the formulation of Southold Town's wireless communications legislation. We were all dedicated to protecting the quality of life and the property values in residential areas. I think we were all very proud of the code that the committee produced,which was based on thorough research and sound principles and precedents. That code is, I believe, threatened by any precedent that could be set by the approval of this tower. I would like first to address this issue, and then the need for improved communication for the Fire Department. I would like to remind the committee of the proposal by Bell Atlantic, for a cell tower on residential property in Orient,that was the immediate reason for enacting the moratorium on cell towers and the subsequent legislation. That tower would have been just one block farther east than this one and at about the same setback from the Main Road. In his analysis prepared for the Planning Board on April 22, 1997, Charles Voorhis of Nelson, Pope, and Voorhis,the Town consultants, expressed strongly his concerns about the potential for land use conflicts and visual impacts that would result,particularly on the agricultural vistas from NYS 25 and Platt Road. "Maintenance of these vistas is important in protecting the rural nature of the hamlet, and thus the visual impacts of the proposed project should be considered significant." "The location of a large communication structure in the area will result in an inherent land use conflict, and this impact is expected to be significant." "In addition to these site specific impacts,the cumulative impacts of the proposed project must be considered. Approval of the proposed project will set a precedent for approval of other tower sites within the Town. Without proper planning,this would result in a significant intrusion on the rural nature of the community." Well, we now have the proper planning in place. The Planning Board designated the project a Type I action under SEQRA. As you know, the proposal was ultimately withdrawn. Subsequently,the stretch of the Main Road between Greenport and Orient Point achieved New York State Scenic Byways designation for its historic and rural vistas. It should be noted that the tower proposed by Beacon Wireless for the Fire Department property is 125', 25' higher than the Bell Atlantic proposal, and the property is only one block from the National Historic District of Village Lane and its environs, one block closer than Bell Atlantic's. If Southold Town did not have legislation, this would clearly be a Type I action. But thanks to all our work, Southold Town does have legislation, and the costly and time-consuming SEQRA process can be avoided . The tower in this proposal exceeds by 65' the height for which the ZBA is permitted to give an exception—it is more than double the height—and is projected to occupy property which is smaller than the required 5 acres. This application must be denied. All the residents of Orient are concerned that the Fire Department have access to adequate communication. There is no question that this facility must be upgraded. I am convinced that this can be achieved in a way that would satisfy both the Fire Department and the community. The Orient community has historically supported the department's needs; financing a bond to build the new firehouse,to purchase the property on which it sits and indeed the property on which this tower is projected, and financing a pension plan, all within the last 20 years. Because of this history,I feel confidant that the community would work with the Department to expedite the identification and financing of the necessary equipment to ensure adequate communication as quickly as possible,. It is in the best interest of the entire community to do so. The 125' Beacon tower and its 10/25/04 (7 Page 2 of 2 accompanying buildings, however,wiiich would impose the appearance of an industrial plant on the rural and historic center of Orient, must be denied. In 1990,the commissioners of the Orient Fire District voted to cancel a contract for a cell tower on the property because, as Chairman Pete Luce was quoted in the Traveler Watchman,the Board felt they didn't have the backing of the community. Residents, Luce said, indicated that the fire district should not be `involved in a commercial enterprise and we thought it was in the best interest of the community to terminate the contract." Orient is a small community. I am convinced that the reception and transmission problems which have now been brought to the atttention of the community can be resolved expeditiously by the community working together. 10/25/04 V 1 6} S/V 14. , 6\ - PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS 0��� �ti� �n = BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. 1,0 s • ®��; P.O. Box 1179 Chairman ► y " '` � Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 4 Southold, New York 11971-0959 cto RICHARD CAGGIANO +; ,c Telephone (631) 765-1938 WILLIAM J.CREMERS � ® �� Fax(631) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS • MARTIN H.SIDOR _ w� itoo PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD St MEMORANDUM y� VUC ,VA Date: October 27, 2003 To: Ms. Oliva, Chairwoman of Zoning Board of Appeals From: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman of Southold Town Planning Board �'%r~! Re: Appeal # 5408 for Orient Fire District, Orient, NY SCTM: 1000-18-3-13.8 In reference to the memo request for information dated October 1, 2003. The Planning Board (PB) held a work session to discuss this application on October 6, 2003 and October 14, 2003, the P.B. would like to offer the following comments and concerns. The P.B. reviewed a preliminary site plan for a proposed 120' communications flagpole tower with emergency communication mounted on a cross bar on a 4.4 acres parcel in the R-80 Zone located at 23300 Main Road Orient, NY 11957. The proposed 120' tower as stated by the applicant in the ZBA application under "Exemption from zoning ordinance part c (Improved public safety. There is a current need to improve public safety communication for the Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services)". This appears to be required for the communication needs of the fire district, police department and public safety. The P.B. agrees no location in Orient will disguise and or hide from view a 120' communication tower and feels the choice of the Fire Department benefits the entire community. The P.B. feels these communication towers would best be located on public owned properties such as schools and fire district where the entire community benefits. The proposed site plan will need to be certified by the Building Inspector before the P.B. can issue final approval. No parking requirements will apply. Thanking you in advance. Cc: file,vs, pb, ZBA, MV (BD) I OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-9064(alt. 1823) TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: eciajaAzyl DATE: (a/L RE: Meeting Date: -Mk, Application # �_ c MESSAGE: Correspondence or related attached regarding the above for your information: ,e. dict d /o/a7/o3, Thank you. #of Page(s) attached: ( l� ,'✓' Jon A. Turner, Ph.D. Nov 2014 1095 Village Lane PO Box 300 Orient, NY 11957p _ -- t/f 631 323 3990 received 11/4/04 by email transmission—to=-ZBA_Office Staff November 3, 2004 NOV 2004 ZBA PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11979 Dear Chairwoman Olivia, I am writing concerning the request by the OFD/AHA/Beacon Wireless to seek a variance in order to erect a 120-foot high flagpole communications antenna adjacent to the Fire House in Orient . My understanding of these matters is that when seeking a variance on the basis of faulty emergency communications, the petitioning party has an obligation to describe the communications gaps in detail and to prove that the proposed remedy will overcome these gaps (for example, see CMK v. Point Pleasant Beach Zoning Board of Adjustment) . I have read the applications of OFD/AHA/Beacon Wireless, attended an information meeting at the Orient Fire House last spring, and have read the Weyhreter Report (Feb 23, 2003, prepared for OFD) . Nowhere has the OFD described their communications problems in sufficient detail to allow a communications engineer to understand the problems, investigate their causes, and propose alternative solutions . Without this information we are left with the unsubstantiated demand by the OFD for a higher antenna. Furthermore, the OFD has not demonstrated that the proposed 120' antenna will remedy their yet unstated communications problems. In fact, the Weyhreter Report (theoretical calculations rather than field measurements) shows good low band (46MH) communications coverage throughout Orient. In order to increase signal strength, Weyhreter recommends 1) replacing 25+ year old base station and handhelds with newer models that have improved sensitivity, 2) replacing the current omni antenna on the OF House with a directional one (orientated East/West) , and, 3) increasing transmitter power. Surely, these less costly remedies should be tried before going to the expense of erecting a 120- foot high antenna that will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars . �X { '..f - There are many causes of emergency communications failure including inadequately charged batteries and improper orientation of handhelds, old or poorly maintained equipment, improper antenna types, inadequate transmitter power, interference, etc. Antenna height is only one of many factors that my influence communications performance. I urge you to request that the OFD describe their emergency communications problems in detail before considering a variance. This information should include: • Description of failure incidents by type (date, time, equipment type being used, location of transmitter and receiver, nature of failure) . Note, this infobmation could be taken from the OFD communications log. • Frequency of failure by type I would be most happy to work with the OFD, withou charge, in order to identify and understand these communications problems and to explore solutions. For the past 26 years I have been a Professor of Information Technology at New York University. Prior to that I spent 10 years designing Command, Control and Communications systems for the Department of Defense. My degrees are in ElectricallEngineering (Yale) and Computer Science/Operations Research (Columbia) . In the early 80s, I completed a study for the NYPD IIf their SPRINT system (the emergency dispatching system known as ' 911 ' ) . The question I was investigating was 'why Prescient Commanders were not making use of the information in Sprint to better manage their Officers?' My Police tutor was Sgt Eddie Norris and I spent 6 months riding with him in unmarked Police cars learning and observing Police operations . The results of my study lead to changes in both the equipment used and in NYPD operational procedures . Sincerely, j 1 Jon A. Turner J V?fir iO3' Page 1 of 1 /_. EelY7 ,&7' &8 '''61'10)K Kowalski, Linda From: emeritused [eblesch@suffolk.lib.ny.us] Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 11:22 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: For ZBA re. OFD Tower Dear Members of the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals. This past Thursday I tried to attend your hearing on the Orient Fire Department's proposed "flagpole structure."When I got to Town Hall, a delay in starting time necessitated my having to leave before it actuelly began. I do want to share with the members of the ZBA some of my feelings which perhaps I could have expressed then. I understand that the matter has been left open for two weeks, so hopefully you will consider for the record my comrrients as part of the input of local residents. Firstly, like all Orienters, I applaud the valiant work of our volunteers and mean them no disrespect. They do a great job, and in appreciation the taxpayers have not been stingy with them. Had the Fire Department gone searching for a better means of communication, I surely would have encouraged their efforts. But a realtor/developer who stands to make lots of money on the project approached th m. And they were caught by the bait. We have an obligation to our Fire Department, not to large communications companies. Recently Carol Gillolley, in her Oysterponds column in The Suffolk Times, commented that her Verizon cell phone of late has been functioning much better in Orient than it ever had. She asked facetiously whether someone had a new tower in his/her backyard.No, I suspect it is the system now installed in the Congregational Church tower. Why cannot police and fire calls similarly work through that already existing facility which causes no eyesore? The proposal of a 120-foot structure, after community resistance to a much smaller one while back, is a deliberate corporate insult to locals who object. I am sure this is not our neighbors in the Fire Department's doing, but that of T- Mobile, AT&T, etc. They do not have an investment in Orient as we all do. Many have documented the unsightliness and unnecessariness of such a tower intruding on the pastoral landscape of our hamlet. While we acknowledge its negative aesthetic in daylight, let us not forget that at night it must be lit with warning lights against aircraft. The country sky, constellations, planets, stars, moon, meteor showers, even darkness itself, that we cherisi will be equally diminished. Thank you for considering these thoughts. Yours truly, Edwin J. Blesch Jr. 45 Youngs Road P.O. Box 430 Orient, NY 11957 Tel/Fax/Ans.: 1-631-323-3858 10/25/04 tij ;;) 1,0 ii?,plo4 e f7g October 21, 2004 TO: Ruth Oliva and members of the Southold Town Zoning Boa d of Appeals FROM; Anne Hopkins, President, Orient Association The Orient Association has received many inquiries in recent weeks from Orient residents concerned about the latest proposal for a cellular tower on Orient Fire Department' property. We have heard from native Orienters with a deep attachment to our hamlet and from newcomers drawn to Orient's natural beauty and historic charm. All are united in believing that there must be a way to meet the real communication needs of the Fire Department without this tower in this place. We are convinced that they are correct. The Fire Commissioners have allowed Vincent Cannuscio, a real estate developer, to lease part of OFD's property with the intended purpose of erecting�a cellular tower whose proposed height has grown since the lease was signed two y ars ago. The lease is with Mr. Cannuscio's company, Affordable Housing Associates, doing business as Beacon Wireless Management. Under whatever name he uses, Mr.Inc;Cannuscio's company is not a public utility. Although he says he intends to sublease space on the tower to wireless communications companies, that does not give him the right to special treatment as a public utility. The proposal before the ZBA today is for a monopole 125' high. This means it would be 40'taller than the steeple of the Orient Congregational Church across the road, which has been the highest structure in our hamlet since it was first erected in 1843.The fact that at that height this tower might have to be lighted just makes it worse, as does the industrial complex that would accompany this structure. One new homeowner of a house behind Village Lane that was sited to enhance its view of the steeple is appalled to learn that he might have this monster in his sights as well. I myself am equally appalled that I would see it across the fields from my house on Platt Road hundreds o yards away. But all residents of Orient as well as those who merely stop by to visit would lbe adversely affected by a monstrosity of this size immediately adjacent to the HistoriclDistrict. It is important to note that the five Fire Commissioners are elected by Orient taxpayers and thus have an obligation, like all elected officials, to listen to and respect the views of those they represent. This they have declined to do. Many members of the Fire Department are among those opposing the decision to allow Mr. Cannuscio to lease Fire District property. The lease does not require Mr. Cannuscio to install new or upgrade existing Fire Department equipment. In fact the lease prohibits the Fire Department from installing equipment that might interfere with his own installation. One member of the Department is reported to have asked, "Mr. Cannuscio, why do we need you?" Why indeed? One possible answer is that the Commissioners are tempted by the prospect of the income the Fire District would receive from Mr. Cannuscio if he does in fact construct a tower and lease space on it to telecommunications companies. But, in the two years the lease has been in effect the Department has received no income and, as has been determined by several court cases, any future income would be offset by loss of the District's tax exempt status. Orient residents have always been willing to support our Fire Department. We would rather pay for whatever facilities the Department needs ourselves, without entangling ourselves with Mr. Cannuscio. I \ -? A group of Orient residents have joined together as a committee of the Orient Association to explore alternative solutions to the Fire Department's genuine need to improve its communications equipment. If there is a demonstrable need for additional antennas in the Orient area beside the one in the steeple of the Congregational Church, something that has not yet been proven, the members of this committee are ready to help telecommunications companies locate appropriate sites. Together they can provide a wide range of technical expertise and experience and they have made it clear that they are eager to assist the Fire Department in meeting its telecommunications needs without destroying the historic beauty of our hamlet. z. \3 Page 1 of 2 • Cowa1ski, Linda eoka e, From: Anne Hopkins[a.s.hopkins@worldnet.att.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 12:10 PM -0 To: Kowalski, Linda NOV Subject: Letter re Orient Fire Department Tower 32004 ORIENT ASSOCIATION ��6�it�9� ���_ - - � �ma � bus �r2, PO BOX 282, ORIENT, NY 11957 November 3, 2004 Ms . Ruth Oliva, Chairwoman Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11979 Dear Ruth We are very pleased that the ZBA's , analysis of the the application submitted by the Orient Fire District and AHA/Beacon Wireless resulted in the separations of issues into two parts : first, the emergency communications needs of the OFD, second, leased accommodations to telecoms for cellular wireless service, each of which has separate zoning requirements . The concerns of the community, as you know, focus largely on the questions, still unanswered, regarding current shortcomings of the existing emergency communications for the OFD, and the range of alternatives by which those shortcomings can be remediated . The Orient Association is facilitating community discussion of this crucial issue and because of the lack of information, we have made repeated requestions of the OFD over the last 12 months which have not been responded to . Thus we request an opportunity to accompany Mr . Dinizio, as the ZBA clearly has the authority to request information through a meeting with the OFD . The community deserves to have its questions answered as well . We believe the best approach to gaining clarity on these issues for the community-. is for Jon Turner, an Orient resident with expertise in radio and emergency communications, to have direct access to the OFD to gain answers to the fundamental operational and technical questions raised in connection with the application . This is an extremely contentious issue in the community and appears to have increasing lack of support in the community at large, which may be partially due to the lack of OFD response to questions we have raised . We are aware that, as part of the variance process, community point of view is an essential component . Without more information, we are unable to develop a response to this vital issue . 11/3/04 Page 2 of 2 Your assistance in facilitating open communications with the OFD is ,,,essential to resolving the issues before us • We intend to retain a communications engineer on behalf of the community, and response to informed and probing questions is a precursor to an effective analysis by such an engineer • We believe that only through this process can the community make the best recommendations for zoning compliant alternatives for our department's future communication capabilities . We intend to support a bond issue for communications equipment, as we have in the past on all of the needs of the Orient Fire District • Sincerely, Anne Hopkins, President P . 5 . In view of the time constraints,please reply by e-mail to me at "a • s . hopkinsaatt • net with copies to Jon Turner at "turneranyu . edu" and Ellen McNeilly at "ejmcneillyaearthlink . net . My telephone number is 631-323-2527 SIO V 3 2004 11/3/04 Email opened 10/22/04 sent to ZBA staff for Chairperson and Members From Harvey Black from email address: Harvey.Black@lehman.com Addressed to Linda Kowalski for: Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Dear Linda and Members of the Southold Zoning Board of Appeals, I have recently been informed that you are hearing a new proposal to place a 125' cellular phone pole on the Orient Fire Department Property in Orient. I am vehemently opposed to such a proposal for a number of reasons. I own a home located at 645 Village Lane in Orient. From my doorstep I can clearly see the top of the 60 foot steeple of the Congregational Church caddy corner to the Orient Fire Department. A 125 foot pole on the Orient Fire Department property would tower over my yard and be a huge eye sore not to mention the negative impact on the value of my property and the whole character of the village. I have been a resident of Orient only since January of this year but I fell in love with the town long before that.I was attracted to its quiet rural qualities, its broad vista's and its incredible natural beauty. In buying on village lane I was also attracted to the benefits of being in the historical district where development is closely controlled. I paid substantial sum for my slice of paradise. A 125' pole towering over my home and much of the center of the village would destroy most of what the property's value is and indeed what much of the entire village's property value is. Furthermore,I have made a number of inquiries as to why this tower is needed and why it must go in such a prominent and exposed spot in the center of town. I am shocked and dismayed to hear that the reasons for erecting this tower in its proposed spot are to financially benefit commercial interests outside of our community and a few members of the Orient Fire Department. I've heard the arguments of the few who support this proposal as to why we need this tower i.e. public safety, convenience etc... To my knowledge there have been no open meetings to discuss these issues or evaluate potential alternatives. Were these issues to be publicly vetted as they should be I suspect we would find many of them to be falsehoods. For example cellular coverage is adequate in most parts of town from the antenna which already exists in the church steeple. At a minimum if more time and consideration were given to this decision. I'm confident we would find a better technological solution with a far less negative impact on property values and on the character of the town. In summary I am strongly opposed to this proposal. It's a BAD IDEA!!! The merits of it are small if even valid. Those who benefit are few and the negative impact on many is huge. I urge you to strike down this proposal. The beauty and idyllic character of our town are not for sale! With best regards, Harvey Black 49 bo a i. ' .6)\ �Q\-g' p - 1)0a1VI; j),_Q_ Id ) 411( - ;t ed.t6 VC CM/14• Statement of Martin Trent 10/21/04 To the Southold ZBA I am Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners of the Orient Fire District, and a past Chief of the Orient Fire Department. I have been a volunteer firefighter in Orient for the last 25 years. A fire commissioner has two basic responsibilities in serving his or her community: 1) to insure that the department has the equipment and resources needed to protect life and property, and 2) to accomplish this in a fiscally prudent manner that controls the fire district portion of our property tax levy. The Orient Fire District is seeking your approval to improve fire, emergency, and police communications for our community in order to better protect life and property — our number one priority. It is an unfortunate fact that there are currently areas within our fire district where radio communications are lacking. To us, this is an issue of protecting our own lives as well as those of the public. We don't want to see one life lost, one firefighter, one police officer, or one person injured, or one home or business destroyed because we couldn't contact the fire house, the police department, or each other, in times of an emergency. The communications antenna will provide for increased public safety by improving our broadcast and receiving abilities to cover the entire geographical area of the fire district. The communications antenna is not a cure-all, but the experts advise us that it is a necessary first step in order to improve our emergency service communications. There are other actions that are necessary. We have already received our FCC license to allow us to move to high band .frequency as many fire districts are now doing, and we also need to • update our hardware communications equipment. We are all aware that we live in a post - 9/11 world now. The Animal Disease Laboratory at Plum Island has been taken over by Homeland I Security. Like it or not, the volunteer members of the Orient Fire Department, and the officers of the Southold Police Department, have been thrust into the role of front line responders in case of an emergency on the island. It is imperative that we have a communications system that works as well at Orient Point as it does on the Causeway. To address our second major priority, fire commissioners are responsible for the property tax warrant associated with operating the fire district. While the financial aspects of the communications antenna are not strictly a concern of this Board, they are important to us. The antenna pole will be constructed at no cost to the district taxpayers by Beacon Wireless Management. Beacon has already received commitments from three major wireless communications companies, T- Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon, to locate antennas inside the pole. The annual rent paid to the fire district for housing three wireless carriers will be $45,000 per year. If a fourth carrier signs on, the income to the fire district will increase to more than $70,000 annually. This is a substantial amount of our total fire district tax levy of approximately $354,000 annually. As a fire commissioner, I would be remiss in my duties to ignore a revenue source that can be utilized to stabilize or reduce future fire district property taxes. The fire district hosted a well attended public information meeting at the firehouse last year as part of a community outreach effort. Most speakers at the session supported the communications antenna on public safety grounds. Two speakers even cited instances of 911 emergency cell calls they made from Orient that "roamed" to Connecticut operators, thus costing valuable response time. In addition to the Orient Fire District, it is noteworthy that the Southold Town Police Department and the Southold Town Police Benevolent Association have supported installation of the communications antenna. We understand that some members of our community will object to the antenna pole on the grounds of aesthetics, saying that it's too tall, or saying additional studies should be conducted to delay the project. It's not a perfect plan, but we intend to do the best we can. The antenna will 2 7 be installed at the rear of the firehouse grounds, away from both the Main Road and Tabor Road. It will be an appropriately colored flagpole type structure, and the base will be landscaped. The experts advise us that the height is necessary in order to obtain the needed geographic coverage to enhance public safety communications. In conclusion, please be aware the Orient Fire Department is an all volunteer organization. No one is paid — not the fire commissioners, not the fire chiefs, not the firefighters, nor our emergency medical personnel. The volunteers are not in this for personal financial gain. The dedicated people in our small department put in thousands hours of training and in response to emergencies of all types every year in our community. We ask that you put their safety, the lives of firefighters, police officers, and emergency medical responders first, and give them one of the tools they need to do the job. I respectfully request your approval of this application to help protect the lives of our volunteers, and the lives and property of all the people in our community. 3 OCT 2 6 2004 LEXSEE 177 MISC2D 296 Nanuet Fire Engine Co. No. 1, Inc. , Petitioner, v. Arnold Amster, as Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Clarkstown, et al. , Respondents. Index No. 2847/98 SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, ROCKLAND COUNTY 177 Misc. 2d 296; 676 N.Y.S.2d 890; 1998 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 300 June 11, 1998, Decided NOTICE: [***1] Matter of County of Monroe (72 NY2d 338) . EDITED FOR PUBLICATION Petitioner commenced this SUBSEQUENT HISTORY: proceeding to declare null and void a decision of the Town of Clarkstown As Corrected September 8, 1998. Zoning Board of Appeals (the Town) dated April 20, 1998 which vacated and LexisNexis (R) Headnotes annulled a building permit previously issued to petitioner for construction of a fire substation. Petitioner COUNSEL: contends that: (1) the application for review of the issuance of the building Schwartz, Kobb & Scheinert, P. L. L. permit was untimely under Town Law; (2) petitioner has vested rights; and C. , Nanuet, for petitioner. Murray N. (3) [***2] the construction is in Jacobson, Town Attorney of Town of the public interest and not subject to Clarkstown, New City, for respondents. the jurisdiction of the Town. JUDGES: HOWARD MILLER, J. Respondents deny petitioner's allegations, and claim that the OPINIONBY: HOWARD MILLER construction of the fire substation is subject to the balancing test set OPINION: [*297] [**891] forth in Matter of County of Monroe (supra) . It is not disputed that under Howard Miller, J. the Town of Clarkstown Building Code a fire station is a permissive use in an Petition to annul the April 20, R-15 zone; however, such use requires 1998 determination of the Zoning Board 80, 000 square feet and the filing of a of Appeals of the Town of Clarkstown site plan. Petitioner intends to is denied and dismissed, except to the construct the fire station on 43,841 extent that the Town of Clarkstown shall, after petitioner files a site square feet, a portion of which is already occupied by another structure, plan, expeditiously determine whether and no site plan was filed. petitioner is subject to the zoning regulations of the Town of Clarkstown, Even if the third-party application based upon the factors set forth in to review the issuance of the building Page 2 , r 177 Misc. 2d 296, *; 676 N.Y.S.2d 890, **; • 1998 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 300, *** permit were untimely, the building to petitioner, a fire company, and not inspector had no discretion to issue a to the fire district. building permit which fails to conform with applicable provisions of law, and A fire' company, such as the permit could have been revoked petitioner, is essentially under the [**892] at any time, even in the complete control of the Fire District; absence of any third party appeal ( that the Fire District rather than the Matter of Parkview Assocs. v City of Fire Company is responsible for the New York 71 NY2d 274) . prevention and extinguishment of fires" ( Knapp v Union Vale Fire Co. , Inasmuch as respondents have not as 141 AD2d 509, 510) . In order for the yet taken any action which will render fire district to provide the service the proposed construction "essentially it is required to provide by law, it valueless" ( Town of Orangetown v must function through fire companies. Magee, 88 [***3] NY2d 41, 48) , It is absurd to argue that only the petitioner's vested interest claim is fire district, i.e. , the commissioners premature. Respondents have not and officers of the district, [*298] at this point made any constitute the "political determination that the project may not subdivision" . That the ownership of go forward at all; rather respondents the real property underlying a fire claim that the County of Monroe station is titled in a fire company, balancing test must precede rather than a fire district, does not construction. in any way alter the fact that the The pivotal issue to be determined fire station is required for public is whether petitioner is subject to use, and utilized by the fire district's employees to fulfill the the Town's zoning ordinance to the fire district's statutory obligations. extent that the Town acted reasonably The differential treatment accorded a in revoking the building permit and fire company under negligence and requiring site plan review and a taxing principles [***5] has no public hearing. The Town contends relevance to this case. Thus, for petitioner is not a political purposes of determining whether subdivision, relying upon the differential treatment accorded fire property to be utilized for a fire station is subject to applicable districts in negligence cases, under zoning laws, a fire company stands Real Property Tax Law § § 410 and upon the same footing as a fire 464, and Town Law § 176, and is district, a conclusion similarly therefore subject to local zoning reached in Informal Opinion No. 83-33 regulations. Alternatively, of the Attorney-General of the State respondents contend that if petitioner of New York in 1983 (1983 Atty Gen is a political subdivision, the balancing test established in County [Inf Opns] 1077 [the 1983 Opinion] ) of Monroe (supra) must be conducted. [*299] Under Town Law § 170, the town The 1983 Opinion states that a fire board of any town may establish a fire corporation need not comply with town district. A fire district is a zoning and building regulations. On political subdivision of the State of June 18, 1992, the building inspector New York, and the members of the local for the Town of Clarkstown, Adolph fire department within the district Milich, Jr. , sent a memorandum to all are employees of the fire district building and fire inspectors advising (Town Law [***4] § 174) . Real them that all properties owned or used property acquired by a fire district by a fire district were exempt from is "deemed to be required for public zoning and building code regulations, use" (Town Law § 176 [14] ) . In this and attached a copy of the 1983 case, the property which is the Opinion. The town attorney, on June subject of this proceeding was given 30, 1992, responded to Mr. Milich's Page 3 r 177 Misc. 2d 296, *; 676 N.Y.S.2d 890, **; 1998 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 300, *** memorandum, advising him of the Court 142, 286 A2d 697) . In developing the of Appeals decision in the County of "balancing test", the Rutgers case Monroe case (supra) , which had applied acknowledges that even if a a "balancing of public interests" test governmental division [*300] is to determine whether one governmental immune from zoning regulation, such body is subject to the zoning immunity "was not to be exercised in requirements of another governmental an unreasonable fashion, so as to body. In December of 1997, when Mr. arbitrarily override all important Milich issued [***6] petitioner a legitimate local interests" building permit, he relied, inter (Annotation, Zoning of Government alia, upon the 1983 Opinion, the June Activities, 53 ALR5th 1, 40) . 30, 1992 town attorney memorandum, and The body of case law leans toward a May 22, 1997 memorandum from the town attorney indicating that an a limited, rather than absolute, expansion of another firehouse could immunity from local zoning regulation be done with a building permit only. for the construction of fire stations, Mr. Milich, in an affidavit submitted particularly since the New York State to the Town Board, states that he Legislature, in enacting article utilized the County of Monroe criteria [***8] 11 of the Town Law, did not in determining that the proposed fire specifically exempt fire districts station was in the public interest. from local zoning regulation. In the absence of an expression of contrary Historically, New York has legislative intent, the fire district recognized that certain entities are is subject in the first instance to entitled to absolute immunity [**893] local zoning requirements ( Matter of from zoning regulation, i.e. , the County of Monroe, 72 NY2d 338, supra; Federal Government ( Breeze v Town of Westhab, Inc. v Village of Elmsford, Bethlehem, 151 Misc 2d 230) ; State 151 Misc 2d 1071) . government ( Matter of Hongisto v Mercure, 72 AD2d 850) ; State urban The Town of Clarkstown has enacted development corporations ( Floyd v New a Zoning Code which allows the York State Urban Dev. Corp. , 33 NY2d construction of fire stations in an R- 1) ; public schools ( Matter of Jewish 15 zone on an 80, 000 square foot lot. Bd. of Family & Children's Servs. v Thus, the Town of Clarkstown has made a determination that, absent an Zoning Bd. , 79 AD2d 657) ; and parks ( exemption, the construction of a fire Incorporated Vil. of Lloyd Harbor v Town of Huntington, 4 NY2d 182; Oswald station is subject to the Zoning Code. v Westchester County Park Comm. , 234 In order to determine whether NYS2d 465, affd without opn 18 AD2d petitioner's planned construction is 1139) . Other governmental entities are exempt from the Zoning Code, the afforded only a limited immunity and balancing of public interests test set are subject [***7] to the balancing forth in County of Monroe (supra) must of public interests test established be conducted. A significant factor in the test is "intergovernmental in the County of Monroe case (supra) , participation in the project i.e. , town government ( Dunn v Town of Warwick, 146 AD2d 601; Armenia v development process and an opportunity Luther, 152 AD2d 928) ; city government to be heard" ( Matter of County of ( Matter of Town of Queensbury v City Monroe, supra, at 343) , neither of of Glens Falls, 217 AD2d 789) ; and which has occurred with respect to industrial development agencies ( petitioner's planned construction. Matter of King v Saratoga Indus. Dev. While the building inspector may Agency, 208 AD2d 194) . In abolishing a have considered, to a limited extent, prior distinction between governmental the criteria set forth [***9] in and proprietary functions, the Court County of Monroe (supra) in issuing of Appeals adopted the balancing of petitioner's permit, there is no public interests test first applied in authority for a building inspector to Rutgers, State Univ. v Piluso (60 NJ Page 4 177 Misc. 2d 296, *; 676 N.Y.S.2d 890, **; a 1998 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 300, *** be the arbiter of whether one a CPLR article 78 proceeding, limited governmental subdivision is subject to in scope to whether the respondents zoning regulation by another acted arbitrarily and capriciously in governmental subdivision, particularly revoking petitioner's [**894] where there has been no significant building permit. Therefore no intergovernmental participation in the determination is made with respect to project development process and no whether petitioner is subject to local public hearing has been held. zoning. Although the Court of Appeals failed to , specify the entity initially Since no significant balancing test responsible for evaluating the has yet been conducted, it cannot be competing public interests, in County said that respondents' April 20, 1998 of Monroe, prior to the commencement determination was either arbitrary or of litigation, public hearings had capricious. It is for the Town of been held by the County, and the Court Clarkstown, in the first instance, to of Appeals had sufficient information determine, after an opportunity to be before it to rule on the issue. heard is afforded other However, in this case, no public intergovernmental agencies and hearing with respect to the proposed legitimate local interests, to apply project has been held, and the record the balancing test set forth in County before the court does not contain of Monroe (supra) . Likewise, sufficient information to enable this respondents' requirement that [*301] court to determine whether petitioner file a site plan is neither petitioner is subject to local zoning. arbitrary nor capricious, since it Further, it is not appropriate that will permit local interests to be the judiciary supplant the role of apprised of the scope of the project. local government in initially The court expects, however, that the reviewing the criteria for an Town of Clarkstown will proceed exemption from zoning requirements expeditiously in order to minimize any (see, e.g. , Matter of King v Saratoga additional costs which might result Indus. Dev. Agency, [***10] supra) . from construction delays, since those It should also be noted that this is costs will ultimately be borne [***11] not a declaratory judgment action, but by the taxpayers. IL a OCT 2 6 2004 / r d� 9 s;:ice - " r-._� --'-'1-b LEXSEE 72 NY 2D 338 In the Matter of the County of Monroe's Compliance with Certain Zoning and Permit Requirements of the City of Rochester in Connection with the City/County Airport Expansion. City of Rochester, Appellant; County of Monroe, Respondent [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL] Court of Appeals of New York 72 N.Y.2d 338; 530 N.E.2d 202; 533 N.Y.S.2d 702; 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 2697 September 15, 1988, Argued October 20, 1988, Decided PRIOR HISTORY: Louis N. Kash, Corporation Counsel Appeal, by permission of the Court (Ellen A. Anderson of counsel) , for of Appeals, from an order of the appellant. I. Under the governmental- Appellate Division of the Supreme proprietary test, the Monroe County Court in the Fourth Judicial airport is proprietary in nature and Department, entered October 20, 1987, subject to local zoning laws. ( which, upon submission of a Nehrbas v Incorporated Vil. of Lloyd controversy on an agreed statement of Harbor, 2 NY2d 190; Little Joseph facts pursuant to CPLR 3222, Realty v Town of Babylon, 41 NY2d 738; determined the controversy in favor of Ricotta v City of Buffalo, 3 Misc 2d the County of Monroe, and granted 625; Town of E. Hampton v Lamb, 9 Misc judgment declaring that Rochester City 2d 1042, 6 AD2d 829; Pueblo Aircraft Code § 115-30 D (7) and City permit Serv. v City of Pueblo, 679 F2d 805; requirements do not apply to the Anderson v Jackson Mun. Airport Auth. , expansion of the Greater Rochester 691 F2d 742; Bowling v City of International Airport as it affects Roanoke, 568 F Supp 446; Western Air the terminal building, temporary and Lines v Port Auth . , 658 F Supp 952, permanent parking facilities, runway 817 F2d 222; Matter of County of aprons and the air freight facility. Broome v Commuter Airlines, 83 AD2d Matter of County of Monroe, 131 742, 55 NY2d 601; People v Rodriguez, AD2d 74. 115 Misc 2d 866. ) II. Notwithstanding the governmental-proprietary distinction in New York, public policy DISPOSITION: dictates that the County of Monroe respect the Rochester City zoning Order affirmed, with costs. code. ( Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233; County of Nassau v South Farmingdale ' LexisNexis (R) Headnotes Water Dist. , 62 AD2d 380, 46 NY2d 794.) Patrick M. Malgieri, County COUNSEL: Attorney (Ann M. Kerwick of counsel) , for respondent. I. A municipality is Page 2 72 N.Y.2d 338, *; 530 N.E.2d 202, **; 533 N.Y.S.2d 702, ***; 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 2697 not subject to zoning restrictions in agree with the result at the Appellate the performance of its governmental Division that it should not. functions. ( County of Westchester v Village of Mamaroneck, 22 AD2d 143, 16 The facts before the Appellate NY2d 940; E. B. Metal & Rubber Indus. Division, pursuant to CPLR 3222 (b) v Washington, 102 AD2d 599. ) II. The (3) , are that the airport is owned and operation of the Greater Rochester operated by the County and is located International Airport is a substantially in the City. Between governmental (as opposed to a 1984 and 1986, the County proposed and proprietary) activity of the County of approved amendments to its master plan Monroe. ( Nehrbas v Incorporated Vil. for the airport, including expansion of Lloyd Harbor, 2 NY2d 190; Little of the main terminal, improvement of Joseph Realty v Town of Babylon, 41 the runway apron, and addition of an NY2d 738; Ricotta v City of Buffalo, 3 enclosed parking garage, an air Misc 2d 625; Amersbach v City of freight facility, a hotel and a Cleveland, 598 F2d 1033; Pueblo temporary parking facility for use Aircraft Serv. v City of Pueblo, 679 during construction of the enclosed F2d 805; Matter of Ruderman v Town parking facility. All improvements Bd. , 58 AD2d 939; County of Nassau v were on property located wholly within South Farmingdale Water Dist. , 62 AD2d the City. 380.) III. Public policy dictates that The County initially submitted a the County of Monroe should be immune site plan application to the City in from the City of Rochester's zoning February 1987, for all of the planned restrictions for airport related improvements except the temporary projects. ( Garcia v San Antonio parking facility, the air freight Metro. Tr. Auth. , 469 U.S. 528; New facility, and the runways. The City York v United States, 326 U.S. 572; requested additional information Nehrbas v Incorporated Vil. of Lloyd concerning the improvements and Harbor, 2 NY2d 190; Little Joseph compliance with the State Realty v Town of Babylon, 41 NY2d Environmental Quality Review Act. The 738. ) County responded that the planned uses (with the exception of the hotel, JUDGES: which is not in issue in this case) were governmental and immune from City Bellacosa, J. Chief Judge Wachtler site plan oversight, and that its and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, prior practice of keeping the City Titone and Hancock, Jr. , concur. apprised of airport [***703] proposals had been only a courtesy, OPINIONBY: not an acquiescence to City review. The City asserted review jurisdiction BELLACOSA based on the proprietary classification test. OPINION: [*341] The Appellate Division unanimously declared that the [*340] [***702] [**202] "Rochester City Code § 115-30 D (7) OPINION OF THE COURT and City permit requirements [**203] Should the expansion, with do not apply to the expansion" (131 accessory uses, of the Greater AD2d 74, 80) based on the traditional Rochester International Airport by the governmental versus proprietary County of Monroe be subject to the categorization. Alternatively, it site plan approval requirements of the noted that since "the governmental City of Rochester? Based on General versus proprietary distinction is of Municipal Law § 350 and on the ancient vintage" and "may be balancing of public interests, we unconvincing" ( id. , at 79) , the Rochester ordinances were nonetheless Y Page 3 72 N.Y.2d 338, *; 530 N.E.2d 202, **; 533 N.Y.S.2d 702, ***; 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 2697 inapplicable because the State The test has surely been on shaky enabling legislation, General ground for a long time. "Even during Municipal Law § 350, impliedly frees its heyday, the distinction between the County operation of the airport 'governmental' and 'proprietary' from City control. While the parties' ' functions of government was subjected arguments concentrate on the to a 'veritable landslide' of governmental-proprietary criticism and was labeled an 'enigma' classification, both acknowledge that [*342] and an 'absurdity' [citations the test may have outlived its omitted] . The abandonment of the rule usefulness. of sovereign immunity has virtually We conclude that the time has come destroyed the only real basis for the for retiring this labeling device. In creation of the distinction" ( County its place, a "balancing of public of Nassau v South Farmingdale Water interests" analytic approach will be Dist. , 62 AD2d 380, 387, affd 46 NY2d 794, 796 [in affirming, this court substituted. Talismanic application of the old test " [begs] the critical added, "the demarcation between question of which governmental governmental or proprietary interests interest should prevail when there is in property owned or operated by a conflict between the zoning government or its subdivisions no longer is as clear as it was in the ordinance of one political unit and past"] ) the statutory authority of another unit to perform a designated public The Supreme Court itself noted in function" (Note, Governmental Immunity Garcia v San Antonio Metro. Tr. Auth. from Local Zoning Ordinances, 84 Hary (469 U.S. 528, 531) , overruling L Rev 869 [1971] ) . National League of Cities v Usery (426 The governmental-proprietary U.S. 833) , that an "attempt to draw function test, as traditionally the boundaries of state regulatory applied in this State to land use, was immunity in terms of 'traditional borrowed from the field of tort governmental function' is not only liability as derived from the absolute unworkable but is also inconsistent sovereign immunity doctrine ( Nehrbas with established principles of federalism" . The court observed that v Incorporated Vil. of Lloyd Harbor, 2 the governmental function rationale of NY2d 190, 194; compare, County of National League of Cities v Usery Westchester v Village of Mamaroneck, 22 AD2d 143, 148 149, affd 16 NY2d (id. ) had been construed as providing immunity from regulation in the 940) . Under the old test, a governmental operation of a municipal municipality is immune from zoning airport ( Amersbach v City of regulations if the uses qualify as Cleveland, 598 F2d 1033, 1037-1038 governmental (see, Nehrbas v Incorporated Vil. of Lloyd Harbor, [6th Cir] ) , but not for the regulation of air transportation ( Hughes Air supra [village immune from own zoning Corp. v Public Utils. Commn. , 644 F2d ordinance] ; Village of Larchmont v 1334, 1340-1341 [9th Cir] ) Town of Mamaroneck, 239 NY 551 Consistent with our own court's [village immune from town ordinance] ; observation in Nehrbas v Incorporated Oswald v Westchester County Park [***704] Vil. of Lloyd Harbor (2 NY2d Commn. , 234 NYS2d 265, affd 18 AD2d 190, 194, supra) , the Supreme Court in 1139 [county immune from town Garcia (supra) concluded that an ordinance] ) . However, a municipality organizing principle behind the test's has been subject to such prescriptions application was not apparent and, when it acts in a corporate or thus, it discarded the governmental- proprietary capacity ( Little Joseph proprietary function label in the Realty v Town of Babylon, 41 NY2d 738, field of [**204] regulatory immunity 742 [operation of asphalt plant] ) . under the Commerce Clause. 7 • Page 4 72 N.Y.2d 338, *; 530 N.E.2d 202, **; 533 N.Y.S.2d 702, ***; 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 2697 Contradictions in governmental Dev Code § § 7-301, 7-304, 12-201) . function designations have even This balancing approach subjects the cropped up within traditionally encroaching governmental unit in the provided municipal services. In first instance, in the absence of an O'Brien v Town of Greenburgh (239 App expression of contrary legislative Div 555, affd without opn 266 NY 582) , intent, to the zoning requirements of for example, we affirmed an Appellate the host governmental unit where the Division holding that the collection extraterritorial land use would be and disposal of garbage was a employed ( Rutgers State Univ. v proprietary function. Twenty-two Piluso, 60 NJ 142, 152, 286 A2d 697, years later, we distinguished that 702) . Then, among the sundry related holding, concluding that disposal of factors to be weighed in the test are: rubbish was a governmental function, "the nature and scope of the and allowed the storage of garbage instrumentality seeking immunity, the trucks in a residential area contrary kind of function or land use involved, to village zoning restrictions ( the extent of the public interest to Nehrbas v Incorporated Vil. of Lloyd be served thereby, the effect local Harbor, 2 NY2d 190, 195, n 1, supra) . land use regulation would have upon Such contradictions unmask the the enterprise concerned and the illusory benefit of the litmus impact upon legitimate local governmental-proprietary distinction interests" ( id. , 60 NJ, at 153, 286 (see, Township of Washington v Village A2d, at 702) . In Orange County v City of Ridgewood, 26 NJ 578, 584, 141 A2d of Apopka (299 So 2d 652, 655 [Fla 308, 311; City of Pittsburgh v App] ) , the catalogue of potential Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 468 Pa factors to be considered by the 174, 178-179, n 4, 360 A2d 607, 609- reviewing court was expanded to 610, n 4) . " [The] reasoned balancing include the applicant' s legislative of the competing public and private grant of authority, alternative interests essential to an equitable locations for the facility in less resolution [*343] of such conflicts restrictive zoning areas, and has been forsaken for a mechanical alternative methods of providing the application of convenient labels" needed improvement (see, Lincoln (Note, Governmental Immunity from County v Johnson, 257 NW2d 453, 458 Local Zoning Ordinances, 84 Hary L Rev [SD] ; Blackstone Park Improvement 869, 872 [1971] ; Blackstone Park Assn. v Rhode Island Bd. of Stds. & Improvement Assn. v Rhode Island Bd. Appeals, 448 A2d 1233 [RI] , supra) . of Stds. & Appeals, 448 A2d 1233, 1238 Another important factor is [RI] ) . One often cited denunciation intergovernmental participation in the of the imprecision of the project development process and an governmental-proprietary function test opportunity to be heard. contends that "no satisfactory basis Realistically, one factor in the for solving the problem whether the calculus could "be more influential activity falls into one class or other than another or may be so significant has been evolved [and] [the] rules as to completely overshadow all sought to be established are as others", but no element should be logical as those governing French "thought of as ritualistically irregular verbs" (Seasongood, required or controlling" ( Rutgers Municipal Corporations: Objections to State Univ. v Piluso, 60 NJ 142, 153, the Governmental or Proprietary Test, 286 A2d 697, 703, supra) . 22 Va L Rev 910, 938) . [*344] Dealing first with the The American Law Institute and a legislative intent factor in the great many States have adopted a instant case, our Legislature did not balancing of public interests approach expressly provide that the operation to resolve such land use disputes of the airport should be immune from (see, 4 Rathkopf, Zoning and Planning, all land use oversight by the City of at 53-48, n 17 [4th ed] ; Model Land Rochester. General Municipal Law Page 5 72 N.Y.2d 338, *; 530 N.E.2d 202, **; 533 N.Y.S.2d 702, ***; 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 2697 [***705] § 350 (1) provides, in That a portion of the planned part, however, " [when] the airport or improvements will be leased out for landing field is to be located in operation does not, in the context of whole or in part outside the this airport expansion case, affect boundaries of the municipality seeking the result. The Legislature expressly to establish or construct the contemplated leases by a county for facility, the approval [**205] of the operation or use of all or part of the local legislative body of the the county airport "for aviation city, town or village within which the purposes and for other purposes facility will be located shall be required for or necessary to the obtained [emphasis added] . " Here, the efficient and successful operation of airport is, of course, situated within an airport" (General Municipal Law § the County and, also concentrically, 352 [5] ) . within the boundaries of two separate townships and the City. Moreover, [*345] Some 60 years ago, well General Municipal Law § 350 is a before the congested, common air and provision dedicated to the space age of today, Chief Judge establishment and operation "of a Cardozo presciently captured the city, county, village or town" public importance of municipal airport, and the restrictive portion airports in Hesse v Rath (249 NY 436, previously quoted, by its terms, does 438) : A city acts for city purposes not subject a "county" to the land use when it builds a dock or a bridge or a provision of lesser municipalities. street or a subway ( Sun P. & P. Assn. Thus, the Legislature, by reasonable v. Mayor, 152 N. Y. 257) . Its purpose and natural interpretation of the is not different when it builds an entire section, exempted the County airport ( City of Wichita v. Clapp, from the preapproval requirement of 125 Kans. 100) . Aviation is today an the City. Finally, competing land established method of transportation. use restrictions and policy choices The future, even the near future, will among these various municipalities make it still more general. The city could otherwise foil the fulfillment that is without the foresight to build of the greater public purpose of the ports for the new traffic may soon promoting intra- and interstate air be left behind in the race of competition. Chalcedon was called the commerce. city of the blind, because its Equally significant under the new founders rejected the nobler site of test are these additional public Byzantium lying at their feet. The interest factors in this case: the need for vision of the future in the dispute involves a County plan which governance of cities has not lessened seeks to expand an existing use; given with the years. The dweller within the existing land use, there is no the gates, even more than the stranger other practical location for the from afar, will pay the price of proposed use; the expansion was blindness. " subject to County land use oversight We thus hold that the expansion of approval, including public hearings and a comment period in which the City the Monroe County Airport is free of could have participated; there is no land use oversight from the City of express City oversight authority in Rochester. The airport terminal, the State enabling legislation; no parking facilities, and air freight detriment to adjoining landowners, as facility are embraced within the opposed to competing political immunity from the requirements of the interests, is alleged; and the nature City's land use laws because they of an international municipal airport, constitute accessory uses customarily serving interstate and intrastate incidental to an airport operation commerce goals, is in both the local (see, Matter of De Mott v Notey, 3 and greater public interest. NY2d 116; Great S. Bay Mar. Corp. v Page 6 72 N.Y.2d 338, *; 530 N.E.2d 202, **; 533 N.Y.S.2d 702, ***; 1988 N.Y. LEXIS 2697 Norton, 58 NYS2d 172, affd 272 App Div Accordingly, the order of the 1069) . Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs. OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 • Email addresses: Linda.KowalskiATown.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# 71PC-- / ATTN: c >a..1 ,, 7d V y, DATE: / /C/2004 4 SUBJECT: it,5-410 -Le: MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information. e/L-tP)-1-- Le-ere-0Th Zat-e-- Please feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: f . Al I Kowalskii Linda From: Anne Taylor Davis [ataylordavis@davidchudesign.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 7:13 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Cc: Horton, Joshua Subject:- Hearing on December 16th re: Proposed Cell Phone Tower in Orient Dear Mrs. Kowalski, I respectfully ask that you pass on my letter to the chairperson and members of the Zoning Board. It is only the press of work that keeps me from attending this very important meeting. I have been a resident of Orient for the past 18 years, which doesn't make me an old timer by any standard nor does it make me a new comer. I have seen change, lots of change during that time along Orchard Street and in Orient. But the changes haven't damaged the historic character and pastoral scenery of Orient in the way a 120-foot tower will. I, as much as any other resident of Orient, want to see our volunteer fire department have what they need in the way of professional communication equipment. In my understanding, a 120-foot cell phone tower, which will destroy the special character and landscape of Orient, is neither necessary or acceptable. I urge that the Fire Department's communications needs be professionally determined, options pursued and explored in an effort to preserve what we all love so well. Orient is unique, it is precious. I see what Nantucket has accomplished in the way of keeping up with progress yet tempering to suit the character and culture of the island. I hope that we, residents of the hamlet of Orient and the Southold Zoning Board would do likewise. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully Anne Taylor Davis 3940 Orchard Street 1 r. \-)\ OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email addresses: Linda.Kowalskina,Town.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765:W4 {$a FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# )6 5-6, ATTN: 164,04.4d Aye 1/ £2f. DATE: /o( //i /2004 9-..,*i9/-i SUBJECT: 516 (1- -( c.c��� \-j- j l MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information. Ern-aj / (itez, iVI3 4:0s-Om) Please feel free to call if you did not receive alf sheets between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: . • • • • 1 4 • Kowalski, Linda From: Ellen McNeilly[ejmcneilly@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 11:05 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Cc: Reale Ed; Turner Jon; Suess Richard; Hopkins Anne Subject: Meeting Dear Linda, ZBA member Vincent Orlando asked to be kept in the loop regarding our communications with the Orient Fire District, and their responses to our requests. To that end, a copy of the certified letter to the OFD Chief and the Chair of the Board of Commissioners was forwarded to you for distribution to the Board and for the file. Additionally, a copy of our letter was sent directly to Member James Dinizio, inviting him to any meeting which we could arrange with the Fire District, as he had expressed a desire to meet with the OFD concerning issues we had raised, as well as those of his own interest. Although the certified mail receipts were sent back to us some time ago as delivery confirmed, we again heard nothing in response to our letter until last Friday, December 10, when Jon Turner received a very aggravated phone call from John Boyd, the OFD attorney, who took Mr. Turner to task for not having addressed the letter to him! Mr. Boyd was upset because, had the ZBA not forwarded a copy to him, he would not have known about the requested meeting. One would think that his client, the OFD, would have informed him. Mr. Boyd demanded that we meet with unspecified members of the Fire District (who had not previously responded) along with himself and Bill Scheibel. We have agreed to meet with the OFD on Wednesday, December 15, at 11:00AM, at which time, hopefully, the operational and technical questions outlined in Mr. Turner's letter, will be addressed by OFD operational personnel. 1V We don't really understand why the meeting will involve the attorney and the consultant (Mr. Scheilbel) in addition to (?) rather than (?) the Fire Department officers from whom we seek the operational information needed, but we have agreed to proceed, in a continuing effort to be cooperative rather than confrontational. Mr. Tuner and I plan to attend, along with Richard Suess, who we have retained as a consultant to aid us with vetting some of the technical and operational information we seek, and to make sure that all of the necessary questions get asked. In addition, due to the unexpected presence of Mr. Boyd and Mr. Scheilbel, we have asked our own attorney to sit in, although this was not in our original plans when requesting either this meeting, or the ones previously requested. This meeting is taking place so close to the ZBA meeting, that we are concerned about what can reasonably be accomplished; we have been seeking a meeting for so many months, however, that anything is a good start. Would you please make sure that Mr. Orlando and Chairwoman Oliva get a copy of this email? Thank you. Ellen McNeilly 1 OFFICE OF • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 - Email addresses: Linda.KowalskiATown.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-906.4 , FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# 76 ATTN: in.(tC,,,l U ( . DATE: /0V/ /5-/2004 y.`02,1)9-fr.i, SUBJECT: AU-a 01JA-e 711)-24,-e-,) 6j 4L0 tr MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information. • Please feel ree to call if you did not r ceive Il sheets between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: • 1 - Page 1 of 1 Kowalski, Linda From: Ellen McNeilly [eimcneilly@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 12:12 PM To: Reale Ed Cc: Hopkins Anne; Turner Jon, Wachsberger Freddie; Kowalski, Linda Subject: Meeting 12/15 Ed, I just spoke to Linda Kowalski this AM, who advised me that the letter SHOULD have gone to Boyd, as he is acting as the OFD agent. I apologized, saying that we weren't aware that we should do that. She had fax'd a copy of the letter to Mr. Boyd on 12/6 after its receipt by the ZBA on 12/3. Boyd then called Jon Turner 12/10. I told Ms. Kowalski that all of our previous correspondence over the last year and a half was directed to the Chair of the Board of Commissioners only. We thought it appropriate to do so again as we need to meet with their operational personnel concerning current problems, a thorough understanding of which, our technical people are certain, would suggest a different solution to those proposed by Scheibel/Cannuscio, and adopted by OFD. I also called Member Dinizio, inviting him in person(in addition to the invitation in Jon's letter)to attend the meeting tomorrow. He, correctly, in my opinion, said that although he was very interested in sitting down with them, that it would not be appropriate for him to do so on a matter that is in front of the ZBA. He thanked me for the courtesy, and wished us well, stating that he sincerely hoped something could be worked out. Ms. Kowalski also stated that if we had any other questions, to call her for clarification. I did ask her if the OFD had filed an amended single application, and she said no. It is for the same structure, but has to meet different standards now that it is separated from the cell application. This leaves us still potentially dealing with an 120' tower, if they get an okay for it, without their really demonstrating the need technically, because of existing problems which they say cannot be remedied in any other way, with no real documentation other than the Weyhreter report, which itself suggests alternatives(!!). And if that passes, it becomes an "existing condition" on which a cell company can locate, because they have the height that THEY say they need. Onward. 12/14/04 J - ?(,) OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 . Email addresses: Linda.Kowalski(a,Town.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax (631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# A q ATTN: , d..4 k / qI-v 0DATE: fes/ Ia /2004 SUBJECT: cJAJ � " e c�/!.t �.IiJ f jrT—YAG" MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information.i) Q- 3 a J dp. ird f/ Aid Please feel free to call if you did not receive all sheets between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: CZ . r , 1 ettif )140°4 e yratir gip ,D , Jon A. Turner dAfrtj P4' 1095 Village Lane PO Box 300 Orient, NY 11957 V t/f 631 323 3990 � November 25, 2004 Chief Michael Rose, and Martin Trent, Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners Orient Fire District 23300 Main Road Orient, NY 11957 Dear Sirs: The Southold ZBA has requested that the Orient Association identify the information it needs in order to understand better the emergency communications problems of the Orient Fire Department . The following are our questions : 1. What emergency communications equipment is presently used by OFD: a. At the Orient Fire House? b. In mobile units? c. By officers in the field (hand-held units) ? 2 . Do officers in the field speak directly with other officers using handhelds, or are these signals relayed? 3 . How is this different equipment used operationally? For example, given notification of a fire in Orient by the Southold Police, what is the typical sequence of communication? 4 . Describe the conditions under which the emergency communications equipment does not work properly. That is, what fails? Be as specific as possible (try to take this information from the OFD communication log) . For example, is it base station to mobile unit communication in a heavy rain that does not work, or is it hand-held at Orient Point to base station (OF House) that doesn't work? Do these communications failures occur all of the time or only occasionally (try to estimate the proportion of the time) ? If occasionally, under what conditions do the communications fail? 5 . Do you have any idea why the failures identified in 4 above occur? For example, do you think they are caused by interference, inadequate transmitter power, equipment failure, poor maintenance of equipment, improper operating procedures, or other factors? 6 . Have you investigated the following as possible solutions to the emergency communications problems identified above: a. Using a directional antenna (with at least 3-6 db of gain) orientated E-W in place of the whip antenna on the OF house? b. Replacing the 25+ year old equipment currently in use with newer, more sensitive equipment? c. Using a repeater at the OF house for handheld to handheld communication? d. Placing a repeater on Brown' s Hills (taking advantage of the 100' elevation) , or other location? 7 . How difficult is it to maintain and repair the current emergency communications equipment? That is, can you still get parts? 8 . If you were to replace the current equipment with high-band equipment: a. What would it cost? b. Would this replace the current low band equipment, or would it be in addition to the current equipment? c. If you replaced the current communications equipment, how would communications with emergency units from East Marion, Greenport, Southold be handled? d. What would be the phasing in of this new equipment? If it is more convenient for you we would be happy to meet with the appropriate members of the OFD who are familiar with these emergency communications issues to investigate these questions . Rich Suess, who is currently designing a high band communication network for the Greenport Fire Department, Jim Dinizio from the Southold ZBA, and I would be happy to meet with you at your convenience. We believe that the need for this meeting is urgent and recommend that it take place immediately. For the past 26 years I have been a Professor of Information Technology at New York University. Prior to that I spent 10 years designing Command, Control and Communications systems for the Department of Defense. My degrees are in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science/Operations Research. In the early 80s I completed a study for the NYPD of their SPRINT (911) system. The results of this study led to changes in both communications equipment used by the NYPD and in their operational procedures . I assure you we share the same goal - to insure that OFD has the best emergency communications possible. All that is under discussion is the way it should be accomplished. Please contact me at 212 288 3334 (or turner@nyu.edu) as soon as possible so we may arrange a meeting to discuss this matter further. Sincerely yours, 4 , Jon A. Turner Cc: Jim Dinizio Rich Suess Anne Hopkins Ellen McNeilly Chairwoman Ruth Olivia (ZBA) t-'._, si- - t ' e OFFICE OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email addresses: Linda.Kowalski(n,Town.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# 765-- 76 7 ATTN: 6/ & d. V( & . DATE: c X ,/2004 SUBJECT: a MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information. Arbil e y0 ei/i f le is•-• /6 - /61_4,4-ty , 6.1e,A_ Please feel free to call if you did neceive all sheets be een 8-4. Thank you. / Pages attached: - l . 1 • 9 • 1 .--Th ., /1v/ dl V i + • glynis berry 24190 Main Road PO.Box 444 architecture art urban design studioab@earthhnk net Onent,NY 11957 www.newyotk-architects.com/studioab tel & fax 631 323 1426 ifloyick ' tvl' November 18, 2004 II 4-6. l')°9lf dt Zoning Board of Appeals l Town of Southold P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Dear Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals: We would like to add our input to the Cell Tower Hearing. We live lose to the new location of the proposed tower, and while we do not support NIMBYism, we do ha�e concerns about this proposal. The Fire Department's existing tower is attached to the building and the latticework frame is as unobtrusive as possible. Both members of the Fire Department and the Police Department reference the need for a 90-foot tower, not 125 feet, for decent communications. Please consider a 90-foot tower in the same location as the existing tower. This would have the least impa4t on the neighborhood and still serve Fire Department needs. We would like to point out that the inclusion of a cell tower, which allows 3-4 carriers, seems to be motivated by the generation of income. This income should be weigh d against two major consequences of the tower. First, the property values within sight of the tower will beepressed, having a negative impact on both neighbors' equity and property taxes. Second, the buildings t e cell tower companies want to place on the land would remove from use a considerable portion of the land used for training purposes by the Fire Department. The property itself is valuable, probably worth $400-500,000. Since the Fire Department would loose its use of this land,wouldn't it be more cost i ffective to sell the land outright than allow cell tower construction, if they no longer need this space?Also, other options for the location should be considered: such as the airport or ferry terminal. If the cell tower ends up being built at the fire station, please consider attaching it to the existing structures, using a lattice construction, not painting it white(silver or gray is better), and placing the equipment in a newly constructed basement space under existin structures. The latter would be less intrusive to the neighborhood and allow the fire department conti ued use of its field. Please note that the Church managed to provide tower service and placed equipment n basement space with no impact on the neighborhood. Please encourage the Fire Department to be good neighbors. The Lire Department has wonderful volunteers, who need our support. Please provide this support in a more equable manner, not at the expense of residences in the immediate proximity of the firehouse. Our home is our main asset and full- time residence. 7ly\ele ly, _ nM. rry Kowalski, Linda - From: Jon Turner[turner@nyu.edu] Sent: Saturday, November 27, 2004 12:10 PM To: Kowalski, Linda Cc: Hopkins Anne; Ellen McNeilly; Wachsberger Freddie; Ed Reale Subject: ZBA/OA OFD Info Letter Ea- OFChtefLtrl1.23-04 do ATT304675 txt Hi Ms Kowalski, Attached please find a copy of the letter we have sent to Chief Rose and Chairman Trent of the OFD (Certified) requesting information about their emergency communications difficulties. We also sent a copy directly to Chairwoman Oliva. -Would you please see that Jim Dinizio and Vincent Orlando receive copies. Many thanks, . . .Jon. . . 1 1 &it c ,Du) /� � Al"' Jon A. Turner N/ 1095 Village Lane *04` PO Box 300 Oh, �' �" ) Orient, NY 11957 / t/f 631 323 3990 November 25, 2004 Chief Michael Rose, and Martin Trent, Chairman of the Board of Fire Commissioners Orient Fire District 23300 Main Road Orient, NY 11957 Dear Sirs: The Southold ZBA has requested that the Orient Association identify the information it needs in order to understand better the emergency communications problems of the Orient Fire Department. The following are our questions: 1. What emergency communications equipment is presently used by OFD: a. At the Orient Fire House? b. In mobile units? c. By officers in,the field (hand-held units)? 2. Do officers in the.field speak directly with other officers using handhelds, or are these signals relayed? 3. How is this different equipment used operationally? For example, given notification of a fire in Orient by the Southold Police, what is the typical sequence of communication? 4. Describe the conditions under which the emergency communications equipment does not work properly. That is, what fails? Be as specific as possible (try to take this information from the OFD communication log). For example, is it base station to mobile unit communication in a heavy rain that does not work, or is it hand-held at Orient Point to base station (OF House) that doesn't work? Do these communications failures occur all of the time or only occasionally (try to estimate the proportion of the time)? If occasionally, under what conditions do the communications fail? 5. Do you have any idea why the failures identified in 4 above occur? For example, do you think they are caused by interference, inadequate transmitter power, equipment failure, poor maintenance of equipment, improper operating procedures, or other factors? 6. Have you investigated the following as possible solutions to the emergency communications problems identified above: a. Using a directional antenna (with at least 3-6 db of gain) orientated E-W in place of the whip antenna on the OF house? - b. Replacing the 25+ year old equipment currently in use with newer, more - sensitive equipment? c:' Using a repeater at the OF house for handheld to handheld communication? d. Placing a repeater on Brown's Hills (taking advantage of the 100' elevation), or other location? 7. How difficult is it to maintain and repair the current emergency communications equipment? That is, can you still get parts? 8. If you were to replace the current equipment with high-band equipment: a. What would it cost? b. Would this replace the current low band equipment, or would it be in addition to the current equipment? c. If you replaced the current communications equipment, how would communications with emergency units from East Marion, Greenport, Southold be handled? d. What would be the phasing in of this new equipment? If it is more convenient for you we would be happy to meet with the appropriate members of the OFD who are familiar with these emergency communications issues to investigate these questions. Rich Suess, who is currently designing a high band communication network for the Greenport Fire Department, Jim Dinizio from the Southold ZBA, and I would be happy to meet with you at your convenience. We believe that the need for this meeting is urgent and recommend that it take place immediately. For the past 26 years I have been a Professor of Information Technology at New York University. Prior to that I spent 10 years designing Command, Control and Communications systems for the Department of Defense. My degrees are in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science/Operations Research. In the early 80s I completed a study for the NYPD of their SPRINT (911) system. The results of this study led to changes in both communications equipment used by the NYPD and in their operational procedures. I assure you we share the same goal -to insure that OFD has the best emergency communications possible. All that is under discussion is the way it should be accomplished. Please contact me at 212 288 3334 (or turner@nyu.edu) as soon as possible so we may arrange a meeting to discuss this matter further. Sincerely yours, * kkif ..---- Jon A. Turner Cc: Jim Dinizio Rich Suess Anne Hopkins Ellen McNeilly Chairwoman Ruth Olivia (ZBA) vo ZONING BOARD OF APPL1YLS J w A Office Location: Annex Building on Youngs Avenue Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road, Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Emails: Linda.KowalskiATown.Southold.ny.us or Jessica.BogerATown.Southold.ny.us Web site http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 ext. 1 fax (631) 765-9064 715- 8'969 TRANSMITTAL To: EO6- Gt E{jg• DATE: 1l I IS- /2004 • REF: Hearing Date: l( 1 ), -1 1 T Appl. of (g1Lu2_-J • (x ) Info attached for your information and review. { 1' rL ,h I l��-c Pmt (til e I • Thank you. Pages attached: . 1��J PLI 14 ORIENT ASSOCIATION R10E V P.O.Box 282, Orient,New York 11957 NOV 1 S 2004 November 13, 2004 Ruth Oliva, Chairman LLONING BOARD or- APPEALS Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Town Hall, Southold Dear Ruth, The Orient Association would like to request an adjournment of the hearing on November 18 to give Jon Turner and an independent communications engineer opportunity to review the needs of the Orient Fire Department, and to explore possible solutions that would comply with the Southold Town zoning code. We are grateful for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Freddie Wachsberger for the Orient Association PO 8C. 01.k2) 11957 OFFICE OF TONING BOARD OF APPEAL 53095 Main Road ! Southold, NY 11971 Email addresses: Linda.Kowalski(&,,Town.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-9064 FAX TRANSMISSION FAX# S---516 ATTN: f d &IA V E . DATE: I t / I I /2004 SUBJECT: COu_p - '�Q.t�. S. P MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information. Aft/. Please feel free to call if you did ngt recpve all sheets between 8-4. Thank you. Pages attached: A. j11/ \7/O4 14:14 FAX 6317275t17 _ TLSK _ 002 All 1 � �� .o - 69 _ �� TWOMEY, LATHAM, SHEA & KELLEY, LLP 17-nEd � � fAttorneys at Law Lomeon or COUNSEL Mailing A Box KENNETH F LAVALLE THOMAS A TWOMEV,JR Post Office Box 939e 33 West Second Street JOAN C.HATFIELD o SYEFHEN S.LATHAM Riverhead Riverhead F SHEA.III New York 11901-5398 New Ygrk 11 901-9398 ANNE MARIE CQODALE DIARISTDFHEP D.KELLEY LAURA I.a�uAZZIN� MAUREEN T.L1CCIONE MARTIN 0 FCNE4ANA DAVID M.DU81NG Telephone:631.727.2180 TRACY KARBCW PALUMeb ",,EDWARD REALE F36eIAIIA.631.727.1767 BRYAN C,VAN COTT• PETERS M MOTT ___CYRUB a.DOLGE•• JAY P. L SNE RAROT --_-= _ ;"` ALICIA B.O'CONNORA JANICE L sN6AP yyyyw.suffolklaw.com = -_-- _ -- _ , t LISA A.AzzAYO+ MARTHA L LUST - q(QP- ' NY a LA BARS 0 l�Il 2.13U4 O s II i LL Ni IN TAXATION t ' R®� 1 /4 NY a CT BARNA NY NJ,a FA BARB 0 NY 8 NJ awed• NY,NJ,FL,&CT AARE• !1 t.L M DO TLA NINDSARA• ' Extension 236 7�/ NT,IN DC 51,A CA LIARS,,, November 17, 2004 By Fax . Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re.: Application of Orient Fire District Dear Members of the Zoning Board: Given the impact on the community of the cell tower proposed by the Orient Fire District, the Orient Association would like to be reasonably certain that there are not other viable means of addressing the issues raised as justification for the tower. To that end, the Orient Association has requested an adjournment of the public hearing scheduled for November 18, 2004. The Orient Association has no interest in delaying the process. In fact, the Association has been working for well over a year to learn the facts behind the application. Most of what has been revealed by the Fire District has come to the Association not by informational meetings or cooperative efforts but through requests under formal "Freedom of Information" requests. Further, the Association has requested no prior adjournments of any phase of this application,which had been originally filed by Beacon Wireless over a year ago but was not scheduled for a hearing because of repeated changes to the application requested by the applicant. Moreover, the application supplied no information pertaining to the facts underlying the need for this particular tower. Virtually all of the 20 MAIN STREET 01 HILL STREET 105 MAIN STREET ONE EAST MAIN STREET,SUITE I 400 TOWNUNE ROAD 59340 MAIN ROAD,P.0 BOX 326 EASIIIAMPTON.NY 11537,r-.`-'SOUTHAMPTON,NY 11968 PORTJEFFERSON STA.,NY 11776 BAY SHORE,NY 11705 HAUPPAUGE,NY 11750 SOUTHOLD,NY 11871 831 334,1200 931 07,0000 , 331 92e 4400 631,865.9300 631.585 1414 031 765,%1300 r 11/17/04 14:14 FAX 63172.754 ' TLSH _ __ _ 0003 Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold November 17, 2004 Page 2 justification for the tower was presented orally at the public hearing. That is, until the hearing there was nothing available that the members of the community could review or analyze. With specific reference to Mr. Boyd's November 15, 2004 letter to this Board, none of the Fire District's informational meetings provided any substantive analysis of why this type and size of tower addresses the communications issues that have been raised by the public safety officials. In fact, the Wehyreter report originally commissioned by the Fire District, which reaches a different conclusion, was only obtained by a Freedom of Information request. In any event, in the common interest of all members of the community, on behalf of the Orient Association, it is respectfully requested that the Board grant an adjournment of the hearing to permit the Orient Association to complete its investigation of the communications,needs. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Very truly yours, P.Edward Reale • k OFFICE OF \\ ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Email: Linda.Kowalski(a,Town.Southold.ny.us http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 fax(631) 765-9064 7651 g COVER SHEET FOR TRANSMITTAL ATTN: / % / g _ DATE: 1/ / /7 /2004 SUBJECT: Z&U,1 N29wO-c, ) LG MESSAGE: Please find attached copies for your information: Please call us at 765-1809 if you did not receive all sheets. Thank you. Pages attached: / . .1/16/04i 17:00 AX 212 921 1560 S. ‘' /I{INKO'S Z1002 „ d -/Eotis•': - lill1PYA. • 0 ORIENT ASSOCIATION BOX 282 . ORIENT.NY 11957 : C,„(1,(2.1,CLL 6-t-d_ `-elAi--CLAI +-c / It I i43IV+ , , `a-16 0 tS 0 e4u..C.. `c r • November 16, 2004 Ruth Oliva, Chairwomen Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11979 • • Dear Ruth, • This letter is in response to your message which I oOily received last night on my return from a brief tripto Texas. As president of the Orient Association I am making a formal request that the hearing scheduled for Thursday, Novembelr 18 on the Orient Fire Department's proposal for a communications tower be postponed. We are r g,this postponement in order to gine Jon Turner, an Orient resident with expertise iequestinn communications technology,time to investigate the Fire Department's problems and needs in this area. Sincerely, r • .0‘ ne-Z 'fiCrICCOS , Arsine Hopkins Telephone: 631-323-2527 ' • • ' I 9 i I 1 i 1 6 A vei mAi „_, (/D ORIENT AssocIATIoN BOX 282 . ORIENT • NY 11957 November:1, 2004 Ms. Ruth Oliva, Chairwoman Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals PO Box 1179 1 Southold, NY 11978 NOVa" 2004 9' Dear Ruth We are very pleased that the ZBA's analysis of the the application submitted by the Orient Fire District and AHA/Beacon Wireless resulted in the separations of issues into two parts: first, the emergency communications needs of the OFD, second, leased accommodations to telecoms for cellular wireless service, each of which has separate zoning requirements. The concerns of the community, as you know, focus largely on the questions, still unanswered, regarding current shortcomings of the existing emergency communications for the OFD, and the range of alternatives by which those shortcomings can be remediated. The Orient Association is facilitating community discussion of this crucial issue and because of the lack of information, we have made repeated requestions of the OFD over the last 12 months which have not been responded to. Thus we request an opportunity to accompany Mr. Dinizio, as the ZBA clearly has the authority to request information through a meeting with the OFD. The community deserves to have its questions answered as well. We believe the best approach to gaining clarity on these issues for the community is for Jon Turner, an Orient resident with expertise in radio and emergency communications, to have direct access to the OFD to gain answers to the fundamental operational and technical questions raised in connection with the application. This is an extremely contentious issue in the community and appears to have increasing lack of support in the community at large, which may be partially due to the lack of OFD response to questions we have raised. We are aware that, as part of the variance process, community point of view is an essential component. Without more information, we are unable to develop a response to this vital issue. Your assistance in facilitating open communications with the OFD is essential to resolving the issues before us. We intend to retain a communications engineer on behalf of the community, and response to informed and probing questions is a precursor to an effective analysis by such an engineer. We believe that only through this process can the community make the best recommendations for zoning compliant alternatives for our department's future communication capabilities. We intend to support a bond issue for communications equipment, as we have in the past on all of the needs of the Orient Fire District. S•Zdi Co.) "1 -me C S a10 ,�1e� nterC�� -cY �1 .s. op ne410(1S l�� c� 1 e � �o � p •� a� Cn n u• e�� Ce,SI � wan cop�5 To s'o� 1�mes -�U ° �j • From: 6-A9, Jon Turn arner@nyu.edu] • Sent: ar0 Wednesday, November 17, 2004 11:53 AM To: Ellen McNeilly Cc: k" Reale Ed; Hopkins Anne; Wachsberger Freddie; Kowalski, Linda Subject: Re: ZBA meeting, 11/18 - - Good letter, Ellen. It puts our case forward, clearly. Jon. . . NOV .� 7 2004 > ; On Nov 17, 2004, at 12:28 AM, Ellen McNeilly wrote: r ;i > Dear Linda, > I understand that Ed Boyd, OFD's lawyer, is opposing an adjournment of > the ZBA hearing on the OFD application because there is "no good > reason to delay in order to review information that has been available > in the public arena for some time", or words to that effect. This > simply isn't so. > You remember me filing Freedom of Information forms last Summer to > obtain submissions by the Fire District, as they had ignored letters > seeking to obtain information directly from them. I am sure you also > recall my asking you about the engineer's report referenced in their > application and in mailings to the town, which was missing from the > file. You immediately got on the phone with Mr. Boyd requesting it, > at which point he requested a postponement. The report was not > submitted for some months, necessitating additional postponements. > When advised it finally had come in, we were only able to obtain it by > FOILing the OFD, as they did not otherwise respond to our requests for > a copy. We had nothing "public" to review. The only "information" > they have "made public" is their mailings and their "informational" > meeting of 9/10/03, presided over by Mr. Cannuscio. Mr. Boyd's > statement does not correspond to the facts. > It is interesting to note that the Report we expended such effort to > obtain does not specifically identify OFD emergency communications > problems. It was not based on field-testing of OFD equipment. It > used theoretical equations to calculate the range of current equipment • > used by OFD and to predict only a modest performance gain at a new > antenna height (then 90' ) . and stated that marginal communications > coverage is on the Western side (Southold) , not Eastern (Orient) , > concluding that OFD's 25 year old equipment is the major factor > affecting communications. > Their own report's recommendations (with which we concur) are 1) > replacing 25+year old base station and handhelds with newer models > that have improved sensitivity, 2) replacing the current > omni-directional antenna with a directional one oriented East/West, > and, 3) increasing transmitter power. > Clearly, there are other alternatives for improving emergency > communications that are much less expensive than erecting a 90 ' or > 120' tower. At a minimum, these alternatives (and there are many > more, from the use of relays to different antenna locations) should > be thoroughly explored before approving a non-zoning compliant tower > of technically unsubstantiated need. > We need time to hire a qualified engineer to review the Weyhreter > findings, to do actual field testing to obtain pertinent data, and to > work with OFD to review operational procedures which also impact > communi-ations issues, and which have not been addressed by OFD. 1 > In view of the previous lack of co-operation and openess on the part > of the OFD, and the proposed impact upon and needs of the community, > we view it as essential to have the time to pursue this appropriately, > now that the cell proposition has been separated. It is difficult, • > as individuals, to gather resources together to do so. But the issues > involved are so important that we respectfully request that we, on > behalf of the community, be permitted the time to do so, and ask for > an adjournment. > Ellen McNeilly > ' • From: J,n Turner[' ;r@nyu.edu] - Sent: , i ednesday, November 17, 2004 11:53 AM To: J Ellen McNeilly Cc: prReale Ed; Hopkins Anne;Wachsberger Freddie; Kowalski, Linda Subject: // Re:ZBA meeting, 11/18 Good letter, Ellen. It puts our case forward, clearly. NOV 1 7 2004 . . .Jon. . . On Nov 17, 2004, at 12:28 AM, Ellen McNeilly wrote: > > Dear Linda, > I understand that Ed Boyd, OFD's lawyer, is opposing an adjournment of > the ZBA hearing on the OFD application because there is "no good > reason to delay in order to review information that has been available > in the public arena for some time", or words to that effect. This > simply isn't so. > You remember me filing Freedom of Information forms last Summer to > obtain submissions by the Fire District, as they had ignored letters > seeking to obtain information directly from them. I am sure you also > recall my asking you about the engineer's report referenced in their > application and in mailings to the town, which was missing from the > file. You immediately got on the phone with Mr. Boyd requesting it, > at which point he requested a postponement. The report was not > submitted for some months, necessitating additional postponements. > When advised it finally had come in, we were only able to obtain it by > FOILing the OFD, as they did not otherwise respond to our requests for > a copy. We had nothing "public" to review. The only "information" > they have "made public" is their mailings and their "informational" > meeting of 9/10/03, presided over by Mr. Cannuscio. Mr. Boyd's > statement does not correspond to the facts. > It is interesting to note that the Report we expended such effort to • , > obtain does not specifically identify OFD emergency_communications > problems. It was not based on field-testing of OFD equipment. It > used theoretical equations to calculate the range of current equipment > used by OFD and to predict only a modest performance gain at a new > antenna height (then 90' ) . and stated that marginal communications > coverage is on the Western side (Southold) , not Eastern (Orient) , > concluding that OFD's 25 year old equipment is the major factor > affecting communications. > Their own report's recommendations (with which we concur) are 1) > replacing 25+year old base station and handhelds with newer models > that have improved sensitivity, 2) replacing the current > omni-directional antenna with a directional one oriented East/West, > and, 3) increasing transmitter power. > • > Clearly, there are other alternatives for improving emergency - > communications that are much less expensive than erecting a 90' or > 120 ' tower. At a minimum, these alternatives (and there are many > more, from the use of relays to different antenna locations) should > be thoroughly explored before approving a non-zoning compliant tower > of technically unsubstantiated need. S.f - > We need time to hire a qualified engineer to review the Weyhreter , % > findings, to do actual field testing to obtain pertinent data, and to > work with OFD to review operational procedures which also impact > communications issues, and which have not been addressed by OFD. `1 • . > In view of the previous lack of co-operation and openess on the part > of the OFD, and the proposed impact upon and needs of the community, > we view it as essential to have the time to pursue this appropriately, > now that the cell proposition has been separated. It is difficult, > as individuals, to gather resources together to do so. But the issues > involved are so important that we respectfully request that we, on > behalf of the community, be permitted the time to do so, and ask for > an adjournment. • > Ellen McNeilly • • • e • • iv,/ n� nit . 5tl • WJon A. Turner, Ph.D. 1095 Village Lane PO Box 300 Orient, NY 11957 t/f 631 323 3990 8 2004 November 3, 2004 ZBA PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11979 Dear Chairwoman Olivia, I am writing concerning the request by the OFD/AHA/Beacon Wireless to seek a variance in order to erect a 120-foot high flagpole communications antenna adjacent to the Fire House in Orient. My understanding of these matters is that when seeking a variance on the basis of faulty emergency communications, the petitioning party has an obligation to describe the communications gaps in detail and to prove that the proposed remedy will overcome these gaps (for example, see CMK v. Point Pleasant Beach Zoning Board of Adjustment). I have read the applications of OFD/AHA/Beacon Wireless, attended an information meeting at the Orient Fire House last spring, and have read the Weyhreter:Report (Feb 23, 2003, prepared for OFD). Nowhere has the OFD described their communications problems in sufficient detail to allow a communications engineer to understand the problems, investigate their causes, and propose alternative solutions. Without this information we are left with the unsubstantiated demand by the OFD for a higher antenna. Furthermore, the OFD has not demonstrated that the proposed 120' antenna will remedy their yet unstated communications problems. In fact, the Weyhreter Report (theoretical calculations rather than field measurements) shows good low band (46MH) communications coverage throughout Orient. in order to increase signal strength, Weyhreter recommends 1) replacing 25+ year old base station and handhelds with newer models that have improved sensitivity, 2) replacing the current omni antenna on the OF House with a directional one (orientated East/West), and, 3) increasing transmitter power. Surely, these less costly remedies should be tried before going to the expense of erecting a 120-foot high antenna that will cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. There are many causes of emergency communications failure including inadequately charged batteries and-improper orientation of handhelds, oldor poorly Maintained' equipment, improper antenna types, inadequate transmitter power, interference; etc. Antenna height is only one of many factors that may influence communications performance., _ _ _ I urge you to request that the OFD describe their emergency communications problems in detail before considering a variance. This information should include: • Description of failure incidents by type (date, time, equipment type being used, location of transmitter and receiver, nature of failure). Note, this information could be taken from the OFD communications log. • Frequency of failure by type I would be most happy to work with the OFD, without charge, in order to identify and understand these communications problems and to explore solutions. For the past 26 years I have been a Professor of Information Technology at New York University. Prior to that I spent 10 years designing Command, Control and Communications systems for the Department of Defense. My degrees are in Electrical Engineering (Yale) and Computer Science/Operations Research (Columbia). In the early 80s, I completed a study for the NYPD of their SPRINT system (the emergency dispatching system known as '911'). The question I was investigating was 'why Prescient Commanders were not making use of the information in Sprint to better manage their Officers?' My Police tutor was Sgt Eddie Norris and I spent 6 months riding with him in unmarked Police cars learning and observing Police operations. The results of my study lead to changes in both the equipment used and in NYPD operational procedures. Sincerely, 01/L, A4/12,A7 Jon A. Turner ElinoV dean 5po11n 420 Uieeenway Ea71 �t'ien�, T1Y 11957 he 0 ,f' / z � 5 /9�'I j‘i,/,?,,dAr(e L/7,--fL.A-- .1 g Ate-I x •, /,•.tea-1�. 4e, _ Cm/d,51 etg.,a /tr. ,/-t6/ C fie/, / ev744,-d`A G IOMNIPOINT .:4 .r► n '. ....-.17--,. a, w 1,. ,--_,.a+ ryh.-ii:a. ezrw,. 4 yst ....t'4 ; ` t,.; ••�C� `t'_, y`v4 s .. - .s`—x'i'&yi,. _k--,-_„----_-_,__.-- -.- ,T.3, _ ¢` ---_;7--„,,-,.. , "34.... :s 4' r. "r;ro.' .:i :t-. ;•;;•4•-•''''«.,...Z." s*'`5' �..s -yir-..�o �°7 - Y'`�PM?0'` -"F�`^s w -y,'..- *" + ms#„ • ,. q1 44: e. '%s - 'i• - ,..4....,_ 'Y t4,� f .. - •-- .-*.. "aF . ' 1,741,:::::.--- ,_1:;4f:":7',"--::.:....„--a .. 4:11 7,--11---------- , . r 1c � .4.fT:, },.�, -,. .,`• ; "Vr ...'•fie (. ` _• , 1 ,� A •Ari IA ',.� +C` . • View 2. Existing view taken from the rest stop at the beginning of the causeway, looking east. Site Number Project Address: z Orient Fire District Tabor Road, ADMS! CONSULTING SERVICES,INC. 560 Hudson Street LI-13-547 Orient, New York Hackensack NJ,07601 l OMNIPOINT 14. <r - • - a ` ry`r • • • • • .,-. r . I.'t � _ro Y . r417`1,,,,^...'.--.. .-'..,:-:.:. y. - }' .. --pi - e F _, ' ' -r ` F '�"x . ; '. 477' S.�` -, y,ir '-'::;7:k.,7,47.,: e‘..,':''' t , } "- H l'...:3. tPf t rm",- 4 i_.,,:- di. - 7-- ? P it . - ), • t .L - Y 4.:° A * ¢<> dcF .. v, fi -• R ,'',.,;, Y•.I*,4F# ! - ts :s i`+'4' rr �, i,',,X4 - R .. a' . - jk ,..4,1-!---.•1 ` 4X a r t Lit f. • • t +' II .. tl� ,. r . •t.� r +3Li.�.bit., 'Ycw e.) ..lr � P. _ - View 2. Proposed view taken from the rest stop at the beginning of the causeway, looking east. Site Number Project Address: LI-13-547 z Orient Fire District Tabor Road, DMS, CONSULTING SERVICES,INC. 560 Hudson Street Orient,New York Hackensack NJ,07601 W.\1OMNIPOINT 1' ` t t A ' • 1.,� Y. l ye si:t!' • �t , w, ^jK• *• 1 ✓f 66• �( yy``, • 1 ]`� • t • i $ K qY i k c x v'z v KFS d• I 7r �, 15 t +� n '''''',:.-,,n,-44,, .,*,./' } ALy( ..: f "� -c 4'''''' . C • ..'.Z'4 .4 •.,":',N:.,,,:'r •'.: `'', :,k'r t'. s ri 42'..r ' ' ♦s RL "c �e y'r1+` ::14',.,;,', ;1 �"wi y e:."4. 11'{, r Js' h' � ,�' '1‘,.;4;1:1,f;'!'+' .,r i. :;,:!:,:i4,-...i.)..-"- rk rt� •�. f r t, M ^J.., • ;Y ': te . ii .F' -::„.',,,.."4.,::::`.-y ,.y,, s iJ ii 1. f t, fr t ' j yrs . �- • 'y�• •'•; .; coo i' M k ;.,. .a' ,� I y ='t.F,"iil.�: �`.^C - r,. f'gf %.,-'4.,i:•1641`4 r � '� :�.ti� i+• t':,f` I,�,'. t,'� .�-x *�� '''''W''.." "" "s, t•','.'4,',.. !2z1,0!' �yi ';401.41.',"'''''''04"/, _ ::1,'.',4:40,k&:),,%. n .d''hfj4' ,,OA. : r '' :tt. �g•.,,,� :J•,.Y... • ...'. '1,;-+.•-•'-',:-, .-.).4 • '4'4', 'T,r ..,t.,,-.,,,!:..... v� 1 .'; < •,�,. 'l•J''�-52 rsl... $' i . ,t ,V,:i`1 4Jl'"I.4',if�'Pi% ''./1... s l.!•' ...2.1-•,..• t ,,, --r� '�"' .. .-4S ,Fi• ...„ 'r : t!rj •" :,y ii,+Y'.+ + C- ,,:,,,t1:+/..,v;',‘.•‘..•,• i4...4.i t-4q. j r-•• r F r,.r• ,- rp �,l•r •.,1-,...-?,-''. ' 4 v"..ti- 1,,p ,r, � 1t ,t: �• it :00.1".'t p+' .'-;,:c.II., J"a f.G !i. 111 -.' 1 attar, ,*_.��{ :,+ '''''',‘,1-•,',',,,,',"; • • r: t1 t .. 5�.'f t ttx''' 11 /'',, :.s 3`oil 'f r i.e.. "jtt. '.0.,r' 't„._` a a.i.. Or i • s, .4'‘''• ;•;,i•';../.''';''.%.'...,':'..; ,Le. 7,"L k • 1 i 1 t ' .;1; r , S, '•' + ., - �-'hf •,,' .a a •�--.)•,, � ;''.% ta„ ••;1•y•l l 'X•' ',14 'rl }.�4 l'••‘'..•-',‘,'.': i 1 \ y` ` ..,: `; l �1. !Y�� .t ..,J ,k ?f v. `"1,Z&, 1 ii r%` .�:'.T,y� fv � } / llr, �'� ,, � p `� �•}; P"`.'!'t- r 'i.t :tr'E•x 4�it.•� 1C��t}�i�v.. '.;;;-..,j,;,4.6,.4,.,4- tt-.",t .t.•'a'," .'��tiY ,. F:U�. t'.- i 's tk 'L�". H ��`,r t`• +' .4 p,, �:.r •A 1: .,Y H t ? "k � '. � 1 r We, J'. h iph l ,:. '2'.S, a" i ( p. �l, ',b '� ,, � ;r h , gt�{, l � ii ,r ,,1;:c�.1(. rt � `ti ,.,�6/ .. ,,,-,,,q,,,,..: r { -�ff6,,tt s �: > 3 ,t >ti ••;rt�. .19 •°F" !. , i, .Y �`L1 i,! '�.i,��1`:,r. ,,.s.• hf. - L t^ :S `."`i71 l',.,. .1-. r �!t •:t `i �;;'`a ��y,, ,<�`(�;1: �. !. � t: ,,v„ A:--f,. ,f.'�•'�„...� F. .,s'� f !y6' 3 �. `^�'1'..',•:'.2';',( ,':•;p.,0-',.':',,'-', r fY '.r,, �'T.,,..,-4, .r�n�"h?`rr s' �1- {L ..:}�.'.� !rite:. i `.��..>fi'F1',!� :C .,r ;.s!S '� � G-,f :STS p'E�;'(. �r t �rb"'Y4�•..r ��.�"'.,n ,�. � ys�o-: ,z, :, � '`�� 1H^t t�1.�r .�a�y r �e:, syv � - ''j�'F �t ;r) � s, t�, �. �,``�. � � Ls �^� :���a��1' h,r�,w n ix, s� Z- ,`�+.�A��'C�;l Y�riJt ,.,....4,*, :,�1N rf!y•'- -.Y,,:I�Z..`f t:Y -G�y r�r 1 '1 t.' ('S y! �,.. 1 � • .�t�..- �" S A y,,•,../'-� k'�!:• �,:v .sa K• ":;v.4';',44 ti� .0,J } �, 7•; k,, 1!- { 'f• ! F`' ',"•••,,..'',` ' 1�.���4.("w --e:",,,::!,.-4..2-...V iiv !4{,i;1'.f�3 '7� -S{I+`��r• J�� ���t�t;: k,.� .�r��i7 .�kVa��'� �Rri '4 q��..:1���'{'it.�"f 7�7!':Y t`.. � ���i �� r.. N '!t1 ,h. '.ti }4}ft yr t�,.r, a d', .%>tr.�{ • Mfl,. ' .w �,'•a tirrJ•Jr/�\ _ t � .. f4. +ap rtt`^ k �;. tJ'", S.4.4'4'.y,, .ir' iJ�f- 1,�, -c.,i �r r , f"-1 i R ;',1.6. _a1•.- t '•- 3!'.•,4 k ;moi W «. ,744,7 :40'''' 1. 1' '► � R.M,t1 r2Y� • • "kl ,i 4;;; 4,1`•'1/4-2:,f.‘. 5,')-00.)•'2;, '♦ • ,a+,•. '7 `�' l;r' ,r:f t---M°'3',.R... R -.i1; • .r - 41/> �'• 'r„,i,' pi' r `'. r K, _� k. r may' ,1.rr 9., i'r1 •f :,� .+"11',.: :v ay, f 1 • r+'j• S y i_?�y..'' ate, 1,,•7- 1 fr'�; w.-/ '; � ' -,j f•, �",, , s' c, o. yr ' 'i�, K 1' ,>.,,,”'nI, Q. , "1VV4,,%7-,`Y y_. 4 '1,11.4110,,,,, ,, 1"Nl. -.C.' 'vVo a` Y•4' ,; Vit,.-• ` �-*4, V AK.: >,� ' - Qe,, i -' - ' View 3. Existing view taken from the northwest corner of Orchard Road and Halyoake Avenue, looking north, northwest. Site Number 'p Project Address: Orient Fire District Tabor Road, d DMS'CONSULTING SERVICES,INC. / 560 Hudson Street LI-13-547 Orient,New York Hackensack NJ,07601 IOMNIPOINT • r' ..'q -- s, f3-- ti � .,V• i t f.,.b ' ��'`014iJ `i 1 . / .. !. .� xisi #I.7 •i'' „ a •:ro ih { r , ' t y� L • 1. i i., il�ir y .. '-,*-7,..",i',., = ; • .t-? .,t h 4j� ter,.." . ,: �t .• !3. 4..; •jh t.y` - 4 r.,. aM...if: - fNi a j ry .!:` - a aU !j.' .,' �y ��j t. `_ � _ ` • Y 'sr t •y, t r '..i +r• _ ,,;,i, ;yr .9•k N•5 •ri fv'2% l% 9:: q ' A^-w^�A•lk •� / )14 yy,. ,. �a`�4ki. ,, 1. ,1.�, lam{tr .;' t 3t.#`• 'i.`i1• :„.,-.0,,,,,,,,.;.,‘ t -,3 r1,: h•: i. v �i ,p t ?IJ • '>,i .0,�.} ''..1.- it.”•C-, _ it,*, s. .�'�/ . f •) r L� ,i' - }.11, t .r l lJ:ti` *'t�+t .j.;r�Ji•, lx• �,', - h�" r i'^� .!f5�. s/� .4 i ,5�: , .s t• } t t., .' �S. Z. ^.. .t " Lfa jfF .� '%,C A!i ,.. F ,.,- ' r ';: }` z,. rr;,,,.. afs vilfHr yj ,, -:-..,..,,c,:•_''vj„ cJ�A , � .r'.K Ia ,' ;"• �. tom:, _ .j .t s n.Y �(„Ysa�.J`aN 4 i", � ^`+ �. '''',.',,4,,,1,4?•r+' .,;� l,. 9n ,.+�f i a t, •�� ''C ,y i ! {� '� ,,��yjj�,,,��.• y: �.. ..S v .,,. i• Fns • °;.5 '. - f .", 1',r✓ ,r r ..✓/ . :;p'C .}. i *,..,-4 may} A `r7 ,, , A...• N1.:•• -' 1.•. t� - •'n .1_ yt fro ).- r .J. -Y:,,,;(i),',,,;:.�.,..A r ;,f -, CY ..♦fr � *• t,.. /r ... , .i .�d'.-7,,^:,6C 1",, �.+ .'•• • •,�,. r J', • U o''' fY.''•"1 'A ) Fr•4.IY .k.' V, j. �,, .,+,, f ..3 . F i r/�•, •f•'\:i L+ !. 'r" .s.; !,. '�ih -, Y.. i �:Ya� •,, '2^31..1-,:Ci,;"it ,•e l''' i., ; !•,,'e,,' '.,,.< ; i fl "M1k.,�� r f * +i ' •�i c` 4 t ;X-41,,i,‘ ani! .��� c yi,..,'4.1.:1,14.'..71',•$-i-,-..� ,,, 1'�r { �1. a' +s - !-. y� i raw, 1. s, 3Fwy �^K:. _e j•at!�•.� h" ' +• ,•�r, •::,,,,- ...,V..4:,<i" y' h d3 i. ' Z.. '34' TX. l;t -e.; -`•�,.:,,,-,...,-;,N„ r �''.. FFi1.�,• eN l;Ev r, �3 ,,S lr �.t'4 .^a nw� rE C,i.,• ;.j y, ;r<kx,.i-,,, w. ',} AX�'' 1 s '�'” .... ' ak>y a p,• ..., f 4 �.„,„i; • r'kj'` 1.f lL, *Kr s t,x t?4, ,w, .,.• • r '.,-'.1',,,,,,;;;;',;:;, +r r: `. ' ,. { I - i'.,.--X;.:, �'• ie � „�% ; y'«,y5,e;�.tz'Z'•' �, `• ,. a {�;ry,;.�>n.Skr<y 4. '• Cj ,i.• :;.:'� j,.y� "'){+k nl.• �_..;ti••,.}�r. <_y. , �.� N,:�:niii, T .. . •,k ..F :^t y...3y?ir� °• c.,,,„,4 , 1 ° S' 1 a IJffi:� ` CS F �'rX".t . '�.E� jti'ICG` + .�yfr ti ¢ k "�,r�I '. ✓ � is v r,�. > t_1., F. `r e,�*. 4'r .,r "•• v ; 33....,= rk=,*s ,.�,. "r ..;.--':44;:.,..4.4"4" w . .H+ A i': ti.„..,....,....:"..,,,;,. .,.,,-,,,,4,4).s.,114,F.7 'i1; n�ajK'`e ) ` r`N � }' W' i` `” ,,,,,, ,u-, .A a ={ e, . :� '.' '-Se14q `.x :"-' i6/Y�0):: <, '-,.a. 'c§;"�f1jfr . '' x-• .-,- a.;" i:'.' K., :tp r , 'I: ,; ;$, •j'• •j' -i,,,, . sry, ., .1 .• s , ,>,: .s :�('t k '� -;jd nn+ .► 1�• t ,. p a4 _, '6!r 3�p' ty'' } N° N- .'' Nom.- f.. =,., '.4'� ` R R •• -s ,- ,w', ''"....:0 y, 6i rA. i' ti A} Nr42r•a.rt •' 14f� y I 40• ... y., A Sv -��_ 1,744 i.1.^ _-,4y;L� T9-•.• j •, 't. .r -f• fit_' d,.�•r l ak r - ,Y. •, 4.; ' ,�c 4 - ,s•. *�' , y 4K ti r • " - .;till+ • °- .$,4J. p �- 3 '" '��. +� ,s•cr"-i .. Y ' . .itfk..I; • 'a ...sN.'�_. ..;41C,!')-. :'i5' r. •s ,.. pr !. ✓ ` y.fgA •C 4..4+ 0. �N� '."' , a + w,c r ;.-.; dt� - ''{". oi.,,.. 7��y, 'f' 3 T' 4F'S i Rr 4 s r� _ , .� ._t , I�r' .,.•`t t•a .� `li T .t -......,,,i. ..., p .144 — • _ .. -�h ,�' •1.`t-` 'f t ., '. d �� .,;„:,-41C 1~ N rW ., ii ...• } . ",• d�'` `r' ' `'f '-:-.L.•.....,; 't., l,t�.. fi + View 3. Proposed view taken from the northwest corner of Orchard Road and Halyoake Avenue, looking north, northwest. Site Number 4' Project Address: `@ 1 DMS/ CONSULTING SERVICES,INC. LI-13-547 Orient Fire District Tabor Road, 56o Hudson Street Orient, New York HackensackNJ,07601 IOMNIPOINT ^' 1•' t' 1 "I, '0.4*ii, j�iR;I, •• cwt .4111 _ •; F ;M1� )� ISR''. t i � -* 1.,1.4\ '! .. t _, 4,415;w. V.!, ..•1_ ,T ,_7C�. 5 z�� •. C. • ' '4\\��f . tkr_..., ,....-‘,MihN,.-..".-,...:441144.44‘.. ....,.-,..-.. iir 1`.' ,A... • 'S 4 'l"i 4443 1.,''' 'i \ '. {•` . Y a'1'..• , ,.;.F -c ,rle ••.I •• �tiG titi. ,. ` )' �. �•1' e I!` : r 1,, 4.. ,.,'••���S��"yy,'"-1.tttK ' i. r rl • -HZ' S t, ' y.M':. 'N • r• y4, "� .',in.r,.... ,i,,, '0`' ~ • iii - .,� '. •1 0 <- : +C. �---�•.. •6'M ,• 4 .t"if3 - • `1 oi•,'ice ,: '', : P ISs J ` ' •. . ^et. S , ' F,�• *•i aN _ t _ �l � f • - -. 6 -`....;?"1-•:. ; iiy R ` ---- r4'i • _ • . ,' • 1. e. 0 7 f eta r, ° �. • _ : •?� 4 '" ••fr pf' I f:11.1 2;1. ''...11'1''''''47::i.: ' Slit 4/ 1..;:- 4., :r,r,.. •` • .• A,,, � fALT/ ''• '.,i ..z,„„,.. „74„. 1 Cal, •i i , • I ;. i,,:• i a J •4 c..2/6 I �'}r } 1 I ! Lr I P- ', tJ S " t- �• x6 f . 0 Or I ' to. y I1 1,,, it4A,, , s. `y , ,, rY . e i " �' A ' - btr ,4 �, I ';•t y ...` ' + ''ir ms * ' + . , , 'zr ►.,' • • •• y -s«, —"ow. -air.•. �- � ' • %., .,.' ? , F t .. r: •' �._4 :,. A t ,,.:erree;rj t..:.. _ *9rw_, View 4. Existing view taken from the front walkway of Orient Congregational Church off Main Street, looking southeast. Site Number Project Address: LI-13-547 / Orient Fire District Tabor Road, `DMS CONSULTING SERVICES,INC. / 560 Hudson Street 4' Orient, New York Hackensack NJ,07601 i.......,1 OMNIPOINT r r i r iirAllhOlmiiill, --, , ...wry = y .'.. ,.3 1 1 .v t }4 r 1 'Yi, f' _ •� '` r a 1 a ,: ,;1 s c i ,> .1•;t• gra E • . 1( r ..1\ ..1„,/ � � • � 1 i �js • _(tt/ t 'v ,� / t 'teyt �j` ' .4 S { � • F `'`,••••••-••; • :� v. h ..� x � ,tel ,�'>. 1 , ,>, '1 3r ,t / �♦ `r 1• ,,,,. 0- Y / IJ' tiFk� r� xY GiT' 'F ,,./,V:�Y + ..•r1 ,aL • • d.TY - j, , t. a / yfr lv . e'0 ,gf1 AA 11 1f{'�" 1 r ,a J., - . S } gg}{t 1 W' //„ p 4 yr ' A � � '�1 4e''4!i t t�t t fret, .,',,,..;Y t}�M'? X51 1 ,,5 ' ;.. \ ',,, 1 i 0 : 4 *. f ,.{.ti a f+ kE Srtt � •� rl + v1 a Rr� i.e. • r11� �t, •t�. ►1• - t, 1t+ ) k Y resr • ,� . 1 1 /' /.• 1 ,ill r.*•i A al !3-•� `�!¢)7rt:.,h� i.�Lf 9.x '!1/F.i�n lw_. F+Itl;, ' /�. a i9 .na.)yl���t7". •",•r.ha 2 _1_l • �:�,t a�f ! l tJ:_ _ - r :r� View 5. Existing view taken from the western perimeter of 1340 Platt Road looking west, northwest. Site Number Project Address: � 4DMS� / CONSULTING SERVICES,INC. Orient Fire District Tabor Road, 560 Hudson Street LI-13-547 Orient,New York Hackensack NJ.07601 IOMNIPOINT • i _,. iiy r w . i "'r! I T S a 1 1.✓J 4 �/ f.t n .,,,:.:,-,;;,..,1•---::—_-:.;:•:!,4:: 1,14....,‘'',,;' ,R.:� 4,5f1.; y µ • , i, r• r b ; �JO hl r te{ I �f ' �, lo,,._.r /fi.. - ti 'Y , IA''''''' .v >r.k '}•}r.r• .,*' '.i£ '+ %TF,,r s 1�1 ''7 01,w 9r' r{. ? �+ s I '. }2 '`� 3f I .-„... .:, µ a '.a4 ' '' :t'q a'rc 'i 1' i Y s a s ; t�� 2 •r s � o t V;. .__trip . 'A...iv'. — • S� . , .4_a 4,N. a '” r�,r r4 q ' s �R ,_ j' � �' t as •>!d �- -CxY •r r t a .1,•'• i—, r ! 1,-. qt-,.'1 t• . h T.�'iIC f'", ,1.R • ':- ,, .=,Y Y � `- 1rT "t.. , 2. •.,„, ., s' ',,_ 1�r { 7 {' ,''. a. .�' ? )'Sa..1 F' � ' }" :.•. , --r� ,� , - • t a'.y'•. " : '+ +1'+� ,�firr' >r-. • 'aK x k $� --: s . .� 1 aw •t • ,- -' rti, ,. /! . ro^.,r9 .fig�i ,l :7.4,07-- ,+.. .�, �'' t,4% ,1��`w(,y r,, ,� �, r i_ x � _ '1,.• .• • . „� k• --,,.n:/t.$.7„. .,,,,,,,#,,;' 1, +� ��t�'. .rh} 1 3 �}�l�k.' I yf } ' ` / .J`r '---'-;; r l �� h.%f -'4-11 2 - i ,r .ori • - 7 ' ..,4",:•''.:Cr ? I,';`A ` `iqY} CI 1f' 6_4,41'4".- 6 1'/ ');I'r•ICA'r yR •dtr �, " / • :,'":,,,,,f;;;°.,1:011.,.'S. r •1 v tv 1}`•4' �, J .� IFar few ° ' , y - ,: J :AI• p� ,,ti', 4"' • Vr X 1 . . ' n ^ 114 LI if., b 0 1, . f' ti Fi.. .. +�` ktT3„,310,1,;,i,,,•..20.'.4.,',,',Pt".}S6 a z�'/ ..�f.»w.�i �! ,ti. .,:1' 1._ty is '.`2 rt:41 I.C:' rfSt.;i .r:es 4 View 5. Proposed view taken from the rest stop at the beginning of the causeway, looking east. Site Number Project Address: �z 1DMSt CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. LI-13-547 Orient Fire District Tabor Road, 560 Hudson Street Orient, New York ' HackensackNJ,07601 OMNIPOINT .. _ kA--r,i.i,,,1,,,i,,kx-„,,:1.:,.e-4-,..s,.-a..-,6,,.-;. ,,'":,-e'e.,.s.-..,,:4•'•.:-.,i•,.l...-,l.,,.A,-.- '.F1.'.,..,.r,.'.•,".f....„•, •,,4, ,,.4.-0.,L,.,--.\...--,,••-•.-,.•1._-,•4,•,1'0',,'..,4.•-b,..,,-,'1,,,•„•.._•,...i,.0,,.,,,,.',4,• t,`„1_s„.,:-.,:.:`,-:_-,.,--,4-,...,.-.-."...5c.„,;,,---.-....•,..,.,,t.(f•-•-`.,•4- .^'•.:•-4•., es, °, ' • • ,. 44 -. - , 4* , ..., . • ,. ,•.,-„"„..*/,.•.rk ' V. I, • iief ---??. ; : „ _,i. , • „1 " It.-.'.. .... : • ,.. l'ZIre i ta.,i-1/4: :. . v ' .,---:4,_ ' . *-jir,''-1', "N•.7'11 ''..rt"4,1, -- - • ., .41, - s'v-: .t• rk,,,i-o?4'-:',;:4-,.-_”" ••• - -.'-' :'-':-..*':. ' '"" ':fs;ir• .!,4.. ,,t'',:'' ^-1, . . , • i 4 ,•• - vi,3..i5.1„,2 ,,-•,.. 4.,-„,„, ,' i'.'.. , -•f- . ':.*".. ' ••-,- . 1.75rv,.... •*-- • • - '-' - • - .' .-.'6. .e*: i,• .4-u- ,,,,, I or S. .1"'1 VS''' .'t. . .' 4---iik.;`• -• • ''•''' -144', •••••• •.-:-..ifit'.N.'Zililtd •.•c.F -0'.' ,, • • • ., •/,.. •,,„,.. • '.-' •• ' '.•:•43'.W. . , . .....,:.,,,-. . ,... ,,,,,.-•.. 5,._ ...::.., . . •-,. - , . ..... 4,0 . . ..,,-::e.. _-.-- ...--s.,-..,„-.k- .:.. • ''••‘•'--arrAti...m..-: •.I'.' • . =44;•••-....4•.^....- ,•••,' - ..• • 01-• ;•'•• 4.;:'" . ' '.• ';.::.•••• -:.':-'i -;• ,-.•-4 ' , 'w:AO, '"fly,.• -, ...; • ., ..r•i' - . •• . -,-.:. ,„ •• 7. .. • • - , • ;.. . “. . ,..4• .• .,;„''•• • • • • • ''' l• '.• ••••• • • ...; . 04,,,,,, * '‘`. '''', 74. ' .., ...4, . , 'fL'' . .—'''''' .... A•f'... 4.• , .,.:,..T',.-7 4.,..,••„ • '''' 0140 - 41, . 4.-. 1-...:,„..•,.,..,•'..,..iNit,. •`• .."..-.,.r4-4..4*1/4 r• .,,4...1„.,_..•,,4-1 If, ..•..-„,4t.iipiyi;, 0.si„•. ..• -.-'••..- :,.-,”'4 1 4;,-1.,, .• ; • ; .: . , „ I• , •t'- 151F4- , . i:• ',I .-4..4:4 •.--.,—_--,,. ..„...._....,.,.-..-s-••, ,•: •‘ t / - . 4. - • .J_ _; /..V ./ ' ; •,,..T. z•4.,• A•,,, a,.. .., .. ..-,•-...e.„,,...4---...v.4 . , . rp . 4. ''01 . it lift is g lirc4 it;'' * '''..*” .• t 1' 1.1.ti :,...... • ' _4 .'79CA4* ....:, . - .....-4 ar , f, a •No),ri- frt. '., .. di-. ..i"I''''00 "—Iowa-4-.10i* 4,7,11,' L..— - - ••,...-- ,• . ... t;•-- •-•••47".• '' - •;••• ' •• ;, - • ' No/4• •-- 1•T , , 4, • •• .i-,e, '4 tta;-...'..."',•-, „.• - _ •11•0,f • . zo,• i . .• ,• r .. ,.....,.. -... - , . . - . . . Lis. ..4,44,' i .....,i• .- ,-...I; •••","%,.._•••••isfi ' - - 1 At • , ., .•s• • 'I ii.•-•••S...t. -. 16.1,11%, . • , ,v„ -4 t.`:,-•,..r, • • 3,- '-• • .1,0,..tv - '', • '-.Irk-,v-,,,...--..,-4? -.,---e!,.. ....-,4•••Si .*`; . ' ' ' ' ' • ;-•.t. ••.•e. 4.• . ... :";'s .. . ,. .., *v.,'.. ,. .1 ‘t''.7.V", Vitl'o • ' - 14' •:— • ..: Ni...- - .......-'1riet ..: ../..:. - - A i . ....,•:... . . . . •iii•-. 10-,- : A . . '*i ,.;•0•0'.... ' •"'.-- kJ:. ',,' .._._.„. -----:---.-,---j--,- , ,,- 11 li iii . ''' ,11:1t4is ,,"41111 i ,,... ,...- : :....7.---- ..5.:: i . . 3" .1-4,••„4„ •••ki...'.C.' '... P t•'' ,.4.1.•!'lk,........ e $ "*I4'$' '' ` ''ti. :' i_ ,,!, ..,....„ ...., _ ,..„.. / ...„ 1..0 A....---- 'iv --0"., 0, ,:, . • . , . ..., ,. ...-. - •-...-... --:-Ar. 4,- -_--e.: .- -... 7 - ...-'' • - • . _, , 44 44,4`;3;1 • sr " -- --OM- . _ - .._ - — - -- . ...iv -•-••- __ ...,„ _ ..., - . ' -- -...... - -. • _ __, --••• - - View 6. Existing view taken from the southwest corner of Village Lane and Skipper's Lane looking northeast. Non-impact. Site Number '*. Project Address: 1 • 4 DMS CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. LI-13-547 Orient Fire District Tabor Road, -mir 560 Hudson Street Orient,New York Hackensack NJ,07601 IOMNIPOINT 41,. 9.0 -- , .-. - -,or. 414.1V-14,‘*A ? `.1V.t,1":.;. - r'lirr .....4, ‘. , ..... j. „ , 40,..,.. t• 1. 4 .' • . •_ •-' ; frgi 4 - t: + J I y - • rrtw• • �..' -r�EY:• .. . ,t 44.1 ''' ' %OM .' . 1 View 7. Proposed view taken from the southwest corner of Tabor Road and Orchard Street, looking northeast. Site Number - Project Address: Orient Fire District Tabor Road, 4 DMS P CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. •LI-13-547 560 Hudson Street Orient, New York Hackensack NJ,07601 OMNIPOINT .1,,.; . i t f '• \ ' i• -,. i,!.•", �t t �1 ?r •,tom• a'+ ,,.r �,4 C. ,, 3 i r4 4 , ! %,,, Irirlk.• 4, bee • P �.,t ... r la"" . Nt } , .,-, �y -:,,.• �4,t 3c•S. _ t� �J.kl • *'e4 wrf.v,-e•, ir -LS:+ �'u•: v•' tri ,Y.L,' ♦ � !'{� t y^ ',. - '1� t s' ~ .t ,, 3 • �f•1. w'..' ' i AU".'*.d.5 .h!'yD.:♦ Vis. •. i [, 'i,.E -.�.•, • fry.-„ "A4.•.�'•✓ :y...� t•. J f, 'ti. ,t .� �4y`\\Tri.A• + '±. • v ..Y". [, ..tom... •.' ; ••, •-.r 4. f •s,�;• w t N. .a + ' . 7.. .•r te, ',•. 1 ,;(.4 - ... .11,'r tt . f 115.*Vyor; *•' .. `{• . a `n.,r..yp�,, 1r Why✓, ,. .K`' .v: .. • R,1 L -...to. S i *i 4'. 4,<I4,/, F .. ik f•Tao. .\fir 9 Air . 4 :/ x •• f 'f,v•tr.l.•-r 1 �44) ,:a • 5- t i 1 • 4.�l>' S 41• J , ` - i h`• A�. tilt\•- •pisalit � ' Y'� t 1 rt'.r ...*_t1: �J, p•S .i i. y err aF •rNt d;• .. � 1.k '.y tv d-t, ,i:•� ,,;T'�" F` '•{ •i�` t t n f \ 1"4,r9'-4 « ' h I ei ‘,1 i�.***. i .♦.,w f ` • 441.7'0„•)at ''V-'b:-...- 1`•k4 ••i' / ��` + a ♦ ?r t a !r f.., ►> ;Srt.a '411" K t W '•iti.irst�C '.•40 i ,�tj • 4 -.4'. 'y'rt1 t 'Z'•�' 1` ,..../' i b't -'C .. • p •• .. ''`. - ,b- • - • • . •1• •t y: • fid. X • ,t'./ • l• • Y• G. Ji: a � , :1,1's;,' 1•r'.. r��� �� iyf�"J/,• - • ��'f,y. ", .' _ ',. .. .� a 5.4 .•<•t,t�.. .•t', •a _ 4 art ♦ rr♦ ....$;;:41:;70,4‘; *p=i'�701'.F•1�a/Y .1 �:ry�;'; it.. :511;:{.::4' �.(? �. 4.• 4'''''....;6:;::":' �'4 r, -`�• .�` '�- Y' - vim: .i•,4-70, 'iY I ��aaqt w • y f,7.• {' , :r e • ;fr r '� r 4 ,� •1W L 1 �lti~ 7y ¢ •~. • ,4•~ •..r L•• w ••.,�1- \• _ -^c�� - ...y '1t•'. 1' - •t. tr r .0• A E '.A'�•.I', ,w .s •tJ��`'• r#• . • - _ Ar'- = Tr .9. w : ,,;....L.4.1›:‘,6`./.1111•••ga.z4 . f \dtI 4.r �.' t.�4 ate �i� . •\ F7 �:'i*rr � -' �► Y 4 41 -, Ibt?', "1111i1g0.1644.044,•4 .-' . ..•••• .4. -..4, L p. '‘.'" - lq., .• h, r * 'i.ii 91*`‘.; 7' -, "" 'A` !4. •L •Y�.,i. ;OAl • M1 s +I''Z-.�♦ j "•''_• .r ` t4� • • at• s' 't t .i, ' • Yy lA 1 , u'•... h _. n ..,.. • -\. - $ •' l•I -/ -.� ,,..Deer •t ' '.• .•`99,949...r.. - v rte `c • • 5 1� r••t. ?I `' ...., ! i k(v • > SgiliSt kmsxr 4 .► 44 111101131010% . _ View 8. Existing view taken from the driveway of 200 Village Lane, looking east. Site Number Project Address: i Auk DWI CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. LI-13-547 z l Orient Fire District Tabor Road, 560 Hudson Street Orient,New York Hackensack NJ,07601 �'OMNIPOINT 4 a / _6. --- _ ,._. --- .. - • 46R « t fir. - � -- y µ ltiA • 30/ , ..�.,AF ... �- - --. J 7 PJB � .T. s — �- a '. C - • View 9. Existing view taken from the southeast corner of Navy Street and Village Lane, looking northeast. Non-impact. Site Number Project Address: ... IP" ADMS CONSULTING SERVICES,INC. Orient Fire District Tabor Road, 560 Hudson Street LI-13-547 Orient, New York ® Hackensack w,07601 ��OMNIPOINT ■ 1 . . �., ( I A Y �� ;.v -�' .;1.• _.� • \ r + r n ►-•.; os - .a•v! t. r- 4_,...;40-, f r; A,,, a •� '�•i _ 1 /` ,,l ,•..i.:',,-,• +-:, mow . _x 4.-4 spy ,II `'', .? rf' ,•,,, r "'1, r* �9.`• ..`"•• • Y• r3i •• • r 1 }.. .... .r� r.' '.'moi �. yi�•t '.-44.. S- �,Jw' 1 - /i"•i ;p`•" ^ MM.,,, X7.4 . ✓ .S. .4�• i �. • .'444 .x y •',Y �,,(' , • V. 'S"( ■•Y .. •f.•t' _44va-',� *1,7'751g-7, ,.t'i`M V.-4....:414:: .' •3•~..' ,✓��#s��Lr . • ..v. r .'�,�!�,. ,.'LTi ,•r • .; i, L.'V C .�'�, + : r F-'f/'%.� `'tix a, �, X16_ 1 '�w , -•it Y•. ((,, i: �,.�•�u • r?w 1� a. _,tfSy '4 11'%_,Ti f •-.4- w ,-yr.� -. tile �,, •No .•..- x •,,• ,i; - “, -, 'm , .,.'�+ 0, - '. :.a • te i?yl':t .? ti ` _ w i \ 1/. �1.?„, • 10;4..,...• •f• "t1*f .f0 ,,-,..t.0,--•�� *�. •'`a.,� C..: ,-, ,.j�• :SS:�tY..•*,.7*, - • ' .- t ,e r.•1' f 1..„..;,,-406...•;:.•••. ...-:,',r,- •,fYF' Y'a' ► •' • r•'1.'1-7,,,:: r `.tr• ``14,:'-v, ;rtit••-^- • 1-.c.-, Vi .X ' • ete'pt ;t �4 • F.. ��Y yt��"gy S !o •.” -t` 1i. 'heS. ' 1• ' ,, 5 +.,' / i E. Y .r.. • S 1 r-( . mo • ,,,.fti: • *4 , r + a' r l,g'ei 4 r •• • i xA i. •�,: tZ ". \' a\k. '''' -%"--.4.09f .� 1i-' 1.*, •."77.1140.*t'.�I. •\(- . 4fsr :';; _ 1 4 t .. •'fir! '� .� 77""-- �'. • 4- e. �. - f � ;, ,ti ¢ ti ' •tel * T_ • '9 P 14 '4' ' ' rM mss ..a �, . `Yr .4 •a. 4 4'..44'11". l y-�r to r"• 4. lC 14 ..y • .,1'0... (‘ • - 1 ^• View 8. Proposed view taken from the driveway of 200 Village Lane, looking east. Site Number Project Address: u IDMSr CONSULTING SERVICES,INC. Orient Fire District Tabor Road, 560 Hudson Street LI-13-547 Orient,New York Hackensack N.1,07601 VIEWS AND DISTANCES The nine(9)views that are provided here were assessed for visual impact and are described below. An icon of a red flag notes the location of the proposed structure. Microsoft Expedia measured the approximate distances from which the view was taken through the mapping program of Streets. View Point Key Distance View 1 View taken from the northwest corner of egress ± 384 feet driveway of the elementary school, looking southeast. Simulation of Before and After View 2 View taken from the rest stop at the beginning of the ±1.7 mile Causeway, looking east. Nominal view. Simulation of Before and After. View 3 View taken the northwest corner of Orchard Road ±2603 feet And Halyoake Avenue, looking north/northwest. Simulation of Before and After View 4 View taken from the front walkway of the Orient ± 624 feet Congregational Church off Main Street, looking southeast. Simulation of Before and After. View 5 View taken from the western perimeter of 1340 Platt Road, ±2112 feet looking northwest. Simulation of Before,and After View 6 View from the southwest corner of Village Lane and ± 1584 feet Skipper's Lane, looking northeast. Non-Impact View. View 7 View taken from the southwest corner of Tabor Road and ± 1200 feet Orchard Street,looking northeast. Simulation of Before and After. View 8 View taken from the driveway of 200 Village Lane, ±927 feet looking east. Simulation of Before and After. View 9 View taken from the southeast corner of Navy Street and ± 0.5 mile Village Lane, looking northeast. Non-Impact View. I PROCESS The photographs were taken with a Nikon N60 Camera. The lens was set on 50mm auto focus to match the human eye's focal view. Kodak Gold 200 ASA print film was used for the negatives for this project. All photos were developed in a 4x6 size print and the then scanned into digital format at 600 dpi. The images are directly imported into the Adobe Photoshop version 6.0 software program. The proposed images of the equipment portrayed in the renderings are digital files of actual existing structures/antenna. The files are layered onto the photographic image and scaled using internal graphing and pixel measuring tools. Lighting and colors are matched based on time of day, current weather conditions at the time of picture and proposed construction drawings. The blending of these layers will create the final image. The final image is exported to a post production software Adobe Illustrator 9.0 and scaled to page size using its Vector Based scaling engine to ensure zero percent distortion in final print. Text additions and final prints are run from Illustrator with Panton Color Matching on all colors. Final images are printed on a Epson Glossy Photo Paper to maximize contrast, brightness and attention to detail for each image. \r MUM-LEY, MEADE, NIELSEN & RE ATTORNEYS AT LAW REPLY TO: ❑ REPLY TO: 160 MIDDLE NECK ROAD 36 NORTH NEW YORK AVENUE GREAT NECK,NEW YORK 11021 HUNTINGTON, NEW YORK 11743 (516)487-6500 RECEIVED (631)425-4100 TELECOPIER TELECOPIER (516)487-6539 APR 2 7 2005 (631)425-4104 April 26, 2005 ZONING soAR9 OF APPEALS Ms. Linda Kowalski Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 RE: Request for Review of Documents in Accordance with Freedom of Information Law Premises: Orient Fire District 23300 Main Road Orient,New York SCTM#: Section 18,Block 5, Lot 13.8 Dear Linda: We enclose herewith our Check No. 4264, dated April 26, 2005, in the sum of $45.00 made payable to the Town of Southold, representing payment of the fee for the captioned FOIL request. Very truly yours, MUNLEY, MEADE,NIELSEN&RE By: 2S( 14&icild Dorothy Belard /db Enclosure 1 ASR Registration 1039820 Page 1 of 2 ( Dic)-11 c i_ikt.i-PAY- Fc. Federal I I p I � . . : � FCC Home Search Updates El-FilingInitiatives I For Consumers I Find People /Csfotrrmunc�ic�atl�n�, C'dmnissin $V �Y � .„... _ ._ Fr� sitk\ .-. , ,.. _ I;-2,:t ",_ -. Antenna Structure Registration U FCC> WTB> ASR > Online Systems > ASR Search FCC Site Map ASR Registration Search Registration 1039820 ®HELP ga New Search Ei. Return to Results aPrintable Page ft Reference Copy Registration Detail , Reg Number 1039820 Status Granted File Number A0046843 Constructed FAA Study EMI No FAA Issue NEPA No Date Antenna Structure Structure Type TANK -Any type of Tank (Water, Gas, etc) Location (in NAD83 Coordinates - Convert to NAD27) Lat/Long 41-06-15.0 N 072-22-25.0 W APPROX 100 FT W OF MOORES LN @ NORTH City, State GREENPORT , NY ST Center of AM Array Heights (meters) Elevation of Site Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground (AGL) 2.0 49.0 fl, 0,7 F( Overall Height Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground w/o Appurtenances 51.0 48.5 Painting and Lighting Specifications None Owner &Contact Information FRN Licensee ID Owner . SUFFOLK COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY P: (516)589-5200 4060 SUNRISE HWY E: OAKDALE , NY 11769 Contact P: E: • Last Action Status http://wireless2.fcc.gov/U1sApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistrationj sp?regKey=603527 3/17/04 i •• „ • • • • • • • • : C ASR Registration 1039820 Page 2 of 2 Status Granted Received 01/26/1998 Purpose New Entered 02/03/1998 Mode Mail In (Manual) Related Applications 01/26/1998 A0046843 - New (NE) Comments • Comments None Automated Letters 03/09/2000 Construction Reminder, Reference 42913 ASR Help ASR License Glossary - FAQ - Online Help - Documentation -Technical Support ASR Online TOWAIR- CORES/ASR Registration -ASR Online Filing - Application Search_- Systems Registration Search About ASR Privacy Statement -About ASR- ASR Home Registration jBy Registration Number j I st18M!T' Search FCC I Wireless I 1.11.5 I CORES Help I Tech Support Federal Communications Commission Phone: 1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322) 445 12th Street SW TTY: 1-888-TELL-FCC (1-888-835-5322) Washington, DC 20554 E-mail: fccinfo@fcc.gov http://wireless2.fcc.gov/U1sApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistration jsp?regKey=603527 3/17/04 ASR Registration 1041889 Page 2 of 2 Last Action Status Status Constructed Received 02/25/2002 Purpose Change Owner Entered 02/25/2002 Mode Interactive Related Applications 02/25/2002 A0248490 - Change Owner (OC) 04/24/2000 A0122192 '- Notification (NT) 07/23/1998 A0049390 - Modification (MD) All related applications (4) Comments Comments None Automated Letters 02/26/2002 Ownership Change, Reference 202434 02/26/2002 Authorization, Reference 202496 03/09/2000 Construction Reminder, Reference 43053 ASR Help ASR License Glossary - FAQ - Online Help - Documentation -Technical Support ASR Online TOWAIR- CORES/ASR Registration -ASR Online Filing - Application Search - Systems Registration Search About ASR Privacy Statement -About ASR- ASR Home Registration 'By Registration Number;;`) ; Csuatrr Search FCC 1 Wireless I ULS CORES Help I Tech Support Federal Communications Commission Phone: 1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322) 445 12th Street SW TTY: 1-888-TELL-FCC (1-888-835-5322) Washington, DC 20554 E-mail: fccinfo@fcc.gov http://wireless2.fcc.gov/U1sApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistration jsp?regKey=605199 3/17/04 ASR Registration 1003627 Page 1 of 2 FCFederal Communications, FCC Home I,Search I Updates I E-Filing I Initiatives I For Consumers I Find People CommMissISSion ``` �� ` Antenna Structure Registration P FCC> WTB> ASR > Online Systems > ASR Search FCC Site Map ASR Registration Search Registration 1003627 ®HELP New Search 13° Return to Results a Printable Page Ii Reference Copy Registration Detail Reg Number 1003627 Status Constructed File Number A0004150 Constructed 01/01/1969 FAA Study EMI No FAA Issue NEPA No Date Antenna Structure ' Structure Type TOWER - Free standing or Guyed Structure used for Communications Purposes Location (in NAD83 Coordinates - Convert to NAD27) Lat/Long 41-06-35.0 N 072-22-03.0 W WASHINGTON AVE City, State ' GREENPORT, NY Center of AM Array Heights (meters) ' Elevation of Site Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground (AGL) 3.0 109.7 %36,a Fir-- Overall Height Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground w/o Appurtenances 112.7 ` ' ' ' 108.2 Painting and Lighting Specifications FCC Paragraphs 1, 3, 12, 21 ' • Owner &Contact Information ' FRN Licensee ID Owner CSC ACQUISITION NY INC P: (516)727-6080 254 OLD COUNTRY RD E: RIVERHEAD , NY 11901 Contact P: E: Last Action Status http://wireless2.fcc.gov/U1sApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistration jsp?regKey=109393 3/17/04 L ASR Registration 1003627 Page 2 of 2 Status Constructed Received 10/09/1996 Purpose New Entered 10/16/1996 Mode Mail In (Manual) Related Applications 10/09/1996 A0004150 - New (NE) Comments Comments 11/08/1996 CLEARED STRUCTURE WITH APPROPRIATE FCC PARAGRAPHS BASED ON OLD TOWER FILE RECORD 042679, FAA 81-AEA-157-OE. Automated Letters None ASR Help ASR License Glossary - FAQ - Online Help -Documentation -Technical Support ASR Online TOWAIR- CORES/ASR Registration - ASR Online Filing - Application Search - Systems Registration Search About ASR Privacy Statement-About ASR-ASR Home Registration y ?• SUBMIT Search �BRegistration-Number��__--------____—; FCC I Wireless I ULS I CORES Help I Tech Support Federal Communications Commission Phone: 1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322) 445 12th Street SW TTY: 1-888-TELL-FCC (1-888-835-5322) Washington, DC 20554 E-mail: fccinfo@fcc_gov_ http://wireless2,fcc.gov/U1sApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistration jsp?regKey=109393 3/17/04 ASR Registration 1033042 Page 1 of 2 COdt "(tttfh fit- FCC Home � Search I Updates I E-Filing I Initiatives I For Consumers I Find People COMMission `M'� ._ S 7 Antenna Structure Registration FCC> WTB> ASR> Online Systems > ASR Search FCC Site Map ASR Registration Search Registration 1033042 ® HELP New Search Return to Results t Printable Page Reference Copy_ •'egistration etail Reg Number 1033042 Status Constructed File Number A0039190 Constructed 11/04/1997 FAA Study 97-AEA-3104-OE EMI No FAA Issue 10/17/1997 NEPA No Date Antenna Structure Structure Type TOWER - Free standing or Guyed Structure used for Communications Purposes Location (in NAD83 Coordinates - Convert to NAD27) Lat/Long 41-06-34.0 N 072-22-06.0 W 0.5 KM S. OF INTERSECTION AT NORTH RD. & City, State GREENPORT , NY RT. 25 Center of AM Array Heights (meters) Elevation of Site Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground (AGL) 2.4 114.9 - /77 P-r Overall Height Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground w/o Appurtenances 117.3 114.0 Painting and Lighting Specifications FM Chapters 4, 8, 13 Paint and Light in Accordance with FAA Circular Number 70/7460-1J Owner &Contact Information FRN Licensee ID Owner VILLAGE OF GREENPORT P: (516)477-0248 236 THIRD STREET E: GREENPORT , NY 11944 Contact P: E: Last Action Status http://wireless2.fcc.gov/UlsApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistration jsp?regKey=598253 3/17/04 ASR Registration 1033042 Page 2 of 2 Status Constructed Received 11/04/1997 Purpose New Entered 11/04/1997 Mode Interactive Related Applications 11/04/1997 A0039190 - New (NE) Comments Comments None Automated Letters None ASR Help ASR License Glossary_- FAQ - Online Help - Documentation -Technical Support ASR Online TOWAIR- CORES/ASR Registration -ASR Online Filing - Application Search - Systems Registration Search About ASR Privacy Statement-About ASR- ASR Home Registration SearchBY Registration Number fro _ (SUBMIT) FCC I Wireless I ULS I CORES Help I Tech Support Federal Communications Commission Phone: 1-888-CALL-FCC (1-888-225-5322) 445 12th Street SW TTY: 1-888-TELL-FCC (1-888-835-5322) Washington, DC 20554 E-mail: fccinfo©fcc.gov http://wireless2.fcc.gov/U1sApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistration jsp?regKey=598253 3/17/04 ASR Registration 1041889 Page 1 of 2 federalUpdates Fc me Search U dates I E Filing I Initiatives I For Consumers I Find People Comrnunlcat��ns I I p FCC Ho Commis ion , -,,Im"", , '', ,,, "ice ,max Antenna Structure Registration FCC> WTB> ASR> Online Systems> ASR Search FCC Site Map ASR Registration Search Registration 1041889 I ®HELP Ck New Search ° Return to Results Printable Page II Reference Copy Registration Detail Reg Number 1041889 Status Constructed File Number A0248490 Constructed 07/16/1998 FAA Study 98-AEA-2144-OE EMI No FAA Issue 09/15/1998 NEPA No Date Antenna Structure Structure Type 3TA3 - Antenna Tower Array - 1st N = # towers 2nd N = Position of this tower Location (in NAD83 Coordinates - Convert to NAD27) Lat/Long 42-11-59.0 N 073-50-02.0 W TWR 3 - RT 9G &COUNTRY RD 14 City, State GREENPORT , NY Center of AM Array Heights (meters) Elevation of Site Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground (AGL) 58.0 136.0 4 6 tCi Overall Height Above Mean Sea Level Overall Height Above Ground w/o Appurtenances 194.0 135,1 Painting and Lighting Specifications FAA Chapters 3, 4, 5, 13 Paint and Light in Accordance with FAA Circular Number 70/7460-1J Owner& Contact Information FRN 0001675818 Licensee ID L00121681 Assignor ERN 0006144612 Assignor ID L00230402 Owner Clear Channel Broadcasting, Inc. P: (918)664-4581 2625 S. Memorial Drive, Suite A E: FCCcontact@clearchannel.com Tulsa , OK 74129 Contact Langham , Troy G P: (918)664-4581 2625 S. Memorial Drive, Suite A E: troylangham@clearchannel.com Tulsa , OK 74129 http://wireless2.fcc.gov/U1sApp/AsrSearch/asrRegistration jsp?regKey=605199 3/17/04 Village of Orient PointSoy1 Fire District ` - Proposed coverage @ 110 ft. -A ' 1 ofy e, r ur lAq_ - .. , O Nolthv‘e 49/. Demarest Rd R P.1 oh,/)s / -- • - -- \ x/ A ,-- .d 1 -2-. <,>'4. . �a c o r �, cr oo� ' '7;1. . A ,> cD ?w Halyoke Ave �` Orchard St ire o 0 A . t, "4, 2 0 King St C� •c� ate�' .9 0/0 O� 8'• 0 8 Qa �h o4. �y -o co oJo, o0 d0 7 Ilii i- aIlkm ,� -A:iiiii, 44, _ I- • • OMN1POINT° Town •. ► of of a. , ..,;14 'v'!! Southold o3 ,03 S • 1 -, CD `' ..I1354B ' 4 A• �,. > 0- lir '1 0 Subject Site •' apCe._ il o- A On Air Sites • M 4.4Coverage from subject CO ElCoverage w ■ ` (-84 dBm In vehicle) sou�dpr Ma�rd U O �r . Coverage from existing sites D (-84 dBm In vehicle) ' � � (-.7)"(7) m 3 �� N� @ Q V.0\:(\‘-\-\-\ L 113547 B N U, Vas\' e a .— Caron _ ' , Map 2 c �� Men L ,P a.)-- r' f,r'. - Oe C•. settsIL...... Map Scale 1"= 1.016 mi Rd ..340) 1li 11.41120,2004 ast Ln �4��. �,73 417 Itelt"...: Prepared by o- • ,.... 0, wis FiCa • :„....,,7 ,r.„, d 40 a 1`c PierUm Sel■tbiii 4 �� A, ate' OMNIPOIN" • Town of ...5' �' !' y Southold CP. (5) INI;:' N 'il-- 4 `.1 I 4354 / - j w qY 4- ` - t,ir '� Subject Site ��; ♦ 401°) A On Air Sites Q. , a Or Ma;\�d U O Or MI from existing ■■L�� If •P. sites `�'13162C (-84 dBm In vehicle) co)7,vo c X '7N ' N� J a Port .e� L11 3547B N Carou d ' � � d o, tMen : den Ln Ma p1 _, Oe .• , s.� Cgbiettstl Map Scale 1"= 1.016 mi 'd October 20,2004 1i1; ', ' v Prepared by , • f 11' /1 11 MUNLEY, MEADE, NIELSEN & RE 1 O 1111 ATTORNEYS AT LAW may/ REPLY TO: 1E1 REPLY To: LJ 160 MIDDLE NECK ROAD 36 NORTH NEW YORK AVENUE GREAT NECK,NEW Yomc 11021 HUNTINGTON,NEW YORK 11743 (516)487-6500 (631)425-4100 TELECOPIER TELECOPIER (516)487-6539 (631) 425-4104 0:',- 1-r;-;'((71`71\\17:'_ _} October 13, 2004 OCT 1 3 2004 BY HAND Ms. Linda Kowalski Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 RE: Application of Orient Fire District,Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T'Wireless, and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC No. 5408 Dear Ms. Kowalski: With regard to the pending Special Use Permit Application relating to the captioned matter, enclosed please find the following: 1. Eight(8) copies of revised Site Conformity Assessment with FCC Rules and Regulations, 47 CFR Section 1.1310 et seq.; 2. Eight(8) counterparts of revised zoning drawings; and 3. Six (6) counterparts of revised Visual Simulation Presentation. Thanking you for your continued courtesies and cooperation,we remain, Very truly yours, MUNLEY,MEADE,NIELSEN&RE By: ZG ti4ence C. Re Lawrence C. Re LCR:ew Enclosures jMUNLEY, MEADE, NIELSEN & RE ATTORNEYS AT LAW �'�// REPLY TO: CI REPLY TO: Ei 160 MIDDLE NECK ROAD 36 NORTH NEW YORK AVENUE GREAT NECK, NEW YORK 11021 HUNTINGTON, NEW YORK 11743 (516) 487-6500 (631)425-4100 TELECOPIER TELECOPIER (516)487-6539 (631)425-4104 October 13, 2004 ck OCT 1 3 2004 BY HAND 2con Ms. Linda Kowalski Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold P.O. Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 RE: Application of Orient Fire District, Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless, and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC No. 5408 Dear Ms. Kowalski: With regard to the pending Special Use Permit Application relating to the captioned matter, enclosed please find the following: 1. Eight(8) copies of revised Site Conformity Assessment with FCC Rules and Regulations, 47 CFR Section 1.1310 et seq.; 2. Eight(8) counterparts of revised zoning drawings; and 3. Six (6) counterparts of revised Visual Simulation Presentation. Thanking you for your continued courtesies and cooperation, we remain, Very truly yours, MUNLEY, MEADE, NIELSEN&RE By: 2ati,ozence e. R2 Lawrence C. Re LCR:ew Enclosures R C Petersen Associates LLC Consulting— Wireless Safety 711' err--�ii.`9 OCT 1 3 2004 4\c zoks„, r C r`) ")7Lf LS Site Conformity Assessment with FCC Rules and Regulations, 47 CFR § 1.1310 et seq. (Radiofrequency Emissions) FCC Licensee: AT&T Wireless Services Omnipoint Communications Site ID: LI-735 (AWS) LI-13-547B (Omnipoint) Site Name: Orient Fire District Site Address: 23300 Main Road, Orient Suffolk County, New York Prepared for Omnipoint Communications AT&T Wireless Services 4 Sylvan Way, rd Floor 15 E. Midland Avenue Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Paramus, New Jersey 07652 October 11, 2004 170 FAIRVIEW DRIVE, PO BOX 386, BEDMINSTER, NJ 07921-0386 ' Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-2 Table of Contents Summary 3 J 1.Introduction 4 2. Technical Data 4 3. Environmental Levels of RF Energy 4 4. Comparison of Environmental Levels with RF Standards 5 5.Discussion of Safety Criteria 5 6.For Further Information 8 7. Conclusion 8 8.References 9 Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-3 Site Conformity Assessment with FCC Rules and Regulations,47 CFR§ 1.1310 et seq. (Radiofrequency Emissions) Summary This report is an analysis of the radiofrequency (RF) environment associated with the radio communication facility proposed for installation in Orient, Suffolk County, NY. The analysis includes the contribution from the base-station antennas of services to be co-located at this site: public safety land- mobile radio, cellular radio and personal communications services. Engineering data and site information provided by each service provider and well-established analytical techniques were used for calculating the RF fields in order to assess compliance with federal safety guidelines. Worst-case assumptions were used to ensure safe-side estimates, i.e., the actual values will be significantly lower than the corresponding analytical values presented in this report. The maximum level of RF energy associated with each transmitting antenna was compared with the appropriate frequency-dependent exposure limit, and these individual comparisons were combined to ensure that the cumulative RF environment is in compliance with safety guidelines. The results of this analysis indicate that the maximum level of RF energy in all locations in the vicinity of the installation that are normally accessible to the public is below all applicable health and safety limits. Specifically, the maximum level of RF energy associated with simultaneous and continuous operation of the proposed transmitters at this site will be less than 3% of the safety criteria adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is the applicable Federal law with respect to consideration of environmental effects of RF emissions in the siting of FCC licensed facilities, such as base stations used for personal wireless communications. The maximum level of RF energy will also be less than 3% of the exposure limits of ANSI, IEEE, NCRP, the limits used by the State of New York Department of Health and the limits used by all states that regulate RF exposure. Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-4 1. Introduction The purpose of this report is to ensure that the radiofrequency (RF) environment associated with the operation of a proposed radio communication facility will comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) safety guidelines as required by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 [1]. Specifically, the report was prepared in response to a request from AT&T Wireless Services (AWS) and Omnipoint Communications (Omnipoint) for an analysis of the RF environment in areas normally accessible to the public and a conformity assessment to ensure that the installation will comply with FCC safety guidelines. These guidelines address public health concerns associated with long-term exposure in this enviromnent. The analysis includes the contribution from all radio communication services proposed for installation at this site: public safety land-mobile (two-way)radio (Orient Fire District and Southold Police),AWS cellular radio and personal communication services(PCS)and Omnipoint PCS. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is the applicable Federal law with respect to consideration of environmental effects of RF emissions in the siting of wireless facilities. With respect to personal wireless communication services, e.g., cellular and PCS, Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 states the following: "No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions." 2. Technical Data The proposed cellular radio and PCS base-station antennas are to be mounted within a flagpole-type monopole tower and the public safety two-way radio antennas mounted to the flagpole cross-arms. The flagpole will be located at the Orient Fire District, 23300 Main Road, Orient, Suffolk County, NY. The PCS antennas transmit at frequencies between 1930 and 1990 million hertz (MHz). The cellular radio antennas transmit at frequencies between 869 and 894 MHz (these frequencies were formerly allocated for UHF television channels 79 through 83). The two-way radio antennas transmit in the in the VHF low band(25—50 MHz),VHF high band(140— 170 MHz)and the UHF band(440—470 MHz). The actual RF power propagated from PCS and cellular radio antennas is typically less than 20 watts per transmitter (channel) and the actual total RF power is typically less than 200 watts per sector (assuming the maximum number of transmitters are installed and operate at maximum power). The actual RF power propagated from two-way radio antennas is typically less than 100 watts per transmitter. These are extremely low power systems when compared with other familiar radio systems, such as AM, FM, and television broadcast, which operate upwards of 50,000 watts. The attached figure, which depicts the electromagnetic spectrum, lists familiar uses of RF energy. Table 1 lists engineering specifications for the proposed systems. 3. Environmental Levels of RF Energy The antennas used for PCS and cellular radio propagate most of the RF energy in a relatively narrow beam (in the vertical plane) directed toward the horizon. The small amount of energy that is directed along radials below the horizon results in an RF environment directly under the antennas that is not remarkably different from the environment at points more distant. The methodology used to calculate the exposure levels follows that outlined in FCC OET Bulletin No. 65 [2]. For the case at hand, the maximal potential exposure levels associated with simultaneous and Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-5 continuous operation of the proposed transmitters can be readily calculated at any point in a plane at any height above grade. Based on the information shown in Table 1, the maximum intensity(power density) associated with these antennas, at any point in a horizontal plane 6 ft and 16 ft above grade, will be less than the values shown in Table 2. The values at 16 ft above grade are representative of the maximum power density immediately outside the upper floor of nearby residential or commercial 2-story structures (assuming level terrain). The results are also shown in Table 2 as a percentage of the FCC's maximum permissible exposure (MPE) values found in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (specifically, in the FCC Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation [3]). The values shown in Table 2 are the theoretical maxima that could occur and are not typical values. There are a number of reasons why this is true including the following: • The calculations include the effect of 100% field reinforcement from in-phase reflections, which quadruples the power density. Although this is possible"theoretically for a single frequency and perfect reflecting surfaces,the probability of it occurring here is negligible. • It is assumed that each transmitter operates continuously at maximum power. • The intermittent nature of the transmission from the two-way radio antennas will result in time- weighted-average values that will be lower than those shown in Table 2. • Due to the operating (transmission) techniques used in AWS' and Omnipoint's GSM systems, the average power and the corresponding power density will be less than predicted. • The combined maximum power density is obtained by adding the maximum values for each of the services. This assinnes that the maximum power density for each service occurs at the same horizontal distance from the tower—which is not the case. Experience has shown that the analytical technique used in this analysis is extremely conservative. That is, the actual (measured) power density levels have always been found to be smaller than the corresponding calculated levels even when extrapolated to maximum use conditions (all transmitters operating simultaneously) [4]. The maximum values shown in Table 2 correspond to those associated with outdoor (open-air) enviromnents. The levels inside nearby homes and buildings will be lower than those immediately outside because of the high attenuation of common building materials at these frequencies,typically by a factor of ten times or more. 4. Comparison of Environmental Levels with RF Safety Criteria Table 2 shows the calculated maximal RF power density levels in the vicinity of the proposed installations; Table 3 shows federal, state and consensus exposure limits for human exposure to RF energy at the frequencies of interest. Because the MPEs vary with frequency, the calculated RF levels must first be weighted with frequency(the percentages are shown in Table 2) and then combined before comparing with the safety guidelines. With respect to FCC limits for public exposure, comparisons of the weighted combined analytical results indicate that the maximal level associated with the proposed base-station antennas (the summation of the maximum values for each service) is at least 33 times below the MPE, i.e., 3%of the MPE. 5. Discussion of Safety Criteria Publicity given to speculation about possible associations between health effects and exposure to magnetic fields from electric-power distribution lines, electric shavers and from the use of hand-held cellular telephones has heightened concern among some members of the public about the possibility that health effects may be associated with any exposure to electromagnetic energy. Many people feel uneasy about new or unfamiliar technology and often want absolute proof that something is safe. Such absolute Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-6 guarantees are not possible since it is virtually impossible to prove that something does not exist. However, sound judgments can be made as to the safety of a physical agent based on the weight of the pertinent scientific evidence. This is exactly how safety guidelines are developed. The overwhelming weight of scientific evidence unequivocally indicates that biological effects associated with exposure to RF energy are threshold effects, i.e., unless the exposure level is sufficiently high the effect will not occur regardless of exposure duration. (Unlike ionizing radiation, e.g., X-rays and nuclear radiation, repeated exposures to low level RF radiation, or nonionizing radiation, are not cumulative.) Thus, it is relatively straightforward to derive safety limits. By adding safety factors to the threshold level for which the most sensitive effect considered harmful occurs, conservative exposure guidelines have been developed that ensure a large margin of safety. At present, there are of the order of 20,000 reports in the scientific literature that address the subject of RF bioeffects. These reports, most of which describe the results of epidemiology studies, animal and cell-culture studies, have been critically reviewed by leading researchers in the field and all new studies are continuously being reviewed independently by expert panels and committees throughout the world in the interest of ensuring that RF safety standards protect the public and the worker. These include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, the standards committees sponsored by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection under the sponsorship of the World Health Organization, the National Radiological Protection Board of the UK, the Health Council of the Netherlands and Health Canada, to name just a few. All of these groups have recently either reaffirmed existing safety and health standards, developed and adopted new standards,or proposed standards for exposure to RF energy. For example, in 1986, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) published recommended limits for occupational and public exposure [5]. These recommendations were based on the results of an extensive critical review of the scientific literature by a committee of the leading researchers in the field of bioelectromagnetics. The literature selected included many controversial studies reporting effects at low levels. The results of all studies were weighed, analyzed and a consensus obtained establishing a conservative threshold upon which safety guidelines should be based. This threshold corresponds to the level at which the most sensitive, reproducible effects that could be related to human health were reported in the scientific literature. Safety factors were incorporated to ensure that the resulting guidelines would be at least ten to fifty times lower than the established threshold, even under worst-case exposure conditions. The NCRP recommendations for both continuous occupational and public exposure to RF energy at the frequencies of interest are shown in Table 3. Although the State of New York does not have a regulatory program for the RF portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, the NYS DOH compares potential exposure levels with the recommendations of the NCRP to assess public safety. (Table 3 also includes a summary of the corresponding safety criteria recommended by various organizations throughout the world.) In July of 1986, the Environmental Protection Agency published a notice in the Federal Register, calling for public comment on recommended guidance for exposure of the public [6]. Three different limits, ranging from approximately 500 to 5000 tW/cm2 at PCS frequencies and from approximately 275 to 2,750 µW/cine at cellular radio frequencies, were proposed. In 1987 the EPA abandoned its efforts and failed to adopt official federal exposure guidelines. However, in 1993 and 1996 the EPA, in its comments on the FCC's Notice of Proposed Rule Making to adopt safety guidelines [7], recommended adoption of the 1986 NCRP limits [5]. In September 1991, the RF safety standard developed by Subcommittee 4 of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standards Coordinating Committee SCC-28 was approved by the IEEE Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-7 Standards Board[8]. (Until 1988 IEEE SCC-28 was known as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) C95 Committee—established in 1959. Because of its membership of leading scientists throughout the world, the committee is now called the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety–ICES). In November 1992, the ANSI Board of Standards Review approved the IEEE standard for use as an American National Standard. The standard was reaffirmed in 1997. The limits of this standard are essentially identical to the 1982 ANSI RFPGs [9] for occupational exposure and are one- fifth of these values for exposure of the general public (exposures in uncontrolled environments). Like those of the NCRP, these limits resulted from an extensive critical review of the scientific literature by a large committee of preeminently qualified scientists,the majority of whom were from academia and from research laboratories of federal public health agencies. The panels of scientists representing the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)1[10] and the National Radiological Protection Board in the United Kingdom [11] independently developed and in 1993 published guidelines similar to those of ANSI/IEEE. In 1997, after another critical review of the latest scientific evidence, ICNIRP reaffirmed the RF limits published in 1993 [12]. More recently, expert panels representing Health Canada and The Health Council of the Netherlands independently reviewed the extant scientific literature and recommended limits similar to those of IEEE, NCRP and ICNIRP. Also, what was formerly the USSR, which traditionally had the lowest exposure guides, twice has revised upward its limits for public exposure. Thus, there is a converging consensus of the world's scientific community as to what constitutes safe levels of exposure. Finally, in implementing the National Enviromnental Policy Act regarding potentially hazardous RF radiation from radio services regulated by the FCC, the Commission's Rules require that licensees filing applications after January 1, 19972 ensure that their facilities comply with the 1996 FCC MPE values outlined in 47 CFR §1.1310 [3]3 (which are essentially the same as the NCRP, ICNIRP, and the other contemporary limits at the frequencies of interest). (Note: Under the terms of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, no local government may regulate the placement of wireless facilities based on RF emissions to the extent that these emissions comply with the FCC regulations [1].) It is important to note that the study of RF safety is a mature scientific discipline with a history of more than five decades. Although the safety limits that result from the many independent reviews of the scientific literature may vary slightly from organization to organization as shown in Table 3, the bases of all contemporary standards and guidelines, called basic restrictions, are identical. Thus there is international scientific consensus on what constitutes safety – this consensus is reflected in the safety standards and guidelines. With respect to the proposed cellular, PCS and two-way radio antennas, be assured that the actual exposure levels in the vicinity of the Orient, Suffolk County,NY installation will be below any science- based safety and health standard used anywhere in the world and literally thousands of times below any level associated with verifiable evidence of any functional change in humans or laboratory animals. This holds true even when all transmitters operate simultaneously and continuously at their highest power. 1.ICNIRP is recognized by the World Health Organization as an appropriate organization for developing guidelines to protect against non- ionizing radiation. The ICNIRP limits are now used throughout the European Union and in many other countries as the basis for their safety guidelines 2.The FCC extended the transition period to October 15,1997. Second Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ET Docket 93-62,FCC 97-303, adopted August 25, 1997. Prior to this date,the FCC required PCS licensees to comply with the 1992 ANSI/IEEE C95.I limits and all other licensees(since 1987)to comply with the 1982 ANSI C95.1 limits. r 3.Although all FCC licensees will be required to comply with 47 CFR§1.1310 limits,the FCC will continue to exclude certain land mobile services from proving compliance with these limits 47 CFR§1.1307. Previously,although licensees had to comply with the 1982 ANSI C95.I limits, the FCC categorically excluded land mobile services, including paging, cellular and two-way radio, from hazard analyses because "individually or cumulatively they do not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment"[13]. The FCC pointed out that there was no evidence of excessive exposure to RF radiation during routine normal operation of these radio services. Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-8 Power density levels of this magnitude are not even a subject of speculation by the scientific community with regard to an association with adverse health effects. 6. For Further Information Anyone interested can obtain additional information about the enviromnental impact of PCS, cellular and two-way radio communication antennas from: Dr. Robert Cleveland,Jr. Federal Communications Commission Office of Engineering and Technology 445— 12`h Street SW Washington,DC 20554 (202)418-2422 and William J. Condon, CHP Chief,Bureau of Environmental Radiation Protection State of New York,Department of Health 2 University Place Albany,NY 12203 (518)458-6495 7. Conclusion This report is an analysis of the RF environment associated with the radio communication base-station antennas proposed for installation in Orient, Suffolk County, NY. In particular, this analysis utilizes engineering data and site information provided each service provider and well-established analytical techniques for calculating the RF fields in order to assess compliance with federal safety guidelines. Included in the analysis are contributions from all proposed services: PCS, cellular radio and public safety two-way radio. Worst-case assumptions were used to ensure safe-side estimates, i.e., the actual values will be significantly lower than the corresponding analytical values. The maximum level of RF energy associated with each transmitting antenna was compared with the appropriate frequency- dependent exposure limit, and these individual comparisons were combined to ensure that the cumulative RF environment is in compliance with safety guidelines. The results of this analysis indicate that the maximum level of RF energy in all locations in the vicinity of the installation that are normally accessible to the public is below all applicable health and safety limits. Specifically, the maximum level of RF energy associated with simultaneous and continuous operation of the proposed transmitters at this site will be less than 3% of the safety criteria adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is the applicable Federal law with respect to consideration of environmental effects of RF emissions in the siting of FCC licensed facilities, such as base stations used for personal wireless communications. The maximum level of RF energy will also be less than 3%of the exposure limits of ANSI, IEEE, NCRP, the limits used by the State of New York Department of Health and the limits used by all states that regulate RF exposure. Enclosure. Figure. Electromagnetic Spectrum Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-9 8. References [1] Telecommunications Act of 1996,Pub. L.No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996). [2] OET Bulletin 65, Edition 97-01, August 1997. Federal Communications Commission, Office of Engineering and Technology,Washington,DC [3] Federal Communication Commission 47 CFR Parts 1,2, 15,24 and 97. "Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation"(August 6, 1996) [4] Petersen, R.C., and Testagrossa, P.A., "Radiofrequency Fields Associated with Cellular-Radio Cell-Site Antennas,"Bioelectromagnetics,Vol. 13,No. 6. (1992) [5] Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, NCRP Report No. 86, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, MD. (1986) [6] Federal Register,Vol. 51,No. 146,Wednesday, July 30, 1986. [7] Notice of Proposed Rule Making In the Matter of Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation,August 13, 1993.ET Docket No. 93-62. (1993) [8] ANSI/IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz, ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,Piscataway,NJ. (1992) [9] American National Standard Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 300 kHz to 100 GHz, ANSI C95.1-1982, American National Standards Institute,New York,NY. (1982) [10] Electromagnetic Fields (300 Hz to 300 GHz), Environmental Health Criteria 137, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. (1993) [11] Board Statement on Restrictions on Human Exposure to Static and Time Varying Electromagnetic Fields and Radiation, Documents of the NRPB, Vol. 4, No. 5, National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton,Didcot, Oxon,United Kingdom. (1993) [12] "Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields(up to 300 GHz)-ICNIRP Guidelines,"Health Physics,Vol. 74,No.4,pp 494-522. (1998) [13] Action by the Commission February 12, 1987, by Second Report and Order (FCC 87-63), and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking(FCC 87-64). General Docket No. 79-144. Cellular/PCS Site Orient,Suffolk County,NY-10 Table 1 Engineering Specifications for the Proposed Cellular Radio,PCS and Two-way Radio Systems Orient,Suffolk County,NY Two-way Radio Cellular Radio PCS Site Specifications Orient FD Southold Police Orient FD P AWS(GSM850) T-Mobile AWS(GSM1900) (46 MHz) (155 MHz) (450 MHz) 1 maximum ERP per channel t 100 watts 363 watts 240 watts 242.7 watts 491 watts 242.7 watts actual radiated power per channel 100 watts 100 watts 100 watts 20.2 watts 15 watts 9.7 watts actual total radiated power per sector 100 watts 100 watts 100 watts 60 6 watts 180 watts 29.1 watts number of transmit(Tx)antennas 1 1 1 N/A N/A _ N/A number of receive(Rx)antennas 1 1 1 N/A N/A N/A — --- -•--- ----- number of Tx/Rx antennas(duplexed) N/A — N/A __ N/A 2 per sector** 2 per sector** — T -2 per sector**___ maximum number of transmitters 1 1 1 3 per sector 12 per sector 3 per sector number of sectors configured N/A(omm) N/A(omm)__ N/A(omm) 3 3 3 1 antenna centerline height above grade 95 ft f 96 ftf 125 ftf 102 ft&108 ft± 112 ft&118 ftf 102 ft&108 ft± antenna manufacturer RFS Celwave Decibel Products Decibel Products L Decibel Products _ EMS Wireless Decibel Products 1_ model number 1142 DB 222 DB404 _ DB731DG85V I EXM*_ DR65-18-02DPL2Q DB731DG85VIEXM* g_atn 2.15 dBi 5 15 dBi 5 95 dBi 12.95 dBi 17.3 dBi 16 15 dBi type omni-directional omni-directional ni om -directional directional directional directional downtilt 0° 0° 0° 0° 2°(electrical) 0° 't Effective Radiated Power(ERP)is a measure of how well an antenna concentrates RF energy,it is not the actual power radiated from the antenna. To illustrate the difference,compare the brightness of an ordinary 100 r wait light bulb with that front a 100 watt spot-light Even though both are 100 watts,the spot-light appears brighter because it concentrates the light in one direction In this direction,the spot-light effectively appears to be emitting more than 100 watts In other directions,there is almost no light emitted by the spot-light and it effectively appears to be much less than 100 watts i$Typical antenna used for this service o This Decibel antenna is a dual-band antenna that operates in both the cellular and PCS frequency bands "•Them arc two antennas stacked vertically per sector at the centerline heights listed • 1 s i c I • Cellular/PCS Site. Orient,Suffolk County,NY- 11 Table 2 " Calculated Maximal Levels and the Levels as a Percentage of 1996 FCC MPEs*for the Proposed Cellular Radio,PCS and Two-way Radio Antennas Orient,Suffolk County,NY __ Power Density(µW/cm2) %of MPEs* ' Provider—Service 6 ft AMGLt 16 ft AMGLt 6 ft AMGLt 1 16 ft AMGLt ______Orient FD—two-way radio(46_MHz) <1.778 1 _<2.256 0.889% 1.128% Southold Police—two-way_radio(155 MHz)___ _ <0.461 <0.584 0.231% 0.292% • _ _ Orient FD-two-way radio(460 MHz) _ <_2.843 <3.389 0.948% 1.130% T-Mobile—PCS <2.385 <2.907 0.238% q,291%. AT&T—PCS(9p41900) <0.196 <0.245 0.020% 0.025% AT&T—cellular radio(GSM850) <0.531 <0.662 0.097% 0.120% Total 2.423% 2.986% * MPE. The FCC limits for maximum permissible exposure(same as 1986 NCRP limits at the frequencies of interest) t AMGL:above mean grade level Cellular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY- 12 , Table 3 Summary of International,Federal,State and Consensus Safety Criteria for Exposure to Radiofrequency Energy at Frequencies Used for Radio Communication Systems(30-2000 MHz) Exposure Power Density(µW/cm2) Organization/Government Agency Population 30--300 MHz 300-2000 MHz International Safety Criteria International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection(1997) _-Occupational _ 1000 f/0.4 (Health Physics 74:4,494-522.(1998)' Public 200 f/2 National Radiological Protection Board , Occupational 10002 50003 (NRPB, 1993) Public 6602 26003 Federal Requirements Federal Communications Commission Occ>pational 1000 f/0.3 (47,CFR§1.1310) �_Public 200 f11.5 Consensus Standards and Recommendations American National Standards Institute - ___Occupational _ 1000_ _ ___f/0.3__ (ANSI C95.1 - 1982) Public 1000 f/0.3 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers __Occupational_ 1000 f/0.3____ _ (ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1999 Edition)4 Public 200 f/1.5 National Council on Radiation Protection&Measurements Occupational___ 1.000 _ f/0.3 (NCRP Report 86, 1986) Public 200 f/ 1.5 State Codes New Jersey(NJAC 7:28-42) Public 1000 f/0.3 Massachusetts(Department of Health 105 CMR 122) Public 200 f/1.5 New York States Public 200 f/1.5 ' f=frequency in MHz NOTES: 1. Reaffirmed in 1997 and published,with modification,in 1998. 2. The NRPB guidelines have slightly different frequency ranges for their investigation levels. The values shown are the lowest values for the corresponding frequency range. 3. All licensees are required to comply with the limits outlined in 47 CFR§1.1307. 4 Incorporating IEEE Standard C95.1-1991 and IEEE Standard C95.1a-1998. 5 State of New York Department of Health follows NCRP Report 86. Cellular/PCS Site: Onent,Suffolk County,NY-13 W1 • -A , IFT1' • • Non-Ionizing Radiation \ /Ionizing Radiation '- "_, .. _. .:r¢ °�t .. .�.,-....- .._e. ... ;J"".a,:=:.;3,,;:=,�'.,.1,t..,+�,:a„n•'':FNr.;:.r,:�'z;'";a Service/Device: Frequency Range . LI AM Radio: 535—1605 kHz CB Radio. 27 MHz '' ` Cordless Phones: 49-2450 MHz TVCH2-6: 54-88 MHz FM Radio 88-108 MHz _ `i,, Marine/Weather Radio 160 MHz TVCH7-13: 174-216MHz TV UHF CH 14—69 470—800 MHz Cellular Radio,ESMR,Paging/Data: 806—946 MHz Antitheft devices: 10—20 kHz and/or 915 MHz Wireless LAN(WiFi). 915—5800 MHz Microwave oven: 915 and 2450 MHz Personal Communication Services 1800—2200 MHz Intrusion alarms/door openers: 10 5 GHz Microwave radio: 1—40 GHz Power Satellite communications. 100 MHz—275 GHz Frequency • • 103 I I 106 I I 109 I I 1012 I I 1015 I I 1018 --�60Hz 1MHz 1GHz Frequency(Hz) 0-)Z VISUAL SIMULATION PRESENTAFIN FOR A FROP(ISEJI COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT - - \ \ The Orient Fire District 0 -,\23300 Tabor Road Orient, N.Y (Suffolk County) Prepared by: DMS Consulting Services,Inc. 560 Hudson Street Suite 3 First Floor Hackensack,New Jersey 07601 Tel: (201)229-1550 October 6,2004 DMS CONSULTING SERVICES , INC EDWARD JOHN BOYD V ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW 54655 MAIN ROAD P.O.BOX 1468 SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK 11971 (631)765.1555 FACSIMILE:(631)765-5969 E-MAIL:ejb@elilaw.net 1287 EAST MAIN STREET RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK 11901 (631)727-1010 FACSIMILE:(631)727-5524 E-MAIL elb@eblaw net July 11, 2003 Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 Re: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT Tax Map No.1000-18-5-13.8 Greetings: Enclosed please find an Application to the Board of Appeals for a Variance to the Zoning Code allowing the construction of a 120' telecommunications antenna in an R-40 Zone. A copy of this Application has been delivered simultaneously to the Building Department. Please do not hesitate to contact me if anything else is required. Thanking you for your anticipated prompt and courteous attention to this matter, I am, Ve., ruly yours, Edward John Boyd V EJB/bv Encs. EDWARD JOHN BOYD V ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW 54655 MAIN ROAD P.O.BOX 1468 SOUTHOLD,NEW YORK 11971 (631)765-1555 FACSIMILE:(631)765-5969 E-MAIL:ejb@elilaw.net 1287 EAST MAIN STREET RIVERHEAD,NEW YORK 11901 (631)727-1010 FACSIMILE:(631)727-5524 E-MAIL.elb@eldaw net July 11, 2003 Southold Town Building Department Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 Re: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT Tax Map No.1000-18-5-13.8 Greetings: Enclosed please find a copy of an Application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals for a Variance to the Zoning Code relative to your Notice of Disapproval dated July 11, 2003 relative to the above-captioned premises. Very truly yours, /- 7 fJ Edward John Boyd V EJB/bv Enc. By Hand 10/01/2004 15:30 6314254104 MUNLEYMEAD PAGE 02 MUNLEY, MEATDip, NIELSEN 6 RA A •oris Ys ak 1LA.W Rmrkx To;0 R WLx To; 1pJ 160 AILIDDLE NE=ROAD 30 NOATII NAcw YORK A%•mvus GEE.-A.7J QE,NEw Yo, c 11021 XICuNrmar OPT, Mani,Yorm 174,3 (516)4ei7-6500 (031)425-4100 T&LECOPIEYt I TELECOPI$* (516)487-esao (631)4z5-4104 October 1,2004 VIA FACSIMILE Ms.Linda Kowalski Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold P.O.Box 1179 53095 Main Road Southold,NY 11971 RE: Application of Orient Fire District, Affordable Housing Associates,Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless, And Omnipoint Facilities Network 2,LLC ZBA No.5408 Premises: 23300 Main Road,Orient,New York • Section 18,Block 5,Lot 13.8 Dear Ms.Kowalski: I Further to your telephone conversation today with Dorothy Belard, of our firm, regarding the captioned matter, we contacted Edward 3. Boyd V,1Esq., the attorney for the Orient Fire District, and have obtained authorization to act on his;behalf in providing your office with a copy of the Amended Notice of Disapproval, dated September 22, 2004, issued by the Southold Building Department. We are, therefore, enclosing a copy of said Amended Disapproval and hereby amend the captioned Application accordingly. Thanking you for your courtesies,we remain • • Very truly yours, MUNLEY,MEADE,NIELSEN&RE I ; nn � By: 6 / I Lawrence C.R6 LCR:db Enclosure ; :1. .. ZONING B F APPALS • Office Lgcation: An�x . - Maili�ag`Iddress. "S309nt1ding on Youngs AV Southold SMacn Road' Box 1I�y entre • Emails: Lind . 11971_0959 , Jessica.Kowalski Town.S°uthold.n , X631 Web;site htt ://souer l°wn.Southold.n .us us or 765-1809 ext. 1 aR leholdto north for .net wn. k ,1)4,a e)C,I,sari DATE: I® / fax(631) 765-9064 To: FAX TRANSMISSION ZBq File# - © `„ /-416--- /O 44- TO: Date of Building - Inspector Notice of Disapproval: ( ) Thea '`T following:application is incomplete �' for the re • �-� . ' # �.� reasons noted below. 4�� � AII ( ) Please Please furnish furnish seven (7) setsseven (7) sets of the advertising can beiadvertised for thof the following (within application g deadline (s 2 public hearingabout 7 days, however,please days before the calendar date of; y ' if possible in order tf�at The send the ori meeting date. You e ( ) The original and six sets may forward the information - x at Disapproval.map submitted does not by mail or by hand. Thankoration by fa forPlease submit the match the you. and if amendments information cover letter an amended Noticedated on the Building Ins variance drank ung that the of Disapproval is issued directly Inspector's Noti�e o (s) Thank you amended relief please furnish Building Dep "r tan that isbeingadded or revise • ( 1 Missing information ( ) copies .v+t oration- din Your req u st fa OTHER/INFORMATION �� � � REQUESTED when , ( ) Filing fee$ ossible 7 sets with cover/tra Check amount nsmittaf sheet ( ) Available was:$ . Please survey showing contact our office (orn ( g existing property/building send new cF�e, fK 3- te survey map or g details construction areas, updated 'with licensed surveyor p infor<.cva'+t.i on ( ) Roughto property lines,and building lot coverage diagram lot cover of existing and proposed re detail(and or sketch with b age calculations. mean height, if known); building height(#of proposed stories and areaeaoft from ( ) Letter confirming landscaping ind comments status and the of the co ground to to P1r"� or copy of up-to-date date ti review construction- iv ( p to-date agency action. by other involved co ) Updated single-and- *agencies for pies of deeds datingseparate search dated backpresub i•a'� i< s I back to creation of original llines for t� Apr i123,/ ' ice , p ( this property. Section 1U0.23�-- 2 ' d.,„___. i-- '� i / /n _ • Thank you. "p„ ,,iiia._ /I#s'sj,, WFOldr II TT X1/0 ELIZABETH A.NEVILLE ; �� ®Gy� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK o - P.O. Box 1179 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS ".1j' i Southold,New York 11971 ` O 1� Fax(631) 765-6145 MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER e, /Ng ��® ,�'' Telephone (631) 765-1800 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER _ ,s'' southoldtown.northfork.net _ OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Elizabeth A. Neville, Southold Town Clerk DATED: July 15, 2003 RE: Zoning Appeal No. 5408 Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 5408, Application of Orient Fire District by Ed Boyd V, Esq. for a variance. Also included is: Applicant Transactional Disclosure Form, ZBA Questionnaire, Project Description, Short Environmental Assessment Form, transmittal letter to the ZBA by Ed Boyd V, Esq. dated July 11, 2003, transmittal letter to the Building Department dated July 11, 2003 by Ed Boyd V, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department dated April 23, 2003, amended May 2, 2003, renewed July 11, 2003, copy of Building Department Permit Application and a survey. ` 5 FORM NO. 3 (\sf' � NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL 0f DATE: April 23, 2003 AMENDED: May 2, 2003 ba RENEWED: July 11, 2003 Aizfip_ TO: Edward John Boyd A/C Orient Fire District 0,4/0-12-/- PO PO Box 1468 Southold,NY 11971 • Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 JUL 1 5 2003 Rid rayl For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equip •t-ttrixcture,at. ;,- Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient,NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is permitted,per special exception,pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100- 162A(3). In addition, the proposed tower does not meet the requirements of Article XVI, Section 100-162A(3). The proposed tower measures 120 feet in height and is within 300 feet of historic properties (18-5- 15.1, 18-5-11.1). This No 's flhiItt: s proval was amended on May 2, 2003 to correct a type-o. 4,111 ��Au fedS'" a . Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Z.B.A. i PCEIVEI FORM NO. 3 JUN 0 4 2004 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL ZONING BOARD ofAPPEALS DATE: April 23, 2003 AMENDED: May 2, 2003 AMENDED: June 3, 2004 TO: Edward John Boyd A/C Orient Fire District PO Box 1468 Southold, NY 11971 Please take notice that your application dated April 2, 2003 For permit for construction of a telecommunications tower and equipment structure at Location of property: 23300 Main Road, Orient,NY County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 18 Block 5 Lot 13.8 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed telecommunications tower and equipment structure, on this 4.4 acre parcel in the Residential R-80 District, is permitted, per special exception, pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100- 162A(3). In addition, the proposed tower does not meet the requirements of Article XVI, Section 100-162A(3). The proposed tower measures 125 feet in height and is within 300 feet of historic properties (18-5- 15.1, 18-5-11.1). Furthermore,pursuant to Article XVI, Section 100-165,B., which states, "The minimum lot size for the siting of a telecommunication tower shall be in accordance with the following. No tower can be built on a lot which is nonconforming in size to the requirements set forth below: minimum lot area in residential district is 5 acres." The property is 4.4 acres. This Notice of Disapprova . . ended on May 2, 2003 and June 3, 2004, to correct errors and to make-c , cajie 16.401`�-d i + ure Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. i An Analysis of the Orient Point Fire Department's Existing Radiofrequency Coverage and Recommendations for Improving Communications February 23, 2003 Prepared By David Weyhreter,MSEE ;,o‘,-Q Prepared for Orient Point Fire Department r r • • i 0 IP Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 Table of Contents Summary 3 1.0 Introduction 3 2.0 FCC Constraints 3 3.0 Existing FCC License 4 ' 4.0 Description of Analysis 4 5.0 Existing Coverage Simulation 6 6.0 Recommended Coverage Simulation 9 7.0 Differential Analysis 12 8.0 Existing Eastern LI Transceiver Sites 13 9.0 Suggestions to Further Improve Communications 14 10.0 Conclusion 15 2 Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 Summary The following report is an analysis of Radio Frequency (RF) coverage provided by the current antenna/tower configuration at the Orient Point Fire department located in Orient Point, New York. Suggestions for coverage improvement are also presented. The analysis utilizes well-established computational techniques to generate coverage predictions. Information provided by the FCC Low-band VHF database and responses to detailed questions by fire department personnel were also utilized in the analysis. The Fire Department currently utilizes a conventional Low-Band VHF transceiver operating in the 46 MHz band. Existing RF coverage is limited by the current height of their omni-directional antenna(approximately 48 ft AGL) and the antenna's Effective Radiated Power(ERP),which is 30 Watts. Age of the base station equipment (25+ years) could also negatively impact the coverage realized by the Department, as receiver sensitivity, amplifier output power, spectral purity etc degrade with component age. It is recommended that the department increase their antenna height to 90ft to maximize the coverage provided by their existing antenna/base station configuration, while minimizing interference to adjacent agencies utilizing the same frequencies. Modifications to the existing FCC license will need to be made in order to accommodate the recommended changes, and, ultimately, approval by the FCC's appointed Frequency Coordinator is required. No increase in ERP was contemplated, as the FD indicted they were not considering changing out their base station equipment (to control costs). 1.0 Introduction This report was prepared in response to a request by the Orient Point Fire Department to perform an analysis of their existing radio coverage on the North fork of LI. Once concluded, suggestions as to how to improved RF coverage without presenting a significant cost burden to the department would need to be made. 2.0 FCC Constraints Low-band VHF frequencies in use by the fire department are regulated by the FCC under Title 47 §90.20 Private Land Mobile Radio Services Subpart B Public Safety Radio Pool, and are designated"PF" under the jurisdiction of the Fire Coordinator. None of the frequencies in use have any special limitations. The FCC limits the maximum output power of these frequencies to 500W ERP. There is no limitation to the height at which an antenna can be placed above ground level (AGL), however the height of the antenna is 3 n 0 Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 subject to review by the Fire coordinator and can be modified based on the proximity of adjacent entities utilizing the same frequencies. As such a balance must be struck between the coverage provided by an antenna placed at a specific height AGL and the interference caused to adjacent bases utilizing the same frequencies(on the Forward or Base-to-Mobile link). In addition one must consider the effects of reverse link(mobile- to-base)interference due to the reception of a higher percentage of RF radiation from adjacent base stations and field radios (mobiles and portables) at the FD's base station location. 3.0 Existing FCC License The Orient Point Fire Department's Existing License(Call Sign KDZ352) allows for the operation of three fixed base station frequencies at 46.34,46.38 and 46.46 MHz, each of which can broadcast at 30W ERP. The same frequencies are licensed for Mobile operation with output powers also at 30W. The FD also has access to a repeater frequency(46.30MHz)which is currently operated by the town of Southold, west of Orient. The license restricts the operation of FD frequencies to an 8 Km service area radius around the fixed base location. The FD has articulated that coverage is suspect in "Southold" and that a desire exists to improve coverage in this area of Suffolk. This desired coverage area greatly exceeds the coverage area licensed for by the frequency coordinator. The Current license was renewed last year(5/17/02) and is good for a period of 10 years from the issue date. 4.0 Description of Analysis The coverage analyses conducted for this report utilized the well established Longly-Rice propagation modeling algorithm, which takes into account the effects of terrain, atmospheric conditions, soil conductivity etc. A series of propagation studies were conducted including 0dB attenuation plots (as a baseline for mobiles). Portable plots predicting effective forward link coverage for portable radios(6db attenuation applied), in addition to in-building predicted coverage(20 dB attenuation applied). Although u somewhat simplistic the applied attenuations are reasonable approximations of anticipated losses under the conditions described. The effective radiated power of the FD antenna was assumed to be 30W. Actual field conditions were not verified (i.e. verifying actual TX output power via wattmeter and calculating ERP based on anticipated coaxial cable losses, connector losses etc). Proper operation of the base station should be verified annually, at a minimum, as continued base station aging(currently over 25 years of age) will reduce the frequency accuracy, output power and general reliability of the base. Site-specific information was taken directly from the FCC Low-band VHF Primary database via download. Slight variations in the location of the FD's antenna should have 4 Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 a minimal impact on the accuracy of the predictions and are assumed to be negligible (due to the low band nature of the frequencies in use the flat terrain condition etc). The accuracy of the predictions could be improved with the inclusion of drive test data however, in the interest of minimizing cost, a drive test of the north fork was not conducted. Accuracy of the included plots is approximately±6 dB. All plots were completed utilizing 3 arc-second(100 meter)USGS terrain data. All plots, unless otherwise indicated, were conduced for the 46.38MHz frequency. Due to the close spectral proximity of the other FD frequencies there should be no effective coverage difference between them(excluding interference considerations). Due to the type and age of the existing FD radios (both Base and Mobile/Portable) - 100dBm is a reasonable receiver sensitivity threshold defining useable coverage. The omni directional antenna currently being utilized by the Fire Department, as per FCC database, was utilized to simulate coverage for both existing and proposed antenna heights. The FD has indicated that the forward link is more typically problematic than the reverse link. 5 0 pow-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 5.0 Existing Coverage Simulation Plot 1: Existing KDZ352 46.38MHz Radiofrequency Coverage, Unattenuated Baseline, 30W ERP Fnso5d95352Color rodrat45381 it ` +e Yr } 1 T �r'S +,°� st 5'"' x i,d I gill PI ii �— Zir s"-4t.,1 ,,{,3s'.K R, tl< 8111 : ''''17":41.PO4 I. V''''.4 b% p_ i ! f r t) 411 0- yi...',/� s t 6.� q•i : ...�f, Porgy` f1 �" tl 2- ,r. 4�t�,., r! ? .. , S t',. y3, 4,1,,..7.• ` .•,. / f1,.!.44r 2a '� 1' a, 1 '.. r W'. T1T d'e+� + ,41,A.17-iiii I 12111 �� `` (1 `fs f^ F , Mf. .t. .5 6 \� ,� V' 'a�.{'.�t�r �:rts4;:M�y� ''' )'SII !Sr• 12- �lj'i; 811 k..V.. , j- �� I mom I .. Y ....... .1. r i ._ I ..-.-i_...-_1_ I RI 20 iS 10 5 U 5 10 15 10 — Stull:6o — Ctydladm .....Firms — bloat %Wars ........ o..=.. Lam Cnd 6 a0 ' '' Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 Plot 2: Existing KDZ352 46.38MHz Portable Radiofrequency Coverage, 6 dB Attenuation, 30W ERP - &a,gWEIbeak Cm,ro u. e9:1T3owlrP 11 lei, ,J n, ,Arr.' y' Ja"yy.% 4 a<.:'^'Y ,w � 1511 ,G}/,�, ? y .� U h 10 Ir t„ n i,,„t.yt,,, m n r �vd�� ,�t , d a��}�s M,i - 4-01104,74, ;••, a „ 1.15 r ,8 t ^ Igo 5111 t , , Ff { i. t ;t.,,cJt'24y.,1 tk an ^rt.R'. '",:4T",-,,,, ,;...,"i- ,:4T }^ !YF < .tR ,j y t%ti1''t'SV' ; I£I 2 _•' pe J ,'i '.-'-...:.4-r 5j.hr C+, y 5 2`i., 1 ��1 '� . ii'x011 0 `.��.�f ! d,tr�137+.�iS'�,'M,f" CwM si M j / ,.5i,*le.- I 14At#.� art?p14'f�zf' y t' Y'} -`.8.1' ,, - ~ ,1i tilt.';'''. .1.,---,V,•1 :4.....41.;• - ° `,u r S� .. ; r ,._ .. IS I ,11 113 i',14 J1 Ill •--T,"4 T.4 Ii1� i; , 12 L ���Ar� � 2,, ! All In 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 70 - Stet Bad= ...... CryBudm o®. litglicris ® Moils - RSIrTamas .,...,. SI= ...... Lam Col • • 7 . Low-Band VHF' Analysis KDZ352 0 . Plot 3: Existing KDZ352 46.38MHz In-Building Radiofrequency Coverage, 20 dB Attenuation, 30W ERP Lasing LIV352hBn16BCasl Faint MID 11 e4,. `J s ,ter - . - ,?311 Eik; P.07 Y '4"< r+� it I. 19hll 4 A f ', tax,'tF k,' 1 0011 2 `I'•'r ~ig1',am't's Y r i 7811 a +`sI4.>.r..“4.. •> t� ,i"' ,Il t.�r i ! 1+i7�t1� �t4 r�� t �► •i - 2 P i;y .4. ..„_ )4 :r� ;0.4. f- ' 1 sI 8111 10 p. i'S,, '-"' 4�i r7"���PJ � ,011 12 i I l�4/01°A7;,°:::\ �� •Y 1 'Q�;11 j�tii � ,`sf/ , y ~, '011 14 ' ; r ,.' c:$ r '_ - '! Mita Pi 20 1i 10 5 0 5 IU 15 20 - DA Badas ,........ CtyBaden .o Iiitani &bat - 9ker Nita s ..... Subs: •.... LiAm Cr.1 • • 8 r ♦ -J Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 -' 6.0 Recommended Coverage Simulation Plot 4: Simulated KDZ352 46.38 MHz Unattenuated RF Coverage 30W ERP 90ft AGL SzohedlD2332 Pa i6b Co.ecg Foagnt 16381Qk30WEXP%F[AGL I! i, -c Y k <# yr 7yv'F � - aS1I I s f f t ass u$,,,,,q7,,,,,,,;,..., ..41,4,� !, yy1, 1 I 12 -efs � `, 1 1-00.11 10 si b • i.: .,P. 4 ••i. 1 1 r' 44.8.$..'x 1 1r?.2 ,rat` ,' {"�I 9 a ' .1 e}` x ... ',. ' ,. 9331 6 ra q ;••4I',:::71.44...1•1864 ? 1864 et 4 • �. tfik1 n.�C.< • I. 81.11 u * Viz' 1 .r 4 apse • , •„;• 11# tt 'ov.,-r ► t� ; I Ham x0,11 „2 +`�. ^ t i4}�* 4 d-'tY a4f n ���Z .- '. /it'� I 1:: 8111 _ `��4 y'1”cir ,.. ....1:.., %/_I*"'t t ,•'f 46-141103' • is O� '+"•v�►.� •=1••11; J�3 fir, , 12 k �. i1iG+ a i 5 -j. ' I du --� '--'ma. m 20 15 10 5 0 5 18 16 20 — 221 334in .... C413a848 4........ Wisp Mom& �••• Win 1411 — 2ree4 IY1Lm at • 9 - ` row-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 Plot 5: Simulated KDZ352 46.38 MHz Portable RF Coverage 6 dB Attenuation 30W ERP 90ft AGL 5am6udYD1162 Polak Coucgt Foagnt4366ffIt70WFRP 90 FTAGI. , *" „gifFt!t N111,.,7-p;',-3,0*citt,Z4A31,'k-4 ' - Ian , _ -:,g:Zi,,,(x,-•-,,,;t4'..-...z':--:,-.1z,117,d,,,,,4;',..., U{ �i; #� Olf }y 0111 8 _'' 7* :4;.11,,'e,•,,,:0. +PSS lSaa'k" �+t i4 E;'f ' , f 4.''it.'1 1i8111 3 1: ,AL' %A° !811 0— 1411 �1% ? M� i ,�$ �1 taw^. s- vl y r +:� r �I I f....„: gig... 7. r46,:),.:,;',d`. a .Fr\ r 'f,� ^meq i • x,'•,.. F{i p_ i �•' 902.1,41,1,....„.,:•:,,I..Z � '' :; T ft\v ,•4P E 1 dr l ,, r , �/ E '1,47. I --,:iliP• •; 7,44,/-,•;:...A '••:1;1.,,,„?,%.,-;.--,i,:gosoir.-::."---fr 1,4Ntli) ly s 4/0.4 ',r.. t Vit:%, .. c,«A,I. 12 1. ,._ .011 l 1:y M 20 15 10 S 0 S 0 15 0 ®� AatBadta MO.= Cr/Bocdas ® gOW •� 0a000021 ®� Witt RUC room Stas =,—, I�LmG� 10 a , Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 Plot 6: Simulated KDZ352 46.38 MHz In-Building RF Coverage 20 dB Attenuation 30W ERP 90 FT AGL hogged IDE3flbaddiyCaagKarat 536iilix30WER 90FCAGZ MI 12— tie . f 1 l'',,,,,..'1,' f 10— k'Op--". bki1`,`' _ 1110.11 8bu ":,.2)...)1,,� 18111 •, y , �l it ,C4 ��) 4— -';4:•.,54-'"..,, e. 0'". t l 8111 �' vsr 4'+ P f '�% ,' 1�F' 1 1114011 2— •,* OVA' j1 f's:!�'�a� , df, 6 1� w1 E�t�Y'���K+4c?!;; �•:r II 8111 . 8 L=.:.'Vii. — —2.,444, 4,lir�;►� .e+�CtF: 4 LI A ii 10 i • y \ .7 ii 12^ f. �• •- 16.11 14 ?j # L.e1 = I mi 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 — sreBmdal CryBroks — trettlaws — ladnds — Ater F6thier -a— S6tets ..... Lem Gad 11 r Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 7.0 Differential Analysis Plot 7 Differential Coverage Analysis Proposed Vs Existing, Unattenuated , 12..,'1 .. ',t J' .t/?''�,'r sou r• , 10 4e. V' iii ^i iN t - 6 r f`+� =J`' get 1 �'� .�S` . 2i ,,,,,,n,." �+�•7�s T�t3h_ I ti r 1 '1, • \,114 ��* -0- �� �.r 1j.} iSfZCOF .. I X10 2i . isl #�e1l4r ; •-..... P.,. PR' 4 0.0.,;4,•.'1i0,� e,:,1 q 6 o iyje-I. + f 11�r`{�'1'f��1,��-ii:A f```�`s.,_ - 1100 ,._ -...-C.; ,M i `,a. „ A 4-"kg -"gil..4. . el P4�4�? 1 1 m 1 iae v�;�:'11�tf:ti$110' ,� TN XI 15 10 a 0 0 10 15 20 ........® %tt BZdii ...—..• Cey Butts ,..®w.. WARP .w.w. Rubes .......... '81u F:Ia: ...w. ands •,+•.- 1.]ULUI ff]d 12 , . :, .. q--- ow-Band VI-IF Analysis KDZ352 ri 8.0 Existing Eastern LI Transceiver Sites Plot 8: Existing FCC Licensed 46.38 MHz Transceiver Sites—Eastern LI artmg Eastan LITEnsceiver Sits 46313141h . IS PI fr,4111 ,..,/-•%%II nig*7.. 48" 1 --10.1. 20 • 15 cr : : • • 10 , , ''' K fl:f4 1 ' ' • ".k."4: .5° . 7- 5 - : KE ',1)1, ,u•T 4 ',...... .. .. 0 ' 1K1) 'S S200 7 Pr—Az- 4, , . . : ...•-.. : . ' ' ' • , .., „ . : . . . I 20 . • ml 20 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 20 , lisp Footer ! i Immo stgt Dada 1/11159.M1 1 fighilyS =WM= alikOad: an"... Witzrnatorts .......... tatiLan Grid 11 13 i rA Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 Table 1: Sample of 46.38MHz Eastern LI Transceiver Sites FCC Call Sign Owner ERP Antenna AGL Distance to KDZ352 KEE261 LOC 1 East Hampton 250 W 125 ft 13.4 mi Village KEE 261 Loc 2 East Hampton 100 W 89 ft 12.5 mi Village KFF296 Sag Harbor 35 W 59 ft 10.7 mi Village KEG617 East Moriches 30 W 7 ft 7.2 mi FD WPSH707 Hagerman Fire 30 W 7 ft 7.2 mi District KFY891 Town of 100 W 89 ft 8.5,mi Southold KRI582 Village of 30 W 40 ft 4.4 mi Greenport Plot 8 and Table 1 above are provided to demonstrate the separation distance between Orient Point FD and surrounding transceivers utilizing 46.38 MHz. Other sites utilizing this frequency are possible sources of interference to Orient Point's radio communications on this frequency. The reverse however is also true, that being Orient FD can be a source of interference to the surrounding transceivers and field units. This is a key limiting factor in determining how high one can place an omni directional antenna to improve coverage for a specific location. Due to the flat nature of the terrain in Orient and the proximity to water, one must also consider sites located along the Connecticut coast line as well in studying the effect of interference on surrounding locations. The Frequency Coordinator will review. 9.0 Suggestions to Further Improve Communications Increasing base station transmitter power will tend to improve the forward link coverage provided the amplifiers are not overdriven. The age of the FD's base station equipment makes this somewhat undesirable, as increases in power increase current draw and heat dissipation required by the equipment. This would tend to accelerate component aging. The FD should consider replacing their existing base and field radios with newer, more modern equipment. Improvements in receiver sensitivity will go a long way toward improving forward and reverse link coverage. This combined with an interference masking technique such as CTCSS (Private Line)will limit the effects of interference from co-channel adjacent sites. The use of directional antennas could be used to focus radiation in directions more pertinent to FD operations. This also has the effect of reducing interference both caused by the base station site and received by'.the base from outlying locations. _Another benefit 14 1 • Low-Band VHF Analysis KDZ352 of utilizing this type of antenna is the ability to mechanically downtilt the antennas thereby modifying the coverage footprint and reducing the effects of interference due to more distant co-channel sites. ERP can also be increased due to the higher gain, more focused beam pattern typically found in these types of antennas. A Bi-directional Yagi antenna would be most effective in covering the north fork. 10.0 Conclusion Based on the results of an extensive predictive coverage analysis utilizing industry accepted techniques an increase in antenna height to 90' AGL is suggested. This will be subject to approval by the FCC frequency coordinator who will look at the effect of interference on surrounding sites as a result of the increase in height. The FD should modify their license to increase the size of their service area to a radius more in keeping with their charter. Modifications to the existing license can be completed via a 601 form. The FD must attach an explanation of why an increase in service area is required to support the application(schedule D). 601 forms are available on the FCC's website at www.fcc.gov. Overall the modest improvement in coverage strikes a reasonable balance :between coverage improvements and co-channel interference to adjacent sites. The FD may wish to explore some of the additional suggestions for improvement to radio operations as suggested in section 8.0 above. 15 I, 1 ' y' '\� ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK : STATE OF NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of the Orient Fire District, Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless JUL 3 0 2004 Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless, and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC for Special Use Permit ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Premises: AFFIDAVIT 23300 Main Road Orient,New York Section 18; Blocic 5; Lot 13.8 ---- X STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) SS.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) VINCENT CANNUSCIO,being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am the President of Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, the applicant, and am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth. 2. The business address of Affordable Housing Associates,Inc.d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management is P.O. Box 303, Hampton Bays,New York 11946. 3. I make this affidavit pursuant to the Code of the Town of Southold Section 100- 163D(3). The proposed flagpole to be erected at the Orient Fire Department will be constructed in r. �''t tioli40 ay s to be capable of accommodating co-location of additional antennas for future users. JUL302004 ':zosS ;:10,4r SOF APPEALS ---'''.---7(L_ 1\ cetwiA,t,td.„.e. INCENT CANNUSCIO Sworn to before me this d of MN&/I 2004 ou j44s4A4 SHARON'DEMO NOTARYMIMEO,State°Mow York OTARY PUBLIC ���°® �',:s�� aalfjis& olGaunt* Tom Explivz Juno UP, ,70 p 7 r ( I Zoning Board of Appeals : Town of Southold State of New York : County of Suffolk X In the Matter of the Application of the Orient Fire District, Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless, and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC for Special Use Permit Premises: AFFIDAVIT 23300 Main Road Orient,New York Section 18; Block 5; Lot 13.8 X STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) SS.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) MARY MORAN,being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am the Real Estate Manager for Omnipoint Facilities Network 2,LLC,the applicant, and am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth. 2. The business address of Omnipoint Facilities Network 2,LLC,is 21 Keyland Court, Bohemia,New York 11716. 3. I make this affidavit pursuant to the Code of the Town of Southold Section 100- 163D(3). The proposed flagpole to be erected at the Orient Fire Department will be constructed in such a way as to be capable of accommodating co-location of additional antennas for future users. ems, (..—if.LA Y MORAN Swpp.to before me this 26 day of1=a rttq,,. 004 o-gyp—%,` AO ',AL IP i,,, r OTARY P l :LIC ` ,,R la i li t id DOROTHY A. BELARD p JUL 3 ® 2004 Notary Public, State of New York i iNr .1.,.,..optsAisj No. 01 BE6036810 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires Feb.7,20�. �D� N P� � } ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK : STATE OF NEW YORK X In the Matter of the Application of the Orient Fire District, Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless, and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC for Special Use Permit Premises: AFFIDAVIT 23300 Main Road Orient,New York Section 18; Block 5; Lot 13.8 X STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) SS.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) JOSEPH SWEET,being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am the System Development Manager for Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless,the applicant, and am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances hereinafter set forth. 2. The business address of Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless is 333 Crossways Park Drive, Woodbury,New York 11797. 3. I make this affidavit pursuant to the Code of the Town of Southold Section 100- 163D(3). The proposed flagpole to be erected at the Orient Fire Department will be constructed in such a way as to be capable of accommodating co-location of additional antennas for future users. J O S EET Sworn to before me this D-day of FO 2004 NOTARY P LIC X004 •4 LAWRENCE C. R ����y�, E' Notary Public,State of New York No. 52-4799664 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires May 31,_ " !' "s R C Petersen c ;sociates LLC Consulting— Wireless Safety • May 17, 2004 CERTIFICATION The undersigned hereby certifies that the Omnipoint personal wireless service facility, Site LI-735 (AWS)/LI-13-547B (Omnipoint Communications), located at 23300 Main Road, Orient, Suffolk County, NY, is in compliance with the safety criteria adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Specifically, the attached reports demonstrate compliance with FCC Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation (47 CFR §1.1310). Ronald C. Petersen RF Engineer President R C Petersen Associates RFC F 11V r2 JUL 3 0 2004 170 FAIRVIEW DRIVE, PO BOX 386, BEDMINSTER,NJ 07921-0386 R C Petersen L ;sociates LLC 1% Consulting— Wireless Safety Site Conformity Assessment with FCC Rules and Regulations, 47 CFR § 1.1310 et seq. (Radiofrequency Emissions) FCC Licensee: AT&T Wireless Services Omnipoint Communications Site ID: LI-735 (AWS) LI-13-547B (Omnipoint) Site Name: Orient Fire District Site Address: 23300 Main Road, Orient y Suffolk County, New York FD ut JUL 3 0 2004 OP.+MIC ga p OF,APPEALS Prepared for Omnipoint Communications AT&T Wireless Services 4 Sylvan Way, rd Floor 15 E. Midland Avenue Parsippany, New Jersey 07054 Paramus, New Jersey 07652 May 14, 2004 170 FAIRVIEW DRIVE, PO BOX 386, BEDMINSTER, NJ 07921-0386 • Cci ular/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-2 Table of Contents Summary 3 1. Introduction 4 2. Technical Data 4 3. Environmental Levels of RF Energy 4 4. Comparison of Environmental Levels with RF Standards 5 5. Discussion of Safety Criteria 5 6. For Further Information 8 7. Conclusion 8 8. References 9 CIV JUL 302004 ZONING SOAFID OF APPEALS • ('= lar/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY- Site Conformity Assessment with FCC Rules and Regulations, 47 CFR § 1.1310 et seq. (Radiofrequency Emissions) Summary This report is an analysis of the radiofrequency (RF) environment associated with the radio communication facility proposed for installation in Orient, Suffolk County, NY. The analysis includes the contribution from the base-station antennas of services to be co-located at this site:public safety land- mobile radio, cellular radio and personal communications services. Engineering data and site information provided by each service provider and well-established analytical techniques were used for calculating the RF fields in order to assess compliance with federal safety guidelines. Worst-case assumptions were used to ensure safe-side estimates, i.e., the actual values will be significantly lower than the corresponding analytical values presented in this report. The maximum level of RF energy associated with each transmitting antenna was compared with the appropriate frequency-dependent exposure limit, and these individual comparisons were combined to ensure that the cumulative RF environment is in compliance with safety guidelines. The results of this analysis indicate that the maximum level of RF energy in all locations in the vicinity of the installation that are normally a ccessible t o the public is below all applicable health and safety limits. Specifically, the maximum level of RF energy associated with simultaneous and continuous operation of the proposed transmitters at this site will be less than 3% of the safety criteria adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is the applicable Federal law with respect to consideration of environmental effects of RF emissions in the siting of FCC licensed facilities, such as base stations used for personal wireless communications. The maximum level of RF energy will also be less than 3%of the exposure limits of ANSI, IEEE, NCRP, the limits used by the State of New York Depaitalent of Health and the limits used by all states that regulate RF exposure. RECEIVPD JUL 302004 • ( lar/PCS Site: Orient, Suffolk County,NY-4 1. Introduction The p urpose oft his r eport is to ensure that the r adiofrequency(RF) environment associated with the operation of a proposed radio communication facility will comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) safety guidelines as required by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 [1]. Specifically, the report was prepared in response to a request from AT&T Wireless Services (AWS) and Omnipoint Communications (Omnipoint) for an analysis of the RF environment in areas normally accessible to the public and a conformity assessment to ensure that the installation will comply with FCC safety guidelines. These guidelines address public health concerns associated with long-term exposure in this environment. The analysis includes the contribution from all radio communication services proposed for installation at this site: public safety land-mobile (two-way)radio (Orient Fire District and Southold Police),AWS cellular radio and personal communication services (PCS) and Ommpomt PCS. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is the applicable Federal law with respect to consideration of environmental effects of RF emissions in the siting of wireless facilities. With respect to personal wireless communication services, e.g., cellular and PCS, Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 states the following: "No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent t hat such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions." 2. Technical Data The proposed cellular radio and PCS base-station antennas are to be mounted within a flagpole-type monopole tower and the public safety two-way radio antennas mounted to the flagpole cross-arms. The flagpole will be located at the Orient Fire District, 23300 Main Road, Orient, Suffolk County, NY. The PCS antennas transmit at frequencies between 1930 and 1990 million hertz (MHz). The cellular radio antennas transmit at frequencies between 869 and 894 MHz (these frequencies were formerly allocated for UHF television channels 79 through 83). The two-way radio antennas transmit in the in the VHF low band(25—50 MHz),VHF high band(140— 170 MHz)and the UHF band(440—470 MHz). The actual RF power propagated from PCS and cellular radio antennas is typically less than 20 watts per transmitter (channel) and the actual total RF power is typically less than 200 watts per sector (assuming the maximum number of transmitters are installed and operate at maximum power). The actual RF power propagated from two-way radio antennas is typically less than 100 watts per transmitter. These are extremely low power systems when compared with other familiar radio systems, such as AM, FM, and television broadcast,which operate upwards o f 5 0,000 watts. The attached figure, which depicts the electromagnetic spectrum, lists familiar uses of RF energy. Table 1 lists engineering specifications for the proposed systems. 3. Environmental Levels of RF Energy The antennas used for PCS and cellular radio propagate most of the RF energy in a relatively narrow beam (in the vertical plane) directed toward the horizon. The small amount of energy that is directed along radials below the horizon results in an RF environment directly under the antennas that i s not remarkably different from the environment at points more distant. The methodology used to calculate the exposure levels follows that outlined in FCC OET Bulletin No. 65 [2]. For the case at hand, the maximal potential exposure levels associated with simultaneous and 1 • C.sniiiar/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-5 continuous operation of the proposed transmitters can be readily calculated at any point in a plane at any height above grade. Based on the information shown in Table 1, the maximum intensity(power density) associated with these antennas, at any point in a horizontal plane 6 ft and 16 ft above grade, will be less than the values shown in Table 2. The values at 16 ft above grade are representative of the maximum power density immediately outside the upper floor of nearby residential or commercial 2-story structures (assuming level terrain). The results are also shown in Table 2 as a percentage of the FCC's maximum permissible exposure (MPE) values found in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (specifically, in the FCC Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation [3]). The values shown in T able 2 are the theoretical maxima that could occur and are not typical values. There are a number of reasons why this is true including the following: • The calculations include the effect of 100% field reinforcement from in-phase reflections, which quadruples the power density. Although this is possible theoretically for a single frequency and perfect reflecting surfaces,the probability of it occurring here is negligible. • It is assumed that each transmitter operates continuously at maximum power. • The intermittent nature of the transmission from the two-way radio antennas will result in time- weighted-average values that will be lower than those shown in Table 2. • Due to the operating (transmission) techniques used in AWS' and Omnipoint's GSM systems, the average power and the corresponding power density will be less than predicted. • The combined maximum power density is obtained by adding the maximum values for each of the • services. This assumes that the maximum power density for each service occurs at the same horizontal distance from the tower—which is not the case. Experience has shown that the analytical technique used in this analysis is extremely conservative. That is, the actual (measured) power density levels have always been found to be smaller than the corresponding calculated levels even when extrapolated to maximum use conditions (all transmitters operating simultaneously) [4]. The maximum values shown in Table 2 correspond to those associated with outdoor (open-air) environments. The levels inside nearby homes and buildings will be lower than those immediately outside because of the high attenuation of common building materials at these frequencies, typically by a factor of ten times or more. 4. Comparison of Environmental Levels with RF Safety Criteria Table 2 shows the calculated maximal RF power density levels in the vicinity of the proposed installations; Table 3 shows federal, state and consensus exposure limits for human exposure to RF energy at the frequencies of interest. Because the MPEs vary with frequency, the calculated RF levels must first be weighted with frequency (the percentages are shown in Table 2) and then combined before companng with the safety guidelines. With respect to FCC limits for public exposure, comparisons of the weighted combined analytical results indicate that the maximal level associated with the proposed base-station antennas (the summation of the maximum values for each service) is at least 33 times below the MPE,i.e., 3%of the MPE. 5. Discussion of Safety Criteria Publicity given to speculation about possible associations between health effects and exposure to magnetic fields from electric-power distribution 1 ines, electric s havers and from the use o f h and-held cellular telephones has heightened concern among some members of the public about the possibility that health effects may be associated with any exposure to electromagnetic energy. Many people feel uneasy about new or unfamiliar technology and often want absolute proof that something is safe. Such absolute Con lar/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY- guarantees are not possible since it is virtually impossible to prove that something does not exist. However, sound judgments can be made as to the safety of a physical agent based on the weight of the pertinent scientific evidence. This is exactly how safety guidelines are developed. The overwhelming weight of scientific evidence unequivocally indicates that biological effects associated with exposure to RF energy are threshold effects, i.e., unless the exposure level is sufficiently high the effect will not occur regardless of exposure duration. (Unlike ionizing radiation, e.g., X-rays and nuclear radiation,repeated exposures t o low level RF radiation, or nonionizing radiation, are not cumulative.) Thus, it is relatively straightforward to derive safety limits. By adding safety factors to the threshold level for which the most sensitive effect considered harmful occurs, conservative exposure guidelines have been developed that ensure a large margin of safety. At present, there are of the order of 20,000 reports in the scientific literature that address the subject of RF bioeffects. These reports, most of which describe.the results of epidemiology studies, animal and cell-culture studies, have been critically reviewed by leading researchers in the field and all new studies are continuously being reviewed independently by expert panels and committees throughout the world in the interest of ensuring that RF safety standards protect the public and the worker. These include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,the standards committees sponsored by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection under the sponsorship of the World Health Organization, the National Radiological Protection Board of the UK, the Health Council of the Netherlands and Health Canada, to name just a few. All of these groups have recently either reaffirmed existing safety and health standards, developed and adopted new standards, or proposed standards for exposure to RF energy. For example, in 1986, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) published recommended limits for occupational and public exposure [5]. These recommendations were based on the results of an extensive critical review of the scientific literature by a committee of the leading researchers in the field of bioelectromagnetics. The literature selected included many controversial studies reporting effects at low levels. The results of all studies were weighed,analyzed and a consensus obtained establishing a conservative threshold upon which safety guidelines should be based. This.threshold corresponds to the level at which the most sensitive,reproducible effects that could be related to human health were reported in the scientific literature. Safety factors were incorporated to ensure that the resulting guidelines would be at least ten to fifty times lower than the established threshold, even under worst-case exposure conditions. The NCRP recommendations for both continuous occupational and public exposure to RF energy at the frequencies of interest are shown in Table 3. Although the State of New York does not have a regulatory program for the RF portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, the NYS DOH compares potential exposure levels with the recommendations of the NCRP to assess public safety. (Table 3 also includes a summary o f the corresponding s afety criteria recommended by various organizations throughout the world.) In July of 1986, the Environmental Protection Agency published a notice in the Federal Register, calling for public comment on recommended guidance for exposure of the public [6]. Three different limits, ranging from approximately 500 to 5000 pW/cm2 at PCS frequencies and from approximately 275 to 2,750 tW/cm2 at cellular radio frequencies, were proposed. In 1987 the EPA abandoned its efforts and failed to adopt official federal exposure guidelines. However, in 1993 and 1996 the EPA, in its comments on the FCC's Notice of Proposed Rule Making to adopt safety guidelines [7], recommended adoption of the 1986 NCRP limits [5]. In September 1991, the'RF safety standard developed by Subcommittee 4 of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standards Coordinating Committee SCC-28 was approved by the IEEE lar/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY- Standards Board [8]. (Until 1988 IEEE SCC-28 was known as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) C95 Committee—established in 1959. Because of its membership of leading scientists throughout the world, the committee is now called the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety–ICES). In November 1992, the ANSI Board of Standards Review approved the IEEE standard for use as an American National Standard. The standard was reaffirmed in 1997. The limits of this standard are essentially identical to the 1982 ANSI RFPGs [9] for occupational exposure and are one- fifth of these values for exposure of the general public (exposures in uncontrolled environments). Like those of the NCRP, these limits resulted from an extensive critical review of the scientific literature by a large committee of preeminently qualified scientists, the majority of whom were from academia and from research laboratories of federal public health agencies. The panels of scientists representing the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)1[10] and the National Radiological Protection Board in the United Kingdom [11] independently developed and in 1993 published guidelines similar to those of ANSIIIEEE. In 1997, after another critical review of the latest scientific evidence, ICNIRP reaffirmed the RF limits published in 1993 [12]. More recently, expert panels representing Health Canada and The Health Council of the Netherlands independently reviewed the extant scientific literature and recommended limits similar to those o f IEEE,N CRP and I CNIRP. A lso,what was formerly the U SSR, which traditionally had the lowest exposure guides, twice has revised upward its limits for public exposure. Thus, there is a converging consensus of the world's scientific community as to what constitutes safe levels of exposure. Finally, in implementing the National Environmental Policy Act regarding potentially hazardous RF radiation from radio services regulated by the FCC, the Commission's Rules require that licensees filing applications after January 1, 19972 ensure that their facilities comply with the 1996 FCC MPE values outlined in 47 CFR §1.1310 [3]3 (which are essentially the same as the NCRP, ICNIRP, and the other contemporary limits at the frequencies of interest). (Note: Under the terms of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, no local government may regulate the placement of wireless facilities based on RF emissions to the extent that these emissions comply with the FCC regulations [1].) It is important to note that the study of RF safety is a mature scientific discipline with a history of more than five decades. Although the safety limits that result from the many independent reviews of the scientific literature may vary slightly from organization to organization as shown in Table 3, the bases of all contemporary ,standards and guidelines, called basic restrictions, are identical. Thus there is international scientific consensus on what constitutes safety – this consensus is reflected in the safety standards and guidelines. With respect to the proposed cellular, PCS and two-way radio antennas, be assured that the actual exposure levels in the vicinity of the Orient, Suffolk County, NY installation will be below any science- based safety and health standard used anywhere in the world and literally thousands of times below any level associated with verifiable evidence of any functional change in humans or laboratory animals. This holds true even when all transmitters operate simultaneously and continuously at their highest power. 1 ICNIRP is recognized by the World Health Organization as an appropriate organization for developing guidelines to protect against non- ionizing radiation The ICNIRP limits are now used throughout the European Union and in many other countries as the basis for their safety guidelines. 2 The FCC extended the transition period to October 15, 1997 Second Memorandum Opinion and Order and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, ET Docket 9 3-62,FCC 9 7-303,adopted August 2 5,1997 P rior t o this d ate,the FCC required P CS licensees t o comply with the 1992 ANSI/IEEE C95 1 limits and all other licensees(since 1987)to comply with the 1982 ANSI C95.1 limits. 3.Although all FCC licensees will be required to comply with 47 CFR§1.1310 limits,the FCC will continue to exclude certain land mobile services from proving compliance with these limits 47 CFR§1 1307. Previously,although licensees had to comply with the 1982 ANSI C95.1 limits, the FCC categorically excluded land mobile s ervices,i ncluding p aging,cellular and two-way radio,from h azard analyses because "individually or cumulatively they do not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment"[13]. The FCC pointed out that there was no evidence of excessive exposure to RF radiation during routine normal operation of these radio services. 09 ilar/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-8 Power density levels of this magnitude are not even a subject of speculation by the scientific community with regard to an association with adverse health effects. 6. For Further Information Anyone interested can obtain additional information about the environmental impact of PCS, cellular and two-way radio communication antennas from: Dr.Robert Cleveland,Jr. Federal Communications Commission Office of Engineering and Technology 445— 12th Street SW Washington,DC 20554 (202)418-2422 and William J. Condon, CHP Chief,Bureau of Environmental Radiation Protection State of New York,Department of Health 2 University Place Albany,NY 12203 (518)458-6495 7. Conclusion This report is an analysis of the RF environment associated with the radio communication base-station antennas proposed for installation i n Orient, Suffolk County,NY. In particular, this analysis utilizes engineering data and site information provided each service provider and well-established analytical techniques for calculating the RF fields in order to assess compliance with federal safety guidelines. Included in the analysis are c ontributions from all proposed services: PCS, cellular radio and public safety two-way radio. Worst-case assumptions were used to ensure safe-side estimates, i.e., the actual values will be significantly lower than the corresponding analytical values. The maximum level of RF energy associated with each transmitting antenna was compared with the appropriate frequency- dependent exposure limit, and these individual comparisons were combined to ensure that the cumulative RF environment is in compliance with safety guidelines. The results of this analysis indicate that the maximum level of RF energy in all locations in the vicinity oft he installation t hat are normally a ccessible t o the public is below all applicable health and safety limits. Specifically, the maximum level of RF energy associated with simultaneous and continuous operation of the proposed transmitters at this site will be less than 3% of the safety criteria adopted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) as mandated by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 is the applicable Federal law with respect to consideration of environmental effects of RF emissions in the siting of FCC licensed facilities, such as base stations used for personal wireless communications. The maximum level of RF energy will also be less than 3%of the exposure limits of ANSI, IEEE, NCRP, the limits used by the State of New York Depai invent of Health and the limits used by all states that regulate RF exposure. Enclosure: Figure. Electromagnetic Spectrum 4 • ( 'Ear/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY-9 8. References [1] Telecommunications Act of 1996,Pub.L.No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56(1996). [2] OET Bulletin 65, Edition 97-01, August 1997. Federal Communications Commission, Office of Engineenng and Technology,Washington,DC [3] Federal Communication Commission 47 CFR Parts 1,2, 15, 24 and 97. "Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation" (August 6, 1996) [4] Petersen, R.C., and Testagrossa, P.A., "Radiofrequency Fields Associated with Cellular-Radio Cell-Site Antennas,"Bioelectromagnetics,Vol. 13,No. 6. (1992) [5] Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, NCRP Report No. 86, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, MD. (1986) [6] Federal Register,Vol. 51,No. 146,Wednesday,July 30, 1986. [7] Notice of Proposed Rule Making In the Matter of Guidelines for Evaluating the Environmental Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation,August 13, 1993. ET Docket No. 93-62. (1993) [8] ANSI/IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz t o 3 00 GHz, ANSI/IEEE C 95.1-1992,Institute o f Electrical and Electronics Engineers,Piscataway,NJ. (1992) [9] American National Standard Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 00 kHz t o 100 GHz, ANSI C95.1-1982, American National Standards Institute,New York,NY. (1982) [10] Electromagnetic Fields (300 Hz to 300 GHz), Environmental Health Criteria 137, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. (1993) [11] Board Statement on Restrictions on Human Exposure to Static and Time Varying Electromagnetic Fields and Radiation, Documents of the NRPB, Vol. 4, No. 5, National Radiological Protection Board, Chilton,Didcot,Oxon,United Kingdom. (1993) [12] "Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields(up to 300 GHz) -ICNIRP Guidelines,"Health Physics,Vol. 74,No.4,pp 494-522. (1998) [13] Action by the Commission February 12, 1987, by Second Report and Order (FCC 87-63), and Third Notice of Proposed Rulemaking(FCC 87-64). General Docket No. 79-144. Cellular/PCS Site: Orient, Suffolk County,NY- 10 Table 1 Engineering Specifications for the Proposed Cellular Radio,PCS and Two-way Radio Systems Orient,Suffolk County,NY Two-way Radio Cellular Radio PCS Site Specifications Orient FD Southold Police Orient FD AWS(GSM850) T-Mobile AWS(GSM1900) (46 MHz) (155 MHz) (450 MHz) , maximum ERP per channel t 100 watts 363 watts 240 watts 2423 watts 491 watts 242.7 watts actual radiated power per channel _ 100 watts 100 watts 100 watts 20.2 watts 15 watts 9.7 watts actual total radiated power per sector 100 watts 100 watts 100 watts 60.6 watts 180 watts 29.1 watts number of transmit(Tx)antennas 1 1 1 N/A N/A , N/A number of receive(Rx)antennas 1 _ 1 i 1 _ N/A N/A _i_ N/A —_ number of Tx/Rx antennas(dplexed) N/A N/A N/A 2 per sector** 2 per sector** 2 per sector** maximum number of transmitters 1 1 1 3 per sector 12 per sector 3 per sector number of sectors configured N/A(omni) N/A(omni) N/A(omm) 3 3 3 antenna centerline height above grade 98 ft± 100 ft± 125 ft± 102 ft& 108 ft± 112 ft& 118 ft± 102 ft& 108 ft± __ antenna manufacturer - Celwave$ _ Celwave$ _ Decibel Products t _ Decibel Products__ EMS Wireless _`Decibel Products _ model number PD 1142 _ _ PD 200_ T _ DB404 DB731DG85V1EXM* DR65-18-02DPL2Q DB731DG85V1EXM* gain 2.15 dBi — 7.75 dBi 5.95 dBi 12.95 dBi 17.3 dBi 16.15 dBi type ^ --- omni-directional onmi-directional omni-directional _omni-directional _ directional directional directional downtilt 0° 0° 0° 0° 2°(electrical) 0° I t Effective Radiated Power(ERP)is a measure of how well an antenna concentrates RF energy,it is not the actual power radiated from the antenna. To illustrate the difference,compare the brightness of an ordinary 100 watt light bulb with that from a 100 watt spot-light. Even though both are 100 watts,the spot-light appears brighter because it concentrates the light in one direction. In this direction,the spot-light effectively appears to be emitting more than 100 watts. In other directions,there is almost no light emitted by the spot-light and it effectively appears to be much less than 100 watts $ Typical antenna used for this service * This Decibel antenna is a dual-band antenna that operates in both the cellular and PCS frequency bands ** There are two antennas stacked vertically per sector at the centerline heights listed. • • r� C't_hOar/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY- Table 2 Calculated Maximal Levels and the Levels as a Percentage of 1996 FCC MPEs*for the Proposed Cellular Radio,PCS and Two-way Radio Antennas Orient,Suffolk County,NY Power Density(14W/cm2) _ _ %of MPEs* _ Provider—Service 6 ft AMGLt i 16 ft AMGLf 6 ft AMGLf 16 ft AMGLt Orient FD—two-way radio(46 MHz)_______ <1.664 i <2.094 _ 0.832% 1.047% Southold Police—two-way radio(155 MHz) <0.364 <0.455 0.182% 0.228% Orient FD—two-way radio(460 MHz) <2.843 <3.389 0.948% 1.130% T-Mobile—PCS <2.385 <2.907 0.238% 0.291% _ AT&T—PCS(GSM1900) <0.196 <0.245 0.020% 0.025% AT&T—cellular radio(GSM850) <0.531 1 <0.662 0.097% 0.120% Total 2.317% 2.841% * MPE: The FCC limits for maximum permissible exposure(same as 1986 NCRP limits at the frequencies of interest) t AMGL:above mean grade level • C ar/PCS Site: Orient,Suffolk County,NY- U. Table 3 Summary of International,Federal,State and Consensus Safety Criteria for Exposure to Radiofrequency Energy at Frequencies Used for Radio Communication Systems(30-2000 MHz) Exposure Power Density(µW/cm2) Organization/Government Agency Population 30-300 MHz 300-2000 MHz International Safety Criteria International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection(1997) Occupational 1000 f/0.4 (Health Physics 74:4,494-522.(1998)' Public 200 f/2 National Radiological Protection Board Occupational10002 50003 (NRPB, 1993) Public 6602 26003 Federal Requirements Federal Communications Commission3 Occupational 1000_ _ __ _ f/02_3 _ (47 CFR§1.1310) _Public 200 f11.5 Consensus Standards and Recommendations American National Standards Institute Occupational 1000 f/0.3 (ANSI C95.1 - 1982) Public 1000 f/0.3 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Occupational 1000 f/0.3 (ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1999 Edition)4 Public 200 f/1.5 National Council on Radiation Protection&Measurements Occupational _ _ 1000 f 10.3 - - (NCRP Report 86, 1986) Public 200 fI 1.5 State Codes New Jersey(NJAC 7:28-42) Public 1000 f 10.3 Massachusetts(Department of Health 105 CMR 122) Public 200 fI 1.5 New York States Public 200 fI 1.5 f=frequency in MHz NOTES: 1 Reaffirmed in 1997 and published,with modification,in 1998. 2. The NRPB guidelines have slightly different frequency ranges for their investigation levels. The values shown are the lowest values for the corresponding frequency range. 3. All licensees are required to comply with the limits outlined in 47 CFR§1.1307. 4. Incorporating IEEE Standard C95.1-1991 and IEEE Standard C95.1a-1998. 5. State of New York Department of Health follows NCRP Report 86. • ELECTROMAGNETIC S Non-Ionizing Radiation Ionizing Radiation ELF, VF - +dio Frequencies (RF) Infrared UV X-rays, y-rays Service/Device: Frequency Range LI ght AM Radio: 535—1605 kHz CB Radio: 27 MHz Cordless Phones: 49 - 2450 MHz TVCH2-6: 54-88 MHz FM Radio: 88—108 MHz Marine/Weather Radio: 160 MHz TV CH7— 13: 174-216 MHz TV UHF CH 14-69 470-800 MHz Cellular Radio, ESMR, Paging/Data: 806—946 MHz Antitheft devices: 10—20 kHz and/or 915 MHz Wireless LAN (WiFi): 915—5800 MHz Microwave oven: 915 and 2450 MHz Personal Communication Services: 1800—2200 MHz Intrusion alarms/door openers: 10.5 GHz Microwave radio: 1 —40 GHz Satellite communications: 100 MHz—275 GHz 103 I I 10o I I 109 I I 1112 I I 1015 I I 1018 �'- 60Hz LIMB 1GHz Zoning Board of Appeals : Town of Southold State of New York : County of Suffolk X In the Matter of the Application of the Orient Fire District, Affordable Housing Associates, Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless, and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC for Special Use Permit Premises: AFFIDAVIT 23300 Main Road Orient,New York Section 18; Block 5; Lot 13.8 X STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) SS.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) JORGE LABAYO,being duly sworn, deposes and says: 1. I am a radio frequency design engineer employed by Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless ('ATTW'). My responsibilities include identifying signal coverage gaps in ATTW's wireless telecommunications system and assessing the ability of proposed antenna sites to adequately fill signal coverage gaps. 2. This Affidavit is submitted pursuant to Southold Town Code §100-163D(2), (3), (4), (8) and(9). 3. ATTW is considered a public utility for zoning purposes under the laws of the State of New York and is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to serve the public within Suffolk County and throughout much of the United States. " 4. ATTW strives to provide reliable service throughout its licensed coverage area. At present there is a significant service gap in the vicinity of the proposed site captioned above. - 1 - In order to eliminate this service gap, a search ring was created that depicts the area in which a site must be located. A copy of the search ring is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 5. The proposed wireless telecommunications facility at the captioned location has been considered by your deponent, and I have determined that, if antennas are installed as proposed, this site would meet our design criteria and would serve to provide reliable service in the service deficiency area in question. 6. Representatives of our site acquisition team searched the entire area depicted within the search ring (Exhibit "A") and found that there are no existing structures of a sufficient height that would enable ATTW to eliminate the service gap in question. In particular, the church steeple at the Orient Presbyterian Church, which is located within the search ring, is not of sufficient height. A good faith effort was made to co-locate an existing site within the search ring,but no structures exist that meet our criteria. 7. We have determined that the proposed site will meet the primary objectives of ATTW's search area, because it will provide wireless service coverage to a significant portion of the unserved area. We performed predictive tests to determine and confirm whether the site would provide sufficient signal coverage. The tests were performed using sophisticated computer software that is utilized as a predictive modeling tool. It identifies areas where sufficient coverage exists and takes into consideration topography, vegetation and other morphology, which may attenuate the radio signal. Using this software, a signal propagation map, showing ATTW's existing coverage from existing sites, was prepared and is attached as Exhibit "B". This map, entitled "Coverage of Surrounding Sites Without LI-735 Orient Point", shows coverage in the area from two (2) existing sites labeled NY 0225 (existing) and FU2 (future, with lease agreement). A second propagation map, showing the signal coverage from - 2 - . c. • . ✓ ` ATTW's existing sites, together with the coverage that will be provided by this proposed facility, is attached as Exhibit "C". The second map is entitled "Coverage of Surrounding Sites With Site LI-735 Orient Point". As the second map shows, the proposed facility at the Orient Fire District would enable ATTW to meet its coverage objective in the area in question. JRGE LABA O Sworn to before me this 0-4- day of - - c , 2004. NOTARY PUBLIC THERESA A. SCAROLA Notary Public,State of New York No. 01 SC6010177 -3.,A----_., Qualified in Nassau County - +,AR Commission Expires July 13,20 Lai �V , JUL 3 0 2004 - 3 - AT&T Wireless Services Exhibit "A" Plur PUN Gut Oyster Pond Reer, Onent Point ugh t � �nern Point �e 11.0111111111111111. Milford Point- ti r,.��'�"'�'/' MO heti C: :'' till %%% ;men,Hill Rose r.k, i ,Orient Shoal Terry P. _25j. id, :aFe ':,.?diii .4 knie Ry vRocky Point Truman Beach Orient �agle Point v v agles Neck Point 0 . aeht COrient Beach 25 .1011j Beth Bqv Pam Food vBrowns Point 4,.mrrd.P Stale Perk ens Point .East Marion eters Neck Point Cmekr F$>-d.,. n..17 ter:a4 25 vaUPrra v ,Long Booth .�r:ee Ford eol „Inletn„InletPoint - b Cleaves Point vLong Beach Point Eastern Long Island* ,tlrj Aver }Long Beach Bar Lighthouse 3nrWI,Laiii ,Youngs Point lay Beach Point A 1999 PeLomx. Street Atlas USA iiiirEIVED JUL 3 0 2004 ZONING BOARD� o� APPEALS LI-735 Orient Point (subject site) Exhibit "B" Coverage of Surrounding Sites Without LI-735 Orient Point �`'- w S Orient Ferry �. , NPV J `�. 6. \ , Alio P Jill Si kg,„ � r cw - + , -,,,,,:t.,./�1 v f White color shows .14 - • no AWS coverage. IC Light blue color shows . AI 4i/6., NY0 _22AWS coverage. a I :k s' 0 Exhibit"C" IV C=3 ei N Coverage of Surrounding Sites With LI-735 Orient Point [d ' 'al l• we 1 ��;a r \ k.} f Ll-735 -AY,�}%`1,\',.tip ."- I\•. East Marti i - 45 Y. — NI:4:6 ' 0111P Light blue color shows AWS coverage. .0"11White color shows no AWS coverage. ,1� FIY022 iviv_ iir t. 4 - . T. ____1 CO 0 CZ AT&T Wireless Services in Southold Town _ CD (included are LI-741 in Riverhead Town&FU2 in Shelter Island) N ate.: O 0 .° ol I Subject site (LI-735) oma, . Future Sites • Existing sites G Note : Sites LI-741 and FU2 are located in different towns.These sites will provide partial coverage in Southold Town. 2bo ` Clinton/ i't,,, - _ 1 - i !Addle Beach* +~ \ s� enwick y' • •or View +Fieters Is 1 I LI-201 I _ r LI-735 El - T.lent ',-----> ♦gnu Beath ante P' laSt Marion rari e A'GreFilibt4 ® ••.4bring4iarbor Shelter Island tteigJ s 4- ?'4 southoit��ti ®a;heIter Island Wes*ioreland Peconle �, Silvelspeacho+l+Mrxclair Colony S T Fireplace ®� •Reydonlhores +o erndPark Laughing Waters SS S +MatdStone Park st chogue Cutchogue ' � (114) Nassau Fartn: t' / • .,• gs Li. © 4orth H $r' Ili:mil +Napeague •�® Cutchogue *Morton14WR '1 ide ),(35. 16 iiii LI 741 Redwood Sag Harbor Hew Suffolk 4. + . . . .Matt •ck�_1Noydck 1�5�' / tR► Amyagansett Separation distance from the subject site Location Type of site Height(ft) Latitude Longitude (mi) 23300 Main Road,Orient Point,Suffolk,Ny 11957 Monopole/Flagpole 108 41.1425 -72.3021 0 5792 Sound Avenue,Jamesport,NY 11901 Lattice 117 40.9881 -72.6092 19 Church Oceanic Avenue,Fishers Island,Suffolk,NY Church/Building 35 41.2624 -72.8940 17 ,ge Dump Menantic Road,Shelter Island,Suffolk,Ny 11964 Monopole 150 41.0667 -72.3508 6 Rte 25&Elijah Ln,Mattituck,Suffolk,NY Monopole 100 40.9989 -72.5108 15 1 ' ,strict t Peconic Lane,Peconic,Suffolk,Ny Lattice 90 41.0358 -72.4550 11 ~" District Moore's Lane,Greenport,Suffolk,Ny Water tower 148 41.1042 -72 3742 4.5 Note: Sites LI-741,LI-Gu, es.Sites 228,229 and 225 are existing sites. • Affidavit In the Matter of the Application of the Orient Fire District,Affordable Housing Associates,Inc. d/b/a Beacon Wireless Management, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Wireless, and Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC for Special Use permit Premises: 23300 Main Road Orient,New York JUL 3 o 2004 Section 18;Block 5; Lot 13.8 1 APPEALS Janice Madrid,being duly sworn,deposes and says: 1. I am a radio frequency design engineer employed by Omnipoint Facilities Network 2, LLC ("Omnipoint"). My responsibilities include identifying signal coverage gaps in Omnipoint's wireless telecommunications system and assessing the ability of proposed antenna sites to adequately fill signal coverage gaps. 2. This Affidavit is submitted to Southold Town Code §100-163D(2),(3), (4),(8)and (9). 3. Omnipoint is considered a public utility for zoning purposes under the laws of the State of New York and is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC")to serve the public within Suffolk County and throughout much of the United States. 4. Omnipoint strives to provide reliable service throughout its licensed coverage area. At present there is a significant service gap in the vicinity of the proposed site captioned above. In order to eliminate this service gap, a search ring was created that depicts the area in which a site must be located. A copy of the search ring is attached hereto. 5. The proposed wireless telecommunication facility at the captioned location has been considered by your deponent,and I have determined that,if antennas are installed as proposed,this site would meet our design criteria and would serve to provide reliable service in the service deficiency area in question. 6. Representatives of our site acquisition team searched the entire area depicted within the search ring(Exhibit"A")and found that there are no existing structures of a sufficient height that would enable Omnipoint to eliminate the service gap in question. In particular,the church steeple at the Orient Presbyterian Church,which is located within the search ring,is not of sufficient height. A good faith effort was made to co-locate an existing site within the search ring,but no structures exist that meet our criteria. 7. We have determined that the proposed site will meet the primary objectives of Omnipoint's search area,because it will provide wireless service coverage to a significant portion of the unserved area. We performed predictive tests to determine and confirm whether the site would provide sufficient signal coverage. The tests were performed using sophisticated computer software that is utilized as a predictive ' modeling tool. It identifies areas where sufficient coverage exists and takes into consideration topography,vegetation and other morphology,which may attenuate the radio signal. Using this software, a signal propagation map, showing Omnipoint's existing coverage from existing sites,was prepared and is attached as Map"1". This map"Existing Coverage",without LI 13-547 Orient Fire District, shows a four(4) mile coverage gap on Main Road from Back Lane into Point Road. A second propagation map, showing the signal coverage from Omnipoint's existing sites, together with the coverage that will be provided by this proposed facility, is attached as Map"2". This map is entitled"Proposed Coverage" and contains surrounding sites as well as Site LI 13-547 Orient Fire District. As the second map shows,the proposed facility at the Orient Fire District would enable Omnipoint to meet its coverage objective in the area in question. Sworn to before me this et9641-iday of Apra.I ,2004. BRANDY L.BORGER • NOTARY PUBLIC OF NEW AMY C•L «. neon Expires 1/98/2 008 N • 'Y PURL Cluster 34 J.Ndiaye 7 11.1111111 . Search Ring LP73 '47 • • • x , is) 0 ,00,1( 41111110%1..,6 ‘ 4" - - O. ' by ' 51.m Rd a <., dilyN .411111k . ' L11354 ' ,,_��o� � • R• t / C) '•, % i / 3 o, oCte L1135478 wmvi tia •111111r,$) . " and St �,e' iiii, 0 .ia . Ost 0 / co °• ,a Rings Candidates 03a ' , • LIPA Replacement Approved Candidate ��.�. �- Ideal Location i . �' - • Active Ring Collocation Killed Ring i' C_ / No Window C Boundaries On Air Sites or 4 / Cluster Design N 5 Q / a .-- r--) —.----tIPA Replacement a ! o __, Approved Rings R17 -P U ' EXHIBIT "A" 0 • V. 1 00 00 rn p���F Z TIGHT RO PFk�f," Ca 0 yrp �' S-C' — m iL113547B' �1' Z ARAQUAVIEWAVE .1-4— , e . O '. i Rl,F o '1-0 ' � RRO m o <2-9X08 0 f v 00� 2 ', / 1/(NO i0�� ,l �Ov�ti v R -� O O l .g��P. LI13162C m 2 oP� a� �s� 73 ti��� �' , 28 N� cO ...,1........."."5 CAROU ',13, _ = 7`m rn ■ -4 o `��4 cai ��N B. SAN Z .re Q _441 Si -n EAD Z GEO FOX LN Z MOOR ■ I N H BURNS RD w s' 51 '12/O&P ._1Y; < Cr. tLT a Map 1 ,'VIPOI , Existing Coverage V Subject Site at 120' Site ID: NJ13547 • On Air Site City of Orient Point, NY ® Subject Coverage-84dBm Prepared:3/31/04 Existing Coverage-84dBm Prepared By: Map Scale: 1 in = 1.048 mi Water PierCon Sointioiis Spn Mrs n In W,,,-rel.s...tnsn, y eit I - imi. : • m O 0 -J z pFzv00� co T3 boy�. v;\G I1 r}' P p,st\'��\��/ �O TO � In X91),5 .1:;. - ' \A m 1L1135478 �'L S Z (..---5-----: /� NARR AQUA VIEW AVE imo/ / ' A'Q7/, n 'QTS ' �� O OAR/�, m Re`O �P�y RRO �,- r� /It 08 JO O up 1111 O��OO� ��2 v A, Ay�/Fw0R 1 �Py 9,0\-) z l<<\ O O , ''S- 113162C L113162C m �3 ws T y�e N `QO `N� CAROUSE N _ = 7m OAF'-\ Ca N� �,c co, PVE 6e � �N OA`� T SAN S_ e'. 'GE 7 Q R9tij s 73 EAD T z GEO FOX LN co "NO OR g• __G + BURNS RD o: r inr HOR ,. �� ¢ CI_ t: a Map 2 " Proposed Coverage V Subject Site at 120' O ' • Site ID: NJ13547 • On Air Site City of Orient Point, NY Subject Coverage-84dBm Prepared:3/31/04 Existing Coverage-84dBm Prepared By: Map Scale: lin= 1.048 mi Water —�Pier con SoiUt10RS Sjrrs halm:,rn W rrlc*,Ss mem, ,„ (rt&t, P00iMt wee), Orient Fire District Board of Fire Commissioners RECEWED Martin Trent,Chairman Lloyd A.Kahn Robert Hicks Joseph Wysocki MAY - 6 2003 Gary Tabor Edward Loper, Sec/Treasurer ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL S To: All members, Retirees, Residents of the Orient Fire District !' %'-061-11°4 f ) From: Orient Fire District f 1 Re: Application to construct a 120 Foot.Pole Structure that as a principal use will support public safety antennas at a height of 90 feet and also support antennas and related equipment for wireless carriers. We have completed and are submitting the Town of Southold Building Department form titled: Application for Building Permit. As the form does not allow adequate space for explanation and notes, we are also providing the following support information; Description of the Proposed Construction Statements of BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY PLANS PREPARED BY MICHAEL WALKER, LICENSED ARCHITECT, SHOWN (PARTIAL) A. PLOT PLAN B. COMPOUND LAYOUT C. ELEVATION LETTERS OF SUPPORT FORM A. CHIEF OF POLICE CARISLE COCHRAN, JR. B. FORMER CHIEF OF POLICE STANLEY DROSKOSKI C. SOUTHOLD TOWN FIRE CHIEFS COUNCIL "An Analysis of the Orient Fire Department's Existing Radio Frequency Coverage and Recommendations for improving Communications". Please note the application is filed by the Orient Fire District, as owner along with Beacon Wireless Management, as site developer. Construction will be by licensed and insured firms specializing in construction of communication facilities. r > APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICANT: ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT 23300 MAIN ROAD ORIENT,NY 11957 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION: PRIMARY/PRINCIPAL USE: The Orient Fire District and the Southold Town Police -need to improve coverage for Fire and Police Communications. It is recognized by former and current police and emergency workers, that current communications are inadequate. Chief Cochranofthe Southold Town Police Department has determined that Southold Police communications must be improved and that emergency communications can be enhanced by locating antennas at a height of 90 feet at the site of the Orient Fire District. Chief Cochran strongly states in his letter: "Pursuant to our prior conversations, this is to officially inform you that there is a need to improve the police radio system receive site at your firehouse. Just this week there were two officers trying to communicate on portable radios in the East Marion-Orient area and were unable to communicate with each other until they returned to their vehicles. This poses an officer safety issue." "I would request that when the Orient Fire District erects a communications tower that our antenna height be increased to (90) feet. The ninety (90) foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town." Former Chief Stanley Droskoski has provided a letter of support for the current project in which he eloquently states: "For these units to have inadequate communications is incomprehensible. Clear and concise communications is absolutely essential in protecting life and property when dispatching emergency units to the needs of the populace. At present, communications in this area are less than adequate, but could be rectified by the construction of a cellular tower. Presently, emergency response units must rely on relays from other units to receive messages, as some messages lack clarity. A situation of this nature certainly could endanger lives and it is imperative that it be rectified." The Southold Town Fire Chief's representing the eight Fire Departments within the Southold Township, who answered, "over three thousand emergency calls in the past year, support the Orient Fire District request. The Orient Fire District in order to improve public safety in Orient and throughout the Town of Southold proposes to construct a 120-foot structure in the design of a FLAG POLE, with yardarm. Public Safety antennas will be placed at a height of ninety(90) feet. • i MAY ` 6 2003 ZONING BOARD ®F APPEALS "An Analysis of the Orient Fire District's Existing Radio Frequency Coverage and Recommendations for Improving Communications"Report, dated February 23, 2003, is included with this application. It was prepared by Mr. David Weyhreter, MSEE. The report states in part: "Based on the results of an extensive predictive coverage analysis utilizing industry tested techniques an increase in antenna height to 90' (feet) AGL is suggested." The design, financing and construction of the FLAGPOLE will be accomplished by , Beacon Wireless Management. There will be NO cost to either the Orient Fire District or the Southold Town Police for placement of antennas on the flagpole. Beacon Wireless Management will lease space`within the shell of the flagpole"to wireless carriers. ACCESSORY USE: As an accessory use, Beacon Wireless Management will lease antenna space on the interior of the flagpole to wireless carriers. This design is called "stealth technology." NO wireless carrier antennas or cables will be exposed or visible from surrounding areas. Electronic equipment will be located in a storage shed, which will be constructed of material similar to the existing storage building. The storage shed for the electronics and the Flagpole will be located behind the existing firehouse storage building. Use by wireless carriers is accessory and incidental, merely requiring an additional thirty feet to allow the project to be economically feasible. The project cannot proceed at a lower height with the flagpole design. BENEFITS TO THE COMMUNITY: The Orient Fire District specifically will receive the following benefits from the proposed construction: A. No Capital expenditure for the "structure"needed to locate public safety antennas. This will save the Orient Fire District approximately$150,000. B. Improved Public Safety. There is a•current need to improve public safety communications for the Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services. Locating the antennas, at no cost to the community, will improve public safety communications. C. The Orient Fire District, and by extension, the Orient Community, have the capacity to earn more than$3,000,000 (million dollars) over the life of the agreement (30 years). D. The Orient Fire District may elect to own the flagpole structure after 7 years. E. Improved Wireless Communications which will lead to improved public safety. Static's clearly show that approximately 40% of E-911 calls emanate from Wireless phones; substantially reducing the time it takes emergency personnel to respond. F. Enhanced Wireless Services will enable Public Safety personnel to pinpoint the location of emergency calls within a fifty-foot radius, thus improving emergency response. NOTES TO BUILDING PERMIT These notes are provided, as an explanatory addendum to the Application for a Building Permit as spaces does not allow a full explanation of the work proposed. a. Existing use and occupancy. The subject land contains two buildings; 1. Orient Fire Station - 2: Storage Building - b. Intended use and occupancy. The proposal is to construct a 120-foot Flagpole structure that as a principal use will support public safety antennas at a height of 90 feet and as an accessory use support wireless antenna. The Flagpole will be located in a fenced compound with space also utilized to store electronic equipment. "If business, commercial or mixed use occupancy, specify nature and Extend of each type of use." Description: The Orient Fire District, in an effort to improve Public Safety communications in Orient and throughout Southold Town, have entered into an agreement with Beacon Wireless will construct the facility whereby the following will be accomplished: A. Principal/Primary Use. The Orient Fire District, Southold Town Police and Emergency Medical Services, in an effort to improve public safety communications, will locate communications antennas on the exterior of the flagpole at a height of ninety(90) feet. There is a clear and present need by both the Orient Fire District and the Southold Town Police to build a structure to improve communications, whether or not wireless carriers locate on the facility. The Orient Fire District, in a very business like manner, is attempting to complete the project at no cost to the tax payer, improve public safety, co- locate wireless carriers and earn substantial income for the Orient community. The Southold Town Chief of Police, Carlisle E. Cochran, Jr. has unequivocally stated, "When the Orient Fire District erects a communications tower that our antenna height be increased to ninety(90) feet. The ninety(90) foot mark has been successful in improving communications in other parts of the Town." B. Accessory Use. The Flagpole structure is designed to accommodate the antennas of up to four wireless carriers within the "interior"of the structure. No antennas will be visible from adjoining vantage points. Zi; " 33...A � 9 9 \ 'i \ RCA7,-... MAY — 6 2003 - N 87"47'30' E 224,52' t(21/V�j ���, P p_' h �5i41F�oia �+� fi K. �eep v, = e�i1, EALS Q��X„/if1 o sv,N CONO SCAB C p a� (n TANK �p0 ;sir ��” 0 OAS pti N (4.,,,50/7.3)'s{ng) ~Z Z SO 3' s. C METAL- BL1�' t, A CONCpE 1E' • . 903' p . L 1=01%114 r CONCRETE , �,1�0 `` SLAB i ' 2"- TT 01 *i 01111011 , '1/4-r....\ F „------....a110111.111111111, P 111111 { ..-3 r � • c - n LE SPE 1A°°09° \ %-2i0 v\)69O ���G n coRpoVr`� Ne* 50 0 . 570,70' (ACTUAL) 570,83' (DEED) N/D/F SCHRIEVER - Dimensions of existing structures. ' A.' Fire Station Front: Approximately 80 feet Depth: Approximately 115 feet Height: Approximately 35 feet B. Metal Storage Building Front: Approximately 40 feet Depth: Approximately 80 feet Height: Approximately 25 feet Dimension of entire new structure: Flagpole: 120 feet, Base to Top Width at Base 48" Width at Top 24" Shelter: Front: 16 feet Depth: 20 feet Height: 10 feet With other carriers 50 feet to 60 feet as shown Size of lot: Front: Main Road: 226 feet Tabor Road: 116.75 feet Rear: From Main Road: 570.70 feet From Tabor Road: 287.60 feet Side Yards: (1) 169.30 feet (2) 224.52 feet Additional Notes: All structures will have appropriate Certificates of Occupancy or Compliance. 1 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK 3 4 X 5 TOWN O F SOUTHOLD 6 7 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 8 9 SPECIAL MEETING 10 X Southold Town Hall 11 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 12 February 3, 2005 13 9:30 a.m. 14 Board Members Present : 15 RUTH OLIVA, Chairwoman 16 VINCENT ORLANDO, Vice Chairman 17 MICHAEL SIMON, Board Member 18 JAMES DINIZIO, Board Member 19 LINDA KOWALSKI, Board Secretary 20 Absent: Gerard Goehringer, Board Member 21 22 23 24 25 COURT REPORTING AND TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE (631) 878-8047 2 1 2 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: We are here so we can hear some technical testimony from Mr. Scheibel 3 and Mr. Turner. I would appreciate that any comments that are going to be made tonight are 4 only on the technical aspects only. We have heard from most of you and we really appreciate your 5 comments and we will take everything into consideration. 6 Tonight the Board has to hear the technical merits on each side. Mr. Scheibel would 7 you like to start tonight? MR. BOYD: I want to provide the Board 8 with several studies that have been done by Mr. Scheibel back in March, 2004 . This was a study 9 that was presented and available at a meeting that we had at the Orient firehouse. And we had a more 10 recent one, which really just brings that one a little bit up to date. 11 Mr. Scheibel, maybe you can take a moment to give your qualifications to this Board. 12 MR. SCHEIBEL: I have a slide for you. MR. BOYD: We will let the slide do the 13 talking. MR. SCHEIBEL: I'm Bill Scheibel, I own 14 Eastern Long Island Electronics. We're located in Quogue. We're a full line Motorola 15 dealership. That's not just selling radios. The difference is that yes, of course, anyone who is 16 in business to sell something wants to make money, but also we're what's called a national MSS, which 17 means we're authorized by Motorola to carry the Motorola logo on my card, my ID, my stationery, 18 because Motorola empowers me to represent them. I go to all the specialized training, I have all the 19 proper test equipment, all the proper software packages, everything I need to be able to do 20 design maintenance installation for communications systems, as per Motorola's guidelines, I'm also a 21 Kenwood dealer, a Midland and an Exxon dealer. So with anything today, you go into car dealers, you 22 don't just have one car, you have many cars, well, I have a lot of radios. This is all we do. 23 Part of my contract with Motorola is I'm maintaining E9-11 for all the east end towns, so 24 when you pick up the phone out here, and you dial E9-11, you're using a system that I maintain for 25 Motorola. It gives you an idea of our technical ability and our credentials, I hope. February 3, 2005 3 1 2 Some of our clients are Southold Police Department, Southampton Police, East Hampton 3 Police, Riverhead, the sheriff's and others further to the west, which are probably of no 4 consequence to us here. I am their radio company. Fire departments, some you may recognize, some you 5 don't, they span all the way from west of Exit 62 on the expressway, all the way to the far reaches 6 of the forks. When these fire departments need communication systems, I'm the person who does the 7 work. Whether it's EMS, whether it's Riverhead, Southampton, Flanders, all departments all run 8 individual ambulance, private ambulance company, I'm also their radio company. This will give you 9 some idea of where my background comes from and the work I do. This is what I do, this is all I 10 do. When the fire department spoke to me, and 11 where they got my name -- probably from another fire department would make sense -- they asked me 12 to take a look at what I could do to improve their overall communications. They had dispatch 13 problems, they had problems in scene management, there were fire safety issues, fire-ground 14 operations. As we move through the presentation, I'm trying to explain what some of those things 15 - mean, so more than just words. Part of my training and the organizations I belong to is not 16 just with Motorola, which is the technical side of what has to be accomplished, but I'm also a member 17 of the NFPA, which is the National Fire Protection Association. I am also a New York State certified 18 incident commander, which means that I know how to go to a scene and manage communications based on 19 New York State standards. So it's not just my technical background speaking, but in terms of how 20 to improve the overall communications, I call upon the other things I've done, the training I have, 21 the other background I have. Additionally, the fire department asked me 22 to look at mutual aid, which is where our fire department has to assist another department. In 23 this day and age in a volunteer-based organization, there aren't enough resources to 24 combat every evil that a fire department is presented with. So there's a thing called mutual 25 aid, so you can be called in by an adjoining department to assist you or call adjoining February 3, 2005 4 1 2 departments to assist you. Additionally, there's the fundamental resource called paging, which is 3 what the system is used for to get the fireman alerted to the fact that his services are 4 required, so we took a look at all that. So what were the goals? What I'd like to 5 do is kind of have everybody through the course of this get a better understanding of fire 6 communications. This is not just pick up a two-way radio and talk to somebody at the bther 7 end. This is not what we do with our very handy cell phones. This is more of a communication 8 system, and what the fire department would do is find out what's available and how to make better 9 use of it to support the mission of fighting fires and running ambulance calls, because obviously 10 across the years we've seen technology change a lot whether it's our VCR in our home or whatever 11 it is, we're not doing things the same way we did them 10 years ago. Ten years ago there was no 12 such thing as an I-Pod for instance. Those same technologies all come to play when it comes to 13 public safety. What they asked me to do is use those technologies to try to solve the 14 communications issues they had, but obviously they wanted to keep their costs contained. There's a 15 lot of ways to design systems. We know that from computer systems. You have heard of super 16 computers that can process millions and millions of instructions per second, then we have the 17 desktop computer in our home or my laptop over there, they can both add, subtract, multiply and 18 divide. Do I need a crazy super computer to add, subtract, multiply and divide? Well, obviously 19 no. My laptop is very effective and of course costs a fraction of that. So one of the things 20 the department asked me to look at was also to keep the cost contained in terms of what I was 21 going to deliver to them in terms of a solution. The current situation, and this was done 22 over an amount of time where I actually monitored their fire communication, I have several 23 monitoring stations around Long Island, I have access to those sites where I can listen to the 24 things that go on. Even if I'm not located at that particular geography. There were missed 25 calls, there were definitely fireman safety issues where a fireman's communication was not heard. February 3, 2005 5 1 2 Obviously in terms of fire safety, a missed call, any missed call is a problem because that fireman, 3 that radio, that chief who needs to get in contact with someone who can provide him resources is 4 paramount to him being able to manage that fire scene and to those people's safety. So any missed 5 call is a problem. It's not a matter of it almost got through. Almost isn't good enough. That's 6 what fire safety is all about. For fire-ground is what we refer to as one 7 radio having to reach another one at the fire scene. Fire-ground is what's referred to as the 8 senior managing. There can be multiple fire-ground scenes within the geography at the 9 same time. Poor fire-ground means that a fireman on the back of the building who's been charged 10 with a rear attack, can't reach the chief who gave him that responsibility. So the chief is sitting 11 out in front of the fire scene, he's trying to speak with that person in the back who's in rear 12 attack and they cannot communicate effectively with each other, and we'll get into the reasoning 13 why that's come to be. Difficult long range communications, if there's a chief on scene -- I'm 14 trying to draw a picture of why we do this the way we do -- when you have got a volunteer fire 15 department and you have multiple chiefs and potentially multiple scenes at the same time, you 16 need a way to effectively communicate with that chief who has other resources at another scene 17 that you may need. Or you may need to consult with him because the scene you're on has now 18 become a haz-mat scene, and you're not the haz-mat trained guy. The haz-mat chief is on the other 19 side of town. You need to be quickly able to interact and get information from him in order for 20 you to effectively get your job done, which once again, the fundamentalal job is to put out the 21 fire. With the amount of resources you need to do that in a volunteer-based fire department, they're 22 not readily available and communication's paramount to getting your hands on those resources 23 in real time, and that's why real time communication is so important. That's what we 24 mean by effective long range, who is currently on mutual aid to the next town over that the chief on 25 scene and that chief can talk to each other the same way we do on a cell phone, with that February 3, 2005 6 1 2 immediate response of pushing the talk button and speaking to that other person who has those other 3 resources. The biggest issue we had to look at was 4 the platform for improvement really wasn't there. The low band system that's in use today, which is 5 the simplex radio system, which means that you're not using any wide area available machine to talk 6 on, you're strictly relying on the antennae available to the radio, and the power the radio 7 makes to reach from radio to radio. Whether that radio's cross town, whether that radio's next to 8 each other, the only thing you can do in the existing platform or low band is to use what the 9 FCC allows you to, which is that small amount of tower, that small antennae and the 30 watts that 10 they license off the firehouse to talk on. And we'll get to why that's important as we move on. 11 Bottom line is that system's outdated. It's not that this is a unique problem to Orient Fire 12 District. This is a problem that every fire district nationwide faces. It was a problem faced 13 at 9/11. You've got to have a reliable communications system that gets you to talk 14 reliably from radio to radio on demand, and if you don't have that, people can potentially lose their 15 lives. That's what this is all about. The existing system that's in place, with low band 16 simplex technology cannot reliably do that. As we move on you'll see how the studies prove that out. 17 There's a real fancy computer program that I own, that Motorola insists that I do, that you 18 put all this information into, and it can plot for you how the radio system performs. Now, to try 19 and give you all the arithmatic how that system works, I'm probably not qualified to do that. It 20 would probably require like a Ph.D. in mathematics, but I understand how radio works so I 21 know how to use the program. The simple explanation on what the plot tells you is let's 22 start with the wording first, "talk out" means from where you want to talk out to the person you 23 want to reach, that's called talk out. If the person at the fire department pushes down at the 24 microphone at the dispatch center, how well does the person out in the fields hear him, that's talk 25 out. Talk out on the low band system was never a problem. It works pretty well, are there February 3, 2005 ti' 7 1 2 interference issues, yes, we'll get to that later. Talk out, as you can see from the diagram, green 3 depicts okay, green is good, red is bad. In this scenario, actually, green is not as good as red. 4 Red indicates hot, very hot, there's a lot of radio energy for that radio to hear so the 5 signal's very clear. Green is still good. As you move more towards blue, then navy blue and darker, 6 means there's less energy, means the radio stops hearing. As you can see from the map, the talk 7 out energy on low band was never really an issue, you can hear someone from the dispatch center just 8 fine all the way out past Plum Island. Low band talk in, however, is a completely 9 different story. Talk in from a mobile radio in the chief's car back to the dispatch center was 10 significantly impaired. You can see where there's blue areas and dark blue areas right within the 11 fire district. Now, how many of them are there? Doesn't look all that bad, does it? But that's 12 from a mobile radio which your chief has had in his car, not from the chief standing at the fire 13 scene or from the guy at back in rear attack trying to talk to the dispatcher. Now, let's look 14 at low band. As represented from unit to unit, I 15 couldn't plot it because it's that bad. The whole chart is blue. Because low band fundamentally one 16 in a simplex connection from radio to radio doesn't work that well. You don't have any 17 height, you don't have any power, you have whatever energy's in that battery and that little 18 rubber antennae. There's no back stage infrastructure to help you complete that 19 communication. Also, there's an interference issue, and we'll get to what causes those. 20 There's a legacy of issues associated with low band communications. For one thing it's 21 what's called a no tone system, and this problem's been around since its inception but there's 22 nothing anyone's willing to do about it because the system's already in place. But the radios 23 have to work in a mode which is called carrier squelch, which means there's no signal to block 24 anything in the radio. They leave the radio intentionally wide open so it can hear as best it 25 can. The down side to that is that every manmade piece of interference out there also can open the February 3, 2005 8 1 2 radio. So those pieces of interference which can be anything from Nextel telephones to personal 3 computers, microwave ovens all emit energy in the low band space where the radios are today. 4 Because those radios operate and carry a squelch, it's not unusual -- any fireman can tell you 5 this -- he'll be walking down the street and his pager is squawking away. It's not a fire call, 6 it's a leaking microwave oven two houses away. That's the reality of low band. That's the 7 reality of a technology that is done. The demonstration of that is that there's lack of 8 manufacturers for it. Most of the manufacturers have dropped low band equipment from their product 9 line completely. It's not there anymore. Why? Because there's a limited market for it. There's 10 a realization that as a technology this isn't going anywhere. We gotta go someplace else, we 11 have to do other things. And since there are better technology, because obviously people 12 haven't been sitting around doing nothing with technology for the past 20 years, there are other 13 solutions. The other thing you have to deal with similarly, paging difficulties. The pagers 14 themselves that are manufactured on low band have been re-engineered to try to deal with the fact 15 that all this interference is around us. On one hand that's a good thing because it's less likely 16 for the pager to fault. The other side it's a bad thing because now it's more likely the pager won't 17 hear what it's supposed to hear. And a simple example I can give you, any fireman can tell you 18 this too, if you put your low band pager and your Nextel on the same side of your belt, two guys can 19 be standing in the same room, one pager will go off the other pager won't. Move the Nextel to the 20 other side, the pager mysteriously starts working again. Why is that? The FCC let that happen 21 because with this onslaught of technology and the decreased value of our dollar, the FCC decided 22 that it was a better idea to let everybody self-regulate. So we'll create this set of rules 23 where everybody gets to generate interference and we'll leave it up to the person that wears that 24 thing to mitigate interference. And any electronic device you buy today goes with that 25 little statement stamped in the front of the owner's brochure, it's called Part 15. If you February 3, 2005 9 1 2 read a brochure on anything you have laying around your house, your DVD player, it says if you cause 3 interference, it's your problem not the device's problem. You have the ultimate responsibility to 4 unplug it. Of course, that makes it really hard to watch the DVD. But that's what we're dealing 5 with today. The story I'll tell you is that for a week 6 and a half, Southampton had a problem with one of the ambulance companies. Their channel wasn't 7 available for use because there was always something on it. It was like a whirring sound. 8 And we spent about a week with radio direction equipments trying to track it down, and that 9 whirring sound turned out to be the motor in a person's DVD player holding their ambulance 10 channel open. To show you in the real world that this happens, I mean, you could drum your fingers 11 on top of that DVD player and it will run all over the ambulance channel in Southampton. This is the 12 reality of the age we live in. There's also recourse -- well, somebody 13 else will fix it. There's this thing called 800, that's another band, just like low band, 800 14 megahertz is where the county built their radio system back when there were frequencies 15 available. Some of what the county and the local fire departments do today, they do 800 megahertz, 16 there are radios there where they can talk to county control, where they can talk to bedcom, but 17 the scope of that system is limited and the coverage of it is limited, and they're not going 18 to allow local fire departments to add their traffic to an already burdened system. That's 19 another factor. There's a new kind of system coming, well, 20 that's a great possibility, the last county system cost I think someplace upwards of 20 million 21 dollars. Yes, potentially there is going to be another county system coming, but today, there's 22 no frequency to put the county system on because they're all currently held by television stations 23 which have not yet had to relinquish them because of FCC rules. And of course, there's the issue of 24 funding because to build an 800 trunking system that all the fire departments could use would cost 25 in excess of 20 million dollars, conservatively speaking. February 3, 2005 10 1 2 So what do we have for options? Well, we could leave it alone. Something tells me that 3 that's not what the fire department wanted because when you get into life safety issues and firemen 4 safety issues and effective communications to help the people that own homes that are potentially 5 going to have a fire, leaving it alone doesn't sound like a reasonable solution. You can wait 6 for someone else to do it. And we talked about that already, there potentially will be some huge 7 wide area system like there is for Suffolk County Police Department who all cohesively work on one 8 radio system, and any policeman in Suffolk County could call any other policeman. Had that police 9 level system that cost upwards of 20 million dollars been rolled out to police departments on 10 eastern Long Island? No. They all still have their independent radio systems just as the fire 11 service will. There's also the issue of funding. A system of that magnitude costs 20 million 12 dollars, I wonder where that 20 million dollars is going to come from, and that was actually in 13 1980's dollars, I don't know what it would be in 2000's dollars. 14 We could shore up the low band system, okay, let's talk about that for a minute. What 15 problems did we see with the low band system? Talk out was pretty good, talk back in from a 16 mobile was pretty good, so what is it that we're going to do to impact those other factors that 17 affect the very fact that low band is ineffective? We can't stop interference, in fact, it's only 18 going to go up. There's no doubt about that. There are people in this room that don't 19 yet own DVD players that will before the end of this year. There's people that don't own the next 20 plasma television or whatever it is, and the more consumer electronics we buy that all classify as 21 part of the FCC rules, the more likely it is there will be more interference. 22 How do we stop the interference from one low band user to another low band user? The way 23 the low band system was designed is each fire division, not a district. A town is a fire 24 district; a fire division is a group of towns, share one low band channel because that's all 25 there was, that's all there is, that's all the FCC licensed. So if Southold, Mattituck, East Marion February 3, 2005 11 1 2 and Orient and Cutchogue all have a fire scene at the same time, they're all trying to use the same 3 channel. Let's see how effective that is. Having stood at the wild fires on Sunrise Highway and 4 watched pine trees go up like toothpicks soaked in gasoline, I can tell you that more than one 5 department on one channel doesn't work very well. And that is low band and that's not changing. 6 What we can do though is move someplace else where you have your own channel, where you don't have to 7 share with anybody, and you get to bring people by invitation to your party. So when you have a 8 mutual aid situation, you can say here's our channel to use, click it on your radio. That's 9 where this is going, that's where it's gone, , many departments have this already. There are 10 departments in divisions where they have already set up specific mutual aid frequency and what's 11 called protocols, which is how you use the resources that you have to fight a fire, effective 12 communications when you're mutualing with another department. That's how it's done now. The 13 combination of all that is where I think we need to go. Low band paging certainly isn't going to 14 go anywhere for a while. So some shoring up has to happen. 15 Yes, there is an issue of the age of some of the equipment in the Orient Fire 16 Department. Like any organization, you do have to take a look at what is the expected lifespan of a 17 piece of equipment. I mean, how long does your VCR last? How long does your personal computer 18 last? Why would you think that a piece of electronic equipment like a radio, which is 19 designed with much of the same components, with much of the same engineering standard is going to 20 last any different? They don't. But the object of the interference, adjacent channel and 21 co-channel from other districts, interference from within your own fire division, there's nothing we 22 can do in terms of fixing that except move. That's what fix is, that's why everyone's doing 23 it. This isn't a problem just Orient has. We just finished doing Mattituck. Riverhead's 24 already gone. Jamesport's already gone. It's not like we're doing this just for Orient because it's 25 a fun thing to do. We're doing this because it needs to be done and they asked me to look at it, February 3, 2005 12 1 2 and that's how we got to where we are today. So what's involved in doing that? You 3 have to take a new approach and design a system to deal with as best you can within what's reasonable 4 all those problems we covered in the previous slides. The simplest thing to do is a high band 5 repeater which is that move to UHF frequency. What a repeater does is takes the very weak signal 6 that it hears from its antennae and amplifies it a thousand times and sends it out again in real 7 time. It's concurrent, it's not like there's a delay for that to happen. That's what makes the 8 repeater such an interesting device, because it's actually doing two things at once. It's listening 9 and it's talking; that's why it actually takes two frequencies to build a repeater not one. But now 10 I'm going down a road of technical jargon that no one needs to hear about. 11 What does it mean to the fire department? What it means is that that small radio now, and 12 face it no one wants to carry a radio very large now, the technology's there to be more effective 13 and have it on you and not have it weigh 42 pounds like the original radios did -- that small radio 14 with its small antennae now instead of trying to talk fadio to radio, talks to that large antennae 15 where with that very hot receiver and that really strong amplifier, so those other radios can all 16 hear what it says. That's the fundamental principal of how a repeater works. We also need 17 to embrace a fire-ground channel where there isn't any interference. As you move up in frequency, 18 the probability of interference is lower, so we also have the FCC grant, and the FCC application's 19 already in and approved, and we have these channels at our disposal to talk directly from 20 radio to radio. So now a chief on the scene with a rotation of his channel selector can talk in a 21 bunch of different places without ever having to run back to his truck without having to wonder 22 what he's doing. It says right on his radio, I'm on the fire-ground channel, so if I need to talk 23 to the attack guy, I go to the attack channel. If I need to get more resources out here, now I can 24 go to the dispatch channel and get more resources. I can talk to that chief who's one mutual aid over 25 and find out do I need haz-mat support here because he's the one that has that answer, he's February 3, 2005 13 1 2 seven miles away, now I can talk to him. I couldn't do that before. 3 The console and the paging system are nice to have. Would it be great to be able to mingle 4 all those channels on one piece of equipment so it's easy to train the fireman getting to the 5 house as the first guy to be the dispatcher, because that's how the volunteer fire service 6 works. A lot of volunteer fire departments don't have full time paid dispatchers. So what you try 7 to do is make the piece of equipment they have to look at be as simple as possible and there's ways 8 to do that. But that's more of a longer term goal than a shorter term goal of fixing the fact that 9 people can't talk to each other. The paging system, once you put a new high 10 band system in, and you have a better dispatch console, we can effectively change the dispatch 11 system to either be more effective the way it exists by putting a control station for high band 12 at the PD dispatch center and moving everybody to high band or revisit via the new console 13 technology how we generate a more effective page with the existing low band pager that everybody 14 has. We have to do this in stages, to try to do this all at once, it's like you're going to try to 15 build a race car overnight with bushel baskets full of parts, you can't do that. You have to 16 break it into chunks, do what's important first, and important to the fire department, their 17 priority was get us a better coverage, get us better fire-ground communicationss. So that's how 18 we went after it. The bottom line is when you get done you 19 have a systems-wide communication approach. Something that works with those other mutual aid 20 departments that you need to talk to that are already on their way to doing this. But you have 21 to have a place to put it. That repeater doesn't work very well if the antennae is at eye level. 22 Why is that? There are some very simple facts of radio. 23 Radio communications are basically line of sight. FM communications are the type of communications 24 that you can buy and wear on your belt. The simple explanation of that is if I can't shine a 25 flashlight or laser point at the other guy I'm talking to, if he can't see my light, I can't talk February 3, 2005 14 1 2 to him. That's the simplest explanation. So if I have a chief on the East Marion/Orient borderline, 3 I have another guy out at the ferry, can they see each other's laser pointer? No, of course not. 4 But if the antennae that represents the repeater is some number of feet in the air and I'm sitting 5 on top of that structure and I have two laser pointers, can I shine a laser pointer at each of 6 the people I'm talking to? Of course I can. That's the basic principle upon which the repeater 7 system and the line of sight radio communication is effective. If the two laser pointers can see 8 each other, the repeater can take what this laser pointer sees and feed it over to the other guy. 9 But if you can't, if there's no path to create that, you don't have effective communications. 10 Now, I'm giving you the simplisitic cartoon version to keep it simple. Obviously there's a 11 lot of arithmatic behind this. There's a lot of parameters you can set to -- well, how many times 12 do I want the laser point to be able to clearly see everybody; are there leaves on the trees; is 13 there a car going by; is there a building in the way? That all effects how the communications is 14 affected. But what makes the difference is where you put the antennae and the parameters under 15 which you operate the radio system, that's how you get the maps. Height is might. We covered that, 16 right? The higher you go the further the laser pointers can see. You're building an umbrella. 17 Think of the edges of an umbrella are reaching out to the places you want to talk. Everybody within 18 that umbrella can now talk to each other, so obviously the higher you put that point the more 19 effective it's going to work. But there's arrangement to that. Does Orient Point need to 20 talk to Selden? No. Does Orient Point need to talk to East Marion? Yes, probably. That's why 21 we build things the way we do. That's why the computer program tells us what we have to do. 22 There are also some fundamental rules: You can't talk through dirt. Get back to the 23 laser pointer. One of the worst insulators to FM radio, line of sight radio is dirt. You can't 24 talk through dirt, that's why where do you see most antennaes for big TV stations, radio 25 stations? You drive down the expressway there's one in Hauppauge, you drive down Sunrise Highway, February 3, 2005 15 1 2 there's a big one in Manorville, that's because they want their antennae on the dirt, so they find 3 the highest pile of dirt on Long Island and they put the antennae on the dirt pile. But once 4 again, that's if you got somebody who wants to talk, like the county, who wants to talk back to 5 Bay Shore from Amityville to Yaphank. You need that coverage, but if you want to talk from East 6 Marion to Orient or Orient to an adjoining district, you don't need to be on Manorville, you 7 don't need to be on a dirt pile that's 350 feet. You need what works. No one wants to carry a 8 radio much bigger than their wallet, that's just a fact of life. That's the society we live in 9 today. No one wants to carry a four pound brick on their belt, especially in a fire scene in their 10 turnout gear. So we're all trying to deal with what's reasonable technology. Can we get radios 11 the size of a pack of cigarettes? Sure we can. Can we get radios that do everything from 12 tell me where the fireman is to talk to me when I change the channel? Sure you can, they're $5, 000 13 each. Do some fire departments buy them? Yes, they do. Is that a requirement of the type of 14 system that I was asked to put in place by Orient Fire Department? No, it's not. But something 15 about the size of a wallet that fit on your belt was reasonable. So that's the direction we took. 16 You also have to remember that interference is a necessary evil, you can't escape it. No matter 17 what you do there's interference; what you want to try to do is mitigate it. So the system you 18 design has to deal with whatever interference is going to be presented to the users of the radio. 19 So what benefits do you get when you actually put a system like this together? First 20 of all your coverage problem going across the district is solved because now anyone within the 21 district can talk to anyone else within the district strictly by picking the radio up and 22 keying it up. With the reliability as the department asked me to design of 90 percent, which 23 is pretty much the Motorola standards, any radio system, no matter how much resources you pump into 24 it, is not one hundred percent. Simplest example I can give you is the cell phone. Millons and 25 millions of dollars are spent on the cell phone infrastructure, but you still can't, even in a February 3, 2005 16 1 2 highly populated area like Manhattan, walk down the street and expect the cell phone to have 3 coverage from one end of the town to the other without losing it because money just doesn't 4 matter sometimes. You have the general rules of communications you can't escape. You can't talk 5 through dirt, you can't talk through a certain amount of concrete. I'm working for a job in the 6 Suffolk County jail right now where even though the repeater system is within five line of sight 7 miles of the jail, two radios inside the jail can't talk to each other because two feet of 8 reenforced concrete is really hard to talk through; that's the reality. But with the system 9 we put together, we did it as best we could with what we had to work with to get them the 90 10 percent coverage they asked for. How many occasions are there to talk through two feet of 11 concrete in Orient fire district? Not many, we aren't built for that. 12 There are other things a newer radio system can do, obvious, because as technology 13 changes, with it comes features and functionality that you didn't have before, like what's getting 14 to be very important is a man down system, which means that a fireman in trouble only has to fall 15 over, is one example, or hit an emergency button on his radio, and he activates a beacon that tells 16 the fire chief on the scene or the dispatch center that radio number VC44 is in trouble. So if 17 you're in a situation where you can't find another firefighter, you've fallen through to a basement 18 of the building, that button can save your life. The system we are talking about implementing is 19 capable of doing that. The system you have now can't even dream about it. It's not doable, not 20 just from the fact that the functionality doesn't exist in the radio, but if you have coverage 21 problems where you can't talk from one radio to the chief's car, how can you expect the emergency 22 beacon to get through? You can't. The other thing it solves is it eliminates 23 the crowding. Because as more and more fire departments move towards doing this, we talked 24 before about there's mutual aid plan in place and what's called by the FCC a memorandum of 25 understanding where departments can -- the equivalent of licensing the channels so when they February 3, 2005 17 1 2 go from one department to another now to work with that department is a click on that radio, now 3 they're using that radio's resources for that department's system, can't do that today. Bottom 4 line is, you end up with a reliable communication system, and that's what this is all about. 5 So what does it actually look like? This is the high band talk in coverage. Now that we 6 have a lot of green, very little light blue, that map looks familiar to everybody, you recognize 7 what we're looking at, right? Talk out, more effective, that's not unusual in a radio system. 8 The FCC when they license you, they run something called contour maps. What they want you to be 9 able to do is push as much RF down into your area as you can so you get things like basement 10 coverage. Typically they say it's more of an alligator because it's loud and it pushes a lot of 11 energy downwards and into its district. So if you do fall through a floor, that radio has the 12 ability to be heard and penetrate. Listening you try to balance your system, try to get as much 13 coverage listening as you can talking but there's solutions to that, you can actually add more 14 receivers, you can do things, and I think actually Mr. Turner had mentioned that earlier on. We 15 should put more receivers in, that's true, high band systems sometimes what you end up doing, if 16 you find a coverage hole, what you do is you add a receiver so you can take more inbound information 17 and feed it to the repeater instead of just using the singular repeater antennae itself. But talk 18 out is typically accomplished with a singular antennae, and that's what this depicts. 19 Another thing we need and has been found, and I think Chief Cochran was in here one night 20 and mentioned it, there's an lack of inbound portable coverage on the police department system. 21 One of the things we were going to do at the same time we did the Orient system was collocate on 22 that same structure a new inbound police antennae. Like I said, you can have more receivers than you 23 have a transmitter. The police department, they actually have what is called a voted system, so 24 there's multiple paths for inbound audio coming from different places. And there's a computer 25 that decides in real time which signal is heard the best. It's not inexpensive but it's very February 3, 2005 18 1 2 effective, but they need a receiver out here. The receiver, they need to have a new 3 receiver at the site in Orient at the height we selected, would improve their coverage 4 significantly from what they have today. They have a lot of dead spots. I didn't actually bring 5 a map of the existing system but they have a lot of dead spots out on the eastern end of the 6 Island. And they would be well-filled, as you can see it's all green. 7 We have just pretty much covered that. I put the map up first but it's pretty easy to 8 understand if we have that structure available we would also want to let them use it. It would make 9 a big difference in their radio system coverage. That's the end. Have I left any stone 10 unturned? BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: I don't think so. 11 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: The height? MR. SCHEIBEL: The height of the antennae? 12 It's pretty simple, how I came up with all this, is I used a computer program to model it, and the 13 number I came up with to attain those figures and fulfill that goal was 120 feet. It's just a 14 matter of the arithmatic and honestly, could it be higher? Yes. The ultimate plot I ran to get to 15 95, 96 percent coverage took it to 180, 190, and actually if you look at other radio systems like 16 Southampton, Selden, Flanders, they're all at 180 to 195 height. But once again, what's reasonable. 17 I looked at -- this is what I do, I looked at what I had to accomplish, I looked at what my goals 18 were. I looked at what was doable. I looked at 120 feet. One of the requirements was Orient Fire 19 Department is the first mutual aid from the mainland to Plum Island. The Plum Island radio 20 system is a federal system, which they do not share. It's actually going up brand new, and it's 21 not in yet, and really we do not even know how it's going to work. But the federal radio system 22 is being put in by the Department of Homeland Security. I actually did some work on the job for 23 Motorola. That's not what the fire department uses for mutual aid. The fire department uses 24 their system to talk to their men for their men to get assistance from their department. That's why 25 in the mutual aid plans on the chief counsel here on the north fork, there's a plan for this. Like February 3, 2005 19 1 2 I said, this isn't something Orient's doing. It's something everyone's doing, and the 120 foot 3 number is what worked. That's what I could meet the goals with. Could it be higher? Sure. But 4 do they need to talk to Selden? No. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: How far will they be 5 able to talk, just to Mattituck, to Laurel? MR. SCHEIBEL: Map shows hand held to hand 6 held, they'll be able to go from almost the end of Plum Island at 90 percent into East Marion. So 7 they'll be able to cover one fire from mutual district to each site, that's how I engineered it, 8 that's what they asked me to do. Last summer I engineered a system for the Town of Southampton. 9 They wanted hand held to hand held coverage in the whole Town of Southampton, 20 something miles 10 long. They wanted to know that this ambulance guy can talk to this fire guy if one guy is in Speonk 11 and the other guy is out sitting on the East Hampton border, does it work? Yes, it works 12 really good. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: How high is their 13 antennae? MR. SCHEIBEL: They have three of them all 14 over 200 feet. It's a matter of mathematics and engineering. 15 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Even at 120 feet if you needed mutual aid you could not contact Greenport 16 or even Southold? MR. SCHEIBEL: No. Let's put it this way, 17 on a mobile radio, not a hand held, they will probably be able to reach beyond the -- when you 18 feed parameters of the program, we use what we call worst case, so you used a hand held radio at 19 three watts with the standard rubber duck antennae at waist level, because that's where the firemen 20 carry the radio on their turn out gear, then there's another set of arithmatic that says the 21 signal from that radio has to have a certain amount of intelligibility to be a useable radio 22 signal, and that's also the parameters of the program, that's how you know I can do 90 percent. 23 The simple explanation of the 90 percent rule is nine times out of 10 when you key the microphone 24 you can get the person on the first try, that's measured on a three by three foot cell basis. 25 That's why you see the maps, little squares. One square would change colors and one wouldn't, February 3, 2005 20 1 2 that's the cell. You can actually define the cell size too, but I tried to do it like three feet by 3 three feet. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Has Plum Island asked 4 for mutual aid from Orient? MR. SCHEIBEL: That's not something I 5 could tell you. That would be a fire department question. 6 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Members, Vincent, any questions? 7 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: One question I have is, is the 90 feet good for the police department? 8 MR. SCHEIBEL: Yes, because the police is only a receiver, not a transmitter. They have a 9 very big transmitter in Peconic on their tower. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: The one comment you 10 had was you can't talk through dirt, but you're saying that one fire department button has an 11 emergency button, if you're in the basement, isn't that talking through dirt? 12 MR. SCHEIBEL: Remember I showed you how you have a lot more concentration of RF in your 13 local district? That's because you want that radio to be able to in those parameters you feed 14 the program, use the worst case scenario, so yes, you can predict with a high probability, 90 plus 15 percent that when he hits that button, the radio's going to be heard. 16 MR. SIMON: What can you do with 90 feet? MR. SCHEIBEL: Something less than what 17 that map says. MR. SIMON: You can't get to Plum Island, 18 but can you get to Orient Point? MR. SCHEIBEL: I would assume you could 19 probably get to some of it, but what's going to happen is the umbrella of the red and yellow where 20 you want the concentration will shrink, so there you're directly affecting the probability that 21 that radio's reaching when it is in the basement. Because there's a lot of things built into the 22 program, there's a thing called feznol effect, there's a thing called tree canopy, where even 23 based on the time of year it's not just a matter of the radio being in the basement, if it's June 24 or July, it's in the basement talking through all the foliage that's in the trees. So the more 25 energy that you can pump into that local geography where you need the coverage is obviously the February 3, 2005 21 1 2 better the system's going to work. And once again, what is the rule, what is the fundamental 3 rule? Height is might. And you can't talk through dirt. 4 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Jim? BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I understand it 5 perfectly. Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Kieran? 6 MR. CORCORAN: No, thank you. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: All right, let me ask 7 Mr. Turner if he would like to make his presentation. 8 MR. TURNER: I don't have any equipment, I'm sorry. John Turner, I live in Orient. I'm a 9 professor at New York University of information technology. I've been there some 30 years. 10 Before that I designed military command and control systems for Airborne Instruments 11 Laboratory out on the Island. I am an electrical engineer and a computer scientist. My current 12 work now is mostly in various aspects of computing. I did do a study for the New York City 13 Police Department on their 911 system a number of years ago which resulted in changes in the 14 procedures for that system that made it more effective. 15 I thought Mr. Scheibel's presentation was excellent, and I have one point I'll make about 16 it, but I thought it was extremely educational. It was accurate, and he set forth the issues very 17 clearly. I wish it were easier to work cooperately with the commissioners of the Orient 18 Fire District because I think we could have saved ourselves maybe a half an hour. I think there is 19 no disagreement that it would be in the best interest of the community to move the 20 communications to the high band. All of the problems that the low band has make it more 21 problematic to use, and the technology that is available at the high band allows you to do many 22 more things. Just having channels that are available for different types of communications is 23 extremely important. So I think there is no disagreement on the question of moving as many of 24 the fire districts here as possible to the high band. 25 I think the issue, however, is that I don't think Orient's current communication is any February 3, 2005 22 1 2 poorer than Greenport's or East Marions or the surrounding fire districts. In other words, this 3 is a problem that's shared and we're just getting to the end of the useful life of the low band 4 systems, and we are going to have to move. So this is a problem that I think you are going to 5 have to deal with for all the communities here. And I think the question that you're going to have 6 to deal with is do you really want to see a series of 120 foot antennaes spring up every four or five 7 miles or might there be some technologies that would make sense to explore for the Southold 8 community which might in turn allow you to do the same thing but not have a series of antennaes. 9 And the second issue I think is, that should you decide to go forward with 120 foot - 10 antennae for Orient, I think- it's extremely important that that antennae be used for emergency 11 communication and that it not be a vehicle to include cell communications and other types of 12 communications, and that you get into a situation where there are many other difficulties. So I 13 think the issue is how to constrain an antennae if one were to go forward. 14 Let me deal a little bit with some of the technical side of things because I know that that 15 is what you want to focus on, and I'll be very happy to take any questions you may have. I think 16 I agree with everything that Bill said except for the answer on the question of the 90 foot 17 antennae, which I compliment you on, sir, for your asking it. For two months we have asked Bill 18 through Ed, Mr. Boyd, to do plots at the Orient firehouse for talk in and talk out at 120 feet, 90 19 feet, 75 feet, and 60 feet. We did that because we wanted to understand the extent to which the 20 performance was degraded. Now the talk out is not going to be an issue. The question is the talk in 21 and the question is as you lower the height of the antennae, how are you lowering the line of sight. 22 What aren't you going to see? Now Bill has a computer program to do this. My understanding of 23 this is that that's changing essentially a couple of parameters in that program. It probably takes 24 a half an hour to run and plot out. I think that information should be available so that you can 25 see for yourself the extent to which the signal is degraded, and that is really what I disagree with February 3, 2005 23 1 2 him on. A second point I'd like to make is that we 3 have been trying to work cooperatively with the Orient Fire District through Mr. Boyd. I have 4 made repeated requests, and I believe I have copied you on them for a variety of information 5 that would have allowed us to explore the antennae height question and also a couple of alternatives 6 which may not work, but were at least worthwhile to investigate prior to going forward, not 7 afterwards, and what I feel a little -- how can I say this -- what I don't understand is why that 8 information hasn't been forthcoming. When I see this in a student, I usually figure the student's 9 trying to hide something from me. I mean, we are in a cooperative situation here. All of us want 10 to see the absolutely best emergency communication for our fire districts and I would leave 11 immediately if you believe that we wanted anything less, but also, when you're working and you're 12 trying to understand a problem and the community has a right to understand what it is that is being 13 proposed, and whether various alternatives have been explored and, in fact, I believe the rules 14 that govern this require a written submission of alternative schemes, so that they can be 15 understood by others, and that to my knowledge has just not been done by the Orient Fire District, so 16 I find that a little difficult to understand and I am at a loss. I think that there are some 17 alternates that are worth exploring. The Greenport police I know use an antennae in 18 Greenport, and they have run tests out at Orient point, and that they are satisfied with that 19 performance. I think there is a 300 foot public service antennae in Greenport. It may very well 20 be that there needs to be a medium height repeater located at the Orient Firehouse to be able to pick 21 up the signals, the hand helds coming in because you need to have at least one repeater site to be 22 able to take the signal in for the hand helds, and I think going to a repeater system makes all the 23 sense. You don't want two hand helds to communicate to each other, you want to communicate 24 to a repeater site then transmit out. There seems to me there's no problem on the talk out, if you 25 lower the height, and it may very well be that since it's the hand held power that gorges and as February 3, 2005 24 1 2 long as you can see the antennae, it would only be at the fringes on the East Marion side that you 3 would lose signal strength as you lower the height. 4 So I would just like to see what happens with a repeater of lower height at Orient but use 5 of the public service antennae here in Greenport. I don't know whether there is space available, I 6 know nothing of the cost, but it is an option that should be investigated prior to going forward and 7 it should be seriously investigated. It shouldn't be, well, look, we know this stuff, take my word 8 for it, we have investigated it. I think that is not how you do things in an open and in a public 9 situation. We're actually trying to do the same things here. 10 The other thing that is further out and more difficult to investigate is what's called a 11 distributed antennae system, and such a system makes use of fiber optic cabling to existing 12 telegraph poles. The antennae sits on the top of the telegraph pole, all of the electronics are at 13 the top of the pole, so you use your existing poles, you have to put in fiber optic cable, but 14 it gives you a large number of antennaes located throughout the district so you get the advantage 15 of being much closer to a building where you're going to lose signal strength because you're in 16 the basement of a building, and you're much more likely to have good communications than having 17 only one antennae centrally located that may be three or four miles from a transmitter that's in 18 the basement of a building which is probably not going to have sufficient signal strength. 19 So, such a system should be looked at because my understanding is that East Marion now 20 is planning, proposing a system, and I think some of the other communities here could easily do 21 that, and I think Southold needs to think through what an infrastructure like a distributed antennae 22 system that could handle both cell and emergency communication for all of Southold. The costs 23 could be shared by the various communities and it might be a possibility, a way out of just seeing 24 these antennaes springing up every four or five miles. So at a minimum I think it would be 25 worthwhile going far enough down the line to show that such a system was not feasible. I would be February 3, 2005 25 1 2 glad to take any questions. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Vincent? 3 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Has the conversation come up with alternative sites or is 4 it locked in stone it has to be on this topography? What about putting it on the north 5 shore where it's higher? MR. TURNER: I think we originally thought 6 that in the Orient area you wanted to put something on Brown's Hills because you get 100 7 feet up immediately. Orient's pretty flat and if you had a distributor system, you could have 8 something out at the point, you could have something at Brown's Hills. When I learned about 9 these sort of lower height broadly distributed systems, I would tend to look at both. I would 10 look at one with maybe four or five locations around Orient and making sure you were at the East 11 Marion border and maybe even East Marion and making sure you covered Orient with maybe four or 12 five sites, and I'd also look at this mesh system which makes use of a lot of very small antennaes 13 that are just put on top of poles. My understanding of the brief that was given to 14 Mr. Scheibel by the Orient Fire District was first, that they had to cover fire districts to 15 the east, one district to the east and one district to the west, and that the equipment had 16 to be on the Orient Fire District property, which essentially means at the Orient firehouse, and 17 that was, I believe what he was given. I don't know if Bill has investigated any of these other 18 things. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: No, you can't be at 19 another site or no, you haven't looked into it? MR. SCHEIBEL: No, I haven't looked at 20 it. That's not what the fire department asked me to do. And I can tell you also that based on my 21 experience you're talking systems just on a cost basis far in excess, and I mean far, in capital 22 letters, of what we're proposing at the firehouse. MR. TURNER: I think you want to look at 23 economics and you want to do a small study, and you need to have the people come in and you need a 24 proposal in hand. MR. SCHEIBEL: You know what that would 25 cost? MR. TURNER: I know the systems but there February 3, 2005 26 1 2 are other communities, Bill, that are going down that route. 3 AUDIENCE MEMBER: East Hampton. MR. SCHEIBEL: I'm doing their system 4 right now. It's not designed that way. MR. TURNER: I think it is potentially 5 interesting. I don't think it should be ruled out because somebody says it's economically 6 infeasible. I know that East Hampton is in the process of very serious discussions about such a 7 system, and it just behooves Southold to take a look at it and get the data. I think, you know, 8 the problem I have is that I'm used to studying things in advance of deciding what to do, and if 9 reasonable alternatives are not studied seriously then I get very concerned. And I feel to some 10 extent that that is the situation here. And I just would feel better if we could get the 11 information, rule some of these things out, but I do believe you have to go very shortly to a high 12 band system for emergency communications. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Michael? 13 MR. SIMON: No further questions. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Jim? 14 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: I have comments. Number one I don't believe the application before 15 us is necessarily what you're speaking about, Mr. Turner, in that we have before us a fire 16 district that owns a piece of land that the district chose to put a firehouse on. And they 17 - have come before us with an application to put up an antennae. Now, they are not required in my 18 opinion to prove that it will work better someplace else other than the fire department. 19 This is their purview, this is their responsibility, and this is what they're 20 proposing. Certainly, if someone within that district wanted to request of the district to do 21 the study, then those people have every right to make that decision, but to then require this Board 22 to require a fire district to do what you asked them to do, which is to do a study, that's not the 23 reason this Board is here, and that's not the reason we're here tonight. 24 MR. TURNER: Could I respond to that? BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: Sure. 25 MR. TURNER: I am in the district and we have requested verbally and in writing that they February 3, 2005 27 1 2 do these studies, but it doesn't make any difference. The second thing is that my 3 understanding is that they have asked for a waiver in height, and when you ask for a waiver in 4 height, there are certain requirements that need to be followed. My understanding of that is that 5 you need to look at alternatives to that height, to that antennae and that that is part of the 6 process of presenting information for the waiver. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: I agree with you, 7 now the alternative is within what they can control. They can control that piece of land and 8 only that piece of land, and they're proposing -- what they're proposing is what they think is best 9 for them. Now, putting one on Brown's Hill, building a mesh system, I can tell you right now, 10 sir, I have installed probably upwards of 200 miles of fiber cable. If you add up each fiber I 11 installed, I would say it would go into hundreds of thousands of miles I was responsible for as I 12 work for Cablevision. My current company I probably have eight or nine miles of fiber 13 installed, and I can tell you it's about $2, 000 for 100 foot to install and maintain it, $2, 000 14 for about 100 feet, 300 feet, $6, 000. It's a lot of money. I don't know what a hand held radio 15 costs, but I'll tell you if you're going to build a mesh system, you're going to be quite a few 16 miles of that at that cost. MR. TURNER: Look, the economics, I'm just 17 saying we need to take a look at it. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: Sir, that seems 18 that that is just a stalling tactic. The comparison of building a 120 foot tower and 19 handing out some hands held radios and building a mesh system, there is no comparison to that. I 20 understand New York City, they got plenty of money there and, of course, they have their own 21 problems, they have to go up and down and under. These people don't. They just need to 22 build an umbrella that they can transmit to from a radio. 23 Now, I venture to say that if this man did plot out a 90 foot pipe you would not see very 24 much less rod in the center, I would venture to say that. I'm talking from the perspective of 25 being in the fire department for 30 years, I lost two friends that would have, had they had the February 3, 2005 28 1 2 technology he's talking about, would be alive today. I can tell you these gentlemen go to work 3 each day, and when they go to bed at night and that fire bell goes in at 2:00 in the morning, 4 they answer that call. They really don't want to have to deal with whether or not because they 5 built a 90 foot tower they can't get on a certain street. They want the best that their community 6 can afford to give them. I'm going to go back to what I just said before, if you want to hash this 7 out, the best place to hash this out is at the commissioner's meetings. This should have been 8 done three years ago, not now. Now we're trying to deal with one piece of property that wants a 9 120 foot tower and honestly, they have convinced me that height is might and the higher it can go 10 the better. Now, if it's 120 feet they're asking for 11 then maybe that's what they get. If you can show that it can be done at 90 feet, then let us know 12 that, you get your expert in here, and let us know that. But your expert, honestly, is that man, 13 he's your district. Your fire district from Orient hired this man as an expert. 14 MR. TURNER: In effect what you're saying is don't ask intelligent questions, don't ask to 15 see any information. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: No, sir. I'm 16 saying to you, sir, is ask them in the right place. 17 MR. TURNER: I have asked them in writing, I have asked them verbally. 18 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: Your remedy is to vote them out. 19 MR. SIMON: I would actually agree. What we have here is a situation in which we have two 20 experts. One of them is in the employ of an interested party, obviously, that's their job, and 21 when asked is there a problem, his answer, a very articulate, well-argued answer is, no 22 problem. The outside expert has said, we think there are still some questions that need to be 23 answered, not arguing that Mr. Scheibel's recommendation is wrong, but just that we need to 24 answer some further questions, and we are the Board who have the obligation to decide not what 25 is and what is not a good idea, but whether a variance should be granted, and that decision February 3, 2005 29 1 2 could be made intelligently only with answers to the types of questions that Mr. Turner has raised. 3 So to me it seems to be a no-brainer to say that we cannot proceed until further information is 4 given in answer to the questions Mr. Turner raised. 5 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: I would agree with you if I thought this was the proper venue for 6 this discussion. But this is not. This gentleman is suggesting that they do something, that the 7 fire department do something that they have no control over. They have no control over Greenport 8 tower, they have no control over Brown's Hills, they have no control over a mesh system. 9 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I understand that but I do understand what Mr. Turner is saying that you 10 could just look into it. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: You don't need to. 11 That's not part of our application. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I'm not saying that we 12 have to direct them, but I think they have some validity to ask their questions. 13 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: Their venue is the commissioners of their district. 14 MR. TURNER: Is there a commissioner here of the district? 15 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Mr. Scheibel wanted to answer. 16 MR. SCHEIBEL: The only comment is I'm involved in implementation of East Hampton's 17 quote/unquote mesh system right now. That is a nine million dollar implementation. I just wanted 18 to give you an idea of the order of magnitude. It is a mesh system in that it uses multiple sites, 19 but they're all high sites, the shortest one is about 170 feet, it's at the Amagansett firehouse, 20 and that's how the system's being built. MS. MCNEELEY: I'm a resident of Orient. 21 I'm in total agreement with John that we really want the fire department to have the high band 22 communications for all of the reasons that Bill talked about. It's absolutely correct. I was on 23 the phone today with the communications manager of the Planning Board of the Town of East Hampton and 24 she told me that they had invited a company called Clear Lengths to design and distribute an antennae 25 system in mesh for cellular communications. And we know from our researchers that such a system February 3, 2005 30 1 2 can easily be used for emergency communications because what they do is the signal that's 3 broadcast over the fiber optic, that's carried over the fiber optic line, goes to the antennae 4 and is reconverted to a radio frequency signal; which means then that you can use a telephone pole 5 or an existing tower or several lower, 60 foot towers for instance to be a total system. And 6 they decide to do this and to make the invitation because they really didn't want East Hampton to 7 look like a porcupine, and that in her research as communications director she found this particular 8 company who, unlike others, which would erect utility poles and have a utility cabinets at the 9 base of the pole, which is not a very secure situation, this company uses existing telephone 10 poles and existing towers and mounts their utility cabinet on the pole. So it's very much like a 11 telephone thing we see in some of these big things on the poles as they exist now. Because it has 12 been initiated by the planning department and because of their particular zoning regulations, it 13 does not require zoning or building departments issues at all. It's something they can do very 14 quickly if they can come up with the money. Now, East Hampton, like Southold, has a number of 15 hamlets in it. I'm not sure what their governmental structure is, but East Hampton is a 16 township in the same way that Southold is. The proposal that she is inviting is to 17 distribute this throughout the town itself in all of the different hamlets of the town, utilizing 18 the existing infrastructure, and the existing infrastructure would be the four large towers that 19 they now have, the one that Mr. Scheibel is locating behind the fire department in Amagansett 20 and other ones like that, as well as telephone poles, in order to make this very large mesh that 21 covers the entire town. They're distributing the costs obviously through the different fire 22 districts in East Hampton in order to do that. So that what sounds like a nine million dollar thing 23 for the town of Orient would be absolutely out of the question. But we don't cover as much of an 24 area in Southold as East Hampton does. So argueably the cost might be lower. We have no 25 idea because I just was talking to her today, how do I know. February 3, 2005 31 1 2 But if Southold, for instance, were to proceed in a similar manner, we're certain it 3 could result in a well-developed area-wide communications system, improved cellular 4 communications because you would be distributing the costs of such an implementation with the 5 cellular companies because the request that they made was basically to cell companies. And since I 6 had contacted Clear Links myself directly and found out that there would be no impediments to 7 running emergency communications over the wires that they need for the cellular communication, 8 there would be an ability to split the costs between the cell companies and the districts in 9 East Hampton, which was another reason they were so interested in it. If this were to be the case, 10 they would be writing a contract with the town instead of leases with the individual fire 11 departments. So that would enable possibly the full retention of tax exemptions within fire 12 districts without compromising future funding needs. It would also save a lot of legal fees for 13 the various fire districts. Income from the cellular component of that structure could be 14 earmarked for the fire districts for incoming reserve funds or pensions or whatever they wanted 15 to do. The plan in East Hampton is being modeled to coordinate planning and building and zoning, 16 all of whom would have shared input and responsibility; and it thus would be implemented 17 very quickly and avoid public uproar like we have been experiencing. And all of the same concerns 18 which motivated this structure in East Hampton, which has a more complicated terrain than Southold 19 has, eastern Long Island Hospital in Greenport Fire Department and the Southold police 20 communications network on the Greenport tower make Greenport Village participation in such a plan 21 crucial because any emergency communications has to involve eastern Long Island Hospital. There's 22 no question about it. It has to involve the Greenport Fire Department. So it would be whether 23 or not the ease of communication between the village and the town is one issue, but because 24 it's an area wide -- it's a possibility of an area wide solution, and we're with Plum Island, which 25 is federal and dangerous, there is Millstone. There are a lot of different things that we need February 3, 2005 32 1 2 emergency communications for. And this type of system I think really well thought out to be 3 looked at, and if it is structured the way East Hampton is talking about, it could avoid a lot of 4 town distress. BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Did you ask or did 5 they tell you how long it would take to install or implement something like this? 6 MS. MCNEELEY: I had a very brief conversation with her. She was sick. She said 7 because the infrastructure was basically existing, which is to say all the telephone poles are 8 around, it would be relatively quick to implement from that point of view. They have existing 9 towers. Basically what they do is they set up -- BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: You don't know how 10 long it would take? MS. MCNEELEY: No, I don't but I don't 11 think it would be as long as -- BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: I don't want you to 12 speculate. MS. MCNEELEY: The only thing I'm going to 13 say is if you're going to have a tower in Mattituck and a tower in Cutchogue and a tower in 14 East Marion, which is proposed, and a tower in Orient, how long is that whole process going to 15 take to evolve as well. If Southold itself could come up with an emergency communication system 16 that involved all the hamlets with Town responsibility and distribution of costs and 17 cooperation with cell companies who have been wanting to get in here, and we could make it 18 possible to do that without voiding our zoning, it makes a certain amount of sense. 19 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Ellen, I don't disagree with what you're saying it's just that this Board 20 doesn't have the authority to insist that something like this should be done. The fire 21 district here has been more or less an entity unto itself, and this would have to go through the fire 22 chief's council and take a fair amount of time to see if they would be interested in joining 23 together to do something like this. MS. MCNEELEY: Well, they already have 24 joined to the extent that they have written a mutual aid agreement and all of them are 25 signatories to that, including Plum Island. So there is a precedent for that. And if they didn't February 3, 2005 33 1 2 have to risk their tax exemptions -- CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: But you would have to 3 bring this proposal to the fire chiefs association, we have no authority to do anything 4 like that whatsoever. Our only jurisdiction here is a height variance. That's it. 5 MS. MCNEELEY: This is an alternative. MR. CORCORAN: This would have to come 6 through the Town Board as well, since it would require a change in the Town Board and the Town as 7 a governing body. MS. MCNEELEY: I don't think it would 8 require a change in the Town code. MR. CORCORAN: If you're going to require 9 them to engage in this sort of system, I suspect it might. 10 MS. MCNEELEY: John? BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: I can tell you East 11 Hampton Town has three fire districts, Amagansett and Springs -- four. 12 MS. MCNEELEY: And it's very hilly. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: That's why they're 13 doing the mesh system. MR. SCHEIBEL: They have already spent the 14 money for the public safety system. It would be that the clear system (inaudible) . It's built to 15 be a mesh network, and the mesh network is based on the requirements of a cell phone system where 16 each site can populate the other site with its traffic and transparently cast that traffic site. 17 MS. MCNEELEY: That's exactly the beauty of it, what I'm getting at, and what they're 18 getting at. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: You'll have to debate 19 this later. Mr. Turner? MR. TURNER: I just wanted to close with 20 one or two quick comments. I wanted to say to the Orient Fire District that it troubles me greatly 21 to see the Orient Association appearing to be battling the fire district. That is not the case. 22 We really understand what they are attempting to do for us, and we are extremely grateful. I think 23 that there are other matters that are playing here, and I think those have tended maybe on the 24 sidelines influencing things. I think to the extent that we could make sure that anything you 25 do actually is for emergency communications and is not a mechanism for getting cellular February 3, 2005 34 1 2 communications in and is as thin and transparent an antennae as possible would be extremely 3 important. The second point is I think this whole 4 process is very good, and you are to be commended and thank you for hearing us, and thank you for 5 spending the time with us. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you, sir. Mr. 6 Boyd? MR. BOYD: Ma'am, chair, if you can for a 7 moment indulge me, take off my hat as attorney for the fire district, and I'm now putting on my hat 8 as vice-president of Southold Town Fire Chief's Council. 9 We have explored this issue very carefully, and we are definitely as a Fire Chief's 10 Council pushing each and every one of our districts to go to the 450 megahertz communication 11 system. Mattituck already has a tower in place, Cutchogue has a tower in place. We're going to 12 that direction. It has been investigated. It's been investigated very carefully by all of us. I 13 just wanted to let the people know that this matter has been looked at at the chief's council 14 level. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: But it hasn't been 15 looked at as far as doing something cooperatively. MR. BOYD: Yes. We are doing it 16 cooperatively so we can all talk with one another. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: But it means that each 17 hamlet will have to put up their own tower? MR. BOYD: Yes. Each fire district will 18 have its own communications base. There's no question about that, but we are working together 19 to have one system which will give us the inter-communication abilities that is so vital and 20 will also let us talk to our neighbors further to the west because we will have the equipment to go 21 on the 450 megahertz, which is being used presently on the south fork by a goodly number of 22 the departments and almost on a monthly basis you've got another department down there going 23 450. That's my fire chief's hat, not my lawyer hat. 24 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: Does the lawyer hat want to speak now? No. 25 MR. BOYD: As the attorney for the district I would like to give the chairman of the February 3, 2005 35 1 2 Board of fire commissioners an opportunity to speak. 3 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Go ahead, Marty. MR. TRENT: There are a lot of things I 4 want to say. My name is Martin Trent. I live at 4390 Orchard Street in Orient. I'm chairman of 5 the Board of Fire Commissioners from the Orient Fire District. I've been a fireman for 25 years. 6 I have been company secretary for 17 years. I 've been commissioner for 10 years. I've never seen 7 Mr. Turner attend one of our meetings in the last several years. I have also been through the 8 chief's line. I think we're getting way off track. 9 We need to improve our communications. We need to do it now. We don't need a college study. 10 I'd like to get this done in my lifetime. The question before you is one of aesthetics versus 11 public safety. I'm one of those guys that about 20 years 12 ago fell through a floor and ended up in a basement, I'm just glad I was 30 something then 13 and didn't do it now at my age. It could happen, and I don't think I'm going to bounce back as well 14 as I did at that point. The only thing we're asking is to put up a flag pole structure that 15 we're going to make hopefully blue-gray that will be unobtrusive that will improve our 16 communications and protect public safety and the lives of our firefighters and police. Simply put, 17 we're not asking for anything more, anything less. Thank you. 18 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you, Marty. MS. WACHSBERG: Just as a point of 19 privilege as one of the people -- as you did, Ruth -- writing the legislation, and, Jim, the 20 reason why we're here is that's because that's the way the legislation is written, and the way the 21 ledgislation was written was that we spent a great deal of time working out how we could protect 22 residential and historic areas. And the reason we're here is because there was a limit put on the 23 height in those areas, and to request a height variance you have to come here, and that's why 24 we're here, and why are we concerned about the height. 25 It's not a question -- aesthetics makes it sound arty-farty, but the fact is that visual February 3, 2005 r 36 1 2 impact is one of the basic reasons why people come and protest the applications for towers. It has 3 to do with a sense of place and that was picked up after Tony Hiss wrote a book called A Sense of 4 Place. And one of the points he made was that a 10 percent change in visual impact of an area can 5 actually transform people's sense of place 90 percent. And this was picked up by a lot of other 6 communities. This is put out by Scenic Hudson. This is called Protecting Our Region's Sense of 7 Place in the Age of Wireless Communications. This was done after Southold Town's legislation, it 8 recommends a lot of the legislation that Southold Town put into place, and the tenents of that 9 legislation specifically go to protecting the residential and the historic areas. Orient is a 10 particularly sensitive one. I'm speaking now as a past president of the Historical Society and of 11 the Orient Association. And one of the things that struck me as an incomer into this area was 12 how much the community of Orient respected and cared for its past, first evidenced by the 13 formation of the Historic Society in 1944, when 400 people joined, that was practically the entire 14 community. Then again in 1976 when an enormous number of people worked on the project to have the 15 Historic district created, and I just want to read one thing from the book that was published at that 16 time. It's the last paragraph, actually, it says: "Perhaps it's hard to know where to end a 17 history like this because there's always tomorrow. Perhaps it will too say that village sentiment at 18 the time of this writing is in favor of preserving Orient from here on with as little change as 19 possible. The community takes satisfaction in the recognition of the Orient Historic District and 20 hopes that ultimately the stretch of Main Road from the village to Orient Point can be declared 21 an historic corridor, confirming to the world at large that Orient as a whole is a place worth 22 caring for. " The sense of place has been extremely 23 strong in Orient. This tower is sited in a very sensitive place. It's sensitive from the point of 24 view of the scenic by way that was created for the Main Road at that point. And I won't go into the 25 stuff I distributed to all of us, that's why I think the Board should be asked to pay particular February 3, 2005 37 1 2 attention to the conditions that were, in fact, placed on the construction of a tower in a 3 residential and historic district. There are conditions, for instance, which 4 have not been met. For instance, the applicant was supposed to be asked to come in with a site 5 plan showing all of the towers in the town. There are other conditions that have not been met. I 6 don't know whether apart from the height whether the acreage has been met. I'm not sure there's 7 five acres as is requested by the legislation. I'm saying the reason why we're here, the reason 8 why the Orient Association has been concerned is not because we don't want the fire department to 9 have what it needs for adequate communication, obviously we do. It's in all our interests, 10 that's clear. Orient has always given the fire department what it wanted in terms of financing, 11 always, whether it's a pension plan, construction of the building, purchase of the plot that it's on 12 at the moment, we have always supported that financially. There's no question about that. But 13 we have to also balance the other interests here as well. That's why I hope that a compromise, I 14 really hope that Board will see its way to ask for a compromise in this instance, particularly in 15 regard to the height because that is what will make the most impact. 16 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Thank you, Freddie. MR. REALE: Edward Reale, Twomey, Latham, 17 Shea and Kelley, here as attorney for the Orient Association. I'm not going to repeat things we 18 have already talked about tonight or other days we were here. 19 I have two comments, essentially this is a quasi-judicial board. You're here to make a 20 decision about the need for a height variance. What is required to do that is some proof. 21 Mr. Scheibel, as everyone recognizes is very capable, did a very nice job, pretty pictures. 22 One of the questions I have in going through those lovely pictures of coverage, in the course of 23 proving something, if you're proving something in court, you're proving something in front of a 24 Board you show all the other ways something can be done. Mr. Scheibel was very careful not to answer 25 the question about what would happen at 100 feet or 90 feet or 75 feet. I'm sure those pretty February 3, 2005 38 1 2 graphs could have been plotted for some other heights so this Board could see whether the 3 coverage was adequate at 90 or 100 or 60, whatever, I don't know. That would have been very 4 easily done today and been part of the project and picture, I think it's an important question, it 5 goes to what Mr. Dinizio asked earlier, is it your decision to determine these things? It is in fact 6 your decision to determine whether the height variance is merited. Height is might is a nice 7 thing to say, and I hope in future applications, if I ever need a height variance from this Board I 8 can use that. It would be nice to prove that maybe you don't have to go quite as high, that's 9 really the question, and that hasn't been shown as far as I could tell from tonight, not that 10 anything Mr. Scheibel said was incorrect, but I think there's a few missing pieces, and I think 11 that's an important issue. And that goes to my second point, which is this whole thing started 12 some time ago with a telecommunications application from Beacon Wireless, and I don't 13 really know what's happened to that whole process or where they stand, and if the lease that's in 14 the record is still in place and Mr. Cannuscio going to build this tower, and do we need the 15 tower at 120 so we have room for not only emergency services but these other things. I 16 think that goes to the height question as well. I think if anything, those questions do need to be 17 answered. What does it look like at other heights and where is Mr. Cannuscio on this tower and how 18 does that all fit in? Thank you. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Bill, do you have any 19 other questions? MR. SCHEIBEL: I was careful not to 20 respond -- I did what the fire department asked me to. The way the question was asked and answered 21 is, what do I need to do this. I gave them what they need. If this changes, I'll do anything the 22 fire department asks me to do. Don't personalize this that Mr. Scheibel did this. 23 MR. REALE: If any offense was taken, I'm sorry, that's not what I meant. 24 MR. SCHEIBEL: It was just phraseology? MR. REALE: It was phraseology. At the 25 last meeting I said you were credible, capable, you're a very good expert. I say the same February 3, 2005 39 1 2 tonight. My only point was, there were no charts of other heights for proving to this Board -- I'm 3 sure you're doing what the fire department asked you to do, nobody's saying you didn't. I'm not 4 saying that either. All I'm saying as a matter of proof, you could show other heights and other 5 impacts of the coverage, and I apologize if you took that personally, that's not how I meant it. 6 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: What is the Board's pleasure? 7 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: I'd like to ask Mr. Scheibel a couple questions, do you mind? 8 MR. SCHEIBEL: No. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: The way I 9 understand it, the fire department approached you and they wanted a certain increase in the 10 reliability of their radio system that the low band just wasn't going to do. And you determined 11 that that low band is not going to do what they want, what they think they need. 12 MR. SCHEIBEL: And if you own a scanner, you can pretty much figure that out by listening. 13 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: I think everybody's agreed to that. You went out and plotted on your 14 computer this 90 percent coverage -- MR. SCHEIBEL: Right. 15 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: What was the result of that plot? 16 MR. SCHEIBEL: The tower at 120 feet. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: If you were to plot 17 85? MR. SCHEIBEL: The average will go down. 18 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: The tower could probably be lower? 19 MR. SCHEIBEL: Yes. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: Would the tower 20 most likely be lower or would it definitely be lower, it could definitely be lower? 21 MR. SCHEIBEL: Yes. And coverage will go down lower in some proportion which is nonlinear. 22 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: Yes, I agree. And I think that my statement concerning the red would 23 probably hold us up that if you did it at 85 you would not really notice any difference? 24 MR. SCHEIBEL: On the red local to the firehouse, the place you see the difference in on 25 the extremities. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: On the output of February 3, 2005 40 1 2 the hand helds? MR. SCHEIBEL: Correct. 3 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: And the difference probably wouldn't be that much in color on those 4 spots? MR. SCHEIBEL: No, because there's a 5 finite limit and that's one of the questions Mr. Turner asked actually, and I answered as best 6 I could. They give you a tool to do your best job at answering the route question, not of saying 7 what's the coverage going to be right there, what's the coverage going to be there. There 8 actually is a program like that. It's only been determined in systems where there's actually been 9 determined to be a problem where the customer has paid Motorola for a certain level of coverage and 10 that level coverage isn't apparent. There's a program called Factware where you actually drive 11 the whole geography, three square foot by three square foot and it plots in and out of the 12 coverage. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: That was 13 interesting but I don't think it was pertinent. I guess I'm trying to get at, you wouldn't notice as 14 much difference with that program probably at 65? MR. SCHEIBEL: In the red in the center? 15 No, all the changes the diameter in red. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: We're looking for 16 this 90 and the 90 is a number that comes out to 120 feet? 17 MR. SCHEIBEL: Right. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: And 110 feet is not 18 90 any more, it could be? MR. SCHEIBEL: 81. 19 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: That's how you chose this thing, there's no other criteria? 20 MR. SCHEIBEL: Right. The parameters of the equipment are fixed. The FCC license is 21 fixed. You can't play with what the FCC gives you. By the way, the FCC already approved it at 22 120 feet. They said it was okay. They seem to think it was appropriate. They took away the 23 group of people who can cause interference, the body that coordinates who can be on what channel 24 and what the reaches of that machine are allowed to be, that is still done by two separate 25 agencies, and they continue to compare notes before they grant the license and Orient's license February 3, 2005 41 1 2 was granted at 120 feet. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: Could you go lower 3 with that license? MR. SCHEIBEL: Sure. Can't change the 4 pattern of the antennae, can't change the gain, can't change the operator of the transmitter. 5 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: And you can't go 130? 6 MR. SCHEIBEL: Can't go 130. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: That's all I 7 have. The reason you chose this was 120 equals 90 percent efficiency? 8 MR. SCHEIBEL: Right. When I put all the other parameters like the power of the hand held, 9 the size of the antennae, where it is on the person, believe it or not, that all goes into the 10 program. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: Could you plot it for 11 us, say at 75, 85, 90 feet? MR. SCHEIBEL: If that's a request of the 12 fire department. There is something else, too, I have not yet been paid for any of this. I have 13 not submitted an invoice because I typically do this as a service to my customer because I'm going 14 to build the system. This is the first one where I spent -- I'm thinking around somewhere around 15 100 man-hours trying to do this. It's usually I go in, here's the answer -- 16 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: For the Board's information, would the fire department be willing 17 to let him do a couple different heights? MR. SCHEIBEL: I actually checked my 18 results. I have a partner who has a shop down west, and I gave him the parameters and let him - 19 run it. MR. CORCORAN: I think if you're going 20 down that route you also need to know the number for each of those heights for the efficiency 21 rates. BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: Being in the 22 industry for 20 years, this Board couldn't look at a 75 degree of frequence and a 100 degree 23 efficiency and see much difference. You wouldn't see the difference, honestly, you would say, oh, 24 look there are some spots there that aren't there that may look really complicated. 25 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It isn't? BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: No. That program February 3, 2005 42 1 2 is basic, that's what upsets me so much about the fact that requires this or asking for this. If 3 we're going to -- the Board is going to consider, we're not qualified to look at a 75 foot and a 120 4 foot height, look at that picture and say, oh, this will be good enough for the fire department. 5 You won't notice that much different. He could print them out. 6 MR. SCHEIBEL: You end up with more holes, when you look at the chart. 7 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: When you say it's 90 percent, is it 90 percent to the blue, to the 8 red? CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: It's the blue. 9 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: The blue is 90? MR. SCHEIBEL: (Inaudible) it gets to 10 where if you're standing here the coverage is great; when you go like this (indicating) you 11 can't hear anything. That's what happens when you start to drop it. That's when you start to get 12 into whatever the geography you want to cover is. You say it's 90 percent in that geography, that's 13 when it's nine out of ten times. I get in first try in that geography, but like one of the things 14 that has come up for us, is they run a water rescue team, so they wanted their coverage to be 15 out off the coast in both directions too. So if they're out in the Peconic, I think there was a 16 ferry accident out here a couple years ago, the FCC didn't approve this. I don't think the 17 licensing agency asked for it, but the way the system is set up, the coverage is uniform as it 18 can be, but as you lower that number, it's the start, it's how much spotier it gets. 19 Specifically, Plum Island we really see big differences if they're on a scene in Plum Island, 20 and they're on the shoreline adjacent to the mine lands, the coverage would be fine, but if they're 21 putting out a building fire that's around the corner where the ambulance barn is, the coverage 22 would start to fail, that would be the difference. 23 BOARD MEMBER ORLANDO: That's your 90 percent? 24 MR. SCHEIBEL: Right. Same thing with East Marion as they went to the outer edges of 25 East Marion or into the next district over, that's when you get into the works now, can you hear me February 3, 2005 e 43 1 2 now, just like the joke on the cell phone commercials. 3 BOARD MEMBER DINIZIO: With my questioning I'm getting at, we're not qualified, this district 4 has decided on 90 percent efficiency. If we make a decision that 85 is good enough, I have no idea, 5 how we can make that decision. We are not qualified to do that. These people put their 6 lives on the line, and they are saying to us, 90 percent is good enough, 100 percent is good 7 enough, 90 percent is good enough, they're still going to have problems. I don't think we can say 8 you can't have 90, you have to have 75 based on anything this gentleman could give us. That's the 9 point I'm trying to get at. That extra studies, mesh up, all that. We are not, not even myself 10 are capable of comprehending that. MR. TURNER: My only reply in response to 11 this is that the same argument could be made if they said 180 feet and this Board does have an 12 obligation to decide whether 180 feet would be too much. 13 MR. SCHEIBEL: In order to be 99 percent I would have said 180 feet. As John said, there are 14 multilocation solutions. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: John, one more thing. 15 MR. TURNER: Let me -- I think the way the program works and what you do is you generate a 16 certain amount of power on talk out at 120 feet at the Orient firehouse. You then divide up the area 17 into a grid, I don't know what the grid parameters are, so you have this huge grid. You compute the 18 received signal power at the center point of the grid with the hands held at three foot off the 19 ground for talk out so you take a hand held three foot off the ground, and at the center of one of 20 these grids and you compute the transmitted signal strength that you're going to receive, and you 21 give it a color, and so then you look at this, and you see at the fringes it is where you're going to 22 have difficulty as you lower the antennae height. So the question is how do things change 23 at the fringes of the coverage? Now, in fact, we could learn something and these are precisely the 24 plots that I have been asking for for three months. Now the question I would ask is why 25 hasn't it been forthcoming? I am capable of interpreting. February 3, 2005 44 1 2 MR. BOYD: Very simply, the plots are not forthcoming is because they have not been done. 3 They are not done because we are looking for 90 percent coverage. 90 percent coverage is an 4 industry standard. It is a usual sort of thing. The fire district doesn't want to settle for less 5 than 90 percent. Ninety percent is important for the safety of the firefighters not only the Orient 6 firefighters, but other firefighter that might come to assist them in a mutual aid situation. We 7 have to get the coverage outside in the water area around the district. Orient has a boat, rescue 8 boat that goes out. The other fire districts have rescue boats. I'm not going to bore you or go 9 overboard with ideas of the various things that may happen that would require the convergence of 10 emergency resources in that area, we all know what it can be, so let's please provide the coverage, 11 the radio coverage that's necessary to keep all these people safe. That's what it is about. 12 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: You have a technical piece of information, ma'am? I would like to 13 bring this hearing to a close? MS. LIBERTORE: My name is Mary Ann 14 Libertore, and I am a new resident of Orient, and I am so grateful that John brought up the point 15 that has been disturbing me all day, which is I rented with my significant other in Orient for 16 nine years, and then this past June we bought a house and it's really difficult for Sidney and I 17 to even think of disagreeing with our neighbors, all of whom have been massively kind to us. We 18 live across the field from the tower, and that's not my beef, but when I was coming out here to 19 speak tonight at the request of my colleagues, I was coming out on the bus and one of the things 20 that was so striking to me was all of these towers, and you go along the LIE and you see them 21 one town after another, and I guess you only see things when you want to look for them, but I saw 22 them today, and I was grateful to Mr. Scheibe' for mentioning 911 because the reason that Sidney 23 isn't speaking tonight, my fiance, is that he's a lawyer back in town, and he is working on the 24 Freedom Tower. He is lucky enough to be working on rebuilding the World Trade Center, and I was 25 born and raised on Staten Island, so at my core I'm a cop's kid. I grew up with four cops and all February 3, 2005 45 1 2 firemen, so I understand the issue of fire safety, particularly after 9/11 when many people that I 3 grew up with there, I understand what these fellows are talking about. I didn't know as a new 4 resident of Orient that we could go to fire department meetings, and, Mr. Commissioner, if you 5 want me, I'll be there, and I'll do fundraising for you and everything, but I think as a Staten 6 Islander, I have a special thing to share with you all. 7 I was born right at the end of World War II, 11 months after my father came home after 8 being on Utah Beach. I grew up in Staten Island in the '50s. I was a small child in the '50s. It 9 was like growing up in Kansas. I think one of the things that struck me so much when I came out here 10 10 years ago for the first time was how this place looks just like Staten Island in the '50s with the 11 wetlands and the beautiful golden fields and these wonderful trees and I think if you permit this 12 tower to be built at this house are you going to establish the tipping point, the thing that will 13 degrade our portion of the east end, not just Orient, East Marion, and I think the logic is to 14 let the Greenport tower and the mesh system be the new paradigm for how to protect these firemen. 15 That's all I'd like to say. CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I'm going to make a 16 motion to close the hearing and reserve -- MS. EMO: My name is Robin Emo, I live in 17 East Marion. And we had a meeting a week ago on the same topic and one of the questions I asked 18 Mr. Scheibel and he said they work even better than all these other cell and radio situations but 19 it was all about cost. I asked how much. It was $1, 000 per satellite phone, 15 phones would be 20 required for East Marion, I doubt there's a whole lot morewouldbe required for Orient. And the 21 problem he stated was you wouldn't be able to talk to people in the other towns, but if everybody got 22 the satellite phones, which are better quality, we wouldn't have towers. We wouldn't have 23 discussions, we wouldn't have to worry about the health risks that may or may not be involved in 24 the towers, and I think it's something that should be looked into, and I wonder if the cell phone 25 companies hadn't approached the firehouses, would they even be talking about this. Why didn't we February 3, 2005 46 1 2 know that there were problems with the communications systems until the cellular 3 companies appeared on the scene? MR. BOYD: Lawyer and fire chief hat these 4 problems with the communications in the fire departments have been growing over the 5 years. It's not a question that it started all of a sudden, basically it's been getting 6 progressively worse. We're finally to the point where we have to do something about it. 7 CHAIRWOMAN OLIVA: I'd like to make a motion to close the hearing reserving decision 8 until later. (See minutes for resolution. ) 9 (Time ended: 8:30 p.m. ) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 February 3, 2005 1 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK 3 4 X 5 TOWN O F SOUTHOLD 6 7 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 8 9 X Southold Town Hall 10 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11 January 20, 2005 12 9:30 a.m. 13 Board Members Present : 14 RUTH OLIVA, Chairwoman 15 VINCENT ORLANDO, Vice Chairman 16 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Board Member 17 JAMES DINIZIO, Board Member (Arrival time: 1:00 p.m. ) 18 MICHAEL SIMON, Board Member 19 LINDA KOWALSKI, Board Secretary 20 21 22 23 24 25 COURT REPORTING AND TRANSCRIPTION SERVICE (631) 878-8047 ' \ ,, \ \ Email opened 10/22/04 sent to-ZBA staff for Chairperson and Members From Harvey Black from email address: Harvey.Black@lehman.com Addressed to Linda Kowalski for: Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Dear Linda and Members of the Southold Zoning Board of Appeals, I have recently been informed that you are hearing a new proposal to place a 125' cellular phone pole on the Orient Fire Department Property in Orient. I am vehemently opposed to such a proposal for a number of reasons. I own a home located at 645 Village Lane in Orient. From my doorstep I can clearly see the top of the 60 foot steeple of the Congregational Church caddy corner to the Orient Fire Department. A 125 foot pole on the Orient Fire Department property would tower over my yard and be a huge eye sore not to mention the negative impact on the value of my property and the whole character of the village. I have been a resident of Orient only since January of this year but I fell in love with the town long before that. I was attracted to its quiet rural qualities, its broad vista's and its incredible natural beauty. In buying on village lane I was also attracted to the benefits of being in the historical district where development is closely controlled. I paid substantial sum for my slice of paradise. A 125' pole towering over my home and much of the center of the village would destroy most of what the property's value is and indeed what much of the entire village's property value is. Furthermore,I have made a number of inquiries as to why this tower is needed and why it must go in such a prominent and exposed spot in the center of town. I am shocked and dismayed to hear that the reasons for erecting this tower in its proposed spot are to financially benefit commercial interests outside of our community and a few members of the Orient Fire Department. I've heard the arguments of the few who support this proposal as to why we need this tower i.e. public safety, convenience etc... To my knowledge there have been no open meetings to discuss these issues or evaluate potential alternatives. Were these issues to be publicly vetted as they should be I suspect we would find many of them to be falsehoods. For example cellular coverage is adequate in most parts of town from the antenna which already exists in the church steeple. At a minimum if more time and consideration were given to this decision. I'm confident we would find a better technological solution with a far less negative impact on property values and on the character of the town. In summary I am strongly opposed to this proposal. It's a BAD IDEA!!! The merits of it are small if even valid. Those who benefit are few and the negative impact on many is huge. I urge you to strike down this proposal. The beauty and idyllic character of our town are not for sale! With best regards, • Harvey Black GEORGE R. LAT HAT, T3.*77' rPEr)) PETERS NECK, BOK 576 y OCT 2 ® 2004 ORIENT, NEW YORK 119517 0c-7" o 4' Zn.v/N 9 &q a a o F. 417E44'5 R14.4-4- o t:-a 1,19i C Kfi/1e Goorvt A N ,a? 'Dees .1..yl'/p 7r0 .7orsv c -ieiey c +eN.ra,,vsirt) YiNGoNr oi-L4A1Po /N/Z/ , R6 : £ ce' M IAA rrap7i4 J$ AAireA b9 R/P1 No-7- IN FRVBI@ of A colotritekC694„. poLP aN • 7/.1 e- F/ie•e.1 k' .1""Ted.,'j" LoT. / !moo Stiff 01.7 71# l tri .r• ~r- Apr) g ccue 5o'tx4D. 7-14ey Do rq 'rnfe Jox3_ Bk.d-' / 7oN "r "TH/NIS' 1-7-t , s 146 ta-i, e /iv 774v au5/N.20$ oF co EC7nJG 4ND 1 .9$uRtip Ala RwitiTrhow7 f IatGtrvW "TWAT -17-& Pe $etAtT A Aj re WA, A1va ,TODpN �� ,teet�oMs cvc�t'_J 3r L MPT riv&b oee. AI Pa G4c Fit* 74r,tg. LET 7--i-t& Pers/De/u75 OF 0RIg-Air pAtCAR '7 TWRoK5A 4yEs. 4 NEty FoG6 ,4Np TN /C}c co#4,0A y tn1'G- r,E A.4 au,1 i7,Ncf 4- ci.i /N FA/Ce, eu"/' .81 1 .7-5,4F 'N 7"/,r Lor Ut ki .p 8 a 4 pcitnlitaerur ar5olte ,A, 7-Iter VILLAGE, ,Eael- 71-4RT ORIE,iT S1fcu p STAINa fN /7.s d e.cs,v A1'D N"oT Look Foie 01 , e tp FRO*? GaM/+,u.v,ciTia,u COM4N!9S, Tif,.S / R "D,111,510e / S s u.a ntokt`v, r/ • AA]r, ! R s= coMMeNIt 7MRT Yo K. eA,yfit: • APPLc e/r7r o,v , J c 745 7oG+ .' Pa e' Kowalski, Linda ; to 024 PV - From: Kowalski, Linda OCTfir` 1-4 1 9 2004 1T' I Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 8:24 AM } ti To: Jerry Goehringer(E-mail); Jim Dinizio (E-mail); Lydia Tortora; Ruth OlivaL(E-mail);Vincent Orlando(E-mail) \O\ Subject: FW: Orient Firehouse cell tower 'LW/ The attached was received this morning Ref Orient Fire District/AT&T Tower variances and special exception (10/21"PH) for review: Original Message From: ANNE PAPANTONIO[mailto:paptokyo@optonline.net] Sent:Monday,October 18,2004 8:30 PM To:Kowalski,Linda Subject: Orient Firehouse cell tower Dear Chairperson Oliva and Members of the Town of Southold ZBA We have recently received a certified notice of a hearing of your committee on October 21. Unfortunately we will be out of town on that night but would like to make our opinions known to you. First, we strongly favor effective communications for the OFD. Our questions concern whether this particular proposal will satisfy their needs. Earlier materials submitted by OFD did not contain a technical analysis of the root of any communications difficulties, did not discuss alternative solutions, and justified a large cell tower primarily in terms of the economic benefit provided, including benefit to the sponsor, Beacon Wireless. My understanding is that OFD had no intention to construct a cell tower until it was proposed by Beacon Wireless. In your hearing I encourage you to inquire whether a tower of this size is the optimal solution vis avis communications issues, and whether the negative impact on the quality of life in a small hamlet and on surrounding real estate values is justified by the benefits to the community and not Beacon Wireless. Although not technically your brief, my reading of the agreement between OFD and Beacon Wireless gives rise to concerns as to whether OFD is distracting itself from its primary purpose of providing safety and aid to the community, and bringing potential liability to the OFD and its assessed citizens, by assuming maintenance and lease obligations for which it is not prepared. Yours truly, Edmond & Anne Papantonio PO Box 84 orient, NY • 10/19/04 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS i Office Location: Annex Building on Youngs Avenue Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road, Box 1179 --Soutlwl41)117 11971-0959 EmailLinda.Kowalski@Town.Southold.ny.us or Jessica.Boger@Town.Southold.ny.us Web site http://southoldtown.northfork.net (631) 765-1809 ext. 1 fax (631) 765-9064 ( 7 6S-5 6 7 i ) TRANSMITTAL To: &-.1 �d n, DATE: /0 I / /2004 REF: Hearing Date: (0/ o/ I 0 V Appl. of 494 li-u Airti '' AT-1-7/ tew' (x ) Info attached for your information and review. /� ( c i -iU21a c7-/ rte✓ �I-D..�, k4 nto)i 42 I ttijyyv L 167 I i t ' A U/n fu 4W-if 14Y-4,/1./ -lam 1 a)2A d Caf C � Thank you. ���� 7' Pages attached: / . ("<Zt-z,,e-oVy /, _16,4(,5,1 LEGAL NOTICE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2004 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and Chapter 100 (Zoning), Code of the Town of Southold, the following public hearing will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179, Southold, New York 11971-0959, on THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2004, at the time noted below: 1:05 PM AT&T WIRELESS, OMNIPOINT FACILITIES NETWORK 2, LLC, AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSOCIATES, INC. D/B/A BEACON WIRELESS MANAGEMENT, ORIENT FIRE DISTRICT #5408. Location of Property: Orient Firehouse Parcel, 23300 Main Road, Orient; CTM 18-5-13.8; Zone District: R-80. Requests for: (1) Variances under Sections 100-162A(3) and 100-165B, based on the Building Inspector's April 23, 2004 Notice of Disapproval, last amended September 22, 2004, concerning a proposed telecommunications tower at 125 ft. height with antenna, and related equipment. The reasons stated for disapproval are that the telecommunications tower: (1) does not meet the code requirements with a proposed height at 125 feet, (2) is not permitted to be located within 300 feet of historic properties, CTM 18-5-15.1, 18-5-11.1, and (3) is not permitted on a nonconforming lot size, or lot containing less than a minimum lot area in a residential district of five (5) acres. (2) Special Exception under Section 100-162A(3) to construct telecommunications tower. The Board of Appeals will hear all persons, or their representatives, desiring to be heard at each hearing, and/or desiring to submit written statements before the conclusion of each hearing. Each hearing will not start earlier than designated above. Files are available for review during regular business hours. If you have questions, please do not hesitate to call (631) 765-1809. Dated: October 1, 2004. BOARD OF APPEALS RUTH D. OLIVA, CHAIRWOMAN By Linda Kowalski f. ESPSy•b. VED RECEJ 062004 February 3, 2004 ar �'PPeALS FEB Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall PO Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Re: Orient Fire Department Tower Dear Members of the Board: The first correspondence we received regarding the issue of a tower on Fire Department property was a letter from the Fire Department which questioned why a new cell tower was being installed in the steeple of the Orient Congregational Church when the revenue for such a tower could be going to the Fire Department. Since that time the Fire Department's argument has become a life safety issue. Emergency Communications has become a hot button issue in the United States since September 11th, and something we are all concerned about. However it seems that cellular technology is not necessarily the answer. It is unreliable even in the best circumstances. It is inconvenient to drive to Greenport to use those free weekend minutes. Are clear cellular calls a priority? Certainly they are not a necessity. Building a 120' tower in a historic and beautiful town such as Orient would be totally irresponsible. Sincerely, k5gAiWUA Barbara Friedman firt'eel imam roDo( 11 QvIUt N-) 1l17 Page 1 of 1 \_ Kowalski, Linda From: Semon, Bruno Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 10.31 AM To: Kowalski, Linda Subject: RE. Orient Fire Dm and Omnipt Southold Town Hall I will put it in the file. Thank You Bruno Original'Message From: Kowalski, Linda Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 10:27 AM To: Semon, Bruno Subject: Orient Fire Dist and Omnipt Southold Town Hall Bruno,As requested by you, please find attached ZBA Incomplete Notice sent to Mr. Boyd. We are awaiting additional application forms and documentation for the proposed public utility use before it can be advertised. The next possible hearing calendar could be Feb. 26th if it is complete by Jan 12, 04. Thank you. 12/26/03 04 ` � © h Fork C Iptakta Ass©c © 6 � 29745 Maki! Road ' Cutchoguas DIY 11 i3 President:C Jim Capt. House '1/4,X) `\ Vice-President:Capt.Robert Rocchetta Treasurer:Capt Edward Czelatka Secretary:Capt Michael Lotito October 30, 2003 Zoning Board of Appeals Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 To Whom it Concerns: The North Fork Captains Association represents the professional charter boat captains operating charter fishing vessels on the North Fork. It was formed in 19??to address the members' mutual concerns about safety,the establishment of a sustainable fishery and the promotion of the recreational fishing industry. I am writing to express the NFCA's strong endorsement for the erection of a tower in the Village of Orient, NY to provide functional cell phone service in the area off Orient Point. We spend many hours on those waters, March through December, mostly without the safety benefit of having cell phone service. Our request is motivated by the situations listed below: 1. The captains may need to communicate with medical and rescue personnel during an emergency evacuation of an injured or ill party over the course of returning to the dock. The rescue squads and physicians do not have the VHF radios we use on the water, and currently the cell phone service does not allow communication from Orient Point and eastward. 2. The captains serve as observers on the water and report cases of suspicious and illegal activities. We need a private communication system so that the enforcement officers can intercept the perpetrators who can easily screen VHF channel 16.There are at least two cases where perpetrators were not able to be intercepted due to lack of cell phone service. 3. As a matter of convenience,we would like to be able to make business calls during daytime hours when we are on the water. Similarly, our clients often need to contact their offices or families while on the water. I understand that Southold Town and the Village of Orient have made excellent progress in agreeing on the location of the tower, and we strongly commend their efforts. We hope that your Board can continue this vital project and make a positive consideration. Sincerely, aptain Jim House, President CC: E Boyd A-a') f OTIENT ASSOCIATION BOX 282 . ORIENT • NY 11957 December 22, 2003 Ms. Ruth Oliva, Chair Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road/P.O.Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Ruth and Members of the ZBA, Enclosed is an informational flyer on the application of the Orient Fire District to erect a 120' cellular tower on OFD property in Orient. This flyer was prepared over a period of many weeks by a committee formed after the June 28 Orient Association meeting about the tower. At that meeting it was clear to many of those present that we lacked sufficient information about the Fire Department's communication needs to take any position on the merits of the proposed tower as a solution. Members of this committee brought considerable legal, scientific and technical expertise to their task and worked diligently to obtain the information they felt they needed to draw conclusions about the proposal. I urge you and all members of the ZBA to read this flyer before considering the Orient Fire-District application. Sincerely, ,46Tye_ ."*in Anne S. Hopkins, president (631 323-2527) . L i 11 o o _ milP"4� :` It's dei vu allover agar . . . Y.Berra #4. ^' v t, � > , , Without consultingthe community, Orient Fire Department again signs a contract ,� ' ty d ,a } : c ; ° P ' , ,,'P �4 fora cell tower . . No 'd * 1 A'1 t >A' 1990: Contract with Bell Atlantic for 100' tower September 10,2003: OFD "informational meeting". e "' ' " - OA approaches OFD's communications expert Robert 4 Results:Public outcry,fire commissioner defeated Fleming,who was''unfamiliar' with specifics of corn- • - 1*• in election,Board of Commissioners votes to dis- munications problems and unable to describe them. solve contract,citing public opposition. Orient V October,2003:OA files Freedom of Information Act Ell 1 `, Association,formed in 1984 to defend historic Requests with OFD for material requested in August. — •• f `� °i rural environment and quality of life of commu- November,2003: Lease,communications report and r'v t ,• nity,plays key role in defeating project,but coin- p c budgets subsequently provided. After preliminary III' munity bitterly divided by controversy. : review, committee concludes: _; f '. 2002: Lease with developer;Affordable >there is no assurance that proposed tower would enable ter 1 ,,4°'' ,, Housing Associates (d/b/a Beacon Wireless OFD to remedy claimed communications problems g°i _- z a Management) to erect tower (current plans, >risks to OFD and Orient community far outweigh a I t. 120') for unrestricted range of services,includ- benefits of any additional lease rental income ' y Y 1 ing OFD antennas < ' I', } ' January 22,2004:ZBA hearing on request for zoning 'a 0 y Results:Public outcry, Orient Association,hoping variance tentatively scheduled. (Please address corn- ,__, =• o k . ,. , to avoid strife of 1990,forms committee to ments and letters on this issue to the Zoning Board of m cCIO i , explore meeting OFD communications needs Appeals) ' , 16,0 , . , Ci. , , without 120 tower in historic community, Z a+ Requests for information ignored until Freedom Emergency communications issues and causes o �= r ' , of Information Act filings force compliance. remain unclear: H ‘o W , `' , `' Communications problems can result from any num- 1 : ber of factors,including: Z , ' i ' The story so far •. •. •. • Frequency used for communication , ,. ,,,. • Interference October 15,2002:Orient Fire District leasespart of • Inadequate transmitter power I J .: • Inadequate charge on handheld's battery firehouse property to Affordable Housing • Orientation of handheld's antenna 4 2Associates/Beacon Wireless Management,Vincent • Failure to follow prescribed operating procedures • t r Cannuscio,President. • Improperly maintained equipment • f °r ,i= February February 23,2003:AHA/Beacon funded communica- • Antiquated equipment miC -. ::. . - -., tions study presented to OFD.Beacon proposes 120' • Terrain blockage, and -, flagpole cellular tower with yardarm for OFD emer- • Inadequate antenna height. , low t gency communications antennas at 90'. - k n• If OFD's problems and their causes are not understood, t ;,A Apri12,2003:Citing "persistent emergency communi- cations difficulties",OFD applies for permit to build. there is no assurance that any change, in this case chang April3, OFD Commissioners hold meeting,tell FD ing antenna height from the present 60'to 90',will solve H° 4the problems. p members about lease and permit application. _ April 10,OFD informs community via mailing. • Fire,Police and Emergency Service radio broad- April 23,Building Department disapproves tower cast communications are not the same as cellular permit request,based on zoning non-compliance. wireless communications. Radio and cell are separate . May,2003: OFD requests zoning variance,again cit- communications channels. safe ••.' ing public ' OFD/PD/EMS radio transmitter is attached to 4' June,2003:Orient Association holds community �,, ,'t ..4 ( OFD 60' antenna. Southold businesses with 60' anten- meeting,forms committee with technically and legal- na (same height as OFD's ) communicate with a `� jt; ' ly qualified residents to investigate issues. employees from Calverton to Orient Point, Why does v t Julythru earlySeptember,2003: Committee repeat- OFD have problems? r , � � P p , a. .. edly requests information.Writes OFD Chair Martin • Proposed cell tower is only a support for OFD P " '4 • Trent,requesting meeting with OFD members versed radio antenna, i3. -0 v § a in emergency communications, Commissioner Trent • OFD antenna can be supported independently of a � 5, zoo _ . , ,' does not respond.No meetingt is held. cell tower. { 1 m 41 i Weyhreter Report,commissioned I:HA/Beacon: in anyway '''',,,I,ding parkingfire trucks or installing CommunitY review needed: The Orient Association committee that prepareu-�,.�_ improved emergency communications facilitie4that ill -• report certainly is not disagreeing with OFD that it OFD's public mailings,permit and variance requests interfere with Beacon's operations. Beacon has access Orient supports its fire department,honors the vol- needs better emergency communications,simply in cite as justification for their proposal a coverage to the property 24 hours a day, even during a fire or unteers for their service, and has historically support- how to accomplish the improvement. We believe, study and recommendations for improving radio other emergency. OFD must insure that Beacons ed OFD with funds it has requested,voting for a pen- consistent with its own technical report,that it communications commissioned by access is unimpeded and has agreed to indemnify sion fund,a million dollar bond for the construction should first modernize its communications equip- AHA/Beacon/Cannuscio prepared by David Beacon for any damages. OFD has also agreed to pay of the firehouse, and another for the purchase of the ment so it conforms to the FCC mandated require- Weyhreter,MSEE. The report was written more than 4 Beacon for any damages that Beacon suffers due to property now being leased. An undertaking with ments and to replace the current whip (omnidirec- months after OFD signed the lease with AHA/Beacon. an accident in which a member,of the OFD is such a multiplicity of community impacts,however, . . tional) antenna on the Fire House with a directional This raises concerns that it was used to justify a commer- involved. OFD has also agreed to forego any interest deserves thorough review by the community,before antenna. OFD should use its fficreasecurresponsmin----- cial position rather than analyze a communications issue. in the proposed tower,so that if Beacon stops paying a commitment is made,not afterwards. ty for Plum Island (designated first responders) to rent or is otherwise responsible for damages to OFD approach the proper government agency for assis- OA was able to obtain a copy of the report only by property, OFD cannot use or seize the tower. tance (tech expertise,funding,etc.) in upgrading its Freedom of Information request. The findings differ Orient needs to know: __ ---- --emergency communications equipment. After these from what OFD would have us understand. The lease states that there is no limitation on type - - steps are taken,field measurements should be made The Report: or size of tower Beacon can erect.Beacon can submit • What,specifically,are OFD's emergency communi- to determine emergency communications coverage. • does not specifically identify OFD emergency com- new plans at any time;OFD has 15 days to approve cations problems? With what equipment? A tower would be a last resort. or change, or be deemed to have OK'd the changes. • Why isn't OFD's current 60' antenna sufficient for munications problems ("It could look like an oil rig",or the Southold PD tower) providing emergency communications coverage? • was not based on field-testing of OFD equipment • What and who assures that locating its antenna on A Lesson from Greenwich • used theoretical equations to calculate the range of OFD has also agreed that Beacon may assign (sell) the proposed cell tower would remedy OFD's emer- In a front-page story last August the New York Times current equipment used by OFD and to predict per- the lease,which will relieve Beacon of all obliga- gency communications difficulties? described what it called the"nastiest"of several communi- formance at new antenna height (predicted improve tions and liabilities. (The developer,AHA/Beacon- • Will OFD be forced to significantly upgrade emer- ty fights in Connecticut over cellular towers.The implica- ment due to increase in antenna height was modest) tions for Orient are obvious and alarming. Cannuscio, can sell the lease,for instance to a communica- gency communications equipment in order to meet • states that marginal communications coverage is on ,. Omnipoint Communications(T-Mobile)proposed put- tions conglomerate,which could exploit aspects of the lease FCC mandated requirements? Will this create 'inter- tin a tower on property owned b the Round Hill Western side (Southold),not Eastern (Orient),and thatfurthered itsgoals at our expense.) OFD has no right ference",which isprohibited under the terms of the g P P h' Y • concludes that OFD'S 25 yr. old equipment(not p g Volunteer Fire Company in Greenwich."Because the anten- antenna height)is the major factor affecting commu- of approval over any assignment or sale. commercial lease? nas would be hidden inside a new flagpole,"says the anti- • What consequence does a commercial real estate cle,"the firefighters accepted the deal,figuring it was a nications. clever wayto avoid havingto begtheir rich neighbors end- This,we believe, is one of the problems with a third party lease have to OFD's tax-exempt status? g • recommends lesslyfor money."•But the proposedpole was gradually such as AHA/Beacon,whose interests, in economic terms, • What due diligence was performed, and by whom, Y P P g Y > "replacing existing base and field radios with � redesigned to be 150 feet tall and was outfitted with are different from OFD and the community. before entering into the lease. new,modern equipment will go a long way toward appendages to serve five additional wireless carriers. • Why is Affordable Housing Associates the corpo- imrovinThe firehouse disavowed the contract it signed with p g ' . . coverage" Failure of either party to fulfill the lease terms can rate lessee? What is its relationship to Beacon Omnipoint and has alreadyent$25,000 in le al fees in an > replacing existing OFD omnidirectional anten- 7 P sal g na "using a directional antenna to focus radiations in lead to lawsuits and money damages. Where would OFD Wireless and the principal,Vincent Cannuscio. attempt to break or renegotiate the deal.Worse than the d acon, it was ere to manage a real liable,without requestings to pensatea ttax increase?lConversel found communi ations ise come from?estate and between the firefighters ill andwill their neighbors."We re not directions more pertinent to FD operations y suingleasing project try- Factors noted above affecting communications, which the Beacon would be time consuming and expensive. (See article • • Would compliance with the lease provisions ing to upset neighbors,"said Fire Chief Rick Strain,"We're just trying to run a fire company..."Richard Stefan of the study did not address,age of equipment in use,and lack of below on the unhappy situation in Greenwich,Ct). impede OFD's performance of its regular fire and Round Hill Association,which represents 700 houses, field measurements could mean that the study's theoretical emergency rescue activities? counters"The issue here is not cell towers.It is ugly struc- calculations and predictions may be totally incorrect. No alternatives considered: • • What are consequences of failure to perform tures in inappropriate places." under lease?Would taxpayers face higher taxes or lit- Omnipoint is also riling residents of nearby New OA has also learned that present OFD communications On cell tower: igation similar to legal suits in Greenwich,CT?? Canaan,where it is seeking to build a 150-foot tower on equipment may not meet pending FCC requirements and • Have any alternative proposals for either cell or land belonging to a water company.Says Diane Baldwin, will probably have to be replaced in the next several years. • Beacon propositioned OFD. No other proposals ? who with her neighbors has spent$75,000 fighting the OFD antennas been cconsidered. tower,"People heard it was goingto be a flagpole and said, were received or solicited by OFD. P gP • • If a new type and height of antenna is needed by 'Oh,that's nice.'"Only later,she added,did they realize What are proposed benefits of lease? • There was no competitive bidding, a standard busi- -OFD, why wasn't bidding solicited and funding how large the structure would be. ness practice in awarding public entity contracts. requested of town,instead of introducing a third • AHA/Beacon offers to hang OFD antennas on its . Although required by Southold zoning regula- party with their own interests,greatly complicating If you have questions,call Orient Associattion President Anne tower to save OFD cost of constructing "needed" 90' tions,no alternative locations were examined. (For the situation, and creating many more opportunities Hopkins at 323 2527,or committee co Chair,Ellen McNeilly at antenna (OFD guesses savings at$150,000; solicits no for something to go wrong. 323-3989. _ alternative estimates or proposals.) example, other cell antennas could be located inside the nearby Congregational Church steeple and/or • Portion of rental income from cell company/ies other nearby community locations. ) on Beacon tower would go to Fire Department. Viewfrom Orchard Street. • • Fire Department could use income to defray On emergency communications: taxes. (If OFD annual income is$20,000/year,average • new,zoning-height-compliant emergency commu- M" homeowner tax saving:$10.50, but OFD has not commit- nications antennas could be located on an OFD tower , ted to how they will use the income.) at community • cost ••• - , 2 �w F S Current proposal fraught with dangers: • new OFD antennas could be located on Congregational Church steeple, connecting by .. OFD has signed a commercial lease agreement. In c. microwave link to firehouse (This could be done more ; • • exchange for Beacon's agreement to pay rentals,OFD quickly and at lower cost even than erecting a new tower , < 1 � i on OFDproperty.) ' has agreed not to use any Fire Department property :% t T � OR1NT ASSOCIATION BOX 282 • ORIENT • NY 11957 _ n October 27, Zoning Board of Appeals r, Town Hall OCT 3 002n30, ,re) 53095 Main Road, PO Box 1179 Southold NY 11971 :- r�c sj 03 ' L __ "'�: Pte,a9�C P Dear Sirs and Madams, We are writing to you in response to the Letter of Agreement (LA) circulated by the Orient Fire District(OFD), requesting the residents of Orient to agree with the OFD in seeking a variance from the Southold Town Board of Appeals (ZBA) to construct a telecommunications antenna. We are the President of the Orient Association (OA), a civic association whose membership is composed of Orient residents and taxpayers, and members of a committee of the Association formed to explore the OFD proposal. The OA fully supports the premise underlying the request in the LA and the OFD's Renewed Application to the ZBA, dated July 11, 2003, that it is essential for Orient to have the best possible emergency communications to ensure public safety. In fact, the OA invited Fire Commissioner Robert J. Hicks to make a presentation to OA in June 2003. At that meeting, he and Vincent Cannuscio of Beacon Wireless Management, which, we understand, has entered into a contract with OFD for the construction and lease of a 120' wireless cell telephone tower, spoke in general terms of the need for improved emergency communications in the OFD area and agreed to meet with representatives of the OA to discuss precisely the nature of these emergency communications problems and why the OFD proposal is the only feasible alternative. Subsequent to the OA meeting, representatives of the OA wrote to OFD Chief Michael Rose requesting the following information prior to the proposed meeting: * a more detailed description of the exact nature of the emergency communication difficulties * a copy of the report entitled "An Analysis of the Orient Fire District's Existing Radio Frequency Coverage and Recommendations for Improving Communications," prepared by Mr. David Weyhreter, MSEE. * copies of any other reports prepared by or for the OFD that impacted its decision to request a variance to construct an antenna. * a copy of the proposal to construct an antenna presented to the OFD by Beacon Wireless Management * a copy of any agreement proposed by or already entered into with Beacon * a copy of OFD's 2002-2003 budget and financial statements * a copy of any document detailing the budgetary impact of the project and proposed use of funds. ORIENT ASSOCIATION BOX 282 . ORIENT • NY 11957 Chief Rose responded to that request by giving recent exarpRIes of emergency communications shortcomings that impeded OFD response& eferred to the OFD Commissioners as the ones who understood the details of the situation. A similar request to the Commissioners, dated September 1,2003, as well as telephone requests for an informal meeting to discuss these matters, have gone unanswered. Although members of the OA attended the OFD Commissioners' informational meeting on September 10, none of the detail requested above was provided or made available. Rather, much of the meeting was devoted to an advocacy of the Renewed Application by Mr. Cannuscio. Although Mr. Cannuscio presents a commercial argument for approval of the Renewed Application, as a contractual counter party to OFD he has an inherent conflict of interest in this matter and his arguments cannot be taken as representing the best interests of OFD, the taxpayers of Orient or the citizens of Southold. Further, at the September 10 meeting Mr. Robert Fleming, the technical expert retained by the OFD, was unable to explain the nature of the emergency communications difficulties and their causes, whether terrain blocking, interference, signal strength, equipment incompatibilities, maintenance, operating procedures, or other factors at play. In fact, neither Mr. Fleming, Mr. Hicks, nor Chief Rose were able to give assurance that if the two emergency communication antennas were erected at the 90' point on the proposed OFD 120' "flagpole", that this would remedy OFD's unspecified emergency communications difficulties. In fact, it is our understanding that the 120'tower solution came about solely as a result of Beacon Wireless' commercial proposal and that no other proposal was examined. Although the OA surely desires effective emergency communications in the area served by OFD, it is unable to support the 120' "flagpole" emergency communications antenna and cell antenna without the information necessary for proper analysis and evaluation being made available to OA and the Orient community. Until this information is provided along with a set of alternative proposals, the OA recommends that the Southold ZBA reject the Orient Fire District's request for a variance. Very truly yours, The Orient Association By: . nedS Anne •pkins, President Cell Tower Committee of the Orient Association B : �i L�_� By: Ellen vi}v eilly, Co-Chair Jon Turner, Member ., oi.) , ,,,,,,, �,6 #''oSOFFOO,j-;' 'Y' JOSHUA Y.HORTON ��� ®\' �G Town Hall, 53095 Route 25 SUPERVISOR ��_ �J.�: P.O. Box 1179 ca - - % Southold,New York 11971-0959 At ,i Fax(631) 765-1823 .:41 1 ,, �0. oily Telephone(631) 765-1889 `‘ / N V, • OFFICE OF THE SUPERVISOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RECEIVE! ' �S 40.MAR 0 5 2004 'rLCA)1Y LfrrtV Fv1-2 March 4, 2004 ZONING BOARD of APPEALS 0 y Jack and Frances McArthur ( i P.O. Box 420 ,. Orient,NY 11957V_ ' c tab :- -Dear Mr. and Mrs. McArthur: i Thank you for your recent letter regarding the proposed cell phone tower in Orient. I appreciate hearing from you and value your input. I will be sure to forward any comments I receive, including yours, to the Zoning Board of Appeals as they consider the issue. Sincerely yours, os" huarI�otocz------ Supervisor /rbw cc: Zoning Board of Appeals San !- 9_041 i ,arr . . J. A. Mould POB 445 Village Lane Orient, NY 11957 fad of a, , ' , 4 , . �J dt.t, A- a ?tit t 1°4 2 7 7J a .0 Ac4;d- v , :, -, Ad-a-t4L4-. 44 / 0-cot.t, n„...0.4.4.64, 410.24. 4/(;)-1,0,741/ oil_ 4-iee 0FD / . 2004 �' MAR625k7 - . ® �. ,X�i�,5 �� �� 1 % ,., •• C.CAM,444:41%).5 P. O.Box 420 Jir7 - _ 225 King Street .. Orient,New York 11957 • February 21, 2004 Mr. Joshua Horton Supervisor,Town of Southold _ , Southold Town Hall Southold,New York 119710 r e „\ ( 4, • - Dear Mr.Horton: My husband and I are writing you because we are concerned about the cell phone tower the ' Orient Fire Depai tinent is asking for a variance to build, and because we'appreciate your efforts in finding an alternative to what is likely to destroy the skyline of the Orient Village. Although sympathetic with the OFD's need for abetter communications system,we believe that the lease with Beacon Wireless was signed prematurely.,In keeping with Southold zoning regulations, alternative locations and systems should hive been explored. If both the ' Congregational Church and the Ferry Company have made offers of alternative facilities,these should be considered and information,should be made available to the community about what they can offer before any variance is granted. \ , We have read the materials provided by the Orient Association to the community and are particularly concerned about two issues raised. First, it is our understanding that the lease - requires the OFD to agree not to use Fire Depai tinent property in any way that will interfere with Beacon's operations,even in an emergency'. Second,the lease states that there is no limitation on - the type.or size of the tower that Beacon can erect. It seems that both the OFD and the community are completely disempowered by this--\ lease. It is our hope that the zoning board will 1 , take these concerns under consideration and deny,the variance. Again, we thank you for your concern about this issue and hope it will be resolved in a way that satisfies both the Orient Fire Department and the community. ' Sincerely yours / .--4,(1Si- ,rea.../...e-e-i Vc-de . . , Jack and Frances McArthur • • 1 , : 1),)r-------__. ,7t, . Ifl I FEB I Taw. 1;,/ SUPERVISORS y TOWN OF S0U OfOLDE . \ • ho - A - 01 • 7 74-771/ -77g i-7-4-2777--por---p-v-r- 0ryvx/2--, -?-.(717 -h?-7,cgm‘ 0-b -11(1-0-141/ -r-n1):1/2r- 771 72-2crAr -71A7r -772-r14:771-72r 21//-1- 9 V24- t:/ P 7'2417V P7 /fr '2'((27r7 --71-77r -21A4 0 r P 't Z6// (74 ov, rt __,OA :1-7-Y-7(14V74{-r-} , 1, Q°' , �/ " d7 ,40:: , ,, , x , (4_,7_ , I , , „ . - - , il /�. ,,- ,r �� - /e. Ua / FEB 2004 , til P.O.Box 420 , olOiCp°OF APPEALS 225 King Street - Orient,NY 11957 ” 1 Ms.Ruth Oliva,Chair " Zoning Board of Appeals ' - Southold Town Hall " P.O.Box 1179 •• , Southold,NY 11971 Dear Ms. Oliva, ' e My husband and I are writing you because we are concerned about the cell phone tower the Orient Fire 'opt , , ' -',), - _ Department is asking for a variance to build. Not only will this forked tower, disguised as a flag pole,be a ' blight on the skyline of one of the most unique and beautiful small towns on the East End,but it could well - turn out to be a source of continuing concern and expenditure to the community. "- Although sympathetic with the OFD's need fora better communications system,we feel that they undertook signing a lease with the Beacon Wireless Management Company prematurely and without consulting the community. An undertaking that will have such a significant impact on our village should have-been reviewed by concerned parties long before any commitment was made. And in keeping With , Southold zoning regulations,alternative locations and systems should have been explored. The OFD should have come to the community first with'its concerns.,They should not have.responded to the proposal of Vincent Connuscio,whose interests in the project are self-seeking,before asking the town for , _ help and soliciting bids. y, , ' ' It is our understanding that the lease requires the OFD to agree not to use Fire Depaitinent property in any way that will interfere with Beacon's operations,even in an emergency. In addition, it states that there is L. no limitation on the type or size of tower that Beacon can erect. This lease could conceivably interfere with the Fire Department's ability to perform firefighting and rescue tasks that are its charge.L In addition, Beacon's so-called-"flagpole','could grow in size and sprout additional appendages,and we would be • unable to prevent this. Certainly,cases of litigation between cell phone service providers in Greenwich and , , L. New Canaan,Connecticut, should serve as a warning to us of what can happen. _ • There are alternatives that can be explored before this option should even be considered: The i Congregational Church has_offered.its spire,which is can be adapted to the OFD's needs. It is also - rumored that a place for the cell phone tower could be made available m the more industrial area near the ' ' " ferry landmg at the point. Please deny the'OFD's request for a variance,at least until these options can be , explored. , Sincerely yours; 1 c aZ4....., SCK and Frances McArthur, �� i( C ' Cc,: , - Gerard Goeringer 1 George Horning S " S Vincent Orlando - - ' . " L'ydia Tortora "- , _ „ , • w ' _ Kenneth Arthur and Peter Hagan P.O. Box 422 455 Village Lane Orient, NY 11957 ' January 11,2004 Ms. Ruth Oliva, Chair Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall P.O. Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 Dear Ms. Oliva: Please let this letter serve as an expression of strong concern as to the possibility of the erection of a cell phone tower in Orient. We have no objection, of course,to the fire department improving its communication capabilities; surely no reasonable person would. However,there must be a better way than the ill-advised placement of this tower. The North Fork is one of the"last best places"on the East Coast,perhaps in America, and Orient is the jewel in that crown. The unspoiled,timeless nature of this community should be preserved. An unsightly cell phone tower would be as out of place as a McDonald's or a Wal-Mart. We urge the Zoning Board of Appeals to carefully consider all possible alternatives. Respectfully yours, ® Kenneth A ur and Peter Hagan \\, b,((, ,b(R)q cs., PH/eah cc: The Orient Association Xak!tall • , a , a • ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MAILING ADDRESS: 53095 Main Road, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 (631) 765-1809 Fax 765-9064 LOCATION OF PUBLIC HEARINGS: SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL LOCATION OF MAIN OFFICE: North Fork Bank Building, First Floor, Corner of Main Road and Youngs Avenue September 20, 2004 fl . Re: Chapter 58 — Public Notice for Thursday, October 21, 2004 Hearing Dear Sir or Madam: Please find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice describing your recent application. The Notice will be published in the next issue of the Long Island Traveler-Watchman newspaper. 1) Before OCT. 2nd: Please send the enclosed Legal Notice, with both a Cover Letter including a contact person and telephone number, and a copy of your Survey or Site Plan filed with this application which shows the new construction area, CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED, to all owners of property (tax map with property numbers enclosed), vacant or improved, which abuts and any property which is across from any public or private street. Use the current addresses shown on the assessment rolls maintained by the Town Assessors' Office located at Southold Town Hall (631 765-1937) and the County Real Property Office at the County Center, Riverhead. If you know of another address for a neighbor, you may want to send the notice to that address as well. If any letter is returned to you undeliverable, you are requested to make other attempts to obtain a mailing address or to deliver the letter to the current owner, to the best of your ability and to confirm this in either a written statement, or at the hearing, with the returned letter. AND by OCT. 5: please either mail or deliver to our office your Affidavit of Mailing (form enclosed) with parcel numbers, names and addresses noted, and return it with the white receipts postmarked by the Post Office. When the green signature cards are returned to you by the Post Office, please mail or deliver them to us before the scheduled hearing. If any signature card is not returned, please advise the Board at the hearing and return it when available. These will be kept in the permanent record as proof of all Notices. 2) By OCT. 13th: please make arrangements to place the enclosed poster on a signboard such as plywood or similar material, posting it at your property for at least seven (7) days. Securely place the sign on your property facing the street, no more than 10 feet from the front property line bordering the street. If you border more than one street or roadway, an extra sign is available for the additional front yard. Please also deliver your Affidavit of Posting before the day of the hearing. If you are not able to meet the deadlines stated in this letter, please contact us promptly. Thank you for your cooperation. Very truly yours, Zoning Appeals Board and Staff Ends. c _0(611\\M ASi#51j ( -''' ,r- ' ORIENT ASSOCIATION BOX 282 . ORIENT • NY 11957 k V4.Oil August 12, gods An open letter to the Zoning Board of Appeals The Orient rite Department is circulating a "Letter of Agreement" in support of its application to the ZBA to construct a 120' telecommunications tower adjacent to the Orient Firehouse. The letter is intended to be signed by those who agree with this request. It states that this tower"is, in fact, the only available option for providing efficient and effective emergency communications to the area." The letter dismisses opposition to the tower as centering "largely, if not entirely, on the matter of esthetics." Many of those at the May 28 open meeting sponsored by the Orient Association expressed a much more fundamental reason for withholding approval of the tower at this point. We lack the necessary information for an informed decision. We need details of the present communications performance and equipment of the Fire Department and the Southold Police Department and exactly what their needs are. How much of the problem is actually due to inadequate cellular communication and how much to insufficient land based equipment? We need specifics about the Fire Department's finances. Why do the commissioners feel that accepting the proposal by Beacon Wireless Management for a tower that they acknowledge would be 30'taller than they and the Police Department need is the only way to achieve the goal we all support of effective emergency communication? A committee chaired by Orient residents Ed Papantonio and Ellen McNeillyie .-__- - - -- --- - seeking answers to these and other questions. Members of the committee will talk to everyone who can shed-light on this issue and will share their information with everyone who is willing to listen, including the ZBA. Only with a great deal more information will any of us be in a position to form an opinio on this application. Anne opki Dsk ‘•n4 President, Orient Association (323-2527) r-1.--j,;..7 el•.�rtrt}'�')'j''-7,'Fri rt Fra} .- i C e/ar ddb ;1'.-.: ,�—� :; ,.. h�� AUG 1 2 2003 3 Ji( 4111L-64-4.¢- Ed =: :. , OYSTERPONDS hiTORICAL SOCIETY 1THE MUSEUM of ORIENT ` and EAST MARION HISTORY Lydia Tortora, Chairman OCT 1 4 2003 Zoning Board Members /� Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals `s ��/4ie 7� Southold Town Hall L'E October 12,2003 Dear Lydia, - - I was sorry to hear that you are relinquishing the chairmanship of the ZBA,but happy for Pat and for you in your new positions of responsibility. - I am writing to express my concerns about the projected cell tower on the Fire Department property in Orient. -In 1990,the Orient community went through almost exactly the same scenario-a contract signed by the Fire Department without community knowledge; difficulty in obtaining answers to key questions;eventually resolved when the commissioners voted to cancel the contract,because, as Chairman Pet Luce was • quoted,the board'felt we.didn't have the backing of the community'. Residents,Luce said,indicated that the distsrict should not be `involved in a commercial enterprise and. we thought it was in the best interest of the community to terminate the contract."'(That article in the Traveler Watchman happens to be written by Lydia Tortora!) Since then,wireless communications needs have increased,but Orient also has a tower being completed in the Congregational Church which is available for co-location, and Southold Town has wireless communications legislation. I remember that several of you participated, as I did,with the Code Committee in the formulation of Southold Town's wireless communications legislation, and that we were all dedicated to protecting the quality of life and the property values in residential areas. I think we were all very proud of the code that the committee produced. That code is, I believe,-threatened by any precedent that could be set by the approval of this tower. I would like to remind the committee of the proposal by Bell Atlantic, for a cell tower on residential property in Orient,that was the immediate reason for enacting the moratorium on cell towers and the subsequent legislation. That tower would have been just one block farther east than this one and at about the same setback from the Main Road. In his analysis prepared for the Planning Board on April 22, 1997, Charles Voorhis of Nelson, Pope, and Voorhis,the Town consultants, expressed strongly his concerns about the potential for land use conflicts and visual impacts that would result,particularly on the agricultural vistas from NYS 25 and Platt Road. `Maintenance of these vistas is VILLAGE LANE • P.O. BOX 70 • ORIENT, NEW YORK 11957 • (631)323-2480 important in protecting the rural nature of the hamlet, and thus the visual impacts of the proposed project should be considered significant." 'The location of a large communication structure in the area will result in an inherent land use conflict, and this impact is expected to be significant." The Planning Board designated the project a Type I action under SEQRA.As you know, the proposal was ultimately withdrawn. Subsequently,the stretch of the Main Road between Greenport and Orient Point achieved New York State Scenic Byways designation for its historic and rural vistas. It should be noted that the tower proposed by Beacon Wireless for the Fire Department property is,120',20'higher than the Bell Atlantic proposal, and the property is only one block from the National Historic District of Village Lane and its environs, one block closer than Bell Atlantic's. I believe that this proposal must be viewed in the context of the sudden spate of aggressive actions taken by T-Mobile,who I understand to be the projected provider,to capture a significant piece of the market;there have been stories in the New York Times within the last month or two about similar struggles with T-Mobile in Greenwich and Stamford. It would appear that the concept of Homeland Security is being exploited by T-Mobile as a justification for running roughshod over federal, state,and local laws;and not-for-profit entities are being approached and lured by the promise of financial bonanzas. I-believe that Southold Town must stand firm with Greenwich, Connecticut; Oak Park,Illinois;and other communities for whom their unique and historic characters are of vital importance, and resist these wireless-company challenges to local legislation. Mr. Voorhis' report referred to cumulative impacts;I believe that approval of this - proposal would set a precedent for undermining the'Town's legislation,with far-reaching consequences. 3tzug FitaDVA.,' Vrke9i, ) / 'V Oma.'." r 4 �t P ,U Ra 1I tt ti,- 111�YYY���.Vim/_V fl-o 0/,vd3 important in protecting the rural nature of the hamlet, and thus the visual impacts of the proposed project should be considered significant." 'The location of a large communication structure in the area will result in an inherent land use conflict, and this impact is expected to be significant." The Planning Board designated the project a Type I action under SEQRA.As you know, the proposal was ultimately withdrawn. Subsequently,the stretch of the Main Road between Greenport and Orient Point achieved New York State Scenic Byways designation for its historic and rural vistas. It should be noted that the tower proposed by Beacon Wireless for the Fire Department property is 120', 20' higher than the Bell Atlantic proposal, and the property is only one block from the National Historic District of Village Lane and its environs, one block closer than Bell Atlantic's. I believe that this proposal must be viewed in the context of the sudden spate of aggressive actions taken by T-Mobile,who I understand to be the projected provider,to capture a significant piece of the market;there have been stories in the New York Times within the last month or two about similar struggles with T-Mobile in Greenwich and Stamford. It would appear that the concept of Homeland Security is being exploited by T-Mobile as a justification for running roughshod over federal, state,and local laws;and not-for-profit entities are being approached and lured by the promise of financial bonanzas. I believe that Southold Town must stand firm with Greenwich, Connecticut; Oak Park,Illinois;and other communities for whom their unique and historic characters are of vital importance, and resist these wireless-company challenges to local legislation. Mr. Voorhis'report referred to cumulative impacts;I believe that approval of this proposal would set a precedent for undermining the Town's legislation,with far-reaching consequences. j:Ak (A),„4.e9j., ) r• 01 ) 1;64.irt.(2,i GeA'sc16-1-o•- , ORIENT ASSOCTION BOX 282 . ORIENT NY 11957 October 7, 2003 �, OCT 1 4 2003 Mr. Martin Trent, Chairman Board of Commissioners `-° '°�"=`�^ ALP ��`„S Orient Fire District 23300 Main Road Orient, New York 11957 Dear Marty, I understand that information has already been twice requested of the Orient Fire District by the Orient Association, most recently in a letter to you on September 1. Since we have had no response, we are advised by our attorney to submit our requests officially under the Freedom of Information Act, and I have therefore enclosed a formal request for each piece of information. My understanding of the Act is that the information should be forthcoming within seven days. Please address it to me at P.O.Box 473, Orient. Sir, Fredrica Wachsberger For the Orient Association 70 Vincent Street P.O. Box 314 Orient,NY 11957 By hand deliver 42003 OC1 � September 1, 2003 Mr. Martin Trent, Chair Board of Commissioners Orient Fire District 23300 Main Road Orient,NY 11957 Dear Martin, It was very interesting to be at the Commissioners meeting August 26th, and I was pleased to meet you all formally, as was Venetia Hands,who accompanied me. We are glad to be addressing you directly, and enclose a copy of our original letter. We want to re-iterate our support and appreciation for the continuing work of the Orient Fire Department and our agreement that it is essential for our community to have a the best possible emergency communications. As was discussed at your meeting, and referred to in your renewed application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals,we would like to explore alternatives to the proposed 120ft.tower that meets all the requirements for Fire,Police and Emergency Services communications, and can be appropriately funded. We would like the opportunity to see if we can do this. To that end we are seeking the following information: • Details about the equipment the OFD is currently using(communications gear, antennas, repeaters,land lines, etc.)and its performance(range, clarity,reliability, etc.): • A detailed description of the exact nature of the difficulties in emergency communications being experienced; • A copy of the report entitled, "An Analysis of the Orient Fire District's Existing Radio Frequency Coverage and Recommendations for Improving Communications",prepared by Mr. David Weyhreter,MSEE; • Copies of any other requests prepared by or for the OFD that impacted its decision to request a vaiance to construct an antenna; • A copy of the proposal to the OFD by Beacon Wireless Management, and of any agreement proposed by or already entered into with Beacon; • A copy of the 2002-2003 Orient Fire District budget and financial reports, as well as the proposed 2004 budget and any documents and reports which detail the budgetary impact of either of the proposed tower. Please be reassured that we are not challenging the Department's need for improved emergency communications, or questioning that there are serious gaps at present. We ask for this information simply because the more we can know about the pattern of current problems,the better and sooner will we be able to see if we can come up with something else that would work. Martin,you talked about having a dialog with the community, and that is what we would like to have. We know a great deal o time and energy has already been spent on this. The sooner we can start with a complete sharing of information,before and around your planned meeting on September 10,the sooner we will all be able to resolve the matter. After reviewing the documents and information requested,the Cell Tower Committee would like to meet informally with the OFD to discuss the above issues. We will then be in a position to report to the OA membership on the issues outlined above and offer a recommendation to the membership as to whether to agree with the request,or a modification thereof; set forth in the LA. Very truly yours, Cell Tower Committee of the Orient Associations ;1y l By: 4 V 2003 Ellen McNeilly, Co-ChairI/ ' 70 Vincent Street ' P.O.Box 314 , Orient;.NY 11957 , il1Yne4rthlit►k.net ii§r% OCA 2003 1 , 1.7,2003 " , ,- August , Mr.Michael Rose,'Chief - osti.2,L,i;?ra OF APPEALS ' Orient Fire Department - , Orient Fire District, . ' 23300 Main Road ' Orient,NY 11957 . ' _ r, " Dear Chief Rose: We are writing to you in response to the Letter of Agreement(LA),circulated by the Orient Fire District,requesting the residents of Orient to agree with the OFD in seeking a variance from the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals to construct a teleconimunications'antenna. We are co-chairs of the Cell Tower Committee of the Orient Association(OA),a civic association whose membership is composed of Orient residents and taxpayers. ' On behalf of the membership of the OA,we would like to express our support and appreciation for the continuing work of the Orient Fite Department. The OA fully supports the premise underlying the request in the LA.and the OFD's Renewed Application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals,dated July 11,2003,that it is essential for our community to have the best possible emergency communications to ensure public safety. In light of Commissioner Robert J. Hicks's presentation to OA last - month and your request in the LA,we would ask you to provide the information described below to assist us in evaluating the option requested in your LA. Specifically,Commissioner Hick's presentation,the LA and the Renewed Application allude to difficulties in emergency communications in the OFD area. We would appreciate a more detailed description of the exact nature of those difficulties, and a copy of the report entitled,"An Analysis of the Orient Fire District's Existing Radio Frequency Coverage and Recommendations for Improving Comrnunications,"prepared by Mr. David Weyhreter,MSEE. Additionally,we would appreciate copies of any other , requests prepared by or for the OFD that impacted its decision to request a variance to construct an antenna. r We understand the idea of constructing an antenna was proposed to the OFD by Beacon . Wireless Management. We would appreciate/a copy of the proposal as well as any agreement proposed by or already entered into with Beacon, 1 We also understand that certain unbudgeted revenues will accrue to OFD as a result of the construction of the antenna. May we please have a copy of OFD's 2002-2003 budget and financial statements, as well as any document detailing the budgetary impact of the project and proposed use of funds. After reviewing the documents requested, the Cell Tower Committee'Wou'1'd'like'to'ineet informally with the OFD to discuss the above issues. We will then be in a position to report to the OA membership on the issues outlined above and-Offer a recommendation to the membership as to whether to agree with the request,'or a modification thereof,set forth in the•LA. Very truly yours, Cell Tower Committee of the Orient Association • ` 40e' • BY: / ..1 �ll . Elle//'cNeilly, Co-Chair . B B . ;Pr ..� Edmond L.•' onto, o-Chair • We also understand that certain unbudgeted revenues will accrue to OFD as a result of the construction of the antenna. May we please have a copy of OFD's 2002-2003 budget and financial statements,as well as any document detailing the budgetary impact of the project and proposed use of funds. After reviewing the documents requested,the Cell Tower Committee would like to meet informally with the OFD to discuss the above issues. We will then be in a position to report to the OA membership on the issues outlined above and offer a recommendation to the membership as to whether to agree with the request,or a modification thereof,set forth in the LA. Very truly yours, Cell Tower Committee of the Orient Association 40/ OCT 1 4 2003 Elle/7 cNeilly,Co-Chair ZOr.-i lle , 1IA� .-- Edmond L. •- onio, • Chair r. 1 The Honorable Patricia L. Acampora OCT 1 4 2003 400 West Main Street,#20L Riverhead,New York 11901 October 4,2003 Dear Pat, Congratulations on your new party position;a well-deserved acknowledgement of your ability and dedication. I'm writing because of my concern about a proposal to put a cell-tower on the Orient Fire Department property. Several years ago, at the invitation of Jean Cochran, I was a member of the Citizens'Advisory Committee that helped develop a Scenic Byways Program for Southold, so I am very familiar with the State requirements for designation. I am certain that the Main Road between Greenport and Orient Point would not have received State approval for designation had there been the proposed tower. I am particularly concerned because I spent one very hot summer sitting with Bill Moore, chairman of the Southold Town Code Committee, and the other committee members, carefully drafting what we believed was very sound wireless communications legislation, which would accommodate communication needs and at the same time protect residential districts and preserve the historic and rural character of the hamlets. The 120-foot tower proposed by Vincent Cannuscio of Beacon Wireless exceeds the permitted height in a residential district--even with ZBA variances allowed to a fire district--by 60 feet, and violates other elements of the legislation. It would be one block from the historic district,tower over the Church steeple(excuse the pun)and be visible for miles along the previously scenic road. I am concerned by an attempt to justify it under the banner of Homeland Security; I believe it would be a great mistake to violate State and local criteria and destroy the values we are working hard to protect when the communication needs of the Police,Fire Department and EMS services could most certainly be met by other means or more appropriate locations. I want to explore the means available to the State to protect its designated Scenic Highways, and would be very grateful for your guidance. Best wishes as always, Fredrica Wachsberger President of the Board of Trustees Cc: Lydia Tortora, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals • , .4°P7Z ^'• OYSTERPONDS 1- STORICAL SOCIETY u, ;��� THE MUSEUM of ORIENT -.t✓ ,`' ^I ; - • ,� _� ,_- `�,. and EAST MARION HISTORY Box 473, Orient NY 11957 April 22, 2003 RECEIVED Lydia Tortura, Chairman APR 2 2 2003 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals `V ,, Dear Lydia, ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS This tower proposal represents everything we were trying to guard against;I really believe it is not about safety but about money and would be like selling Orient's soul to the devil. There is no way that it should avoid ZBA scrutiny and even a full SEQRA review if it gets that far. It is only one block from the historic district on the National Register of Historic Places. There is a cellular facility already approved, as you know, across the street in the steeple of the church;the fire department's needs should be accommodated there. Sincerely, 2 - Freddie Wachsberger (President) VILLAGE LANE • P.O. BOX 70 • ORIENT, NEW YORK 11957 • (631)323-2480 T ' Orient (\i\elit d-(0 April 20, 2003 To the Editor: Re: the proposed 120 foot tall cellular tower in Orient: Several years ago I spent a long, hot summer with the Southold Town Code Committee,representatives from the ZBA and the Building Department, and other members of the community, assisting in the drafting of the Wireless Communications legislation. Everyone on the committee was extremely mindful of the negative impact of cellular towers on residential areas,particularly on property values and on the visual experience of place, and the legislation that was adopted permits a height of no more than 10 feet above the average roof level or tree canopy within 300 feet of the tower. A fire department may bypass planning permission as long as its projected tower meets these criteria;otherwise an application must be made to the ZBA for a variance, and rigid criteria must be met to demonstrate a need to exceed the limits. I can see no overriding safety issue that would suggest any reason to bypass the Zoning Board,nor,in fact,to construct the tower at all, it as would be hoped,the Fire Department's needs could be met by the wireless facility being concealed in the church steeple across the street. To my knowledge,the Fire Department responds to only about 100 calls a year;their service is invaluable,but the proposed tower is overkill. I also served on the Scenic Byways Advisory Committee. The Orient Fire Department property,where the tower would be located,is on Route 25,which has been designated a New York State Scenic Byway because of its rural and historic character. This proposed tower and its surrounding 3000-square-foot chain-link enclosure with four metal sheds would forever alter the landscape, loom 40 feet higher than the church steeple,which is part of the National Historic District, and intrude the appearance of an industrial site into a residential area, severely impacting property values. I believe that this is the wrong tower, in the wrong place, and at the wrong time: it is generally believed that wireless towers will be made obsolete by the use of satellites in the near future; and Verizon,the apparent partner in this enterprise,has just announced the layoffs of 1200 employees in New York State. But once a tower like this goes up,the damage is done forever. Scerely, • Freddie Wachsberger