The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLL 2009 #04 PATRICIA A. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY patricia.finnegan@town.southold.ny.us JENNIFER ANDALORO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY jennifer, andaloro@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 2009 To: From: Date: Subject: MEMORANDUM Members of the Town Board Jennifer Andaloro, Esq., Assistant Town Attorney May 13, 2009 Amendments to the Wireless Code Attached please find the comments to the Wireless Code that were received after the Code was adopted. Additionally, I have attached suggested changes from Heather Lanza. Please advise if the Town Board is interested in addressing these comments with amendments to the Code. JNIk Enclosures cc: Ms. Elizabeth Neville, '['own C erk (w/encls.) Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director (w/encls.) Page 1 of 3 Andaloro, Jennifer Sent: Wednesday, April 01 2009 4:06 PM To: Andaloro, Jennifer Subject: FW: Wireless Communications Law This went to my spam folder. Always cheek your spam. From: Sharp, William CDOS) [mallto:William.Sharp@dos.state.ny. us] Sent: Wednesday, Apdl 01, 2009 3:35 PM To: Andaloro, 3ennifer; Lanza, Heather Subject: Wireless CommunicaUons Law Hi Jennifer and Heather: I reviewed the Southold Local Law # 4 of 2009 and the consultant's comments. I have a few comments. First, Southold's local law regulating wireless communications is ve~j comprehensive and well-written. Second, the consultant's suggestion to consolidate the definitions of Major and Minor Modification makes sense. I also agree that both modifications to and new construction of wireless facilities should be subject to the information requirements proving need, site design and technical compliance. Third, my only concern is in the last sentence of 280-77 which deals with removal of abandoned wireless communication facilities. That sentence states: "The grant of site plan approval under this article shall include requffing the applicant to post a decommissioning bond and irrevocable permission to the town to accomplish removal of the wireless communication facility under this article." These requirements are impermissible for several reasons. Although some municipalities have similar provisions, requinng a removal or decommissioning bond is of doubtful legality because it is not statutorily authorized and the bonding is of uncertain duration. As a general rule, a municipality cannot require that an applicant post a bond for a permitted project without express statutory authorization. Town of Chester v. Republic Ins. Co., 89 A.D.2d 959,454 N.Y.S.2d 107 (2nd Dept. 1982); Peckham Industries Inc. v. Ross, 61 Misc.2d 616, 306 N.Y.S.2d 1006 affd. 34 A.D.2d 826, 312 N.Y.S.2d 627 (2nd Dept. 1970); Wri.qht v. Town of LaGrenge, 181 Misc.2d 625, 694 N.Y.S.2d 862 (Sup. Ct. Dutchess Co. 1999), Little Pond Hill Inc. v. Mendel.. 74 Misc.2d 989, 347 N.¥.S.2d 86 (Sup. Ct. West. Co. 1973). While Town Law 274-a allow boards to require bonds and other kinds of security to cover the full cost of installing "required infrastructure and improvements" on properties subject to site plan approval, it does not authorize towns to require applicants for wireless communications facilities to post removal or decommissioning bonds. Additionally, a municipality however has no power to require the applicant to post bonds indefinitely. Nothing in state statute provides that a applicant must indefinitely keep money tied up to secure a bond or security based on the distant and unforeseen possibility that the wireless communication facility will someday become unnecessary. What if it is never 4/2/2009 Page 2 of 3 abandoned and the applicant's money is never returned? I believe the applicant would have a viable takings claim for recovery of the money with interest since a removal or decommissioning bond is not statutodly unauthorized.. Finally, a municipality may not require landowners, as a condition of obtaining a land use approval, to grant access onto their property (in this case to remove the abandoned facility). In general, in the absence of an emergency, a local government (or a person acting on behalf of a local government) should not enter onto pdvate property without (1) the voluntary, non-coemed consent of the owner or (2) a warrant. Withholding site plan approval because the applicant does nbt consent to a future search is a kind of coercion. The case of Sokolov v. Village of Freeport, 52 NY 2d 341,438 NYS 2d 257 (1981) dealt with a law enacted by the Village of Freeport which provided that an owner of residential property could not lease property without first obtaining a permit from the village, and which further provided that no permit could be issued without an inspection of the premises to determine that the property is "safe, clean, sanitary, in good repair, and free from rodents and vermin." The New York State Court of Appeals held the law to be unconstitutional because it effectively required a landlord to consent to a warrantless inspection of his property in order to obtain a rental permit. While the Court of Appeals held that such an inspection must be made with either the consent of the owner or a warrant, the court "emphasized however, that our holding is not to be construed as preventing prompt inspections in true emergency situations .... "(52 NY 2d at 349, citations omitted.) Therefore, I advise that the last sentence 280-77 be deleted. Regards, Bill · 4/2/2009 Review of Local Law No. 4, March 2, 2009 I believe that the definition of ordinary maintenance is too restrictive. It should be changed to allow like-for-like replacements of faulty or damaged components. If this is done, there will be no real distinction between Major and Minor Modifications and they should be rolled into a single category of Modification. The revised sections would then read as follows: MODIFICATION The addition, removal, or change of any of the physical and visually discemable components or aspects of a wireless facility, such as antennas, cabling, radios, equipment shelters, landscaping, fencing, utility feeds, changing the color or materials of any visually discemable components, vehicular access, parking and/or an upgrade or replacement of the equipment. Adding a new wireless cattier or service provider (co-location) to a wireless communications tower or site is a modification. Modifications also include: extending the height of the antenna support structure above its current height, replacement of the structure; expansion of the base station equipment or compound area, addition of antennas to an existing carrier's antenna army, re-orientation or relocation of existing antennas, changes affecting the operating frequencies, effective radiated power or number of operating channels. A modification shall not include ordinary maintenance, as defmed herein. ORDINARY MAINTENANCE - Work done to an existing wireless telecommunications facility and antenna support structure for the purpose of maintaining them in good operating condition. Ordinary maintenance includes inspections and testing to maintain functionality, aesthetic and structural integrity, and involves the normal repair of a wireless facility including the like-for- like replacement of damaged or defective components, without otherwise adding, removing, or substantially changing anything. I also believe that the some of the requirements are too lenient. AI_~I modifications and new facility applications should include basic requirements such as demonstration of need, propagation maps and analysis of alternatives. The first table below shows my understanding of the requirements for each type of action. The second table shows my understanding of some of the major submittal requirements for building permits, site planapproval and special exceptions. An "X" indicates items now required by the Local Law and an "A" indicates my recommendation for additional requirements. I did not re-write any of the affected section pending further discussion. Building 3ite Plan Special Permit ~.pproval Exception Ordinary Maintenance Minor Mod. X Major Mod conforming to X permitted Use requirements New Interior Mount in X Existing Structure - LL. LIL, B, HB, or MII zones New Exterior Mount on X X Existing Structure - LL. LIL, B, HB, or MII zones New facilities and major X X X mods not conforming to permitted use requirements Ordinary Existing Sites New Sites Requiring Actions Requiring Actions Requiring Maintenance Requiring a Only a Building Permit Site Plan Special Building Permit Approval Exception General Requirements X X X X Compliance - §780-71 MPE Compliance X X X X Permitted Use X X Compliance - {}780-72 Site Design Standards - X X X X §780-72 Basic Documents A X X X Technical Review A X X X Structural Compliance A X X X FAA Compliance A X X X Aeronautical Study X X GIS Info A X X Site Drawings A A X X Visual Impact A X X Other Info Deemed A A X X Necessary by Board Site Alternative Analysis A A X Propagation & A A A X Gap Maps Good-Faith Collocation A X Attempt Copy of Deed/Lease A X Demonstration of Need A A A X X= Existing Requirement A = Recommended Additional Requirement '~ Andaloro, Jennifer From: Sent: To: Subject: Lanza, Heather Monday, May 11, 2009 8:01 AM Andaloro, Jennifer Wireless - another change As we work with the new wireless code, we have found one more change that should be made That is that the restriction of 500' from homes probably should be relaxed where a facility meets the MPE limits and the facility is completely concealed as in a church steeple. There should probably be more requirements - such as no noise from the equipment vault (I think we have that built into the code already, but have to look through it again). The other thing is asking for propagation maps in the building permit stage for any new facility or co-location. The exact wording is already in the code, but the location of when we ask for it should probably be changed. Heather DAVID A. PATERSON GOVERNOR STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ONE COMMERCE PLAZA 99 WASHINGTON AVENUE ALBANY, NY 12231-0001 March 16,2009 LORRAINE A. CORTI~S-VAZQUEZ SECRETARY OF STATE RECEIVED LyndaMRudder Southold Deputy Town Clerk Town ha11,53095 Main Road PO Box 1179 Southold NY 11971 Soufholcl Town Clerk RE: Town of Southold, Local Law No. 4, 2009, filed on March 11, 2009 Dear SidMadam: The above referenced material was received and filed by this office as indicated. Additional local law filing forms can be obtained from our website, www.dos.state.ny, us/corp/misc.html. Sincerely, Linda Lasch Principal Clerk State Records and Law Bureau (518) 474-2755 WVVW.DOS.STATE.NY.US · E-MAIL:INFOQDO$.STATE.NY.U~ ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net RECEIVED OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 5, 2009 MArl 1 1 2009 Southold Town Clerk PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on February 24, 2009: Local Law #4 A Local Law in relation to Wireless Communications Facilities sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments Mail: Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Suffolk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Emailed: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals ~i~.n~lt~r~, Receiv~d~ - ' / P'fe bri,t nhm ' DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 5, 2009 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown, northfork.net RECEIVED Southold Town Clerk PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on February 24, 2009: Local Law #4 A Local Law in relation to Wireless Communications Facilities Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments Mail: Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Suftblk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Emailed: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Building Department Signature~ Received By Please print name Date: Title: Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK Fax:6515760589 Mar 13 2009 15:24 P.01 ELIZABETH A, N'EV~vJ~, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERIi REGIBTI~A~ OF '~ITAI. STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAG~EI~'T OFFICER FREEDOM OF INYORMATION OFPICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P,O, ~ox 1179 ~outholdto~n.nor thfork, n*t OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWIq OF SOUTHOLD March 5, 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local L~bel~- ,~ ~t. .... ~" ~%'=~ -~'~-~-~ - ................. Local Law #4 A Local Law in relation to Wireless Communications Facilities ?lease sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments Mail: Elizabeth A, Neville Town Clerk Suffolk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Emai]ed: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK LONG I~..ANO REGION N.Y.S, OFFI~ OIIr PARKS IFiGRF.,AllON AND PRI~ERVATION BBJ4ONT LAKE mATE PARK PO BOXZ47 BABYLON, NY 11702,4)247 ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March $, 2009 RECEIVED MAF1 11 2009 Southold Town Clerk PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Local Law #4 A Local Law in relation to Wireless Communications Facilities Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments Mail: Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Suffblk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Emailed: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals Date: Signature, Received By Please print name Title: DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK ELIZABETH A. NEIrH.r.E, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork, net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 5, 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on February 24, 2009: Local Law #4 A Local Law in relation to Wireless Communications Facilities sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments Mail: Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Suffolk County Department of Planning . Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Emailed: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals Signature, Received By Please print flame DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK RECEIYED ~outhold Tow. Clef[ ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hail, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork, net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF $OUTHOLD March 10, 2009 Federal Express Linda Lasch New York State Department of State State Records and Law Bureau 41 State Street Albany, NY 12231 RE: Local Law Number 4 of 2009 Town of Southold, Suffolk County Dear Ms. Lasch: In accordance with provisions of Section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, I am enclosing herewith certified copies of Local Law Number 4 of 2009 of the Town of Southold, suitable for filing in your office. I would appreciate if you would send me a receipt indicating the filing of the enclosures in your office. Thank you. Enclosures cc: Town Attorney Lynda M Rudder Southold Deputy Town Clerk Local Law Filing NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 41 STATE STREET (Use this form to file a local law with the Secretary 6f State.) Text of law should be given as amended. Do not include matter being eliminated and do not use italics or underlining to indicate new matter. SOUTHOLD [] County Ca City [] Town of Cl Village of the year 2009. Local Law No. 4 .A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities". Be it enacted the Town Board of the: SOUTHOLD rn County Ca City [] Town of Ca Village ALBANY1 NY 12231 Article XVII entitled "Wireless Communications Facilities" is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced as follows: §280-67. Purpose A. It is the express purpose of this article to minimize the visual and environmental impacts of wireless communication facilities while protecting the health, safety and welfare of Southold's citizens and allowing wireless service providers to meet their technological and service objectives. This article allows wireless communication facilities, to be reviewed and approved in keeping with the Town's existing zoning and historic development patterns, including the size and spacing of structures. The goals of the following sections are to accomplish the following: a. Site wireless facilities in these preferred locations: Within or on existing buildings and structures where the antennas are invisible (or nearly so) from public and residential vantage points; ii. Industrial areas; b. Take into account the aesthetic aspects of the Town, including open vistas, scenic byways and historic districts, when designing and siting wireless communication facilities. (If additional space is needed, attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each.) DOS-239(Rev.05/05) §280-68. Scope. The regulations of this article shall govern and control the erection, enlargement, expansion, alteration, operation, maintenance, relocation and removal of all wireless communication facilities. The regulations of this article relate to the location and design of these facilities and shall be in addition to the provisions of the Southold Building and Zoning Codes and any other federal, state or local laws or Federal Communication Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other regulations pertaining to such facilities. Nothing herein shall be construed to, apply to, prohibit, regulate or otherwise affect the erection, maintenance or utilization of antennas or support structures by those licensed by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, to operate amateur radio stations. §280-69. Definitions As used in this article, the follovdng terms shall have the meanings set forth below: ANTENNA - Any transmitting or receiving device, including whip (omni directional antenna), panel (directional antenna), disc (parabolic antenna) or similar device, mounted in or on a tower, monopole, building or structure and used in communications that radiate or capture electromagnetic waves, digital signals, analog signal, radio frequencies (excluding radar signals), wireless telecommunications signals or other communications signals. ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE - Any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for wireless telephone, television, radio and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers and monopoles. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, camouflaged tower structures, and the like. The term includes the structure and any support thereto. The term does not include wireless facilities located in or on existing buildings or structures that previously existed or are being constructed for a primary purpose other than a wireless facility e.g. water tower, electric utility pole, or church steeple. BASE STATION EQUIPMENT - Equipment integral to the operation of an antenna system. Base station equipment typically includes, but is not limited to, communications equipment cabinet/shelter, backup power supplies, generators, electric and telecommunications backboards, wiring, grounding loops, equipment enclosures, security fencing and lighting. CO-LOCATION - The use of a single mount on the ground by more than one provider (vertical co-location) and/or several mounts on an existing tower, building or structure by more than one carrier for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. EQUIPMENT SHELTER - An enclosed structure associated with the mount within which is housed the base station equipment for a wireless communications facility. FALL ZONE - The area on the ground within a prescribed radius from the base of a wireless communications facility. The fall zone is the area within which there might be a potential hazard from falling debris or collapsing material, including the antenna support structure. GUYED ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE - An antenna support structure that is supported, in whole or in part, by guy wires and ground anchors. HEIGHT - When referring to a tower or other antenna support structure, the height is the distance from the top of the structure at its highest point, including antennas, lightening protection devices or any other apparatus attached to the top of the antenna support structure, to the base of the structure, measured in feet above ground level (AGL). Absolute height is the distance from the top of the structure, including all attachments, to the height of Mean Sea Level (MSL). LATTICE ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE - An antenna support structure that has open-framed supports on three or four sides and is constructed without guy wires and ground anchors. MODIFICATION - The addition, removal, or change of any of the physical and visually discernable components or aspects of a wireless facility, such as antennas, cabling, radios, equipment shelters, landscaping, fencing, utility feeds, changing the color or materials of any visually discernable components, vehicular access, parking and/or an upgrade or replacement of the equipment. Adding a new wireless carrier or service provider (co-location) to a wireless communications tower or site is a modification. A modification shall not include ordinary maintenance, as defined herein. Modifications shall be classified as major or minor. A. MAJOR MODIFICATION - Changes to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure that result in a substantial change to the facility or structure. Major modifications include, but are not limited to, (I) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Extending the height of the antenna support structure by more than 5 feet above its current height; Replacement of the structure; Expansion of the base station equipment or compound area; Addition of antennas to an existing carrier's antenna array; Co-location; Re-orientation or relocation of existing antennas; Changes affecting the operating frequencies, effective radiated power or number of operating channels. B. MINOR MODIFICATION ~ Changes to existing wireless telecommunications facility or structure, that result in a material change to the facility or structure but of a level, quality or intensity that is less than a substantial change. Such minor modifications include, but are not limited to, replacement of antennas, components and accessory equipment on a like-for-like basis within an existing wireless telecommunications facility. MONOPOLE - A freestanding antenna support structure consisting of a single pole, without guy wires or ground anchors. MOUNT - The structure or surface upon which antennas are mounted and/or the location of the antenna, e.g.: A. ROOF-MOUNTED - Mounted on the roof of a building. B. SIDE-MOUNTED - Mounted on the side of a building. C. STRUCTURE-MOUNTED - Mounted on a structure other than a building. D. FLUSH-MOUNTED - Mounted very close on a building or structure so that the profile of the antenna(s) is not readily apparent. 3 E. INTERIOR-MOUNTED - Mounted within a building or other structure so that the antennas are not visible from the outside. F. GROUND-MOUNTED - Mounted on the ground. ORDINARY MAINTENANCE - Work done to an existing wireless telecommunications facility and antenna support structure for the purpose of maintaining them in good operating condition. Ordinary maintenance includes inspections and testing to maintain functionality, aesthetic and structural integrity, and involves the normal repair of a wireless facility without adding, removing, or changing anything and therefore does not include minor and major modifications. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) PROFESSIONAL - A person who specializes in the study of radio frequency engineering and has expertise in radio communication facilities. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) EMISSIONS or RADIATION - The electromagnetic field of radiation emitted by wireless antennas. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) SIGNAL - The actual beam or radio waves sent and received by a wireless facility. A signal is the deliberate product of a wireless antenna. The RF radiation is the by-product. WIRELESS CARRIER - A company that provides wireless telecommunications services. WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY - Antenna or antenna support structure and base equipment, either individually or together, including permanent or temporary moveable facilities (i.e. wireless facilities mounted on vehicles, boats or other mobile structures) used for the provision of any wireless service. WIRELESS SERVICES - Commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange services, including, but not limited to, voice, data, images or other information, cellular telephone service, personal communications service (PCS), and paging service. {}280-70. Applicability, permitted uses A. No wireless communication facility shall be used, erected or altered in the Town of Southold except in accordance with the provisions of this article and any other applicable sections of the Town Code. B. All wireless communication facilities, and modifications to such facilities (as defined in {}280-69) shall require a building permit, except in cases of ordinary maintenance, as defined in {}280-69. C. Building Permit Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring only a building permit, without the requirement of site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Minor modifications (defined in 280-69); or (2) New wireless facility that is interior-mounted in an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII zoning districts which conforms to the requirements for permitted use in {}280-72; or (3) Major modification, including co-location, on an existing antenna support structure or other wireless 4 facility holding all valid permits and causing essentially no visible change to the exterior, and which conforms to the requirements for permitted use in §280-72. D. Site Plan Approval Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring a building permit and site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) New wireless facility that is roof or side-mounted to an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII zoning districts which conforms to the requirements for permitted use in §280-72; or (2) Major modification, including co-location, to an existing wireless facility holding all valid permits in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or Mil zoning districts and causing a visible change to the exterior, and which conforms to the requirements for permitted use in §280-72. E. All other wireless communication facilities, major modifications, and co-locations require a building permit, site plan approval, and a special exception approval by the Planning Board. §280-71. General requirements for all wireless communication facilities A. No new antenna support structures may be constructed without a carrier licensed by the FCC as co- applicant. An FCC-licensed provider of wireless communications services must be the applicant or the co-applicant for any proposed new wireless communication facility, co-location or modification. B. Guyed or lattice antenna support structures are prohibited C. Antenna support structures shall not be located in the following areas: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Wetlands, tidal and freshwater; Land above high groundwater (within ten feet of the surface). Within 500' of residences; Lands purchased with Community Preservation Funds; Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas; Designated parkland. D. The fall zone of an antenna support structure must not include areas where people congregate, and must be clear of all structures except the base station equipment. Federal Aviation Regulations. All towers shall comply with applicable airport hazard and/or obstruction regulations. Any facility that would be classified as an obstruction or hazard under current federal aviation regulations or would otherwise interfere with the operation of radio navigation aids, communications and/or airport operations is prohibited. F. Antenna support structures in the zoning districts: LI, LIO, MI, MII, B, and HB, are subject to the following restrictions: (1) Minimum lot size i. LI, LIO, B & HB - in accordance with the bulk schedule for each zone ii. MI &MII - 200,000 sq. ft. (2) Maximum Height: 80 feet G. Antenna support structures permitted in AC, R-40, R-80, R-120, R-200, R-400, LB, RO, RR, HD, or AHD zoning districts, are subject to the following conditions (in addition to any other applicable conditions): (1) Minimum area surrounding the proposed location: 200,000 sq. ft. of contiguous vacant land restricted from future residential development by deed for the duration of the property's use for the wireless facility; and (2) Maximum height: 45'; and (3) The structure is a monopole with interior-mounted antennas, or a suitable unobtrusive camouflage structure; and (4) Structure is screened from view from surrounding properties by dense vegetation and trees, either planted or existing, and meeting the site design appearance criteria for residential zones in Section 280-76; and (5) Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at an outside location 10 feet from the equipment shelter; and (6) Minimum distance of all wireless equipment to adjacent residential property lines or street shall be no less than 500 feet. H. Radio emissions must fall within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC. (l) A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless communication facility must be provided by the applicant. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional specializing in radio communication facilities. (2) The results from the analysis must clearly show that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public access) are within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC which are in effect at the time of the application. (3) The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must cite the specific formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and must include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co-located with an existing facility, or is designed for future expansion or co-location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, or likely to be on, the facility in the future must also be analyzed. (4) The power density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy on all channels at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. 6 (5) The conclusions of the power density analysis must be corroborated by an independent radio frequency engineer retained by the Town to provide such determinations. I. At the request of the Building Inspector, which shall be no more frequently than every five years, the provider shall provide a structural inspection report prepared by a structural engineer. §280-72. Requirements for Permitted Use (without Special Exception) (these are in addition to the General Requirements listed above) If the following requirements are met, the applicant may proceed without special exception approval: Fall-zones. An antenna support structure must include an area surrounding it that is free of other structures and uses, except the base equipment, with a radius equal to a distance of two times the height of the structure. A smaller fall-zone may be allowed if supported by a report submitted by a qualified structural engineer, and corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town, that demonstrates that a smaller fall zone is safe. Major modifications causing essentially no visible change in the appearance of the exterior means that the antennas are interior-mounted in the existing structure and are not visible from the outside after installation. The base equipment area is expanded by no more than 10% of its existing floor area, and is entirely screened from view from any public or residential vantage points, including all roads, yards, and commercial buildings the public enters. Exceptionally well-designed flush-mounted antennas may also fall into this category if they present no visible profile protruding from the surface to which they are mounted, and are camouflaged to blend in with the background surface to which they are mounted. Interior-mounted facilities in existing buildings shall be constructed so that the outward appearance of the building or structure before and after the installation is complete is identical or nearly identical. The addition of a significant architectural feature on to'an existing building that is visible from outside for the purpose of accommodating interior-mounted antennas shall require site plan approval. d. Roof-mounted facilities shall conform to the following requirements: i. Visual impact minimized to the greatest extent possible; ii. Height limited to no more than 10 feet above the highest point of the building e. Side-mounted facilities shall be flush-mounted and painted or otherwise camouflaged to blend with the facade or background materials of the structure. Co-locations shall not extend the height of the structure more than ten feet over the original approved structure. To prevent the incremental extension of height over time, any subsequent application with a proposed extension beyond the first ten feet shall require special exception review and approval. g. Base station equipment i. Located within an existing shelter or building, not to be expanded beyond an additional ten percent of floor area; or ii. Located in an underground vault, with any above-ground components screened from view with evergreen planting; or iii. Entirely concealed from view with dense evergreen planting so that all equipment, shelters, fences, gates and other associated structures are not visible from any vantage point. Plantings shall be of sufficient size to achieve this screening effect immediately upon planting. iv. Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at the nearest property lines of all adjacent residences. {}280-73. Special exception approval. Authority. For the purposes of this section, notwithstanding Article XXV of the Southold Town Code, the Planning Board shall be empowered to issue a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, subject to the provisions of this chapter. This supersedes Article XXV in that the Planning Board is the reviewing board in place of the Zoning Board of Appeals for wireless communication facilities that require Special Exception approval. The remainder of Article XXV remains in effect and shall apply to the Planning Board's consideration Of a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, together with the additional standards and requirements in this section. Standards. In addition to the standards in Article XXV of this Code, no special exception approval shall be granted unless the Planning Board specifically finds and determines the following: (1) Construction of the proposed facility or modification of the existing facility is a public necessity, in that it is required to meet current or expected demands of the telecommunications provider and to render adequate service to the public. (2) The applicant has made substantial effort to co-locate with existing wireless facilities, or, failing that, has made substantial effort to locate on municipally-owned land or structures, or within or on existing buildings or structures. (3) There are compelling reasons which make it more feasible to construct the proposed facilities rather than alternatives. Matters to be considered. In addition to the matters to be considered in Article XXV of this Chapter, the Planning Board shall give consideration to the following in issuing a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities: (1) The proposed antenna support structure must be demonstrated to be the lowest height above the ground feasible to achieve the service needs of the carrier(s). The rationale behind the explanation by the applicant must be corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town. (2) The wireless communication facility has been situated to minimize its proximity and visibility to residential structures, residential district boundaries and landmarks designated by Town, federal or state agencies. (3) The wireless communication facility is designed and situated to be compatible with the nature of 8 uses on adjacent and nearby property. (4) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding topography to minimize its visual impacts. (5) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding tree, building or foliage coverage to minimize its visual impacts. (6) The wireless communication facility maximizes design characteristics to reduce or eliminate visual impacts and obtrusiveness. (7) Other adequate conditions have been placed on the wireless communication facility which will minimize any adverse impacts of the facility on adjoining properties. Conditions. The Planning Board shall consider the following in establishing conditions on the issuance of the special exception approval: d) In reviewing special exception approval applications required by this section the Planning Board shall consider the Town's policy as stated in this article. (2) In approving a special exception the Planning Board may waive or reduce the criteria in this article, to the extent specified below, if the Planning Board concludes that the goals and stated purposes of this law are better served, and that doing so will have no detrimental effect on adjacent properties or on the public health, safety and welfare, and thereby: Minimize proximity of the tower to residential structures or historic landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies. (b) Modify the planting of surrounding tree coverage and foliage to account for existing vegetation and land contours, but only to the extent that the existing vegetation achieves the purpose of concealing the structure. (c) Modify the design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that reduce or eliminate visual obtrusiveness. (3) Any special exception approval granted under this article shall have a term of five years, commencing from the grant of the special exception, which may be extended for an additional five-year term upon application to the Planning Board. On a renewal application, the applicant shall demonstrate that the wireless communication facility is in compliance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations and with all of the conditions of the special exception approval and site plan, that the facility is necessary to provide adequate service, and that there is no reasonable alternative available to the owner which will provide adequate service without the continuing use of the facility. Subsequent special exception renewals shall be subject to review by the Planning Board and subject to such standards that shall be included in the Town Code at that point in time. §280-74. Application requirements A. Fees. The following fees are in place of those required in other sections of the code. a. Building Permit Application Fees i. Minor modification $250 ii. Major modification $500 iii. New facility $750 b. Site Plan Application Fees i. Major modification. $1000 ii. New facility $2000 Special Exception Application Fee $1000 Review by independent consultants. In all cases where the Town determines that a review of an application by a qualified expert is warranted, the applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such review, which cost will be assessed as an additional application fee. This payment shall be made to the Town prior to the review commencing and the decision being rendered on the application. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports will be provided to the applicant and an opportunity given to the applicant to respond to the content of the consultants' report prior to any decisions being made. Building Permit Application (1) The following application requirements are in addition to those required in §144-8 C. a. Written analysis demonstrating the project complies with the Maximum Permissible Exposure regulations in accordance with § 280-71H. Written documentation as to the facility's structural compliance with local, State and Federal Codes. Copies of all applicable FCC licenses, notices of proposed construction or alteration, federal environmental impact statements and other documents verifying compliance with federal, state and local regulations. (2) Once the application is received in the Building Department, it will be forwarded to the Planning Director for report and recommendations on compliance with §280-71 General Requirements, §280-72 Requirements for Permitted Use, and any technical consultant reports that may have been required. No building permit for a wireless facility may be granted prior to this report being submitted to the Building Inspector. Site Plan Application The folloWing application requirements are in addition to those required in §280-133. a. Seven copies of items a-c listed above at §280-74B(1) Btlilding Permit Application b. Aeronautical study or appropriate consultant's report demonstrating that the proposed facility will not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. l0 c. Visual Impact Analysis - renderings or computer graphics illustrating the appearance of the completed facility from residential and public vantage points to be determined by the Planning Board. d. Adjacent land uses, structures and zoning within 500 feet. e. The location in latitude and longitude, type and height of the wireless communication facility. f. A list of other carriers already located on the facility with the number, type, height, orientation, effective radiated power, number of channels and operating frequencies of each antenna, including the proposed. g. Digital information about the facility (AutoCAD, Shapefile) that can be imported into a geographic information system depicting the search ring of the proposed facility. h. A photo of the facility, if already existing. i. Location of landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies within 300 feet. j. Distances between the proposed facility and the following: i. the nearest residential structure, ii. the nearest property line with a residential use, iii. all other structures. iv. Roads, rights of way, driveways k. Fall-zone radius and distance 1. Proposed means of access m. Elevation drawings with dimensions clearly indicated, including diameter or width of the structure at its widest and narrowest, and the tallest point including antennas or lightening protection. n. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. Special Exception Application To make the determination on an application for special exception, the Planning Board shall require the following in addition to the requirements of Article XXV: (l) Each application shall include a. One copy of the building permit application b. Once copy of the site plan application (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Each application shall include a written site location altemative analysis describing the location of other sites considered, the availability of those sites, the extent to which other sites do or do not meet the provider's service or engineering needs and the reason why the subject site was chosen. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. The applicant shall document to the satisfaction of the Planning Board that a good-faith effort has been made to locate or co-locate on existing towers or other available and appropriate buildings and structures, that it is not feasible to co-locate on an existing facility and that the proposed location is necessary to provide adequate service to the public. The documentation shall include a notarized statement by the applicant as to whether construction of the wireless communication facility will accommodate co-location of additional antennas for future users Each application shall include a plan which shall reference all existing wireless communication facility locations in the Town of Southold, any such facilities in the abutting towns which provide service to areas within the Town of Southold, any changes proposed within the following twelve-month period, including the applicant's plans for new locations and the discontinuance or relocation of existing wireless facilities. Alternatively, at the beginning of the year the applicant may submit an annual wireless communication facility plan containing the aforementioned information for the calendar year. The Planning Board and Planning Department may retain technical consultants as they deem necessary to provide assistance in the review of the needs and site location alternatives analyses and other matters that the Board deems necessary. The applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such consultation, which cost shall be assessed as an additional application fee. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports shall be made available to the applicant upon acceptance of the final draft of the report by the Planning Board. A copy of the deed or lease agreement establishing applicant's right to use the parcel on which the wireless communication facility is to be located. Propagation maps shall be submitted for existing coverage from existing surrounding and/or approved sites, coverage from all alternative sites considered and coverage from the proposed site. Propagation maps shall include a minimum of three signal strength depictions (-75dBm, - 85dBm and -95dBm) and any other signal strength levels deemed appropriate by the Applicant based on the Applicant's documented coverage and reliability needs. A "gap map" prepared and signed by a qualified radio frequency engineer and overlaid on an "existing coverage" background propagation map demonstrating the area(s) within which the applicant's existing service is not adequate. In addition, a search ring shall depicted indicating where the wireless communication facility needs to be located in order to provide adequate signal strength and/or capacity to the target gap area. The applicant must explain and document its standards and criteria for adequate signal strength, capacity and reliability and must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Board why these standards and criteria are applicable to the Town of Southold. The applicant must also explain to the Planning Board why it selected the proposed site, discuss the availability or lack thereof of a suitable structure within the search ring for collocation, and 12 the extent to which the applicant has explored locating the proposed facility in a more intensive use district. Correspondence with other telecommunication providers concerning collocation is part of this requirement. The applicant shall also provide evidence supporting the existence of inadequate service. This may include the propagation maps cited above, drive test maps, traffic studies, customer complaint logs and similar data. The applicant must also demonstrate to the Board that the proposed facility satisfies the demonstrated service deficiency to an equal or greater degree than any of the reasonably available alternatives. §280-75. Historic buildings and districts. No wireless communication facility is allowed on any designated landmark property or district listed by federal, state or Town agencies, except as specified below, and subject to § 170 Landmark Preservation: Any wireless communication facility located on or within an historic structure listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall not alter the character-defining features, distinctive construction methods or original materials of the building. Any alteration made to an historic structure to accommodate a wireless communication facility shall be fully reversible. Wireless communication facilities within an historic district listed by Federal, State or Town agencies shall be concealed within or behind existing architectural features, so that they are not visible. §280-76. Site design standards. All wireless facilities, including co-locations, shall be the least visually obtrusive design possible that also permits the applicant to achieve its service needs. To that end, the following design standards shall apply to all wireless communication facilities installed or constructed pursuant to the terms of this chapter: Camouflage on buildings. Wireless antennas, if mounted on a building facade, shall be flush mounted and painted or otherwise treated to blend with the facade. When a wireless communication facility extends above the roof height of a building on which it is mounted, every effort shall be made to conceal the facility within or behind existing architectural features to limit its visibility from public and residential vantage points, yet permit the facility to perform its designated function. Facilities mounted on a roof shall be stepped back from the front facade in order to limit their impact on the building's silhouette. If antennas are part of the stepped back facility, the applicant shall submit an access control plan that precludes inadvertent access to the front faces of the antennas by building workers and the general public. The wireless communication facilities shall blend in with the existing building's architecture and shall be painted or shielded with material which is consistent with the design features and materials of the building. Setbacks. Towers and equipment facilities shall adhere to the setbacks for principal uses in the Bulk Schedule applicable to the zone in which the structure(s) are located, unless otherwise indicated elsewhere in this chapter. Signs. Signs shall not be permitted on facilities except for signs displaying contact information and safety instructions, which are required. Safety signs shall be in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for radio frequency radiation warning signs. Contact signs shall identify all service providers located on the facility and shall include normal and emergency contact information for each. Such signs shall not exceed five square feet in surface area. Base equipment shelter. For newly constructed wireless facilities, a base equipment shelter is limited to 500 square feet in floor area. If the newly constructed wireless facility is designed for co-location, the facility may be up to 1,000 square feet. The base equipment shelter shall be constructed with a finish similar to that of adjacent structures on the property and integrated into the architectural style. The shelter and associated fencing must be entirely screened from view by evergreen plantings. The new plantings must be of sufficient size to accomplish the screening within six months. Any newly constructed base equipment shelter shall be located in accordance with the minimum height and yard requirements of the zoning district applicable to the site, and up to two adjacent off-street parking spaces may be provided for service vehicles. Site lighting. The lighting permitted shall be the minimum required to protect the public welfare. Facilities sited on existing developed sites shall be incorporated into the lighting plans of those sites. Outside lighting shall use fully-shielded fixtures so that the light source is not visible from beyond the property line, and no light is reflected or shone towards the sky, except in the case of structures required to follow FAA guidelines for safety lighting. Access. Access to wireless facilities shall be from already established site access points whenever possible. Dish antennas. Dish antennas shall be colored, camouflaged or screened to the extent that they are as unobtrusive as possible, and in no case shall the diameter of a dish antenna exceed six feet. Electric line setback. Except for wireless facilities specifically designed for mounting on electric transmission towers, or within the footprint of such towers, no wireless communication facility shall be located nearer to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than 220 volts than a distance equal to the facility's height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached. Co-location. Wireless communication facilities shall be designed to provide for co-location by multiple providers or designed so that they can be retrofitted to accommodate multiple providers, wherever possible. Scenic landscapes and vistas. All antenna support structures which are not concealed inside of buildings or screened by existing trees or buildings, must be surrounded by a planted buffer of dense tree growth. An antenna support structure that is located within a scenic vista or scenic landscape or within 300' of a scenic road, as designated by the Town, shall not be taller than ten feet above the height of trees within a 300' radius of the proposed location, or 35' maximum in the absence of trees. Base landscaping. A screen of evergreen trees shall be planted outside the fence of the telecommunication tower base area to provide a visual screen or buffer for adjoining private properties and the public right-of-way or other van. tage points accessible to the public. The screen shall consist of a double row of evergreen shrubs and trees that are of sufficient density and height to immediately screen the base equipment from view. Required front yard setback areas shall be landscaped and include shrubs and trees. Survivability of the landscaping shall be guaranteed and maintained by the applicant for the life of the installation. Color. Antenna support structures in the form of monopoles or other towers shall either be blue/gray in color, or be colored appropriate to the context of the structure's location so that the tower is as unobtrusive as possible, unless otherwise required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). If a wireless communication facility is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the colors of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. Wireless facilities sited within new structures meant to mimic some other structure or natural feature must be designed at a scale compatible with the community, be unobtrusive, and characteristic of the area. Antenna support structures in or adjacent to residential zones. Where the site proposed foran antenna support structure is located within a residential zone or has one or more property lines abutting or on the opposite side of a street from a residential zone or use permitted in a residential zone, no antenna support structures may be constructed unless adequately screened from view of those residential zones by existing buildings or large trees, including evergreens. The structure may protrude no more than 10' above screening buildings and/or trees. In the absence of an adequate arrangement of existing large trees or buildings to provide effective screening, the height of the proposed structure may be no more than 35', and the base equipment must be buried in an underground vault. Two rows of evergreen trees must be planted encircling the structure, one row at a distance from the structure of 50% of the height of the structure, and the other at 90% of the height of the structure. Transplanted trees shall have a minimum caliper of three inches, spaced thirty-feet on center. The trees must have an expected height at maturity of at least 10' less than the height of the structure to be screened. Smaller evergreen shrubs must be used to fill in the gaps in between for screening during the time the trees are filling in and maturing. The Planning Board may vary the arrangement of the trees and shrubs to accommodate specific site conditions, and accomplish the goal of screening the facility from view of residential properties. A written guarantee from the wireless facility's owner shall be required to ensure that the plantings survive and are maintained throughout the existence of the installation. Commercial and industrial siting. Towers to be sited on developed commercial or industrial properties shall be located to the rear of other principal buildings and shall not encroach on planting buffers, parking areas or otherwise impair the operation of previously approved systems such as stormwater drainage basins. Existing buildings and structures should be used in the siting of freestanding towers to contribute to the visual screening of the tower. {}280-77. Removal. Any wireless communication facility that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall be deemed abandoned. At that time the owner of the wireless communication facility shall remove same within 90 days of such deemed abandonment. In the case of a wireless communication facility on preexisting structures, this provision shall apply to the wireless communication facility only. If the wireless communication facility is not removed within the said 90 days, the Building Inspectors may, with the approval of the Town Board, give the owner notice that unless the removal is accomplished in 30 days, the Town will cause the removal at the owner's expense. The grant of a site plan approval under this article shall include requiring the applicant to post a decommissioning bond and irrevocable permission to the Town to accomplish removal of the wireless communication facility under this article. §280-78. Nonconforming uses. Preexisting telecommunication towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. New construction, other than maintenance on a preexisting facility, shall comply with the requirements of this article. §280-79. [Reserved]. §280-80. Severability. The various parts, sections and clauses of this article are hereby declared to be severable. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. §280-81. Effective Date. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. (CompLete the certification in the paragraph that applies to the filing of this local law and strike out that which is not applicable.) 1. (Final adoption by local legislative body only.) 1 hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. 4__ of 20 09 . of the (Czxn.~')(C~,)(Town) ~) of SOUTHOLD was duly passed by the TOWN BOARD on February 24 ,20 09 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval, no disapproval or re-passage after disapproval by the Elective Chief Executive Officer*.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the on 20 __, and was (approved)(not approved)(re-passed after disapproval) by the and was deemed duly adopted on 20 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 3. (Final adoption by referendum.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the on 20 ., and was (approved)(not approvedXrepassed after disapproval) by the on 20 . Such local law was submitted to the people by reason ofa (mandatory)(permissive) referendum, and received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon at the (general)(special)(annual) election held on 20 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 4. (Subject to permissive referendum and final adoption because no valid petition was filed requesting referendum.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village)_ of was duly passed by the on 20__ , and was (approvedXnot approved) (repassed after disapproval) by the on 20__ Such local law was subject to permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of 20 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. * Elective Chief Executive Officer means or Includes the chief executive officer of a county elected on a county- wide basis or, If there be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor of a city or village, or the supervisor of a town where such officer is vested with the power to approve or veto local laws or ordinances. 17 5. (City local law concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 __ of the City of having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the provisions of section (36)(37) of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote ora majority of the qualified electors of such city voting thereon at the (special)(general) election held on 20 ___, became operative. 6. (County local law concerning adoption of Charter.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No of 20 of the County of State of New York, having been submitted to the electors at the General Election of November 20 , pursuant to subdivisions 5 and 7 of section 33 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors of the cities of said county as a unit and a majority of the qualified electors of the towns of said county considered as a unit voting at said general election, became operative. (If any other authorized form of final adoption has been followed, please provide an appropriate certification.) I further certify that I have compared the preceding local law with the original on file in this office and that the same is a correct transcript there from and of the whole of such original local law, and was finally adopted in the manner indicated in paragraph I , above. Clerk of~e-County legislative body. C~t~.'~own or (Seal) Village Clerk or officer designated by local legislative body Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk Date: March 4, 2009 (Certification to be executed by County Attorney, CorporatiOn Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or other authorized attorney of locality.) STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law contains the correct text and that all proper proceedings have been had or taken for the enactment of the local law annexe~hereto. - ~ Patricia A. Finnegan~ Esq. Town ~rne¥ Title Town of Date: SOUTHOLD March 4, 2009 Page 1 of 1 Rudder, Lynda From: Kowalski, Linda Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 10:31 AM To: Rudder, Lynda Subject: RE: Notice to Adjacent.dot Receipt of Local Law on Wireless is acknowledged. Thank you. ZBA Town of Southold Office Location: 54375 Main Road (NFB 1st Floor) Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 (631) 765-1809 (ext. 5011 at voice recording) fax (631 ) 765-9064 3/5/2009 Page 1 of 1 Rudder, Lynda From: Rudder, Lynda Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:11 PM To: ezsupp@generalcode.com Subject: LL # 4 of 2009 Lynda M Rudder Lynda M Rudder Deputy Southold Town Clerk Principal Account Clerk 53095 Main Road PO Box 1179 Seuthold, NY 11971 (631)765-1800 ext 265 3/4/2009 Rudder, Lynda From: Sent: To: Subject: ezsupp [ezsu pp@generalcode.com] Wednesday, March 04, 2009 3:11 PM Rudder, Lynda RE: LL # 4 of 2009 Thank you for your e'mail. If you are sending legislation for your next Code supplement, it will be processed in the usual manner. All other messages will be forwarded to the appropriate person, who will respond to your inquiry as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call or e' mail your Account Representative. General Code 1-800-836-8834 ezsupp@generalcode.com Rudder, Lynda From: To: Sent: Subject: Cantrell, Elizabeth Rudder, Lynda Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:44 AM Read: Notice to Adjacent.dot To: Subject: Sent: Glew, Claire; Lanza, Heather; Nunemaker, Amanda; Standish, Lauren; Terry, Mark; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Bunch, Connie; Verity, Mike; Kowalski, Linda; Cappabianca, Lucille Notice to Adjacent.dot 3/5/2009 9:22 AM was read on 3/5/2009 9:4Zl AM. Page 1 of 1 Rudder, Lynda From: Cantrell, Elizabeth Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:51 AM To: Rudder, Lynda Subject: A Local Law in relation to Wireless Communications Facilities Hi Lynda, Email received, thank you. Elizabeth Cantrell 3/5/2009 Page 1 of 2 Rudder, Lynda From: Bunch, Connie Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:52 AM To: 'Rudder, Lynda' Subject: FW: Notice to Adjacent.dot Got it From: Cantrell, Elizabeth Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:50 AM To: Bunch, Connie Subject: FW: Notice to Adjacent.dot From: Rudder, Lynda Sent.' Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:22 AM To: Glew, Claire; Lanza, Heather; Nunemaker, Amanda; Standish, Lauren; Terry, Mark; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Bunch, Connie; Verity, Mike; Kowalski, Linda; Cappabianca, Lucille Subject: Notice to Adjacent.dot Please acknowledge receipt of this email. Thank you March 5, 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on February 24, 2009: Local Law #4 A Local Law in relation to Wireless Communications Facilities Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments Mail: Commission Island Southampton Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Suffolk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Long Island State Park Town of Shelter Town of Emailed: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals 3/5/2009 Page 2 of 2 Southold Town Building Department Signature, Received By Please print name Date: Title: DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK 3/5/2009 Rudder, Lxnda From: To: Sent: Subject: System Administrator Lanza, Heather; Standish, Laumn; Terry, Mark; Kowalski, Linda; Glew, Claim; Nunemaker, Amanda; Cantmll, Elizabeth; Bunch, Connie; Verity, Mike; Cappabianca, Lucille Thursday, Mamh 05, 2009 9:22 AM Delivered: Notice to Adjacent.dot Your message To: Subject: Sent: Glew, Claire; Lanza, Heather; Nunemaker, Amanda; Standish, Lauren; Terry, Mark; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Bunch, Connie; Verity, Hike; Kowalski, Linda; Cappabianca, Lucille Notice to Adjacent.dot 3/5/2009 9:22 AM was delivered to the following recipient(s): Lanza, Heather on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Standish, Lauren on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Terry, Hark on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Kowalski, Linda on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Glew, Claire on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Nunemaker, Amanda on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Canb'ell, Elizabeth on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Bunch, Connie on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Vedty, Hike on 3/5/2009 9:22 Air1 Cappabianca, Lucille on 3/5/2009 9:22 AH Rudder, Lynda From: To: Sent:* Subject: Terry, Mark Rudder, Lynda Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:23 AM Read: Notice to Adjacent.dot Your message Subject: Sent: glew, Claire; Lanza, Heather; Nunemaker, Amanda; Standish, Lauren; Terry, Hark; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Bunch, Connie; Verib/, Hike; Kowalski, Linda; Cappabianca, Lucille Notice to Adjacent.dot 3/5/2009 9:22 AH was read on 3/5/2009 9:23 AH. Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 RESOLUTION 2009-156 ADOPTED Item # 4.7 DOC ID: 4772 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-156 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON FEBRUARY 24, 2009: WHEREAS there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 20th day of January, 2009 a Local Law entitled ."A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" and WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now therefor be it RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" to read as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. 4 OF 2009 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities". BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Article XVII entitled "Wireless Communications Facilities" is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced as follows: §280-67. Purpose A. It is the express purpose of this article to minimize the visual and environmental impacts of wireless communication facilities while protecting the health, safety and welfare of Southold's citizens and allowing wireless service providers to meet their technological and service objectives. This article allows wireless communication facilities, to be reviewed and appro~,ed in keeping with the Town's existing zoning and historic development patterns, including the size and spacing of structures. The ~oals of the following sections are to - accomplish the following: a. Site wireless facilities in these preferred locations: Generated February 27, 2009 Page 12. Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 i. Within or on existing buildings and structures where the antenna~ are invisible (or nearly so) from public and residential vantage points; ii. Industrial areas; Take into account the aesthetic aspects of the Town, including open vistas, scenic byways and historic districts, when desi gning, and siting wireless communication facilities. §280-68, Scope. The regulations of this article shall govern and control the erection, enlargement, expansion, alteration, operation, maintenance, relocation and removal of all wireless communication facilities. The regulations of this article relate to the location and design of these facilities and shall be in addition to the provisions of the Southold Building and Zoning Codes and any other federal, state or local laws or Federal Cnmmnn~cation Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other regulations pertaining to such facilities. Nothing herein shall be construed to, apply to, prohibit, regulate or otherwise affect the erection, maintenance or utilization of antennas or support structures by those licensed by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to C-hapte~ Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, to operate amateur radio stations. .~280-69. Definitions As used in this article, the following terms ~ha}l have the meanings set forth below: ANTENNA Any transmitting or receiving device, including whip (e.'n.n'.'~'.'rect'.'cnal oran, directional antenna), panel (directional antenna), disc (parabolic anlenna) or similar device, mounted in or on a tower, monopole, building or structure and used in communications that radiate or capture electromagnetic waves, digital signals, analog signal, radio frequencies (excluding radar signals), wireless telecommunications signalg or other communications signalg ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE Any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for wireless telephone, television, radio and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers and monopoles. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers. common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, camouflaged tower structures, and the like. The term includes the structure and any support thereto. The term does not include wireless facilities located in or on existing buildingn or structures that previously existed or are beino constructed for a primary purpose other than a wireless facility e.g. water tower, electric utility pole, or church steeple. BASE STATION EQUIPMENT Grc~n~ mc~ntc~ Equipment integral to the operation of an antenna system. Base station equipment typically includes, but is not limited to, communication~ eqmpment cabinet/shelter, backup power supplies, generators, electric and telecommunications backboards, wiring, grounding loops, equipment enclosures, security fencing and lighting. CO-LOCATION The use of a single mount on the ground by more than one provider (vertical Generated February 27, 2009 Page 13 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 .co-location) and/or several mounts on an existing tbwer, building or structure by more than one carrier for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. EQUIPMENT SHELTER An enclosed structure mqhe-bas~ff associated with the mount within which is housed the base station equipment for a wireless communications facility. FALL ZONE The area on the ground within a prescribed radius from the base of a wireless communications facility. The fall zone is the area within which there might be a potential ha?srd from falling debris or collapsing material, including the antenna support structure. GUYED ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that is Supported, in whole or in part, by guy wires and ground anchors. HEIGHT When referring to a tower or other antenna support structure, the height is the distance fromm the top of the structure at its highest point, including antennas, lightening protection devices or any other apparatus attached to the top of the antenna support structure, to the base of the structure, measured in feet above ground level (AGL). Absolute height is the distance from the top of the structure, including all attachments, to the height of Mean Sea Level (MSL). LATTICE ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that has open- framed supports on three or four sides and is constructed without guy wires and ground anchors. MODIFICATION The ~ddition, removal, or change of any of the physical and visually diseemable components or aspects of a wireless facility, such as antennas, cabling, radios, eqmpment shelters, landscaping, fencing, utility feeds, changing the color or materials of any visually discemable components, vehicular access, parking and/or an upgrade or replacement of -~ ...... : ..... Adding a new wireless carder or service the equipment.fcr ~e~er er mere .......... provider (co-location) to a wireless communications tower or site is a modification. A modification shall not include ordinary maintenance, as defined herein. Modifications shall be classified as maior or m~nor. A. MAJOR MODIFICATION - Impr.~vement: Changes to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure that result in a substantial change to the facility or structure. Major modifications include, but are not limited to, (1) Extending the height of the antenna support structure by more than 5 feet above its current height; (2) Replacement of the structure; Generated February 27, 2009 Page 14 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 (3) Expansion of the base station equipment or compound area; (4) Addition of antennas to an existing carrier's antenna array; (5) Co-location; (6) Re-orientation or relocation of existing antennas; (7) Changes affecting the operating frequencies, effective radiated power or number of operating channels. MINOR MODIFICATION - --r ............ Changes to ex~st~ng wireless telecommunications facility or structure, that result in a material change to the facility or structure but of a level, quality or intensity that is less than a substantial change. Such minor modifications include, but are not limited to, replacement of antennas, components and accessory equipment on a like-for-like basis within an existing wireless telecommnnlCatlons faclhty .............. ~ ............... m~ .............. MONOPOLE A freestanding antenna support structure consisting of a single pole, without guy wires or ground anchors. MOUNT The structure or surface upon which antennas are mounted and/or the location of the anlcnna, e.g.: A. ROOF-MOUNTED - Mounted on the roofofa building. B. SIDE-MOUNTED - Mounted on the side of a building. C. STRUCTURE-MOUNTED - Mounted on a structure other than a building. D. FLUSH-MOUNTED - Mounted very close on a building or structure so that the profile of the antenna(s) is not readily apparent. E. INTERIOR-MOUNTED - Mounted within a building or other structure so that the antennas are not visible from the outside. F. GROUND-MOUNTED - Mounted on the ground. ORDINARY MAINTENANCE - Work done to an existing wireless telecommunications facility and antenna support structure for the purpose of maintaining them in good operating condition. Ordina~ maintenance includes inspections and testing to maintain functionality, aesthetic and structural integriW, and involves the normal repair of a wireless facility without adding, removing, or changing anything and therefore does not include minor and malor Generated February 27, 2009 Page 15 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 modifications. RADIO FREQUENCY {RF) PROFEssIONAL A person who specializes in the study of radio frequency engineering and has expertise in radio communication facilities. ~ RADIO FREQUENCY {RF) EMISSIONS or RADIATION The electromagnetic field of radiation emitted by wireless antennas. RADIO FREQUENCY {RF) SIGNAL The actual beam or radio waves sent and received by a wireless facility. A signal is the deliberate product ora wireless antenna. The RF radiation is the by-product. WIRELESS CARRIER - A company that provides wireless telecommunications services. WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY - Antenna or antenna support structure and base equipment, either individually or together, including permanent or temporary moveable facilities (i.e. wireless facilities mounted on vehicles, boats or other mobile structures) used for the provision of any wireless service. WIRELESS SERVICES - Commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange services, including, but not limited to, voice, data, images or other information, cellular telephone service, personal communications service (PCS), and paging service. §280-70. Applicability~ permitted uses A. No wireless communication, facility shall be used, erected or altered in the Town of Southold except in accordance with the provisions of this article and any other applicable sections of the Town Code. B. All wireless communication facilities, and modifications to such facilities (as defined in §280-69) shall require a building permit, except in cases of ordinary maintenance, as defined in §280-69. C. Building Permit Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring only a building permit, without the requirement of site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Minor modifications (defined in 280-69); or (2) New wireless facility that is interior-mounted in an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MIl zoning districts Which conforms to the requirements for permitted use in §280-72; or (3) Major'modification, inc.luding co-location, on an existing antenna support structure or Generated February 27, 2009 Page 16 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 other wireless facility holding all valid permits and causing essentially, no visible change to the exterior, and which conforms to the requirements for permitted use in §280-72. D. Site Plan Approval Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use reqmring a building permit and site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) New wireless facility that is roof or side-mounted to an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII 2;oning districts which conforms to the requirements for permitted use in §280-72; or (2) Major modification, including co-location, to an existing wireless facility holding all valid permits in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MIl zoning districts and causing a visible change m the exterior, and which conforms to the requirements for permitted use in §280-72. E. All other wireless communication facilities, maior modifications, and co-locations require a building permit, site plan approval, and a special exception approval by the Planning Board. §280-71. General requirements for all wireless communication facilities A. No new antenna.support structures may be constructed without a career licensed by the FCC as co-applicant. An FCC-licensed provider of wireless communications services must be the applicant or the co-applicant for any proposed new wireless communication facility, co-location or modification. B. Guyed or lattice antenna support structures are prohibited C. Antenna support structures shall not be located in the following areas: (1) Wetlands, tidal and freshwater; (2) (3) Land above high groundwater (within ten feet of the Surface). Within 500' of residences; (4) (5) Lands purchased with Community Preservation Funds; Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas; (6) Designated parkland. D. The fall zone of an antenna support structure must not include areas where people congregate, and must be clear of all structures except the base station equipment. :he!tcr. Generated February 27, 2009 Page 17 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 Federal Aviation Regulations. All towers shall comply with applicable airport hazard and/or obstruction regulations. Any facility that would be classified as an obstruction or hazard under current federal aviation regulations~or would otherwise interfere with the operation of radio navigation aids, communications and/or airport operations is prohibited. Antenna support structures areqfltov~ in the fc!!c;:Sng zoning districts: LI, LIO, MI, MII, B, and HB, ;;qth are subject to the following restrictions: (1) Minimum lot size i. LI, LIO, B & HB - in accordance with the bulk schedule for each zone ii. MI & Mil - 200,000 sq. ft. (2) Maximum Height: 80 feet G. Antenna support structures ar~aot-attowed permitted in AC, R-40, R-80, R-120, R-200, R-400, LB, RO, RR, HD, or AHD zoning districts, e'x~hw,-mm~ are subject to the following conditions (thzgz are in addition to any other applicable conditions): (1) Minim~un area surrounding the proposed location: ~ 200,000 sq. fi. of contiguous vacant land restricted from future residential development by deed for the duration of the property's use for the wireless facility; and (2) (3) (4) (5) Maximum height: 45'; and The structure is a monopole with interior-mounted antennas, or a suitable unobtrusive camouflage structure; and Structure is screened from view from surrounding properties by dense vegetation and trees, either planted or existing, and meeting the site design appearance criteria for residential zones in Section 280 77 76; and Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator; measures less than 45dB at an outside location l0 feet from the equipment shelter; and (6) Minimum distance of all wireless equipment to adjacent residential property lines or street shall be no less than 500 feet. H. Radio emi~gions must fall within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC. (1) A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless Generated February 27, 2009 Page 18 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 communication facility must be provided by the applicant. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional specializin~ in radio communication facilities. (2) (3) The results from the analysis must clearly show that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public access) are within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC which are in effect at the time of the application. The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must cite the specific formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and mus! include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co- located with'an existing facility, or is designed for future expansion or co- location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, or likely to be on, the facilit~t in the future must also be analyzed. (4) The power density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy on all channels at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. (5) The conclusions of the power density analysis must be corroborated by an independent radio frequency engineer retained by the Town to provide such determinations. 1. At the request of the Building Inspector, which shall be no more frequently than every five years, the provider shall provide a structural inspection report prepared by a structural engineer. r~o:n~ ~,.-a~.ao t'.. v ............ Requirements for Permitted Use (withont 6280-72 .................... -~---~,,~a ..... · Special Exception) (these are in addition to the General Requirements listed above) If the following requirements are met, the applicant may proceed without special exception approval: Fall-zones. An antenna support structure must include an area surrounding it that is free of other structures and uses, except the base equipment, with a radius eqnal to a distance of two times the height of the structure. A smaller fail-zone may be allowed if supported by a report submitted by a qualified structural engineer, and Generated February 27, 2009 Page 19 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town, that demonstrates that a smaller fall zone is safe. ~ajor modifications causing essentially no visible change in the appearance of the exterior means that the antenna~ are interior-mounted in the existing structure and are not visible from the outside after installation. The base equipment area is expanded by no more than 10% of its existing floor area, and is entirely, screened from view from any public or residential vantage points, including all roads, yards, and commercial buildings the public enters. Exceptionally well-designed flush:mounted antennas may also fall into this category if they present no visible profile protruding from the surface to which they are mounted, and are camouflaged to blend in with the background surface to which they are mounted. Interior-mounted facilities in existing buildings shall be constructed so that the outward appearance of the building or structure before and after the installation.~s complete is identical or nearly identical. The addition of a significant architectural feature on to an existing building that is visible from outside for the purpose of accommodating interior-mounted antennas shall require a :pet!a! exc~ptic, n site plan approval. d. Roof-mounted facilities shall conform to the following requirements: i. Visual impact minimized to the greatest extent possible; ii. Heigh[ limited to no more than 10 feet above the highest point of the building Side-mounted facilities shall be flush-mounted and painted or otherwise camouflaged to blend with the fagade or background materials of the structure. Co-locations shall not extend the height of the structure more than ten feet over the original approved structure. To prevent the incremental extension of height over time, any subsequent application with a proposed extension beyond the first ten feet shall require special exception review and approval. Base station eqmpment i. Located within an existing shelter or building, not to be expanded beyond an additional ten percent of floor area; or fi. Located in an underground vault, with any above-ground components screened from view with evergreen planting; or fii. Entirely concealed from view with dense evergreen planting so that all Generated February 27, 2009 Page 20 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 equipment, shelters, fences, gates and other associated structures are not visible from any vantage point. Plantings shall be of sufficient size to achieve this screening effect immediately upon planting. iv. Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at the nearest property lines of all adjacent residences. §280-73. Special exception approval. A. Authority. For the purposes of this section, notwithstanding Article XXV of the Southold Town Code, the Planning Board shall be empowered to issue a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, subject to the provisions of this chapter. This supersedes Article XXV in that the Planning Board is the reviewing board in place of the Zoning Board of Appeals for wireless communication facilities that require Special Exception approval. The remainder of Article XXV remain~ in effect and shall apply to the Planning Board's consideration of a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, together with the additional standards and requirements in this section. Standards. In addition to the standards in Article XXV of this Code, no special exception approval shall be granted Unless the Planning. Board specifically finds and determines the following: (1) Construction of the proposed facility or modification of the existing facility is a public necessity, in that it is required to meet current or expected demands of the telecommunications provider and to render adequate service to the public. (2) The applicant has made substantial effort to co-locate with existing wireless facilities, or, failing that, has made substantial effort to locate on municipally-owned land or structures, or within or on existing buildings or structures. (3) There are compelling reasons which make it more feasible to construct the proposed facilities rather than alternatives. C. Matters to be considered. In addition to the matters to be considered in Article XXV of this Cc, dc Chapter, the Planning Board shall give consideration to the following in issuin~ a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities: (1) The proposed antenna support structure must be demonstrated to be the lowest height above the ground feasible to achieve the service needs of the carrier(s). The rationale behind the explanation by the applicant must be corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town. (2) The wireless communication facility has been situated to mi~irniTe its proximity Generated February 27, 2009 Page 21 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 and visibility to residential structures, residential district boundaries and landmarks designated by Town, federal or state agencies. (3) The wireless communication facility is designed and situated to be compatible with the nature of uses on adlacent and nearby property. (4) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding topography to minimize its visual impacts. (5) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding tree, building or foliage coverage to minimize its visual impacts. (6) The wireless communication facility maximizes design characteristics to reduce or eliminate visual impacts and obtrusiveness. (7) Other adequate conditions have been placed on the wireless communication facility which will minimize any adverse impacts of the facility on adjoining properties. Conditions. The Planning Board shall consider the following in establishing conditions on the issuance of the special exception approval: (1) In rewew~ng special exception approval applications required by this section the Planning Board shall consider the Town's policy as stated in this article. (2) In approving a special exception the Planning Board may waive or reduce the criteria in this article, to the extent specified below, if the Planning Board concludes that the goals and stated purposes of this law are better served, and that doing so will have no detrimental effect on adjacent properties or on the public health, safety and welfare, and thereby: (a) Minimi?e proximity of the tower to residential structures or historic landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies. (b) Modify the planting of surrounding tree coverage and foliage to account for existing vegetation and land contours, but only to the extent that the existing vegetation achieves the purpose of concealing the structure. (c) Modify the design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that reduce or eliminate visual obtrusiveness. (3) Any special exception approval granted under this article shall have a term of five years, commencing from the grant of the special exception, which may be extended for an additional five-year term upon application to the Planning Board. Generated February 27, 2009 Page 22 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 On a renewal application, the applicant shall demonstrate that the wireless communication facility is in compliance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations and with all of the conditions of the special exception approval and site plan, that tile facility is necessary to provide adequate service, and that there is no reasonable alternative available to the owner which will provide adequate service without the continuing use of the facility. Subsequent special exception renewals shall be subiect to review by the Planning Board and subject to such standards that shall be included in the Town Code at that point in time. §280-74. Application requirements A. Fees. The following fees are in place of those required in other sections oftbe code. a. Building Permit Application Fees i. Minor modification $250 ii. Malor modification $500 iii. New facility $750 Site Plan Application Fees i. Major modification. $1000 ii. New facility $2000 Special Exception Application Fee $1000 Review by independent consultants. In all cases where the Town determines that a review of an application by a qualified expert is warranted, the applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such review, which cost will be assessed as an additional application fee. This payment shall be made to the Town prior to the review commencing and the decision being rendered On the application. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning. Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports will be provided to the applicant and an opportunity given to the applicant to respond to the content of the consultants' report prior to any decisions being made. Building Permit Application (1) The following application requirements are in additioh to those required in §144-8 C. a. Written analysis demonstrating the proiect complies with the Maximum Permissible Exposure regulations in accordance with § 280-71 J. (!) (5) Generated February 27, 2009 Page 23 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 Written documentation as to the facility's structural compliance with local, State and Federal Codes. c. Copies of all applicable FCC licenses, notices of proposed constmctiCn or alteration, federal environmental impact statements and other documents verifying compliance with federal, state and local regulations. (2) ReFz~ ~cm plann!ng Department Once the application is received in/he Building Department, it will be forwarded to the Planning Director for report and recommendations on compliance with §280-71 General Requirements, §280-72 Requirements for Permitted Use, and any technical consultant reports that may have been required. No building permit for a wireless facility may be granted prior to this report being submitted to the Building Inspector. Site Plan Application The following application requirements are in addition to those required in §280-133.' a. Seven copies of items a-c listed above at §280-74B(1) fzr the Building Permit Application h Aeronautical study or appropriate consultant's report demonstrating that the proposed facility will not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation· c. Visual Impact Analysis - renderings or computer graphics illustrating the appearance of the completed facility from ~ .... '~*' ~ ~ ~ ~" TM ...... * ......... residential and public vantage points to be determined by the Planning Board. d. Adjacent land uses, structures and zoning within 500 feet. e. The location in latitude and longitude, type and height of the wireless communication facility. f. A list of other carriers already located on the facility with the number, m':~ type, · ght orientation, effective radiated power, number of channels and operating frequencies of each antenna, including the proposed. g. Digital information about the facility (AutoCAD, Shapefile) that can be imported into a geographic information system depicting the search ring of eac-h-~m~ ...... , ..................... ~, .......... r, the proposed faclhty. h. A photo of the facility, if already existing. i. Location of landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies within 300 feet. Generated February 27, 2009 Page 24 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 j. Distances between the proposed facility and the following: i. the nearest residential structure, ii. the nearest property line with a residential use, iii. ail other structures. iv. Roads, rights of way, driveways k. Fall-zone radius and distance 1. Proposed means of access Elevation drawings with dimensions clearly indicated, including, diameter or width of the structure at its widest and narrowest, and the tallest point including antennas or lightening protection. n. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. Special Exception Application To make the determination on an application for special exception, the Planning Board shall require the follnwing in addition to the requirements of Article XXV: (1) Each application shall include a. One copyie~s of the building permit application b. On~ copy of the site plan application Each application shall include a written site location aitemative analysis describing the location of other sites considered, the availability of those sites, the extent to which other sites do or do not meet the provider's service or engineering needs and the reason why the subject site was chosen. d. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. (2) The applicant shall document to the satisfaction of the Plannin?. Board that a good-faith effort has heen made to locate or co-locate on existing towers or other available and appropriate buildings and structures, that it is not feasible to co- locate on an existing facility and that the proposed location is necessary to provide adequate service to the public. The documentation shall include a notarized statement by the applicant as to whether construction of the wireless Generated February 27, 2009 Page 25 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 200'9 (3) (4) (5) communication facility will accommodate co-location of additional antennas for future users Each application shall include a plan x0hich shall reference all existing wireless communication facility locations in the Town of Southold, any such facilities in the abutting towns which provide service to areas within the Town of Southold, any changes proposed within the following twelve-month period, including the applicant's plans for new locations and the discontinuance or relocation of existing Wireless facilities. Alternatively, at the beginning of the year the applicant may submit an annual wireless communication facility plan containing the aforementioned information for the calendar year. The Planning Board and Planning Department may retain technical consultants as they deem necessary to provide assistance in the review of the needs and site location alternatives analyses and other matters that the Board deems necessary. The applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such consultation, which cost shall be assessed as an additional application fee. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports shall be made available to the applicant upon acceptance of the final draft of the report by the Planning Board. A copy of the deed or lease agreement establishing applicant's right to use the parcel on which the wireless communication facility is to be located. tho Generated February 27, 2009 Page 26 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 trrm~.--..itting radio cncrg¥ at a pcwcr !crc! cqua! tc Lhc maximu:n ¢7-)(6) Propagation maps shall be submitted for existing coverage from existing surrounding and/or approved sites, coverage from all' alternative sites considered and coverage from the proposed site. Propagation maps shall include a minimum of three signal stxength depictions (-75dBm, -85dBm and -95dBm) and any other signal strength levels deemed appropriate by the Applicant based on the · Applicant's documented coverage and reliability needs. (s)(7) A "gap map" prepared and signed by a qualified radio frequency engineer and overlaid on an "existing coverage" background propagation map demonstratin~ the area(s) within which the applicant's existing service is not adequate. In addition, a search ring shall depicted indicating where the wireless communication facility needs to be located in order to provide adequate signal strength and/or capacity to the target gap area. The applicant must explain and document its standards and criteria for adequate signal strength, capacity and reliability and must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Board why these standards and criteria are applicable to the Town of Southold~ (93(8) The applicant must also explain to the Planning Board why 'it selected the proposed site, discuss the availability or lack thereof of a suitable structure within the search ring for collocation, and the extent to which the applicant has explored locating the proposed to~v~ facility in a more intensive use district Correspondence with other telecommunication providers concerning collocation is part of this requirement. The applicant shall also provide evidence supporting the existence of inadequate service. This may include the propagation maps cited above, drive test maps, traffic studies, customer complaint logs and similar data The applicant must also demonstrate to the Board that the proposed facility satisfies the demonstrated service deficiency to an equal or greater degree than any of the reasonably available alternatives. ~280-75. Historic buildings and districts. No wireless communication facility is allowed on any designated landmark property or district listed by federal, state or Town agencies, except as specified below, and subiect to §170 Landmark Preservation: A. Any wireless communication facility located on or within an historic structure listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall not alter the eharacter-definlng features, distinctive construction methods or original materials of the building_ B. Any alteration made to an historic structure to accommodate a wireless communication facility shall be fully reversible. Generated February 27, 2009 Page 27 Southold Town Board.- Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 C. Wireless communication facilities within an historic district listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall be concealed within or behind existing architectural features, so that thex(~are not visible. .§280-76. Site design standards. All wireless facilities, including co-locations~ shall be the least visually obtrusive design possible that also permits the applicant.to achieve its service needs. To that end, the following design standards shall apply to all wireless communication facilities installed or constructed pursuant to the terms of this chapter: A. Camouflage on buildings. Wireless antennas, if mounted on a building fagade, shall be flush mounted and painted or otherwise treated to blend with the faCade. When a wireless communication facility extends above the roof height of a building on which it is mounted, every effort shall be made to conceal the facility within or behind existing architectural features to limit its visibility from public and residential vantage points, yet permit the facility to perform its designated function. Facilities mounted on a roof shall be stepped back from the front facade in order to limit their impact on the building's silhouette. If antennas are part of the stepped back facility, the applicant shall submit an access control plan that precludes inadvertent access to the front faces of the antennas by building workers and the general public. The wireless communication facilities shall blend in with the existing building's architecture and shall be painted or shielded with material which is consistent with the design features and materials of the building. Setbacks. Towers and equipment facilities shall adhere to the setbacks for principal uses in the Bulk Schedule applicable to the zone in which the structure(s) are located, unless otherwise indicated elsewhere in this chapter. Do Signs. Signs shall not be permitted on facilities except for signs displaying contact information and safety instructions, which are required. Safety signs shall be in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for radio frequency radiation warning signs. Contact signs shall identify all service providers located on the facility and shall include normal and emergency contact information for each. Such signs shall not exceed five square feet in surface area. Bas q 'p t shelte ed..: .............. ,^ +[~ ..,.~ .......... :~.+:~_ rn~:,,. ..... ~v.~ ,,~..w~^~+~ "':+~':......-- ..... ~- '~,~-"--..~:~+:~ ~'":~:~v ~'--~---r, ~ ........... ~, ............ For newly constructed wireless facilities, a base equipment shelter is limited to 500 square feet in floor area. If the newly constructed wireless facility is designed for co-location, the facility may be up to 1,000 square feet The base equipment shelter shall be constructed with a finish similar to that of adiacent structures on the property and integrated into the architectural style. The shelter.and associated fencing must be entirely screened from view by evergreen plantings. The new plantings must be of sufficient size to accomplish the screening within six months. Any newly constructed base equipment shelter shall be located in Generated February 27, 2009 Page 28 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 accordance with the minimum height and yard reqmrements of the zoning district applicable to the site, and up to two adiacent off-street parking spaces may be provided for service vehicles. Site lighting. The lighting permitted shall be the minimum required to protect the public welfare. Facilities sited on existing developed sites shall be incorporated into the 1 ghting plans of those sites. Outside lighting shall use fully-shielded fixtures so that the light source is not visible from beyond the property line, and no light is reflected or shone towards the sky, except in the case of structures required to follow FAA guidelines for safety lighting. Access. Access to wireless facilities shall be from already established site access points whenever possible. Dish antennas. Dish antennas shall be colored, camouflaged or screened to the extent that they are as unobtrusive as possible, and in no case shall the diameter of a dish antenna exceed six feet. Electric line setback. Except for wireless facilities specifically designed for mounting on electric transmission towers, or within the footprint of such towers, no wireless communication facility shall be located nearer to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than 220 volts than a distance equal to the facility's height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached Co-location. Wireless communication facilities shall be designed to provide for co- location by multiple providers or designed so that the, can be retrofitted to accommodate multiple providers, wherever possible. ~.J. Scenic landscapes and vistas. All antenna support structures which are not concealed inside of buildings or sc3eened by existing trees or buildings, must be surrounded by a planted buffer of dense tree growth. An antenna support structure that is located within a scenic vista or scenic landscape or within 300' of a scenic road, as designated by the Town, shall not be taller than ten feet above the height of trees within a 300' radius of the proposed location, or 35' maximum in the absence of trees. Base landscaping. A screen of evergreen trees shall be planted outside the fence of the telecommunication tower base area to provide a visual screen or buffer for adjoinin~ private properties and the public right-of-way or other vantage points accessible to the public. The screen shall consist of a double row of evergreen shrubs and trees that are of sufficiem density and height to immediately screen the base equipment from view. Required front yard setback areas shall be landscaped and include shrubs and trees. Generated February 27, 2009 Page 29 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2009 Survivability of the landscaping shall be ~uaranteed and maintained by the applicant for the lif0 of the installation. G.L. Color. Antenna support structures in the form of monopoles or other towers shall either be blue/gray in color, or be colored appropriate to the context of the structure's location so that the tower is as unobtrusive as possible, unless otherwise required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). If a wireless communication facility is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be o£ a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the colors of the supporting structure'so as to make the antenna and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. g~.M. Wireless facilities sited within new structures meant to mimic some other structure or natural feature must be designed at a scal~ compatible with the community, be unobtrusive, and characteristic of the area. Camcufiage ~7 vcg:tat~;n f~.r residcrXial screen:.ng. Antenna supPort structures in or adiacent to residential zones. Where the site proposed for an gr~ antenna support structure is located within a residential zone or has one or more property lines abutting or on the opposite side of a street from a residential zone or use permitted in a residential zone, no antenna support structures may be constructed unless adequately screened from view of those residential zones by existing buildings or large trees, including evergreens. The structure may protrude no more than 10' above screening buildings and/or trees. In the absence of an adequate arrangement of existing large trees or buildings to provide eamcuSage effective screening, the height of the proposed structure may be no more than 35', and the base equipment must be buffed in an underground vault. Two rows of evergreen trees must be planted encimling the structure, one row at a distance fi.om the structure of 50% of the height of the structure, and the other at 90% of the height of the structure. Transplanted trees shall have a minimum caliper of three inches, spaced thirty- feet on center. The trees must have an expected height at maturity of at least 10' less than the height of the structure to be screened. Smaller evergreen shrubs must be used to fill in the gaps in between for screening during the time the trees are filling in and maturing. The Planning Board may vary the arrangement of the trees and shrubs to accommodate specific site conditions, and accomplish the goal of screening the facility from view of residential properties. A written guarantee from the wireless facility's owner shall be' required to ensure that the plantings survive and are maintained throughout the existence of the installation. G.O. Commemial and industrial siting. Towers to be sited on developed commercial or industrial properties shall be located to the rear of other principal buildings and shall not Generated February 27, 2009 Page 30 Southold Town Board ~ Letter Board Meeting of February 24, 2069 encroach on planting buffers, parking areas or otherwise impair the operation of previously approved systems such as stormwater drainage basins. Existing buildings and structures should be used in the siting of freestanding tow. ers to contribute to the vis-.! screening of the tower. §280 78 77. Removal. A. Any wireless communication facility that is not operated for a continuous period of 1 ? months shall be deemed abandoned. At that time the owner of the wireless communication facility shall remove same within 90.days of such deemed abandonment. in the case of a wireless communication facility on preexisting structures, this provision shall apply to the wireless communication facility only. If the wireless communication facility is not removed within the said 90 days, the Building Inspectors may, with the approval of the Town Board, give the owner notice that unless the removal is accomplished in 30 days, the Town will cause the removal at the owners expense. The grant of a site plan approval under this article shall include requiring the applicant to post a decommissioning bond and irrevocable permission to the Town to accomplish removal of the wireless communication facility under this article. ~280 7978. Nonconforming uses. Preexisting telecommunication towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. New construction, other than maintenance on a preexisting facility, shall comply with the requirements of this article. §280 8079. [Reserved]. §280-81- 80. Severability. The various parts, sections and clauses of this article are hereby declared to be severable. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as ,n whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid~ §280 -,°2 81. Effective Date. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell Generated February 27, 2009 Page 31 ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 29, 2009 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net £ECEJV~D 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the proposed Local Law listed below on February 3, 2009: 4:35 PM - A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communication Facilities and also PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on January 20, 2009: Local Law itl: Limit size of dwellings units in Residential Site Plans in Hamlet Density District Local Law it 2 Design standards and regulations for Residential Site Plans Local Law it 3: Open Space in subdivisions in the Hamlet Density Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachme/nts cc: /Suffolk Comnty Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Email: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors SouXhold Town Building Department S~natu~, Receive~ By/ Please print nme Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals Date: DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK ELIZABETH A. NEVII,I,E, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.nor th fork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 29, 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the proposed Local Law listed below on February 3, 2009: 4:35 PM - A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communication Facilities ~and also PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on January 20, 2009: Local Law #1: Limit size of dwellings units in Residential Site Plans in Hamlet Density District Local Law # 2 Design standards and regulations for Residential Site Plans Local Law # 3: Open Space in subdivisions in the Hamlet Density Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments cc: S~ffolk County Department of Planning t~illage of Greenport Town of Riverhead Email: Southold Town Planning Board Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Building Department pdnt name ~J Southold Town Board of Appeals DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 29, 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the proposed Local Law listed below on February 3, 2009: 4:35 PM - A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communication Facilities dso PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on January 20, 2009: Local Law Itl: Limit size of dwellings units in Residential Site Plans in Hamlet Density District Local Law # 2 Design standards and regulations for Residential Site Plans Local Law # 3: Open Space in subdivisions in the Hamlet Density Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments cc: Suffolk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport ~wn of Riverhead Email: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors So~T[~..ow~ld ~'o .uil~gj~.' ' ent Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals Signatur.~NReceived By Please print name Date: Title: DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 29, 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of thc Town of Southold will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the proposed Local Law listed below on February 3, 2009: 4:35 PM - A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communication Facilities and also PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on January 20, 2009: Local Law #1: Limit size of dwellings units in Residential Site Plans in Hamlet Density District Local Law # 2 Design standards and regulations for Residential Site Plans Local Law # 3: Open Space in subdivisions in the Hamlet Density Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments cc: Suffolk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Email: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk ~ong Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals Southold Town Bu'~e~partment Signatu~ei,!~ ei, e,, ~B~;~ Please prat nme ' - Date: Title: DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.north fork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 29, 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the proposed Local Law listed below on February 3, 2009: 4:35 PM - A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communication Facilities also PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on January 20, 2009: Local Law #1: Limit size of dwellings units in Residential Site Plans in Hamlet Density District Local Law # 2 Design standards and regulations for Residential Site Plans Local Law # 3: Open Space in subdivisions in the Hamlet Density Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments cc: Suflblk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Email: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Building Department S~gnature, ,Rec~eiyed By Please ~rint name Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island ~Town of Southampton Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals Date: Title: DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS M~NAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 29, 2009 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a PUBLIC HEARING on the proposed Local Law listed below on February 3, 2009: 4:35 PM - A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communication Facilities also PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold has Enacted the following Local Laws listed below on January 20, 2009: Local Law #1: Limit size of dwellings units in Residential Site Plans in Hamlet Density District Local Law # 2 Design standards and regulations for Residential Site Plans Local Law # 3: Open Space in subdivisions in the Hamlet Density Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments cc: Suffolk County Department of Planning Village of Greenport Town of Riverhead Email: Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Assessors Southold Town Building Department Signature, Rece~ed~By J - Please print name) ~ Elizabeth A. Neville Town Clerk Long Island State Park Commission /ff~own of Shelter Island Town of Southampton Southold Town Trustees Southold Town Board of Appeals Date: Title: DUPLICATE TO BE SIGNED AND RETURNED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK PATI~ICIA A. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY patricia.finnegan~town.southold.ny.us KIERAN M. CORCORAN ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY kieran.corcoran (~a;town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse~town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk From: Lynne Krauza Secretary to the Town Attorney February 6, 2009 LL/Wireless Communications Facilities SEQRA Date: Subject: For your records, I am enclosing the original, fully executed Short Environmental Assessment Form in connection with the referenced matter. have retained a copy of this document in our file. We Also attached is a copy of the resolution authorizing Scott to sign this document. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Thank you for your attention. Ilk Enclosures cc: Members of the Town Board (w/encls.) Patricia A. Finnegan, Esq., Town Attorney (w/encls.) '".- ORIGINAL Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor) 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR [2. PROJECT NAME Town of Southold Town Board / "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality TownofSouthold County Suffolk 4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map) Town of Southold 5. PROPOSED ACTION IS: [] New [] Expansion [] Modification/alteration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: Repeal "ARTICLE XVII. Wireless Communications Facilities" and replaced with "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities." 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially [N/~ acres Ultimately NA acres 8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? [] Yes [] No If NO, describe bdefly 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? [] Residential [] Industria~ [] Commercial [] Agdcelture [] ParkJFomst/Open Space [] Other Describe: The proposed" Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities." is applicable town-wide. 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)? [] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and pon'nit/approvals: 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? [] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and pelto/t/approvals: Not applicable 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? [] Yes [] No I CERTIFY THAT THE IN~RMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name;Signature: __~J~-,~~ Date: 2/2/09 I If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the I Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment I OVER PART II - IMPACT ASSESSMENT (To be completed by Leah Agency) A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.47 If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL FAF. ~--~ Yes I~No B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency. r-lyes lNo C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible) C1. Existing air quality, sudaco or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic pattern, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: None C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or ether natural or cultural resources; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly: None C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: None C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly: None C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities litiely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly: None C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C59 Explain briefly: None C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly: None D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN tMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)? [] Yes [] No If Yes, explain briefly: E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? [] Yes [] No If Yes, explain briefly: PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f} magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was checked yes, the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristics of the CEA. EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. [] Checkthis box if youhave determined, based on the inf°rmati°n and analysis ab°ye and any supp°rting d°cumentati°n' that the pr°posed acti°n WILl' NOT result in any significant adverse environmenfal impacts AND provide, on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination Town of Southold Town Board Name of Lead Agency Scott Russell /~ Print or Ty~~nc~ Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency 2/2/09 Date Supervisor Title of Responsible Officer Signa;~ Preparer (I;Tent fm~,~ible omco, SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD PUBLIC HEARING February 3, 2009 4:35 PM Present: Supervisor Scott Russell Justice Louisa Evans Councilman Thomas Wickham Councilman Albert Krupski, Jr. Councilman William Ruland Councilman Vincent Orlando Assistant Town Attorney Kieran Corcoran Town Clerk Elizabeth Neville This hearing was opened at 5:01 PM COUNCILMAN W1CKHAM: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 20th day of January, 2009 a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" and NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 3rd day of February, 2009 at 4:35 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. OF 2009 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities". BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Article XVII entitled "Wireless Communications Facilities" is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced as follows: §280-67. Purpose A. It is the express purpose of this article to minimize the visual and environmental impacts of wireless communication facilities while protecting the health, safety and welfare of Southold's citizens and allowing wireless service providers to meet their technological and service objectives. This article allows wireless communication Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 facilities, to be reviewed and approved in keeping with the Town's existing zoning and historic development patterns, including the size and spacing of structures. The goals of the following sections are to accomplish the following: a. Site wireless facilities in these preferred locations: i. Within or on existing buildings and structures where the antennas are invisible (or nearly so) from public and residential vantage points; ii. Industrial areasl b. Take into account the aesthetic aspects of the Town, including open vistas, scenic byways and historic districts, when designing and siting wireless communication facilities. 2 §280-68. Scope. The regulations of this article shall govern and control the erection, enlargement, expansion, alteration, operation, maintenance, relocation and removal of all wireless communication facilities. The regulations of this article relate to the location and design of these facilities and shall be in addition to the provisions of the Southold Building and Zoning Codes and any other federal, state or local laws or Federal Communication Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other regulations pertaining to such facilities. Nothing herein shall be construed to, apply to, prohibit, regulate or otherwise affect the erection, maintenance or utilization of antennas or support structures by those licensed by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to Chapter 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, to operate amateur radio stations. §280-69. Definitions As used in this article, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below: ANTENNA Any transmitting or receiving device, including whip (omnidirectional antenna), panel (directional antenna), disc (parabolic antenna) or similar device, mounted in or on a tower, monopole, building or structure and used in communications that radiate or capture electromagnetic waves, digital signals, analog signal, radio frequencies (excluding radar signals), wireless telecommunications signals or other communications signals. ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE Any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for wireless telephone, television, radio and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers and monopoles. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, camouflaged tower structures, and the like. The term includes the structure and any support thereto. The term does not include wireless facilities located inor on existing buildings or structures that previously existed or are being constructed for a primary purpose other than a wireless facility e.g. water tower, electric utility pole, or church steeple. BASE EQUIPMENT Ground-mounted equipment integral to the operation of an antenna system. Base equipment typically includes, but is not limited to, communications Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 3 February 3, 2009 equipment cabinet/shelter, backup power supplies, generators, electric and telecommunications backboards, wiring, grounding loops, equipment enclosures, security fencing and lighting. CO-LOCATION The use of a single mount on the ground by more than one provider (vertical co-location) and/or several mounts 6n an existing tower, building or structure by more than one carrier for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. Eq}UIPMENT SHELTER An enclosed structure at the base of the mount within which is housed the base equipment for a wireless communications facility. FALL ZONE The area on the ground within a prescribed radius from the base of a wireless communications facility. The fall zone is the area within which there might be a potential hazard from falling debris or collapsing material, including the antenna support stmcture. GUYED ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that is supported, in whole or in part, by guy wire and ground anchors. HEIGHT When referring to a tower or other antenna support structure, the distance measured from the average preexisting grade level within a radius of 300' to the highest point on the tower or structure, including antennas, lightening protection devices or any other apparatus attached to the top of the tower or antenna support structure. LATTICE ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that has open-framed supports on three or four sides and is constructed without guy wires and ground anchors. MODIFICATION The addition, removal, or change of any of the physical and visually discemable components or aspects of a wireless facility, such as antennas, cabling, radios, equipment shelters, landscaping, fencing, utility feeds, changing the color or materials of any visually discemable components, vehicular access, parking and/or an upgrade or replacement of the equipment for better or more modem equipment. Adding a new wireless carrier or service provider (co-location) to a wireless communications tower or site is a modification. A modification shall not include ordinary maintenance, as defined herein. Modifications shall be classified as maior or minor. A~. MAJOR MODIFICATION -- Improvements to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure that result in a substantial change to the facility or structure. Major modifications include, but are not limited to, (1) Extending the height of the antenna support structure by more than 5 feet above its current height; (2) Replacement of the structure; (3) Expansion of the base equipment or compound area beyond ten percent of the current floor area. (4) Addition of antennas to an existing carrier's antenna array (5) Co-location B._:. MINOR MODIFICATION - Improvements to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure, that result in a material change to the facility or structure but of a level, quality or intensity that Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 4 is less than a substantial change. Such minor modifications include, but are not limited to, replacement of antennas and accessory equipment on a like-for-like basis within an existing wireless telecommunications facility and relocating the antennas of approved wireless telecommunications facilities to different height levels on an existing antenna support structure upon which they are currently located. MONOPOLE A freestanding antenna support structure consisting of a single pole, without guy wires or ground anchors. MOUNT The structure or surface upon which antennas are mounted and/or the location of the antenna, e.g.: A. ROOF-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the roof of a building. B. SIDE-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the side of a building. C. STRUCTURE-MOUNTED -- Mounted on a structure other than a building. D. FLUSH-MOUNTED - Mounted very close on a building or structure so that the profile of the antenna(s) is not readily apparent. E. INTERIOR-MOUNTED - Mounted within a building or other structure so that the antennas are not visible from the outside. F. GROUND-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the ground. ORDINARY MAINTENANCE - Work done to an existing wireless telecommunications facility and antenna support structure for the purpose of maintaining them in good operating condition. Ordinary maintenance includes inspections and testing to maintain functionality, aesthetic and structural integrity, and involves the norn3, al repair of a wireless facility without adding, removing, or changing anything and therefore does not include mino? and maior modifications. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) PROFESSIONAL A person who specializes in the study of radio frequency engineering and has expertise in radio communication facilities. RADIO FREQUENCY 0IF} EMISSIONS or RADIATION The electromagnetic field of radiation emitted by wireless antennas. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) SIGNAL The actual beam or radio waves sent and received by a wireless facility. A signal is the deliberate product of a wireless antenna. The RF radiation is the by-product. WIRELESS CARRIER - A company that provides wireless telecommunications services. WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY - Antenna or antenna support structure and base equipment, either individually or together, including permanent or temporary moveable facilities (i.e. wireless facilities mounted on vehicles, boats or other mobile structures) used for the provision of any wireless service. WIRELESS SERVICES - Commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange services, including, but not limited to, voice, data, images or other information, cellular telephone service, personal communications service (PCS), and paging service. §280-70. Applieabili .ty~ permitted uses Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 A. No wireless communication facilit~ shall be used, erected or altered in the Town of Southold except in accordance with the provisions of this article and any other applicable sections of the Town Code. B. All wireless communication facilities, and modifications to such facilities (as defined in §280-69) shall require a building permit, except in cases of ordinary maintenance, as defined in §280-69. C. Building Permit Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring only a building permit. without the requirement of site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Minor modifications (defined in 280-69); or (2) Design standards for permitted use in §280-72, as applicable to specifications in (3) below; and (3) Location and design: i. New wireless facility that is interior-mounted in an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII zoning districts; or ii. Maior modification, including co-location, on an existing antenna support structure or other wireless facility holding all valid permits and causing essentially no visible change to the exterior. D. Site Plan Approval Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring a building permit and site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Design Standards for Permitted use as applicable to specifications in (2) below.. (2) Location and design: i. New wireless facility that is roof or side-mounted to an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or Mil zoning, districts; or ii. Maior modification, including co-location, to an existing wireless facility holding all valid permits in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII zoning districts and causing a visible change to the exterior. E. All other wireless communication facilities, maior modifications, and co-locations require a building permit, site plan approval, and a special exception approval by the Planning Board. §280-71. General requirements for all wireless communication facilities A. No new antenna support structures may be constructed without a carrier licensed by the FCC as co-applicant. An FCC-licensed provider of wireless communications services must be the applicant or the co-applicant for any proposed new wireless communication facility, co-location or modification. B. Guyed or lattice antenna support structures are prohibited Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 6 February 3, 2009 C. Antenna support structures shall not be located in the following areas: (~) (2) (3) (4) Wetlands, tidal and freshwater; Land above high groundwater (within ten feet of the surface). Within 500' of residences; Lands pumhased with Community Preservation Funds; (5) Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas; (6) Designated parkland. D. Antenna support structures may not exceed 80 feet in height. E. Antenna support structures maynot belocated within 500' of residences F. The fall zone of an antenna support structure must not include areas where people congregate, and must be clear of all structures except the base equipment shelter. G. Antenna support structures shall not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. Antenna support structures are allowed in the following zoning districts: LI, LIO, MI, MII, B, and HB, with the following restrictions: (1) Minimum lot size i. LI, LIO, B & HB - in accordance with the bulk schedule for each zone ii. MI &MII - five acres Antenna support structures are not allowed in AC, R-40, R-80, R-120, R-200, R- 400, LB, RO, RR, HD, or AHD zoning districts, except under the following conditions (these are in addition to any other applicable conditions): (1) Minimum area surrounding the proposed location: five contiguous acres of vacant land restricted from future residential development by deed; and (2) Maximum height: 45'; and (3) The structure is a monopole with interior-mounted antennas, or a suitable unobtrusive camouflage structure; and Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 7 (4) Structure is screened from view from surrounding properties by dense vegetation and trees, either planted or existing, and meeting the site design appearance criteria for residential zones in Section 280-77 (5) Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at an outside location 10 feet from the equipment shelter; and (6) Minimum distance of all wireless equipment to adjacent residential property lines or street shall be no less than 500 feet. J. Radio emissions must fall within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC. (1) A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless communication facility must be provided by the applicant. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional' specializing in radio communication facilities. (2) The results from the analysis must cleai'ly show that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public access) are within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC which are in effect at the time of the application. (3) The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must cite the specific formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and must include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co-located with an existing facility, or is designed for future expansion or co-location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, or likely to be on, the facility in the future must also be analyzed. (4) The power density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 (5) 8 The conclusions of the power density analysis must be corroborated by an independent radio frequency engineer retained by the Town to provide such determinations. §280-72. Design standards for permitted uses (these are in addition to the General Requirements listed above) a. Fall-zones. An antenna support structure must include an area surrounding it that is free of other structures and uses, except the base equipment, with a radius equal to a distance of two times the height of the structure. A smaller fall-zone may be allowed if supported by a report submitted by a qualified structural engineer, and corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town, that demonstrates that a smaller fall zone is safe. b. Major modifications causing essentially no visible change in the appearance of the exterior means that the antennas are interior-mounted in the existing structure and are not visible from the outside after installation. The base equipment area is expanded by no more than 10% of its existing floor area, and is entirely screened from view from any public or residential vantage points, including all roads, yards, and commercial buildings the public enters. Exceptionally well-designed flush-mounted antennas may also fall into this category if they present no visible profile protruding from the surface to which they are mounted, and are camouflaged to blend in with the background surface to which they are mounted. Interior-mounted facilities in existing buildings shall be constructed so that the outward appearance of the building or structure before and after the installation is complete is identical or nearly identical. The addition of a significant architectural feature on to an existing building that is visible from outside for the purpose of accommodating interior-mounted antennas shall require a special exception. d. Roof-mounted facilities shall conform to the following requirements: i. Visual impact minimized to the greatest extent possible; ii. Height limited to no more than 10 feet above the highest point of the building e. Side-mounted facilities shall be flush-mounted and painted or otherwise camouflaged to blend with the fa¢ade or background materials of the structure. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 Co-locations shall not extend the height of the structure more than ten feet over the original approved structure. To prevent the incremental extension of height over time, any subsequent application with a proposed extension beyond the first ten feet shall require special exception review and approval. g. Base equipment i. Located within an existing shelter or building, not to be expanded beyond an additional ten percent of floor ama; or ii. Located in an underground vault, with any above-ground components screened from view with evergreen planting;, or iii. Entirely concealed from view with dense evergreen planting so that all equipment, shelters, fences, gates and other associated structures are not visible from any vantage point. Plantings shall be of sufficient size to achieve this screening effect immediately upon planting. iv. Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at the nearest property lines of all adiacent residences. §280-73. Special exception approval. A. Authority. For the purposes of this section, the Planning Board shall be empowered to issue a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, subject to the provisions of this chapter. This supercedes Article XXV in that the Planning Board is the reviewing board in place of the Zoning Board of Appeals for wireless communication facilities that require Special Exception approval. The remainder of Article XXV remains in effect and shall apply to the Planning Board's consideration of a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, together with the additional standards and requirements in this section. Standards. In addition to the standards in Article XXV of this Code, no special exception approval shall be granted unless the Planning Board specifically finds and determines the following: (1) The applicant is a public utility duly authorized to provide service in the Town of Southold. The proposed carrier shall be identified as the applicant or co- applicant. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 10 (2) Construction of the proposed facility or modification of the existing facility is a public necessity, in that it is required to meet current or expected demands of the telecommunications provider and to render adequate service to the public. (3) The applicant has made substantial effort to co-locate with existing wireless facilities, or, failing that, has made substantial effort to locate on municipally- owned land or structures, or within or on existing buildings or structures. (4) The facility conforms with applicable regulations of the FCC, FAA and other authorities having jurisdiction. (5) There are compelling reasons which make it more feasible to construct the proposed facilities rather than alternatives. C. Matters to be considered. In addition to the matters to be considered in Article XXV of this Code, the Planning Board shall give consideration to the following in issuing a special approval for wireless communication facilities: (1) The proposed structure must be demonstrated to be the lowest height above the ground feasible to achieve the service needs of the carrier(s). The rationale behind the explanation by the applicant must be corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town. (2) The wireless communication facility has been situated to minimize its proximity and visi .bility to residential structures, residential district boundaries and landmarks designated by Town, federal or state agencies. (3) The wireless communication facility is designed and situated to be compatible with the nature of uses on adjacent and nearby property. (4) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding topography to minimize its visual impacts. (5) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding tree, building or foliage coverage to minimize its visual impacts. (6) The wireless communication facility maximizes design characteristics to reduce or eliminate visual impacts and obtrusiveness. (7) Other adequate conditions have been placed on the wireless communication facility which will minimize any adverse impacts of the facility on adjoining properties. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 11 February 3, 2009 Conditions. The Planning Board shall consider the following in establishing conditions on the issuance of the special exception approval: (1) In reviewing special exception approval applications required by this section the Planning Board shall consider the Town's policy as stated in this article. (2) In approving a special exception the Planning Board may waive or reduce the criteria in this article, to the extent specified below, if the Planning Board concludes that the goals and stated purposes of this law are better served, and that doing so will have no detrimental effect on adjacent properties or on the public health, safety and welfare, and thereby: (a) Minimize proximity of the tower to residential structures or historic landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies. (b) Modify the planting of surrounding tree coverage and foliage to account for existing vegetation and land contours, but only to the extent that the existing vegetation achieves the purpose of concealing the structure. (c) Modify the design of the tower, with particular referende to design characteristics that reduce or eliminate visual obtrusiveness. (3) At the request of the Building Inspectors, which shall be no more frequently than annually, the provider shall have each wireless communication facility inspected at its own expense, and a copy of the inspection report shall be promptly transmitted to the Building Inspector. Radio emission inspections shall be performed by a qualified person specializing in radio frequency engineering with expertise in radio communication facilities. The radio emission report shall describe the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the facility, including the cumulative effects of collocated antennas. In the event that the radio emission inspection indicates that the electromagnetic energy generated from the facility is above the allowable limits stated within the applicable FCC or ANSI standards or other applicable state or federal guidelines in effect, the applicant shall cease all use of the facility until such time as it proves to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy to be generated are below the applicable standards. Additionally, at the request of the building inspector, which shall be no more frequently than every three years, the provider shall provide a structural inspection report prepared by a structural engineer. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 12 (4) Any special exception approval granted under this article shall~have a term of five years, commencing from the grant of the special exception, which may be extended for an additional five-year term upon application to the Planning Board. On a renewal application, the applicant shall demonstrate that the wireless communication facility is in compliance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations and with all of the conditions of the special exception approval and site plan, that the facility is necessary to provide adequate service, and that there is no reasonable alternative available to the owner which will provide adequate service without the continuing use of the facility. Subsequent special exception renewals shall be subject to review by the Planning Board and subject to such standards that shall be included in the Town Code at that point in time. §280-74. Application requirements A. Fees. The following fees are in place of those required in other sections of the code. a. Building Permit Application Fees i. Minor modification $250 ii. Major modification $500 iii. New facility $750 b. Site Plan Application Fees i. Major modification. $1000 ii. New facility $2000 c. Special Exception Application Fee $1000 Review by independent consultants. In all cases where the Town determines that a review of an application by a qualified expert is warranted, the applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such review, which cost will be assessed as an additional application fee. This payment shall be made to the Town prior to the review commencing and the decision being rendered on the application. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants~ qualifications~ findings and reports will be provided to the applicant and an opportunity given to the applicant to respond to the content of the consultants' report prior to any decisions being made. B. Building Permit Application Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 13 The following application requirements are in addition to those required in § 144-8 (1) Written analysis demonstrating the project complies with the Maximum Permissible Exposure regulations in accordance with § 280-71 J. (1)-(5). (2) Written documentation as to the facility's structural compliance with local, State and Federal Codes. (3) Copies of all applicable FCC licenses, notices of proposed construction or alteration, federal environmental impact statements and other documents verifying compliance with federal, state and local regulations. (4) Report from Planning Department on compliance with the General Requirements, Design Standards for Permitted Use, and any technical consultant reports that may have been required. No building permit for a wireless facility may be granted prior to this report being submitted. C. Site plan Application The following application requirements are in addition to those required in §280- 133. a. Seven copies of items A.1-3 listed above for the Building Permit Application Aeronautical study or appropriate consultant's report demonstrating that the proposed facility will not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. Visual Impact Analysis - renderings or computer graphics illustrating the appearance of the completed facility from all residential and public vantage points. d. Adjacent land uses, structures and zoning within 500 feet. e. The location in latitude and longitude, type and height of the wireless communication facility. A list of other carriers already located on the facility with the number and type of antennas for each, and the capacity of each carrier at that location, including the proposed. Digital information about the facility (AutoCAD, Shapefile) that can be imported into a geographic information system depicting the search ring of each carrier already located on the facility, including the proposed. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 14 February 3, 2009 h. A photo of the facility, if already existing. i. Location of landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies within 300 feet. j. Distances between the proposed facility and the following: i. the nearest residential structure, ii. the nearest property line with a residential use, iii. all other structures. iv. Roads, rights of way, driveways k. Fall-zone radius and distance 1. Proposed means of access m. Elevation drawings with dimensions clearly indicated, including diameter of the structure at its widest and narrowest, and the tallest point including antennas or lightening protection. n. Other information deemed by th.e Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. Special Exception Application To make the determination on an application for special exception, the Planning Board shall require the following in addition to the requirements of Article XXV: (1) Each application shall include a. One copies of the building permit application b. Once copy of the site plan application Each application shall include a written site location alternative analysis describing the location of other sites considered, the availability of those sites, the extent to which other sites do or do not meet the provider's service or engineering needs and the reason why the subject site was chosen. d. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. (2) The applicant shall document to the satisfaction of the Planning Board that a good-faith effort has been made to locate or co-locate on existing towers Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 15 February 3, 2009 or other available and appropriate buildings and structures, that it is not feasible to co-locate on an existing facility and that the proposed location is necessary to provide adequate service to the public. The documentation shall include a notarized statement by the applicant as to whether construction of the wireless communication facility will accommodate co- location of additional antennas for future users (3) Each application shall include a plan which shall reference all existing wireless communication facility locations in the Town of Southold, any such facilities in the abutting towns which provide service to areas within the Town of Southold, any changes proposed within the following twelve- month period, including the applicant's plans for new locations and the discontinuance or relocation of existing wireless facilities. Alternatively, at the beginning of the year the applicant may submit an annual wireless communication facility plan containing the aforementioned information for the calendar year. (4) The Planning Board and Planning Department may retain technical consultants as they deem necessary to provide assistance in the review of the needs and site location alternatives analyses and other matters that the Board deems necessary. The applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such consultation, which cost shall be assessed as an additional application fee. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports shall be made available to the applicant upon acceptance of the final draft of the report by the Planning Board. (5) (6) A copy of the deed or lease agreement establishing applicant's right to use the parcel on which the wireless communication facility is to be located. A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless communication facility. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional specializing in radio communication facilities. The results from the analysis must clearly show that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public access) are within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC which are in effect at the time of the application. The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must cite the specific formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and must Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 16 include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co-located with an existing facility, or is designed for future expansion or co-location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, or likely to be on, the facility in the future must also be analyzed. The power density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. (7) Propagation maps shall be submitted for existing coverage from existing surrounding and/or approved sites, coverage from all alternative sites considered and coverage from the proposed site. Propagation maps shall include a minimum of three signal strength depictions (-75dBm, -85dBm and -95dBm) and any other signal strength levels deemed appropriate by the Applicant based on the Applicant's documented coverage and reliability needs. (8) A "gap map" prepared and signed by a qualified radio frequency engineer and overlaid on an "existing coverage" background propagation map demonstrating the area(s) within which the applicant's existing service is not adequate. In addition, a search ring shall depicted indicating where the wireless communication facility needs to be located in order to provide adequate signal strength and/or capacity to the target gap area. The applicant must explain and document its standards and criteria for adequate signal strength, capaci!y and reliability and must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Board why these standards and criteria are applicable to the Town of Southold. (9)' The applicant must also explain to the Planning Board why it selected the proposed site, discuss the availability or lack thereof of a suitable structure within the search ring for collocation, and the extent to which the applicant has explored locating the proposed tower in a more intensive use district. Correspondence with other telecommunication providers concerning collocation is part of this requirement. The applicant shall also provide evidence supporting the existence of inadequate service. This may include the propagation maps cited above, drive test maps, traffic studies, customer complaint logs and similar data. The applicant must also demonstrate to the Board that the proposed facility satisfies the demonstrated service deficiency to an equal or greater degree than any of the reasonably available alternatives. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 17 §280-75. Historic buildings and districts. No wireless communication facility is allowed on any designated landmark property or district listed by federal, state or Town agencies, except as specified below, and subiect to § 170 Landmark Preservation: A. Any wireless communication facility located on or within an historic structure listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall not alter the character-defining features, distinctive construction methods or original materials of the building. Any alteration made to an historic structure to accommodate a wireless communication facility shall be fully reversible. C. Wireless communication facilities within an historic district listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall be concealed within or behind existing architectural features, so that they are not visible. §280~76. Site design standards. The following design standards shall apply to all wireless communication facilities installed or constructed pursuant to the terms of this chapter: A. Camouflage on buildings. Wireless antennas, if mounted on a building faCade, shall be flush mounted and painted or otherwise treated to blend with the facade. When a wireless communication facility extends above the roof height of a building on which it is mounted, every effort shall be made to conceal the facility within or behind existing architectural features to limit its visibility from public and residential vantage points, yet permit the facility to perform its designated function. Facilities mounted on a roof shall be stepped back from the front facade in order to limit their impact on the building's silhouette. If antennas are part of the stepped back facility, the applicant shall submit an access control plan that precludes inadvertent access to the front faces of the antennas by building workers and the general public. The wireless communication facilities shall blend in with the existing building's architecture and shall be painted or shielded with material which is consistent with the design features and materials of the building. Setbacks. Towers and equipment facilities shall adhere to the setbacks for principal uses in the Bulk Schedule applicable to the zone in which the structure(s) are located, unless otherwise indicated elsewhere in this chapter. Signs. Signs shall not be permitted on facilities except for signs displaying contact information and safety instructions, which are required. Safety signs shall be in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for radio frequency radiation warning signs. Contact signs shall identify all service prox(iders located on the facility and shall include normal and emergency contact information for each. Such signs shall not exceed five square feet in surface area. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 18 Base equipment shelter. Equipment accessory to the wireless communication facility may be located within an existing building or in an underground vault. For newly constructed wireless facilities, a base equipment shelter is limited to 500 square feet in floor area. If the newly constructed wireless facility is designed for co-location, the facility may be up to 1,000 square feet. The base equipment · shelter shall be constructed with a finish similar to that of adjacent structures on the property and integrated into the architectural style. The shelter and associated fencing must be entirely screened from view by evergreen plantings. The new plantings must be of sufficient size to accomplish the screening within six months. Any newly constructed base equipment shelter shall be located in accordance with the minimum height and yard requirements of the zoning district applicable to the site, and up to two adjacent off-street parking spaces may be provided for service vehicles. Site lighting. The lighting permitted shall be the minimum required to protect the public welfare. Facilities sited on existing developed sites shall be incorporated into the lighting plans of those sites. Outside lighting shall use fully-shielded fixtures so that the light source is not visible from beyond the property line, and no light is reflected or shone towards the sky, except in the case of structures required to follow FAA guidelines for safety lighting. Access. Access to wireless facilities shall be from already established site access points whenever possible. Dish antennas. Dish antennas shall be colored, camouflaged or screened to the extent that they are as unobtrusive as possible, and in no case shall the diameter of a dish antenna exceed six feet. Electric line setback. Except for wireless facilities specifically designed for mounting on electric transmission towers, or within the footprint of such towers, no wireless communication facility shall be located nearer to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than 220 volts than a distance equal to the facility's height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached. Co-location. Wireless communication facilities shall be designed to provide for co-location by multiple providers or designed so that they can be retrofitted to accommodate multiple providers, wherever possible. §280-77. Appearance and visual impacts on character of community A. Scenic landscapes and vistas. All antenna support structures which are not concealed inside of buildings or screened by existing trees or buildings, must be surrounded by a planted buffer of dense tree growth. An antenna support structure Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 19 February 3, 2009 that is located within a scenic vista or scenic landscape or within 300' of a scenic road, as designated by the Town, shall not be taller than ten feet above the height of trees within a 300' radius of the proposed location, or 35' maximum in the absence of trees. Bas~ landscaping. A screen of evergreen trees shall be planted outside the fence of the telecommunication tower base area to provide a visual screen or buffer for adioining private properties and the public right-of-way or other vantage points accessible to the public. The screen shall consist of a double row of evergreen shrubs and trees that are of sufficient density and height to immediately screen the base equipment from view. Required front yard setback areas shall be landscaped and include shrubs and trees. Survivability of the landscaping shall be guaranteed and maintained by the applicant for the life of the installation. 'Color. Antenna support structures in the form of monopoles or other towers shall either be blue/gray in color, or be colored appropriate to the context of the structure's location so that the tower is as unobtrusive as possible, unless otherwise required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). If a wireless communication facility is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the colors of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment~ as visually unobtrusive as possible. Wireless facilities sited within new structures meant to mimic some other structure or natural feature must be designed at a scale compatible with the community, be unobtrusive, and characteristic of the area. Camouflage by vegetation for residential screening. Where the site proposed for a freestanding tower structure is located within a residential zone or has one or more property lines abutting or on the opposite side of a street from a residential zone or use permitted in a residential zone, no antenna support structures may be constructed unless adequately screened from view of those residential zones by existing buildings or large trees, including evergreens. The structure may protrude no more than 10' above screening buildings and/or trees. In the absence of existing large trees or buildings to provide camouflage, the height of the proposed structure may be no more than 35', and the base equipment must be buried in an underground vault. Two rows of evergreen trees must be planted encircling the structure, one row at a distance from the structure of 50% of the height of the structure, and the other at 90% of the height of the structure. Transplanted trees shall have a minimum caliper of three inches, spaced thirty- feet on center. The trees must have an expected height at maturity of 10' less than Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 20 the height of the structure to be screened. Smaller evergreen shrubs must be used to fill in the gaps in between for screening during the time the trees are filling in and maturing. A written guarantee from the wireless facility's owner shall be required to ensure that the plantings survive and are maintained throughout the existence of the installation. Alternate screening. The location of a cellular wireless communication facility on an existing water tower, silo or equivalent vertical structure, ,including an existing cellular, radio or television tower, is permitted without the need to meet the conditions in Subsections A, B, C and D above, provided that the height of the existing structure is not increased as a result of the attachment of the cellular structure. A decorative disguising structure such as a clock tower may also be approved as an alternative to the conditions in Subsections A, B, C and D at the discretion of the Planning Board. If the height of the existing structure is to be increased by the attachment of the new structure, all of the conditions herein shall apply as to a new freestanding structure. Commercial and industrial siting. Towers to be sited on developed commercial or industrial properties shall be located to the rear of other principal buildings and shall not encroach on planting buffers, parking areas or otherwise impair the operation of previously approved systems such as stormwater drainage basins. Existing buildings and structures should be used in the siting of freestanding towers to contribute to the visual screening of the tower. Commercial districts. Towers to be sited on undeveloped properties in the commercial districts shall apply the standards of the condition in § 280-72C herein to all property lines, including the streetline, except that a driveway shall be permitted to gain access to the facility for maintenance personnel and equipment. Federal Aviation Regulations. All towers shall comply with applicable airport hazard and/or obstruction regulations. Any facility that would be classified as an obstruction or hazard under current federal aviation regulations or would otherwise interfere with the operation of radio navigation aids, communications and/or airport operations is prohibited. §280-78. Removal. A. Any wireless communication facility that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall be deemed abandoned. At that time the owner of the wireless communication facility shall remove same within 90 days of such deemed abandonment. In the case of a wireless communication facility on preexisting structures, this provision shall apply to the wireless communication facility only. If the wireless communication facility is not removed within the said 90 days, the Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 21 Building Inspectors may, with the approval of the Town Board, give the owner notice that unless the removal is accomplished in 30 days, the Town will cause the removal at the owner's expense. The grant Of a site plan approval under this article shall include requiring the applicant to post a decommissioning bond and irrevocable permission to the Town to accomplish removal of the wireless communication facility under this article. §280-79. Nonconforming uses. Preexisting telecommunication towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. New construction, other than maintenance on a preexisting tower, shall comply with the requirements of this article. §280-80. [Reserved1. §280-81. Severability. The various parts, sections and clauses of this article are hereby declared to be severable. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competem jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. §280-82. Effective Date. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. I have before me a copy of the newspaper in which it has appeared as a legal, I have a copy of the certification that it has appeared as a legal on the Town Clerk's bulletin board outside and I have a letter dated February 3, which is today from Snyder and Snyder LLP which goes into great length, it is almost as long as the code itself. Seven pages so I don't think I can read that and I should say Snyder and Snyder are, they represent Omnipoint Communications or Omnipoint, who are one of the cell tower providers who would like to build an antennae in this town. I will just, they are making suggestions on the site modification process, the proof of need, height limitations, setbacks, removal and performance security-security bond, renewal and recertification, municipal preferences and RF emissions requirements and finally, no, not finally, municipal consultant fees, some specific siting restrictions, visual impact analysis and information regarding other carriers, submission of leases, historic buildings and districts, underground or interior equipment and finally landscaping requirements. Those are all sections that they have responded to in their letter of February 3fa. I have a note here from Southold Town's Local Waterfront Revitalization coordinator, Mark Terry, dated February 2. 'The proposed action is for consideration for a local law in relation to wireless communication facilities, the proposed law has been reviewed. Based upon information that has been provided as well as records available, it is my recommendation that the proposal is consistent with the below listed policy standards and therefore is consistent with LWRP.' And the specific policies that they have attributed consistency to is 1. Fostering a pattern of development in the Town that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of coastal location and minimizes adverse effects of development. He also sites that it is consistent with policy Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 22 #2., which is preserve historic resources of the Town of Southold and it is consistent with policy #3, enhance the visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town and finally, policy 12, to protect agricultural lands in the Town. I have a note here from the Suffolk County Planning Commission, 'pursuant to the requirements of our section, the Planning Commission considers this to be a matter of local determination as there is no apparent significant county wide or intercommunity impact.' I have a letter here from Munley, Mead, Neilson and Ray, who I believe are, this is a legal firm who also represents a wireless provider namely New Singular Wireless PCS LLC. This is also a very lengthy commentary on our proposed law which I don't think I can read. This letter refers to the state and federal status and the regulatory aspects that they have. Southold's draft local law would violate state and federal law they say and there are several paragraphs that support that point of view. Miscellaneous unworkable requirements in your law and they have about nine or ten of those that they view as unworkable. I am not going to try to summarize all of this but it is in the file and people who want it can get it from the Town Clerk's office or from anywhere else. And I believe that that is all there is in the file. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anyone like tO come up and address the Town Board on the wireless issue? Marie Dominici? COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Before I go, I should say I do have a Planning Board recommendation here, it was just put in my hands. 'The Planning Board has reviewed the proposed legislation and fully supports the changes to the wireless facilities code and believes the changes as proposed are thorough and complete. These changes are necessary to bring a more thorough level of review to the process and to approve the guidelines replacement of these facilities. While a previous code provided some guidelines on location, safety and appearance, with these new regulations we will have taken charge of where they will be placed and what they will be what they will look like. The Planning Board asked the Town's wireless facilities consultant, Walter Cooper, to comment on these changes and his comments are below. And there follows a matrix and table of his comments on the code. And I believe those are the only comments that are in the file. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay. Marie Dominici, Mattituck. MARIE DOMINICI: Good evening. I come to you to talk about the cell tower thing because I have a grave concern about, health concerns that emanate as a result of the electro-magnetic fields and the radio frequencies and I think we take this stuff for granted and I think when we don't know stuff, I think we become, we can fall victim to what we don't know can hurt us. So I am going to read my notes because I can't remember most of the things I have to say. so to be on point, I will read this and I ask for your indulgence and I have a copy that I can give to each of you if you actually need copies because I make reference to websites as well. Okay, so I come before the Board to share my concerns regarding adding new cell towers in the Town of Southold. This is not about NIMBYism, it is about the general health and well-being of the residents of this Town. It is about asking if future cell tower locations are a want or a need. Of the Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 23 companies are applying for permits, I must ask the question are we the people of Southold Town calling out to fix the dead zones, do we have dead zones? And if so, have the dead zones been identified as such or is this about more is better and or corporate greed? If people are reaching out to these companies, how many people are actually reaching out 2 or 200? In conducting research about cell towers, cell phones, electromagnetic field's EMF and radio frequency RF, I found that there is not enough evidence to say conclusively that EMF and RF will not cause a health hazard. This is what is so troubling about widespread usage'of cell towers. I listed web sites in everything that I make reference to. Cause for concern with EMF and RF have been associated with endocrine disruptors, so I would the question does anyone in this room know what endocrine disruptor is? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I believe that I would usually ask either you or Frank for that information, so. MS. DOMENICI: Okay. So let me go on to explain what it is. An endocrine disruptor meaning hormone disruptors or chemicals or mixtures of chemicals from outside the body that can interfere with the development of function of body systems in human and wildlife, especially in their offspring and may lead to irreversible adverse health affects. The greater distance between EMF and RF the less harmful the exposure. Now if we put up cell towers over the next few years, no one will live far away from any one cell tower. Currently there are 13 cell tower sites in the Town of Southold which start in Mattituck and go to Orient and Fishers Island. Unless someone can say conclusively cell towers do no, will not cause health concems, are we going to be a town of guinea pigs? Of the 13 sites, two sites currently have no cell phone companies associated with those locations and perhaps maybe a potential for future mobile sites without having to add more cell towers in the community. So then, why do we need more sites? It may be just a matter of having cell tower providers using those two cell towers. And let me share with you the following, there was a breast cancer cluster in five zip codes in Suffolk County. The towns are Corm, Mount Sinai, Sound Beach, Port Jeff and Miller Place. Two years ago I attended a meeting sponsored by Cornell and the Department of Health. The people in attendance were local politicians, breast cancer organizations, doctors of oncology and breast cancer survivors. The take away from this meeting was that no one could say or would say conclusively why these five zip codes had a high breast cancer rate. And frankly it was an insult to the intelligence of everyone in the room. Are we to believe that all breast cancer survivors moved to five zip codes to form a unique club or is there some kind of environmental problem no one will disclose? And this situation could be due, could it be due to the Keyspan plant in Port Jeff?. Spewing pollution in the air or is it because there are too many cell phone towers concentrated in this area. Guinea pigs? You tell me. For more information, go to this website. And this next piece I am going to share with you is kind of interesting. In 1938 British scientist and physician Edward Charles Dodd and his colleagues had announced the synthesis of a chemical that somehow acted in the body like a natural estrogen and the medical community was abuzz with excitement. Leading researchers and gynecologists hailed the man made estrogen as a wonder drug with a host of potential uses. Almost immediately researchers began giving this estrogen to women experiencing problems during pregnancy in the belief that Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 24 insufficient estrogen levels caused miscarriages and premature births. What proved to be a massive haman experiment, one that eventually involved an estimated five million pregnant women in the United States, Latin America and elsewhere was just getting underway. In the decades that followed, doctors not only prescribed this estrogen to prevent miscarriages, they began to recommend it for untroubled pregnancies as if it were a vitamin that would improve on nature. Prestigious publications, among them the Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology carried drug company ads such as the one from Grant chemical company which appeared in June 1957 which touted the use of this estrogen for all pregnancies boasting that it produced bigger and stronger babies. The name of this estrogen is known as DES or more commonly known as Thalidomide. By the time DES was removed from the market, it had caused severe deformities in 8,000 children in 46 countries. This prompts me to ask the question, were these women used as guinea pigs and who was minding the store? The reason I share these stories with you is to present the scenarios and ask the tough questions about inconclusive studies. Whether the studies are about drugs, EMF and RF, health issues prevail and there is no accountability. The entire country is hosting hundreds of th0usands of cell towers and no one can explain the health issues and yet we are putting local citizens in harms way or maybe perhaps using us as guinea pigs. When I moved to the Town of Southold, I don't believe anywhere on my deeded paperwork did it say, sold to the Dominici's who agreed to be guinea pigs. To change the subject just a little but still, I have questions about fall zones. IfI want to put up a windmill on my property, it would be necessary to have a fall zone in event the tower falls. It should not fall outside my property line and fall.on any structures. We do not currently have fall zones for cell towers, or do we? And if not, why? There is a cell tower on Route 48 in Mattituck and should it fall, not only would fall on the road way but it would hit many structures. If that cell tower by the police station in Cutchogue falls, it will take out the entire police department. Why are cell towers exempt from the fall zones? I ask the town to take this under serious consideration. What is good for the local taxpayers should be good for corporate America, no exceptions. We count on the various agencies in place like the DEC, the FDA, the EPA, the CDC and in the case of cell towers the FCC to provide reliable information as it relates to the environment, health and well-being or whatever. I don't believe there is enough information to allay my fears about EMF and RF. Unfortunately we have found many things which have come to the marketplace putting everyone at risk. Dog and cat food, poisoned our pets. Toys from China filled with lead and our children are playing with these toys and we wonder why autism is rampant. Drugs that have been put on the market and then later withdrawn due to health concerns or causing death. Who is minding the store, who can we trust and are we being used as guinea pigs? The companies who have currently have cell towers in Southold are AT&T, Sprint, Nextel, Verizon and T-Mobile, and in conducting research I found that the mission statement of these companies, I was very hard pressed to actually find these mission statements, so I did a lot of googling and what I came close to was mission statements for some, not all of these companies and this is what I found. I am almost done. For Verizon, 2007 corporate responsibility report, partnering with communities. We are committed to using our financial, human and technological resources to improve the quality of life in our communities. Our goal is to use technology to address social issues that are crucial to our business success and the well-being of our communities. Those issues are education, Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 25 February 3, 2009 literacy, family health and safety and employee volunteerism. AT&T mission statement: we aspire to be the most admired and valuable company in the world. Our goal is to enrich our customers personal lives and make their business more successful by bringing to market exciting and useful communications services, building share owner value in the process. Sprint: Corporate social responsibility. Sprint is committed to the belief that we all share in the responsibility to conduct our business in an environmentally friendly manner. We base this on the premise that a company is much more than the products and services that it sells. The effect a company has on the environment, the people and the community it serves reflects its dedication to being not only a good business but being a good corporate citizen. And Sprint, a veteran at being green in everything from wireless recycling to renewable energy in its network is fully engaged in ensuring it does its part to incorporate sustainability in every major touch point of its business. We use the phrase corporate social responsibility to describe our approach to balancing our business objectives with our environmental, social and economic responsibilities. As you can see, there is a lot of buzz words used in the various statements, green, recycling, sustainability but nothing really focusing on the health and well-being of the communities these corporations serve. My take away is more about profit although Sprint uses enough buzz words to make one think that they might be concerned about the general public. In closing, and I know you are waiting for this, let's not make decisions based on profitability whether it is for the Town or private citizens whose properties may be future cell towers sites and or properties that are currently hosting cell towers. Let's not be town of guinea pigs. We don't want to find out down the road we have created a town with health issues that no one can put their finger on and why health issues are specific to Southold zip codes. Thank you for allowing me to share my concerns and hope you take these concerns seriously. When armed with good information, we make better choices and I look forward to your findings. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Thank you very much, Marie. MS. DOMENICI: Anybody want a copy? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Please. I will take one. Would anybody else like to come up and address the Town Board on the issue of cell towers? Ann? ANNE MURRAY: I have a couple of questions. The East Marion cell tower, is this going to affect the height of that cell tower? I understand that it's in the process still. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That one has already been through the process. I can't or I don't believe that legislation will be retroactive to an application that has already been through the process. I have the attorney who can address that. MS. MURRAY: Do you know the answer to that, Kieran? ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY CORCORAN: Yeah. It will hot affect existing towers or currently permitted towers. I don't know if it is being built or not but if it is permitted .... Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 MS. MURRAY: Well, it is not built yet so .... 26 ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY CORCORAN: If it already has its permit, it will not have to comply with this at all. MS. MURRAY: Okay. And one of my other questions has to do with the removal part of this legislation which is great, ! am glad to see it in there because 10 years from now maybe will just need little antenna's this size and we don't want these things standing around, so I am happy to see that in there but shouldn't, couldn't the removal be retroactive to the older towers as well? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I believe we have in the current legislatign, removal issues. what we don't have is the guarantees of a bond that the new legislation would call for. MS. MURRAY: A bond? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yeah. I believe the new legislation calls for like a performance bond, so that we can make sure it gets removed. Suppose a company goes bankrupt, they can commit to it today but 10 years from now they could be gone, we need the assurance of the performance; so I believe we have the right to ask for a performance bond so that it gets removed. So that we have the resources to remove it if we need to. MS. MURRAY: So with the pre-existing towers, the removal option is not... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I believe it has a removal option, it just does not have any teeth or meaning based on the legislation at that time. MS. MURRAY: So what can the Town do then maybe 10 years from now? How will we get rid of cell towers. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: There is one option that is possible. As these towers can be utilized by other carriers, they will have to come in for a permit and at that permit, we can draw them into the new legislation. Because people like to coexist on a tower. MS. MURRAY: Right. I see what you are saying. Okay. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: So at that point, it would become part of the new legislation. COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Some of the older ones that are already here, that are on leased property, the lease explicitly says that the provider has to remove the structure at the end of their lease. MS. MURRAY: Oh, okay. Gmat. Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 27 February 3, 2009 COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: That is between the lease holder and the company, the Town has nothing to do with it. So as they said, it doesn't really have teeth but it is in their leases. I wouldn't say all of them are like that but some of them are. MS. MURRAY: That is good to hear. My other question is you passed a resolution regarding a lease you are going to engage in with .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is a renewal. The lease is already in place. That is a renewal of a lease for one of the four or perhaps five carriers that we currently already have leases for. MS. MURRAY: How much is the Town getting per month? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: We get, for all five leases, about $108,000 a year. That will change because the new leases have two components. One, we have raised the fees that we will be collecting and secondly, we have included a recapture on taxes because it is taxable property so they have agreed to pay what they would need to pay for the tax liability for those leases. I don't have the full figures for you tonight but I know it is about $108,000 plus the increases. I can get that to you tomorrow. But those are for renewals. There are going to be no new tower or communications equipment as a result. It is simply renewing what they already have in place. MS. MURRAY: Is that the only leases the Town has for cellular service? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I believe we have four or five. Let me just tell you, I think there is a little misunderstanding with this legislation. This was designed to actually restrict the opportunities to locate cell towers, not expand them. Current legislation is fairly weak on this, that is why we went through this exercise, was to restrict it. Also, one of the problems is in this, three issues. Number one is called preemption. The federal government protects these operations and they tied the hands of towns to ban, limit or eliminate cell towers. They are allowed by law, by federal law, to be in this town. What we can do is direct them or guide them in locations that have the least burden or are the least onerous on the public. Secondly is the nature of the industry. With the expansions and mergers and the bankruptcies, owners change quickly. That is why it was so important to have that removal clause in there. Because we need to make sure it can get done with the changing nature of this industry. Thirdly, it is a changing technology. What we are trying to legislate today changes and needs and demands change over night but I happen to agree with you, I think down the road you are going to see movement away from these large facilities to the smaller, I think they are looking more for saturation then for height down the road. Which is why it was important to have some sort of design standard now. MS. MURRAY: Right. And my question I guess, my next one is to Kieran, I notice that there were some objections cited from I guess, some of the cellular companies or an attorney for them. Do you expect them to litigate against this legislation at all? Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing February 3, 2009 ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY CORCORAN: I don't .... 28 COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: This is a public hearing, the Board will take into account the comments from you all who are here today, we will take into account the comments, written comments from them, I doubt if, at least we haven't discussed this but likely we are not going to enact this today. We will take all of this into account and see what modifications may be called for. As a Board. MS. MURRAY: Okay, great. And in terms of what Scott was discussing, the federal laws, there are a lot of preemptions there for towns, from what I understand from what I have read, one of the only things you can do is limit the location and the aesthetics of the thing. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: We can do more. In fact, in this legislation we can require that the applicant pay for us to go out and get a professional consultant to ensure that all of those health issues are considered. Now, the federal government dictates the standards for health issues but we can make sure that we can go out on their, at their expense, and hire an independent professional to help guide us so that it is not their paid consultant coming in to tell us that everything is fine and dandy, you know, we can actually go out now and sort of like SEQRA for health reasons for cell towers. They will be paying for it, we will be going out to our own consultant and getting that unbiased opinion. MS. MURRAY: Well, that is great. And actually if you are going to revise this at all, I think you should raise the fees because .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is something we can consider. MS. MURRAY: Phone companies are probably one of the only companies that are going to keep going in this terrible economy and the Town should make as much money as it can. From anybody who wants to do this kind of business in the Town. Thank you. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Sure. Thank you. I also would like to take up the issue of the fall zone that Marie had mentioned before. I think thht is certainly a legitimate concem. ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY CORCORAN: In terms of fees, I think what we have tried to do, right or wrong or correctly or incorrectly, is try to match the increase in fees with the amount of time that it takes the Town to review and the amount of Town manpower it takes to review the applications. These are very complicated and intense. We are not trying to use it as a profit making incentive or raise fees because these companies, we think they make money or don't, it is because the burden on the Town and going through the approval process. PETER TERRANOVA: Good evening, Peter Terranova of Peconic. This seems to be a very well-written set of requirements for these folks but I do have one question. I see we have listed under definitions major modifications which includes replacement of the Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 29 February 3, 2009 structure. If an existing structure that is grandfathered, okay, was to be destroyed or whatever and they do not meet the current fall zone requirement, would they be allowed to rebuild? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: First, if you are going to locate it within an existing structure, first hurdle you need to get past to build a structure of significant height would be the Zoning Board of Appeals. They are going to speak to the issue of the height of the new building, current limit being 35 feet. MR. TERRANOVA: Okay. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: The, if it is located within a structure, the fall zone would become a bit moot there but you still need to go to the ZBA for relief to build the height you might need. MR. TERRANOVA: Okay. Well, what I meant to say is and maybe I didn't express it well, you have an existing tower right now... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Okay. MR. TERRANOVA: And it doesn't meet the fall zone requirement as covered in this new local law and that tower was to be destroyed, let's say we have a big storm, hurricane, tornado or whatever, would they be allowed to rebuild on that existing site even though they don't meet... COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I think it would follow the new regulations. MR. TERRANOVA: Okay, so in essence they would have to .... COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: That is my opinion. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I will ask Kieran. Is that a replacement in kind or does that go through .... ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY CORCORAN: Well, you know, we have sections in the code in the building code that deal with preexisting, nonconforming structures. I know that applies to houses that burn down, you have a period of one year, I think, in which to rebuild. I am not sure if that would pertain to these, even though they are structures. COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Is there a 50 % cost rule? ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY CORCORAN: Well, I am assuming that this would meet that. If it was completely damaged .... Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 30 February 3, 2009 SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Leave it to Peter to ask the hard' questions. We are just afraid to say yes. We don't want to see Ann out there with a rope in East Marion, trying to pull the tower down. MR. TERRANOVA: No, I am just trying to go through this. I am trying to find out, now this is a definition of a major modification .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: What that speaks to, I believe, is trying to locate and it certainly makes sense to locate them within existing structures, so that if you are a chumh and you want to locate it within a steeple, 'it certainly makes sense, you need to, you know, that's, you know again, it is difficult because then you raise health issues, I know Marie would probably have a huge health issue with that but it mitigates aesthetic issues. so this is a very difficult piece of legislation. It was far more intensive then we thought it was but I do have to say while I have the chance, Heather Lanza came as director of Planning after we had already started this process. I have to tell you with the amount of effort and the product she has produced, I just can't thank her enough for the amount of detail she put into this particular issue. And any credit for this legislation has to go to, and how well written it was that you had mentioned earlier, full credit goes to Heather and Pat and Kieran. MR. TERRANOVA: Because to address the previous speaker, we all know that new technology are coming along. So if you do have a situation where a tower an existing tower that is sort of exempt from this right now, suffers some major damage and they have to go in and repair it or rebuild it or whatever, and there is new technology that is available that would make it less obtrusive, okay, we certainly would want to reserve the right, the Town should reserve the right to fome them in a way to adopt some of that new technology rather than rebuild an existing tower so high. So, you know, and I am not sure if it is included you know, in this new law and perhaps maybe they can look at that. Thank you. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is a good point, thank you. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Very good point. MR. TERRANOVA: Thank you. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anybody else like to address the Town Board on the cell towers? Mr. Wills? FRANK WILLS: Frank Wills, Mattituck. Good evening. In the code, there is a restriction of 500 foot within any, that any tower has to be put but it also says they can be put on buildings. Now, (inaudible) was in residence, the tower (inaudible) can be put on the side or on the roof of the building. What defines residence and for how many hours would people in those buildings be exposed to the radiations that come in and out? Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 31 February 3, 2009 SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is probably an issue of use. I think this new legislation actually restricts location of cell towers in all residential zones, if I am not mistaken. MR. WILLS: Right. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: If there is a residential use there, it would presumably for preexisting, nonconforming. MR. WILLS: But you see, an office building or this building it would be permitted now how about the people who live here or work here .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Again, those would be facts of finding that the Zoning Board of Appeals is going to have to impose on the applicant when he applies to locate a cell tower in a church or office building. MR. WILLS: Okay. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: The ZBA has the authority now to require they pay for an independent, unbiased study to determine the impacts there. MR. WILLS: Okay. Thank you. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Thank you. Anybody else like to address the Town Board on the issue of the cell towers? JACQUELINE FLEMING: Good evening, Jacqueline Fleming. Munley, Meade, Nielsen and Re, 36 North New York Avenue, Huntington, New York. Our office represents a new Cingular wireless and we also co-counsel with Snyder and Snyder representing Omnipoint Communications, our office does represent many of the other carriers in their efforts to seek wireless sites in the Town of Southold. Because you do have copies of our letters that were submitted earlier and I heard them read into the record, I won't repeat them at this time. I do want to note that we do appreciate the amount of time and effort that has gone into the current draft of the regulations, it is a very lengthy, detailed undertaking but as set forth in our letters, we would like to see revisi, ons that address the issues that we discussed and we would like to request a second opportunity to review and comment on any revisions to the draft before it is adopted and I would just like to stress that less is more. This is a very complicated local law, it may not need to be that complicated and reach the goal set forth and if our office can be of any assistance in providing any information or whatever kind to the Town in helping them complete the revised code, please let us know. We are here to assist you in any way we can. Thank you. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Thank you very much. Would anybody else like to address the Town Board on the issue of cell tower wireless communications? Any Town Board members? (No response) Wireless Communication Facilities Public Hearing 32 February 3, 2009 This hearing was closed at 5:34 PM Southold Town Clerk RESOLUTION 2009-155 ADOPTED DOC ID: 4764 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-155 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON FEBRUARY 3, 2009: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the proposed "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, 6 NYCRR Section 617, and that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby establishes itself as lead agency for the uncoordinated review of this action and issues a Negative Declaration for the action in accordance with the recommendation of Mark Terry dated February 2, 2009, and authorizes Supervisor Scott A. Russell to sign the short form EAF in accordance therewith, and is consistent with the LWRP pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, Waterfront Consistency Review. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: William Ruland, Scott Russell SECONDER: Vincent Orlando, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeti~:0f February 3, 2009 RESOLUTION 2009-155 ADOPTED Item # 5.44 DOC ID: 4764 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-155 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON FEBRUARY 3, 2009: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the proposed "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, 6 NYCRR Section 617, and that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby establishes itself as lead agency for the uncoordinated review of this action and issues a Negative Declaration for the action in accordance with the recommendation of Mark Terry dated February 2, 2009, and authorizes Supervisor Scott A. Russell to sign the short form EAF in accordance therewith, and is consistent with the LWRP pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, Waterfront Consistency Review. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: William Ruland, Scott Russell SECONDER: Vincent Orlando, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski .Ir., Wickham, Evans, Russell Generated February 4, 2009 Page 56 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meetin~ of February 3, 2009 RESOLUTION 2009-116 ADOPTED Item # 5.5 DOC ID: 4685 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2009-116 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON FEBRUARY 3, 2009: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to forward the proposed Local Law entitled "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" to the Suffolk County Planning Commission and the Southold Town Planning Board for their review and comments. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Vincent Orlando, Councilman SECONDER: Albert Krupski Jr., Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Jr., Wickham, Evans, Russell Generated February 4, 2009 Page 13 February 3, 2009 To: Scott Russell, Vincent Orlando, A1 Krupski, Tom Wickham, William Ruland, Louisa Evans From: Marie Domenici RE: Cell Phone Towers I come before the Board to share my concerns regarding adding new cell towers in the Town of Southold. This is not about NIMBYISM, it's about the general health and well being of the residents of this town. It's about asking if furore cell tower locations are a "want" or a "need". Of the companies who are applying for permits, I must ask the question - are people from Southold Town calling out to fix the "dead zones"; do we have dead zones and if so, have these "dead zones" been identified as such; or is this about "more is better" and/or Corporate greed? If people are reaching out to these companies...how many people are reaching out..., two or 200? In conducting research about cell towers, cell phones, electro magnetic fields (EMF) and radio frequency (RF), I found there is not enough evidence to say conclusively EMF & RF will not cause a health hazard. That is what's so troubling about wide spread usage of cell towers. I have listed a web site that poses questions about cell phones, EMF and cancer. Go to: http://www.cancer.org/docrootYPED/contentYPED 1 3X Cellular Phones.asp Cause for Concern EMF & RF have been associated as endocrine disrupters; meaning -** "Hormone disruptors are chemicals (or mixtures of chemicals)from outside the body that can interfere with the development of function of body systems in humans and wildlife, especially in their offspring, and may lead to irreversible adverse health effects ". The greater distance between EMF & RF, the less harmful the exposure. Now, if we put up more cell towers, over the next few years, no one will live far enough away from any one cell tower. Currently, there are 13 cell tower sites in the town of Southold which start in Mattituck and go to Orient and Fishers Island. Unless someone can say conclusively cell towers do not/will not cause health concerns, we are going to be a town of"guinea pigs". Of the 13 sites, 2 sites currently have no cell companies associated with those locations and perhaps may be a potential *Our Stolen Future" by Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski & John Peterson Myers **Hormone Deception by D. Lindsey Berkson for furore mobile sites without having to add more cell towers in the community. So, then, why do we need more sites? It may be just a matter of having cell providers use those existing 2 towers. Let me share with you the following: There is a breast cancer cluster in 5 zip codes in Suffolk County; The towns are: Corm, Pt. Jefferson, Mt. Sinai, Sound Beach and Miller Place. Two years ago, I attended a meeting sponsored by Cornell and the Department of Health. The people in attendance were local politicians, Breast Cancer Organizations, Doctors of Oncology, and breast cancers survivors. The take away from this meeting was no one could/would say conclusively why these 5 zip codes had high breast cancer incidences, and frankly, was an insult to the intelligence of everyone in the room. Are we tobelieve all breast cancer survivors moved to these 5 zip codes to form a unique club or is there some kind of environmental problem no one will disclose? Is this situation due to the dirty Keyspan plant in Pt. Jefferson, spewing pollution in the air or is it because there are too many cell phone towers concentrated in this area? Guinea Pigs? You tell me! For more information on breast cancer and EMF, please refer to the National Institute of Health web site: http://www.epa.gov/edrlupvx/inventory/NCI-018.html *"In 1938, British scientist and Physician Edward Charles Dodds and his colleagues had announced the synthesis of a chemical that somehow acted in the body like natural estrogen, and the medical community was abuzz with excitement. Leading researches and gynecologist hailed the man-made estrogen, as a wonder drug with a host of potential uses. Almost immediately, researchers began giving this estrogen drug to women experiencing problems during pregnancy in the belief that insufficient estrogen levels caused miscarriages and premature births. What wouM prove to be a massive human experiment- one that eventually involved an estimated 5 million pregnant women in the US, Latin American and elsewhere - was just getting under way. In the decades that followed, doctors not only prescribed this estrogen to prevent miscarriages, they began to recommend it for untroubled pregnancies as if it were a vitamin that couM improve on nature. Prestigious publications, among them the "Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, "carried drug company ads such as one from Grant Chemical Company that appeared in June 1957, which touted the use of this estrogen for ALL pregnancies, boasting that it produced "bigger and stronger babies." The name of this estrogen is known as DES or more commonly known as thalidomide. *By the time DES was removed from the market it had caused severe deformities in *Our Stolen Future" by Theo Colbom, Dianne Dumanoski & John Petcrson Myers **Hormone Deception by D. Lindsey Berkson 8,000 children in 46 countries. This prompts me to ask the question....where these women used as "guinea pigs and who was minding the store?" The reason I share these stories with you is to present the scenarios and ask the tough questions about inconclusive studies; whether the studies are about drugs, EMF & RF, health issues prevail and there is no accountability. The entire country is hosting hundreds of thousands of cell towers and no one can explain the health issues and yet are putting local citizens in harms way or aka using us as "guinea pigs." When I moved to Southold, I don't believe anywhere on my deeded paperwork did it say "sold to the Domenici's who agreed to be "guinea pigs!" Fall Zones I also have questions about "fall zones." If I want to put a wind mill on my property, it would be necessary to have a "fall zone" in the event the tower falls, it should not fall outside my property line and not fall on any structures. Do not have "fall zone" zoning for cell towers? Why? There is a cell tower on Rte 48 in Mattituck and if it should fall, it will not only fall on the roadway, it will hit many structures. If the cell tower by the police station in Cutchogue falls, it will take out the entire police department. Why are cell towers exempt from the "fall zones"? I ask the Town to take this under serious consideration. What's good for the local tax payer should be good for Corporate America...no exceptions!! We count on the various agencies in place like the DEC, FDA, EPA, CDC, and in the case of cell towers, the FCC, to provide reliable information whether it relates to the environment, health or whatever. I don't believe there is enough information to allay any fears about EMF & RF. Unfortunately, we have found many things which have come to the marketplace putting everyone at risk. Dog and Cat food poisoned our pets; toys from China filled with lead and our children are playing with these toys and we wonder why autism is rampant; drugs that have been put on the market and later withdrawn due to health concerns or causing death. Who is minding the store? Who can we trust? Are we being used as "guinea pigs?" The companies who currently have towers in Southold are: AT&T; Sprint, Nextel, Verizon, T-Mobile and in conducting research, I tried to fred the "Mission Statements" of these companies and I was hard pressed to locate this information and had to do a lot of Googling before I could come close to obtaining "mission statements" for some, not all, of these companies. Here's what I found: *Our Stolen Future" by Theo Colbom, Dianne Dumanoski & John Peterson Myers **Hormone Deception by D. Lindsey Berkson Verizon 2007 Corporate Responsibility Report Partnering with Communities We are committed to using our financial, human and technological resources to improve the quality of life in our communities. Our goal is to use technology to address social issues that are critical to our business success and the well-being of our communities. Those issues are education and literacy, family health and safety, and employee volunteerism. http://70.32.120.177/imagcs/vz uploads/vcrizon cr report 2007.pdf AT&T Mission Statement We aspire to be the most admired and valuable company in the world. Our goal is to enrich our customers 'personal lives and to make their businesses more successful by bringing to market exciting and useful communications services, building shareowner value in the process. http://www.anshawn.com/andremeadows/ibmco/att/about.htm l Sprint - Corporate Social Responsibility Sprint is committed to the belief that we all share in the responsibility to conduct our businesses in an environmentally friendly manner. We base this on the premise that a company is much more than the products and services it sells; the effect a company has on the environment, the people and the communities it serves reflects its dedication to being not only a good business, but to being a good corporate citizen. And Sprint, a veteran at being green in everything from wireless recycling to renewable energy in its networks, is fully engaged in ensuring it does its part to incorporate sustainability into every major touch point of its business. We use the phrase "corporate social responsibility" to describe our approach to balancing our business objectives with our environmental, social and economic responsibilities. http://www.sprint.com/responsibility/index.html *Our Stolen Future" by Theo Colbom, Dianne Dumanoski & John Peterson Myers **Hormone Deception by D. Lindsey Berkson As you can see there are a lot buzz words used in the various statements; green, recycling, sustainability but nothing really focusing on the health and well being of the communities these Corporations serve. My take away is more about profit although Sprint used enough buzz words to make one think they might be concemed about the general public. In closing, let's not make decisions based on profitability whether for the Town or private citizens whose properties maybe future cell tower site and/or properties that are currently hosting cell towers. Let's not be a town of"guinea pigs." We don't want to find out down the road, we have created a town with health issues that no one can put their finger on why health issues are specific to Southold's zip codes! Thank you for allowing me to share my concerns and hope you take these concerns seriously. When we are armed with good information, we can be better choices. I look forward to your findings. Sincerely, Marie Domenici 516-510-7873 *Our Stolen Future" by Theo Colbom, Dianne Dumanoski & John Peterson Myers **Hormone Deception by D. Lindsey Berkson February 3, 2009 Supervisor Russell and Members oft.he Southold Town Board Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Draft Local Law entitled "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Telecommunications Facilities" Dear Honorable Supervisor Russell and Members of the Board: Our office represents New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC regarding its efforts to provide reliable wireless telecommunications services to thc Southold community. New Cingular Wireless acknowledges the Town's laudable goal to allow wireless service providers to meet their technological and service objectives while protecting the welfare of the community, but the current draft of the Local Law includes many provisions that are unnecessarily burdensome and other provisions that are vague. We submit the following comments on the above-reference Local Law and ask that a copy of this letter be included in the official record. This letter is intended as a summary, not an exhaustive list of concerns. State and Federal Status The services provided by New Cingular Wireless represent an important part of New York's telecommunications infrastructure and are offered to all persons who require advanced wireless communications services, including local businesses, public safety entities, and the general public. New Cingular Wireless is afforded the status of a public utility for zoning and land use purposes under the laws of the State of New York. See e.g., Cellular Telephone Company v. Rosenberg, 82 N.Y.2d 364 (1993); Cellular Telephone Company v. Meyer, 206 A.D.2d 743 (2nd Dept. 1994). By categorizing New Cingnlar Wireless and other carriers as public utilities for zoning purposes, the Court of Appeals recognized the special status of wireless telecommunications services and the need to provide carriers with wider zoning latitude to allow them to provide their services to the public quickly and efficiently. Under the Rosenberg standard, a local government may not exclude a wireless carrier fxom an area where it has demonstrated that a site is necessary to enable it to remedy a service gap, and that there are compeIling reasons, including economic reasons, why other alternatives are not feasible. Rosenberg, 82 N.Y.2d at 371-73. In addition, the burden on the applicant is reduced where the burden on the community is minimal. Id. at 372. Hon. Supervisor Russell and Member of the Town Board Wireless Communications Facilities Draft Local Law February 3, 2009 Page 2 of 5 In addition to its status as a public utility in New York, New Cingular Wireless is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"). As a FCC license holder, New Cingular Wireless serves the public interest and is mandated to comply with the public policy of the United States "to make available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States... a rapid, efficient, Nation-wide and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges, for the purpose of the national defense, for the purpose of promoting safety of life and property through the use of wire and radio communication .... " 47 U.S.C. 151. The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Pub. L. No. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56 (1996), hereafter "TCA") established a national public policy in favor of encouraging rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies. The TCA builds upon a federal regulatory framework that was designed to "foster the growth and development of mobile services that, by their nature, operate without regard to state lines as an integral part of the national telecommunications infrastructure." H.R. Rep. No. 103-111, 103d Congr., 1~t Sess. 260 (1993) (emphasis added). Indeed, the FCC requires that New Cingular Wireless, as a provider of wireless services, timely complete the construction and build-out of its wireless network and fill coverage gaps in its federally-licensed service area, including the Town of Southold. To achieve this goal, the TCA includes express limitations on the authority of local governments. For example, local governments shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers, shall not regulate facilities on the basis radio frequency emissions to the extent that a facility complies with FCC regulations, and shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. In addition, a local government "shall act on any request for authorization to place, construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities within a reasonable period of time .... "47 U.S.C.332(c)(7)(B). Southold's draft Local Law would violate State and Federal Law As currently drafted, the Town of Southold's proposed Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities ("Wireless Law") would violate New York State Law by impermissibly regulating the occupant of the land rather than the usc of the land according to general land use principles. See e.g., Dexter v. Town Bd., 36 N.Y.2d 105 (explaining that zoning deals with the use of land, not the person or entity owning or occupying the land). Several provisions seek to unfairly regulate wireless carders differently than other applicants without justification and without regard to traditional site plan or use district considerations. Examples of differentiated treatment include: · Application fees ($1000 rather than $400 for other uses); · Time limitation on grant of SUP (10 years rather than no limiting period); · Deed restrictions in residential areas; · Annual radio emissions analyses at the carder's expense; · Structural inspections every three years at the carder's expense; Hon. Supervisor Russell and Member of the Town Board Wireless Communications Facilities Drait Local Law February 3, 2009 Page 3 of 5 · Visual Impact Analysis from ail residentiai and public vantage points; · Existing and planned facilities in and surrounding the town; · Additional application fees specifically to pay for review by consultants; · Bond posting for removal of facility. In addition, the draft Wireless Law ignores the public utility status of wireless telecommunications and attempts to arbitrarily limit the height of proposed facilities, to 35 feet in some situations, regardless of what height is needed to adequately fill the service gap. The draft Wireless Law also impinges upon the federai jurisdiction and limitations set forth in the TCA by establishing application procedures that are so burdensome and so permeated with unlimited discretion that the draft Wireless Law constitutes an effective prohibition of telecommunications services in violation of the TCA. For example, it is unnecessarily burdensome to require Site Plan Review and Speciai Use Permits for most major modifications, and Site Plan Review and Speciai Use Permit Approvai bom the Planning Board, and an Area Variance or Use Variance before the Zoning Board of Appeals for co-locations and new applications that cannot meet the overly restrictive height limits or fall zone requirements or must be located in a prohibited area set forth in Section 280-71. Since only a small fraction of the Town is included in the non-residential zoning districts set out in the draft Wireless Law, it may be impossible to meet the many setback and height limitations in most areas of the Town. In addition, the Planning Department is given unbridled discretion to determine what is a material versus a substantial change to a site, and whether a proposal is a permitted use or requires discretionary approvals. The Planning Department, not just the Planning Board, is given the authority to retain and direct technicai consultants "as they deem necessary" and the Applicant must bear all costs. The Building Department is given unlimited discretion to require annual reports and periodic structural analyses at the can'iar's expense. In addition to materially inhibiting the ability of carriers to provide adequate service to the Southold community, these procedures and requirements go well beyond the land use authority delegated to the Town of Southold by New York State pursuant to New York Town Law. Further, the application requirements and procedures in the draft Wireless Law interfere with the technical and engineering aspects of wireless service provision, which is within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government. With the TCA, Congress intended to leave technical decisions regarding choices in technology to competitive market forces, not to local govemments. For example, aa Applicant must submit propagation maps at three set signal strengths regardless of the can'ier's network design requirements. Hon. Supervisor Russell and Member of the Town Board Wireless Communications Facilities Draft Local Law February 3, 2009 Page 4 of 5 Miscellaneous Unworkable Requirements It appears that the draft Wireless Law currently contains wording that would not achieve the intended purpose of the provision or the propose of the Local Law. Below are a few of the most problematic examples. 1. A major modification includes co-location by another carder, but the same section limits a height extension to only 5 feet with an expansion of the equipment compound to ten percent of the current floor area. A co-location would require an extension of 10 feet and additional equipment area. The relationship of these provisions should be clarified. Notably, Section 280-72(I) acknowledges that an additional ten feet in height is needed for co-location. 2. In several sections, the draft Wireless Law requires that interior-mounted antennas be locate "in an existing building or existing structure" without acknowledging the use of Radiofrequency-transparent materials to replace existing non-transparent materials. 3. Section 280-73(C) provides that a carrier's need for thc proposed height will be corroborated by the Town's consultant, thereby making set height limits unnecessary. 4. Section 280-7303) authorizes the Planning Board to waive only certain setbacks and landscaping requirements and includes a vague reference to "the design of the tower". To avoid many applications to the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Planning Board should be given broader authority to waive all specific requirements of the draft Local Law. 5. The Visual Impact Analysis requires views from all residential and public vantage points. The base requirement should be for representative views with the Planning Board having the authority to seek additional views as necessary for a specific application. 6. The requirements in Section 280-74(C)(g) are vague and impermissibly require an applicant to submit technical information about ether carders. This requirement should be omitted. 7. Section 280-7403)(I)(c) requires all Applicants to submit an extensive alternatives analysis. This requirements ignores the Court of Appeals finding that the burden on an Applicant must be reduced where the burden on the community is minimal. 8. Section 280-7403)(7) and (8) require propagation maps and a "gap map", including coverage of possible alternative. These requirements are unduly burdensome and interfere with the technical and engineering aspects of wireless service provision in violation of federal law and should be omitted. 9. Section 280-76 requires equipment to meet the setback standards for principal uses. Equipment should be required to meet the setback requirements for accessory uses. There is no legal justification for requiring a shelter or underground vault rather than outdoor equipment on an above-ground concrete pad. Neither is there a legal justification for a general rule limiting the area of the equipment. Such concerns may be dealt with on a case-by-case basis due to site-specific concerns. Hon. Supervisor Russell and Member of the Town Board Wireless Communications Facilities Drafi~ Local Law February 3, 2009 Page 5 of 5 Thank you for your consideration of the above comments. If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Very truly yours, ce: Heather Lanza, Planning Director DAVID L. SNYDER* LESLIE J, SNYDER ROBCRT D. GAUDIOSO FREDERICK W. TURNER, COUN$£L LAW OFFICES OF SNYDER & SNYDER, LLP 94 WHITE PLAINS ROAD TARRYTOWN, NEW YORK IO591 (Si4) 333-0700 FaX (gi4) 333-0743 WRITER'S E-MAIL ADDRE~ e mail to rgaudioso@snyderlaw.net February3,2009 NE~/JERSEY OFFICE ONE GATEWAY CENTER. SUITE ~SOO NEWARK, NEW JERSEY O710~ REPLY TO: Tarrytown office RECEIVED Honorable Supervisor Russell and Members of the Town Board Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 1197l RE: Onmipoint Communications Inc. Comments to Proposed Local Law Dear Hon. Supervisor Russell and Members of the Town Board: We represent Omnipoint Communications Inc. ("Omnipoint"). It is our understanding that the Town Board intends to conduct a public hear/ng on February 3, 2009 on a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communication Facilities" (the "Wireless Law"). As you are aware, Omnipoint has two pending applications for waivers from the terms of the Town of Southold Local Law 7 of 2008 entitled "Temporary Moratorium on the Processing, Review of, and Making Decisions on Applications for Building Permits, Site Plans and Special Exception Use Permits for Wireless Communication Facilities in the Town of Southold" (the "Moratorium"). It is our understanding that the Town Board will not re-enact or extend the Moratorium, which has now expired. Accordingly, Omnipoint has a significant interest in the Wireless Law. By way of background, kindly note that Omnipoint is a provider ofcommeroial mobile radio services, and is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission to provide digital wireless telecommunications throughout the New York metropolitan area, including the Town of Southold. While the Wireless Law is clearly well-intended, and we commend the municipality's efforts, we believe the current draft is, in many respects, contrary to both New York State law and federal law, including the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, 47 U.S.C. § 332(c) ("Telecommunications Act"). We believe that on its face, numerous elements of the proposed Wireless Law, individually and collectively, violate federal law. For example, the lot size, setback, height limit and landscaping requirements will cumulatively have the effect of prohibiting wireless services in violation of the Telecommunications Act. Accordingly, the proposed Wireless Law will fail to withstand judicial scrutiny. This letter is intended to highlight the most egregious provisions, but is certainly not exhaustive. Kindly include a copy of this letter in the official administrative record in connection with the Wireless Law. SITE MODIFICATION PROCESS The proposed process to modify an existing facility is vague and overly burdensome as set forth in the definition of the term "modification," which includes the upgrade or replacement of equipment for better or more modero equipment. As wireless carders improve service and add new applications to their systems (e.g., mobile email and video), like-kind equipment replacements or mere software upgrades are often necessary to make these advances available to subscribers. At the same time, if a local ordinance makes like-kind equipment exchanges or software upgrades too burdensome, affected carriers will have a cause o faction under the federal Telecommunications Act. See Verizon Wireless LLC v. City of Rio Rancho, N.M, 476 F. Supp.2d 1325 (D.N.M. 2007), holding that carriers could challenge an ordinance requiring public hearings for minor site modifications. By attempting to regulate the operational and technological operations that are solely withing the purview of federally licensed wireless carders, the Town has exceeded its land use authority under both State and federal law. Where like-kind exchanges or similar minor modifications are proposed for a site, we believe it would violate federal law to require Site Plan review, Special Exception Use Permit review or any other administrative review. Courts are likely to view unnecessary administrative procedures as evidence of institutional hostility toward advanced wireless services, as a mechanism to increase municipal consultant fees or as an attempt to unreasonably delay the provision of advanced wireless Services. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the term "modification" be defined so that routine iheility modifications that do not result in height increases or compound expansions can be performed by right as part of an applicant's ordinary site maintenance. To that end, the following alternative provision is offered for your consideration: "An existing wireless communications facility may be modified upon the issuance of a building permit provided such modification does not result in any increased height of the Facility or expansion of the existing equipment compound or equipment building." PROOF OF NEED Sections 280-73(B)(2) and 280-74(D)(7&8) of the Wireless Law, which require an applicant to prove the need for a proposed facility are unconstitutionally vague and wholly lacking in the objective standards required for fair and consistent review. This lack of objective standards invites abuse by misguided consultants and may handicap the ability of a reviewing board to render a decision on the merits. Moreover, the language of these sections are directly contrary to the prevailing legal standards established by various federal courts pursuant to the Telecommunications 2 Actwithrespect to prohibitionofservice. Seee.g, 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(i)Ol);SprintSpectrum, LP. v. Willoth, 176 F.3d 630 (2d Cir. 1999). Likewise, while purporting to be Special Exception Use criteria, Section 280-73(B) of the Wireless Law attempts to mimic the Use Variance standard applicable to public utilities. See Cellular One v. Rosenberg, 82 N.Y.2d 364 (1993). An applicant may seek a Use Variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals, and avoid the remainder of the Wireless Law criteria and conditions. Section 280-73(B) of the Wireless Law should be amended to remove the public utility Use Variance standard. Many municipal consultants rely upon unsupported design criteria, including radio signal strength, during the review of applications. We believe such design criteria are technically inaccurate and not supported by scientific consensus. The requirement that three specified signal level propagation maps be submitted will invariably lead to conflict and litigation. HEIGHT LIMITATIONS The proposed height limitations are vague and lack objective criteria. Limiting new towers to 80 feet, or even less depending upon existing vegetation and location, will deter co-location and encourage the proliferation of numerous additional towers. More troubling is the limitation of new stmctmes to "the lowest height above the ground feasible" as "corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town," as set forth in Section 280-73(C)(1) of the Wireless Law, which is an illegal delegation of authority to a municipal consultant. New towers should be permitted up to 150 feet above ground level in height in order to encourage co-location and discourage the unnecessary proliferation of multiple facilities. Tower heights exceeding 150 feet above ground level should be permitted by the reviewing agency if necessary to remedy a significant gap in reliable wireless service. At a minimum the Planning Board should be granted express waiver authority over tower height. Antennas and equipment installed upon an existing structure should be permitted up to 25 feet above the highest point of the existing structure. Additional height should be permitted by the reviewing agency if such additional height is necessary to remedy a significant gap in reliable wireless serv/ce. SETBACKS The setback requirements are overly restrictive and the 500 foot residential setback is an illegal attempt to regulate the placement of wireless facilities on the basis of radio fxequency emissions. The Electric Line setback has no tectm/cal justification. The setback limitations should be streamlined as follows: 1. Any equipment shall meet the applicable underlying setback requirement for the zone in which it is located. Equipment shall not include utilities, fencing, access roads and other accessory appurtenances. 2. Towers shall be set back from any property line a distance equal to the height of the 3 tower, or a height less than the height of the tower ifa professional engineer certifies in writing that the tower will be designed with a fall-zone less than the height of the tower. REMOVAL & PERFORMANCE SECURITY Removal of an unused wireless telecommunications facility can be made a condition of approval and enforced in the ordinary course of municipal law. Them is no basis or legal justification to require removal security in the form ora bond or some other financial requirement or surety obligation. Simply put, them is absolutely no State enabling legislation that would allow the Town to require a removal bond. RENEWAL/RECERTIFICATION There is no justification to require renewal of the Special Exception Use Permit. In the event the existing facility is not operating in accordance with its approvals of applicable regulations, the municipality may bring an enforcement action in the ordinary course of events. MUNICIPAL PREFERENCES The municipal siting preference set forth in Section 280-73(B)(3) of the Wireless Law is illegal and will subject the municipality to litigation from both the wireless industry and local land owners whose properties are placed at a competitive disadvantage. Potential impacts from wireless facilities are the same whether the property is owned by a municipality or a private landowner. Both federal and state courts have struck down municipal siting preferences. See Sprint Spectrum L.P.v. Borough of RingwoodZoningBd. of Adjustment, 386 N.J. Super. L., 2005; Omnipoint Commc 'ns Inc. v. Common Council of City of Peel~kill, 202 F.Supp.2d 210 (S.D.N.Y. 2002); Countryman v. $chmidt, 673 N.Y.S.2d 521 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Westchester Co., 2006) (which all invalidate local government efforts to require location on or grant special preference for wireless facilities located on municipal property). RF EMISSIONS REOUIREMENTS The issue of radio frequency ("RF") emissions is federally preempted. Local governments are prohibited from regulating the placement or operation of a wireless facility on the basis of radio frequency emissions. See 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iv). The Wireless Law should be amended to require, at most, a certification that the facility will meet FCC RF exposure guidelines. Pursuant to FCC guidelines, such certification does not require a professional certification, as is required by Section 280-71(J)(1) of the Wireless Law, and certainly does not require an applicant to pay for a municipal consultant's review, as mandated by Section 280-71 (J)(5) of the Wireless Law. See Local Official's Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF Emission Safety: Rules, Procedures, and Practical Guidance (FCC, June 2, 2000) ("Local Official's Guide"). The Local Official% Guide provides information and voluntary guidance to local governments to facilitate their ability to devise 4 reasonable and effective procedures for assuring that antenna facilities located within their boundaries comply with FCC limits for human exposure to RF emissions. It provides a summary of the FCC's RF exposure guidelines and the FCC's procedures for ensuring compliance and enforcing its rules. Wireless Law requirements suggesting the installation o fbarricades axe contra~ to FCC requirements, which expressly allow warning signage to control a given area. See OET Bulletin 65, Federal Communications Commission, Office of Engineering and Technology, Washington, D.C. Periodic or annualRF certifieafionreqnirements, particularly when required at the whim of a building official, as set forth in Section 280-73(I))(3) of the Wireless Law, axe also preempted and well beyond local jurisdiction. In fact, the proposed requirements fail to serve any legitimate local interest and will unreasonably and illegally increase the municipal consultant review fees. This section of the Wireless Law must be substantially mended to avoid a clear violation of federal law. MUNICIPAL CONSULTANT FEES Often, localities do not need a specialized consultant to review and report on proposed projects. Much like any other type of development, planners can look at the proposed work and evaluate it as per the local code. In many cases, industry is willing to assist staff in developing alternative designs and proposals to address staff concerns and potential impacts. If the locality does determine that additional expertise is warranted, the selection of professional services should include a comparative evaluation of consultants' skills, expertise and objectivity, to ensure that the locality secures the best possible fit for the community and its development objectives. The requirement for an "application fee" for unknown consultant costs is illegal as set forth in Section 280~74(A)(d) of the Wireless Law. Even if this section were amended to require a refundable escrow deposit for possible use by mtmicipal consultants, the more general concern that municipal consultants may obstruct the development of robust wireless infrastructure in the municipality is still implicated. Any such escrow account should be based on a written scope of work, consultant qualification statement and reasonable hourly rates. We believe that the municipality should thoroughly investigate multiple consultants and use the attached Consultant Questionnaire. There must also be a designated municipal Board, not a municipal official, that is responsible for directing the consultant's work and reviewing the invoices to be charged against the applicant's escrow deposit, to ensure the consultant does not exceed its written scope of work. Likewise, there must be a review and appeal process in the event the applicant challenges the fees charged by the municipal consultant. The application fees enumerated in Section 280-74(A) of the Wireless Law are illegal to the extent they are inconsistent with application fees for similar approvals for other uses within the Town of Southold. SPECIFIC SITING RESTRICTIONS There are simply no legal justifications to restrict the siting of wireless facilities as set forth in Sections 280-71 (C), (F) and (I) of the Wireless Law, particularly where other uses are permitted in such areas. What is the rational basis for restricting a wireless facility from a wetland ff the required wetland permits are obtained or from parkland if a special act of the legislature is obtained pursuant to the Public trust Doctrine? The 500 foot residential property line setback set forth in Section 280-71 (1)(6) of the Wireless Law results in the need for a parcel in excess of 22 acres. Was that the true intent of the Town Board, and if so, what is the basis for requiring such a large parcel? Likewise, the 5 contiguous acre deed restricted requirement set forth in Section 280-71(1)(1) is so overly burdensome it will result in an inability of a carder to site a wireless facility in vast areas of the Town, thereby having the effect of prohibiting wireless service in violation of the Telecommunications Act. vISUAL IMPACT ANALYSIS The requirement in Section 280-74(C)(c) of the Wireless Law to provide visual renderings illustrating the appearance of the facility from "all residential and public vantage points" is overbroad, vague and unduly burdensome. We recommend that this section be revised to allow the Planning Board to request such renderings from certain selected reasonable locations. INFORMATION REGARDING OTHER CARRIERS The requirements of Section 280-74(C)(f) and (g) to provide information about other carriers not within the control of the applicant is clearly unreasonable and illegally burdensome. An applicant has no way of confmning the system capacity or the search ring of its competitors. LEASE SUBMISSION The requirement to submit a lease agreement establishing the applicant's fight to use the parcel as set forth at Section 280-74(D)(4) is illegal under New York State law. See Cellular Telephone Company v. Sherlock, Westchester County Index No. 741/93 (Murphy, J.)(unreported). A letter of authorization from the property owner is all that should be required. HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND DISTRICTS The restrictions on designated landmark properties set forth in Section 280-75 of the Wireless Law are pre-empted by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq. and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.. Moreover, the criteria set forth in Section 280-75 of the Wireless Law are unconstitutionally vague. A finding of No Effect or No Adverse Effect by the New York State Historic Preservation Office ("SHPO") is all that is legally required for the siting of a wireless facility on a designated historic property. UNDERGROUND OR INTERIOR EQUIPMENT The requirement set forth in Section 280-76 (D) of the Wireless Law that accessory equipment be located within an existing building or in an underground vault may operate to create greater environmental and aesthetic burdens. In the event interior equipment space is not available, it may be better to place an applicant's small equipment cabinets at the base of the existing building in a lbnced and landscaped compound. The construction of an underground vault for the equipment will necessarily require a large area of disturbance and will place the essential wireless facility radio equipment in an environmentally precarious location subject to flooding or ground water intrusion. Wireless facilities provide essential communication services during times of an emergency, therefore it would be counterproductive ii'the accessory equipment were damaged and non-operational dta-ing a natural disaster such as a flood or hurricane. The location of accessory equipment should be subject to normal site planning criteria. LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS Section 280-77 of the Wireless Law is overly restrictive and may unintentionally disqualify viable facility sites from consideration. Rather than attempting to legislate specific landscaping requirements in the absence of the benefit of an actual site plan, the Town Board should allow the Planning Board to make landscaping and aesthetic judgements on a site plan specific basis. In the alternative, the Planning Board should be granted specific waiver authority to allow landscaping and other design options that are consistent with the intent of the Wireless Law. Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions or require additional documentation, please do not hesitate to call. Very respectfully submitted, SNYDER & SNYDER, LLP Robert D. Gaudioso, Esq. Enclosure cc: Omnipoint Communications Inc. Z:~SSDATA\WPDATAXSS3~I)G\voicestream~outhold~Ordinance comments Town Board.wpd REQUIRED CONSULTANT QUESTIONNAIRE In order to review qualifications, determine potential biases, and confirm reasonableness of proposed fees, the following questionnaire must be completed accurately and in its entirety. Attach additional sheets and documents as necessary. 1. Do you have any professional credentials (e.g. attorney, PE, professional planner, real estate broker license)? A. If so, please provide details, jurisdictions and a copy of any such certificate of good standing, license or other credentials. B. Have you ever had a professional complaint lodged against you? Please provide the details. 2. Please provide names and qualifications of all persons in your organization that are considered radio frequency engineers. 3. Do you carry general liability and professional liability insurance? Please provide certificates and policy endorsements naming the municipality as an additional insured and certificate holder. 4. Have you or your affiliates ever represented private residents, groups or other parties opposed to telecommunication facilities? If yes, please provide a list of all such incidents. 5. Have you or your affiliates ever been disqualified by a court to review a telecommunications application? 6. Has any municipality or other party that you or your affiliates signed a contract with stopped using your services? If so, provide contact information for each such municipality or other party. 7. Have you or your affiliates ever sued or threatened to sue a municipality or other party that you had provided services to7 If so, please provide details. 8. Has any company that you or your affiliates have been associated with been the subject of a voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy or receivership proceeding? If so, please provide details. 9. Please provide complete details regarding any litigation that you or your affiliates have ever been involved with, personally or professionally. 10. Has any municipality that enacted your model ordinance conceded that the ordinance is illegal and thereafter revised said ordinance? If so, please provide details. I l. Has any municipality that retained you or your affiliates been required to or agreed to pay any of your fees, rather than the applicant? If yes, please provide details. 12. What is your company's legal formation (i.e., partnership, corporation, LLC, limited partnership)? Please provide state of formation and all jurisdictions in which such entity is registered to do business within. 13. Do you and your affiliates comply with all federal, state and local regulations, and is your company an Equal Opportunity Employer? 14. Have you or any of your affiliates ever provided any form of payment to any municipal official, including municipal consultants, agents and attorneys, or made any political contributions to any such municipal officials? If so, please provide details. 15. Is your hourly rate consistent with what other similar consultants charge? Please provide documentation of proof. 16. Is your hourly rate the same from jurisdiction to jurisdiction or does it vary? If it varies, please provide lowest hourly rate and applicable jurisdiction. 17. Have you ever agreed to a contract with a municipality whereby you agreed not to charge for travel expenses? If yes, please provide details. 18. Attach a detailed proposed scope of work. 19. Please provide number of hours anticipated to complete scope of work and cost estimate. 20. Attach resume of any person working on the project and a list of applicable hourly rates. Certification: The foregoing answers are tree and accurate and are provided under penalty ofperj u~. The signatory below understands that such answers will be relied upon in the issuance of a contract and any misstatements provided herein will be a basis for revocation of any such con~ract awarded. ACCEPTED AND AGREED: BY: Nanle~ Title: Date: Sworn to before me this __ day or ,20__ Notary Public OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY 11971 MAILING tM)DRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3138 LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RECEt¥2D To: Town of Southold Town Board From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner ~ LWRP Coordinator Date: February 2, 2009 Re: Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Consistency Review for consideration of a Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities. This proposed action is for consideration of a Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities. The proposed local law has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided to this department as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is CONSISTENT with the below listed Policy Standards and therefore is CONSISTENT with the LWRP. Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient usc of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. Policy 2. Preserve historic resources of the Town of Southold. 2.1 Maximize preservation and retention of historic resources. Preserve the historic character of the resource by protecting historic materials and features or by making repairs using appropriate methods. Avoid potential adverse impacts of new development on nearby historic resources. Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold 3.1 Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. Minimize introduction of structural design components (including utility lines, lighting, signage and fencing) which would be discordant with existing natural scenic components and character. C. Screen components of development which detract from visual quality. Use appropriate siting, scales, forms, and materials to ensure that structures are compatible with and add interest to existing scenic components. Protect visual quality associated with public lands, including public transportation routes, public parks and public trust lands and waters. K. Protect visual quality associated with agricultural land, open space and natural resources Policy 12. Protect agricultural lands in the Town of Southold. 12.4 Preserve scenic and open space values associated with the Town's agricultural lands. Locate and arrange new development to maximize protection of agricultural land in large contiguous tracts to protect associated scenic and open space values. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Town Board shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action. Cc: Patricia Finnegan, Town Attorney Kieran Corcoran, Assistant Town Attomey Heather Lanza, Director of Planning PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGED. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 MEMORANDUM To: Scott Russell, Town Supervisor Members of the Town Board From: Jerilyn B. Woodhouse, Planning Board Chairperson Date: February 2, 2009 Re: Wireless Facilities - Proposed Code Amendments The Planning Board has reviewed the above proposed legislation and fully supports the changes to the wireless facilities code, and believes the changes as proposed are thorough and complete. These changes are necessary to bring a more thorough level of review to the process, and improve the guidelines for placement of these facilities. While the previous code provided some guidelines on location, safety, and appearance, with these new regulations, we will have taken charge of where they will be placed, and what they will look like. The Planning Board asked the town's wireless facilities consultant, Walter Cooper to comment on these changes. His comments follow: 1. Add a table to the lc: islation to make it easier to distinguish what level of approval is needed. Building General DeSign Site PfJn Special Permit Requirements Standards Approval Exception Maintenance Minor Mod. X X 280-70C Compliant X X X Major Modification or New Facility 280-70D Compliant X X X X Major Modification or New Facility Ail Others X X X X X 2. Considerchangingthe codelanguageasfollows: Seeattached pages withproposed changes. Article XVII Wireless Communications Facilities Move 280-73D(3) to General Requirements § 280-67. Purpose A. R is the express purpose of this article to minimize the visual and environmental impacts of wireless communication facilities while protecting the health, safety and welfare of Southold's citizens and allowing wireless service providers to meet their technological and service objectives. This article allows wireless communication facilities, to be reviewed and approved in keeping with the Town's existing zoning and historic development patterns, including the size and spacing of structures. The goals of the following sections are to accomplish the following: a. Site wireless facilities in these preferred locations: i. Within or on existing buildings and structures where the antennas are invisible (or nearly so) from public and residential vantage points; ii. Industrial areas; b. Take into account the aesthetic aspects of the Town, including open vistas, scenic byways and historic districts, when designing and siting wireless communication facilities. § 280-68. Scope. The regulations of this article shall govern and control the erection, enlargement, expansion, alteration, operation, maintenance, relocation and removal of all wireless communication facilities. The regulations of this article relate to the location and design of these facilities and shall be in addition to the provisions of the Southold Building and Zoning Codes and any other federal, state or local laws or Federal Communication Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Adminislxation (FAA) or other regulations pertaining to such facilities. Nothing herein shall be construed to, apply to, prohibit, regulate or otherwise affect the erection, maintenance or utilization of antennas or support structures by those licensed by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to ChaptcrTitle 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, to operate amateur radio stations. § 280-69. Definitions As used in this article, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below: ANTENNA Any transmitting or receiving device, including whip (oma4dir-ec-tionatomni directional antenna), panel (directional antenna), disc (parabolic antenna) or similar device, mounted in or on a tower, monopole, building or structure and used in communications that radiate or capture electromagnetic waves, digital signals, analog signal, radio frequencies (excluding radar signals), wireless telecommunications signals or other communications signals. BASE STATION EQUIPMENT ~Equipment integral to the operation of an antenna system. Base station eequipment typically includes, but is not limited to, communications equipment cabinet/shelter, backup power supplies, generators, electric and telecommunications backboards, wiring, grounding loops, equipment enclosures, security fencing and lighting. [ Comment: Base station equipment or base transceiver equipment (BTS) is a standard industry term. ] CO-LOCATION The use of a single mount on the ground by more than one provider (vertical co-location) and/or several mounts on an existing tower, building or structure by more than one carrier for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. structure .......... EQUIPMENT SHELTER An enclosed n, ,~.~ ~-n~ c~fassociated with the mount within which is housed the base station equipment for a wireless communications facility. FALL ZONE The area on the ground within a prescribed radius from the base of a wireless communications facility. The fall zone is the area within which there might be a potential hazard from falling debris or collapsing material, including the antenna support structure. GUYED ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that is supported, in whole or in part, by guy wires and ground anchors. HEIGHT. ~hen referring to a tower or other antenna support structure, the height is the distance from the top of the structure at its highest point, including antennas, lightening protection devices or any other apparatus attached to the top of the antenna support structure, to the base of the structure, measured in feet above ground level (AGL). Absolute height is the distance from the top of the structure, including all attachments, to the height of Mean Sea Level LATTICE ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that has open- framed supports on three or four sides and is constructed without guy wires and ground anchors. MODIFICATION The addition, removal, or change of any of the physical and visually discemable components or aspects of a wireless facility, such as antennas, cabling, radios, equipment shelters, landscaping, fencing, utility feeds, changing the color or materials of any visually discemable components, vehicular access, parking and/or an upgrade or replacement of the equipment ...... Addln a new wireless carrier or service provider (co-location) to a wireless communications tower or site is a modification. A modification shall not include ordinary maintenance, as defined herein. Modifications shall be classified as major or minor. 2 A. MAJOR MODIFICATION -- -...r ............ Changes to existing wireless telecommunications facility or ~-stmcture that result in a substantial change to the facility or structure. Major modifications include, but are not limited to, (1) Extending the height of the antenna support structure by more than 5 feet above its current height; (2) Replacement of the structure; (3) Expansion of the base station equipment or compound area beyond ten percent of the current floor area. (4) Addition of antennas to an existing carder's antenna array (5) Co-location {6) Re-orientation or relocation of existing antennas (7) Changes affecting the operating frequencies, effective radiated power or number of operating channels. B. MINOR MODIFICATION - tmpr-o~eum~Changes to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure, that result in a material change to the facility or structure but of a level, quality or intensity that is less than a substantial change. Such minor modifications include, but are not limited to, replacement of antennas, components and accessory equipment on a like-for-like basis within an existing wireless telecommunications facility_, and .......... ~, ............... ^c ........ ~ ...;~.o~ MONOPOLE A freestanding antenna support structure consisting of a single pole, without guy wires or ground anchors. MOUNT The structure or surface upon which antennas are mounted and/or the location of the antenna, e.g.: A. ROOF-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the roofofa building. B. SIDE-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the side of a building. C. STRUCTURE-MOUNTED -- Mounted on a structure other than a building. D. FLUSH-MOUNTED - Mounted very close on a building or structure so that the profile of the antenna(s) is not readily apparent. E. INTERIOR-MOUNTED - Mounted within a building or other structure so that the antennas are not visible from the outside. F. GROUND-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the ground. ORDINARY MAINTENANCE - Work done to an existing wireless telecommunications facility and antenna support structure for the purpose of maintaining them in good operating condition. Ordinary maintenance includes inspections and testing to maintain functionality, aesthetic and structural integrity, and involves the normal repair of a wireless facility without adding, removing, or changing anything and therefore does not include minor and major modifications. 3 RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) PROFESSIONAL A person who specializes in the study of radio frequency engineering and has expertise in radio communication facilities. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) EMISSIONS or RADIATION The electromagnetic field of radiation emitted by wireless antennas. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) SIGNAL The actual beam or radio waves sent and received by a wireless facility. A signal is the deliberate product of a wireless antenna. The RF radiation is the by-product. ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE Any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for wireless telephone, television, radio and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers and monopoles. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carder towers, cellular telephone towers, camouflaged tower structures, and the like. The term includes the structure and any support thereto. The term does not include wireless facilities located in or on existing buildings or structures that previously existed or are being constructed for a primary purpose other than a wireless facility e.g. water tower, electric utility pole, or church steeple. WIRELESS CARRIER - A company that provides wireless telecommunications services. WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY - Antenna or antenna support structure and base equipment, either individually or together, including permanent or temporary moveable facilities (i.e. wireless facilities mounted on vehicles, boats or other mobile structures) used for the provision of any wireless service. WIRELESS SERVICES - Commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange services, including, but not limited to, voice, data, images or other information, cellular telephone service, personal communications service (PCS), and paging service. § 280~70. Applicability, permitted uses A. No wireless communication facility shall be used, erected or altered in the Town of Southold except in accordance with the provisions of this article and any other applicable sections of the Town Code. B. All wireless communication facilities, and modifications to such facilities (as defined in §280-69) shall require a building permit, except in cases of ordinary maintenance, as defined in §280-69. C. Building Permit Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring only a building permit, without the requirement of site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Minor modifications (defined in 280-69); or 4 (2) Design standards for permitted use in §280-72, as applicable to specifications in (3) below; and (3) Location and design: i. New wireless facility that is interior-mounted in an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MIl zoning districts; or ii. Major modification, including co-location, on an existing antenna support structure or other wireless facility holding all valid permits and causing essentially no visible change to the exterior. D. Site Plan Approval Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring a building permit and site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Design Standards for Permitted use as applicable to specifications in (2) below. (2) Location and design: i. New wireless facility that is roof or side-mounted to an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII zoning districts; or ii. Major modification, including co-location, to an existing wireless facility holding all valid permits in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MIl zoning districts and causing a visible change to the exterior. E. All other wireless communication facilities, major modifications, and co-locations require a building permit, site plan approval, and a special exception approval by the Planning Board. § 280-71. General requirements for all wireless communication facilities A. No new antenna support structures may be constructed without a carrier licensed by the FCC as co-applicant. An FCC-licensed provider of wireless communications services must be the applicant or the co-applicant for any proposed new wireless communication facility, co-location or modification. B. Guyed or lattice antenna support structures are prohibited C. Antenna support structures shall not be located in the following areas: (1) Wetlands, tidal and freshwater; (2) Land above high groundwater (within ten feet of the surface). (3) Within 500' of residences; (4) Lands purchased with Community Preservation Funds; (5) Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas; (6) Designated parkland. D. Antenna support structures may not exceed 80 feet in height. E. Antenna support structures may not be located within 500' of residences F. The fall zone of an antenna support structure must not include areas where people congregate, and must be clear of all structures except the base station equipment~el-t~-. G. Antenna support structures shall not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. H. Antenna support structures are allowed in the following zoning districts: LI, LIO, MI, MII, B, and HB, with the following restrictions: (1) Minimum lot size i. LI, LIO, B & HB - in accordance with the bulk schedule for each zone ii. MI & MI1 - five acres Antenna support structures are not allowed in AC, R-40, R-80, R-120, R-200, R-400, LB, RO, RIL HD, or AHD zoning districts, except under the following conditions (these are in addition to any other applicable conditions): (1) Minimum area surrounding the proposed location: five contiguous acres of vacant land restricted from future residential development by deed; and (2) (3) Maximum height: 45'; and The structure is a monopole with interior-mounted antennas, or a suitable unobtrusive camouflage structure; and (4) (5) Structure is screened from view from surrounding properties by dense vegetation and trees, either planted or existing, and meeting the site design appearance criteria for residential zones in Section 280-77 Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at an outside location 10 feet from the equipment shelter; and (6) Minimum distance of all wireless equipment to adjacent residential property lines or street shall be no less than 500 feet. Jo Radio emissions must fall within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC. (1) A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless communication facility must be provided by the applicant. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional specializing in radio communication facilities. (2) The results from the analysis must clearly show that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the 6 nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public access) are within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC which are in effect at the time of the application. (3) (5) The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must cite the specific formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and must include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co- located with an existing facility, or is designed for future expansion or co- location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, or likely to be on, the facility in the future must also be analyzed. The power density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy on all channels at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. The conclusions of the power density analysis must be corroborated by an independent radio frequency engineer retained by the Town to provide such determinations. At the request of the Building Inspectors, which shall be no more frequently than annually, the provider shall have each wireless communication facility inspected at its own expense, and a copy of the inspection report shall be promptly transmitted to the Building Inspector. Radio emission inspections shall be performed by a qualified person specjalizing in radio frequency engineering with expertise in radio communication facilities. The radio emission report shall describe the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the facility, including the cumulative effects of collocated antennas. In the event that the radio emission inspection indicates that the electromagnetic energy generated from the facility is above the allowable limits stated within the applicable FCC or ANSI standards or other applicable state or federal guidelines in effect, the applicant shall cease all use of the facility until such time as it proves to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy to be generated are below the applicable standards. Additionally, at the request of the building inspector, which shall be no more frequently than every three years, the provider shall provide a structural inspection report prepared by a structural engineer. § 280-72. Design standards for permitted uses (these are in addition to the General Requirements listed above) 7 ao Co Fall-zones. An antenna support structure must include an area surrounding it that is free of other structures and uses, except the base equipment, with a radius equal to a distance of two times the height of the structure. A smaller fall-zone may be allowed if supported by a report submitted by a qualified structural engineer, and corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town, that demonstrates that a smaller fall zone is safe. Major modifications causing essentially no visible change in the appearance of the exterior means that the antennas are interior-mounted in the existing structure and are not visible from the outside after installation. The base equipment area is expanded by no more than 10% of its existing floor area, and is entirely screened from view from any public or residential vantage points, including all roads, yards, and commercial buildings the public enters. Exceptionally well-designed flush-mounted antennas may also fall into this category if they present no visible profile protruding from the surface to which they are mounted, and are camouflaged to blend in with the background surface to which they are mounted. Interior-mounted facilities in existing buildings shall be constructed so that the outward appearance of the building or structure before and after the installation is complete is identical or nearly identical. The addition of a significant architectural feature on to an existing building that is visible from outside for the purpose of accommodating interior-mounted antennas shall require a special exception. d. Roof-mounted facilities shall conform to the following requirements: i. Visual impact minimized to the greatest extent possible; ii. Height limited to no more than 10 feet above the highest point of the building Side-mounted facilities shall be flush-mounted and painted or otherwise camouflaged to blend with the facade or background materials of the structure. Co-locations shall not extend the height of the structure more than ten feet over the original approved structure. To prevent the incremental extension of height over time, any subsequent application with a proposed extension beyond the first ten feet shall require special exception review and approval. Base station equipment i. Located within an existing shelter or building, not to be expanded beyond an additional ten percent of floor area; or ii. Located in an underground vault, with any above-ground components screened from view with evergreen planting; or 8 iii. Entirely concealed from view with dense evergreen planting so that all equipment, shelters, fences, gates and other associated structures are not visible from any vantage point. Plantings shall be of sufficient size to achieve this screening effect immediately upon planting. iv. Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at the nearest property lines of all adjacent residences. § 280-73. Special exception approval. Authority. For the purposes of this section, the Planning Board shall be empowered to issue a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, subject to the provisions of this chapter. This supercedes Article XXV in that the Planning Board is the reviewing board in place of the Zoning Board of Appeals for wireless communication facilities that require Special Exception approval. The remainder of Article XXV remains in effect and shall apply to the Planning Board's consideration of a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, together with the additional standards and requirements in this section. Comment from Walter Cooper: I believe that 280-73B &C should be moved to General Requirements and apply ALL actions requiring a building permit, not just special exception. The Planning Board felt that with the limitations on the types offacilities that need only a building permit or site plan - it was not necessary to move these provisions. Standards. In addition to the standards in Article XXV of this Code, no special exception approval shall be granted unless the Planning Board specifically finds and determines the following (1) ~rbe applicant is a public utility duly authorized to provide service in the Town of Southold. The proposed carder shall be identified as the applicant or co-applicant. (2) Construction of the proposed facility or modification of the existing facility is a public necessity, in that it is required to meet current or expected demands of the telecommunications provider and to render adequate service to the public. (3) The applicant has made substantial effort to co-locate with existing wireless facilities, or, falling that, has made substantial effort to locate on municipally-owned land or structures, or within or on existing buildings or structures. (4) The facility conforms with applicable regulations of the FCC, FAA and other authorities having jurisdiction. (5) Them are compelling reasons which make it more feasible to construct the proposed facilities rather than alternatives. Do Matters to be considered. In addition to the matters to be considered in Article XXV of this Code, the Planning Board shall give consideration to the following in issuing a special approval for wireless communication facilities: (1) The proposed structure must be demonstrated to be the lowest height above the ground feasible to achieve the service needs of the carrier(s). The rationale behind the explanation by the applicant must be corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town. (2) The wireless communication facility has been situated to minimize its proximity and visibility to residential structures, residential district boundaries and landmarks designated by Town, federal or state agencies. (3) The wireless communication facility is designed and situated to be compatible with the nature of uses on adjacent and nearby property. (4) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding topography to minimize its visual impacts. (5) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding tree, building or foliage coverage to minimize its visual impacts. (6) The wireless communication facility maximizes design characteristics to reduce or eliminate visual impacts and obtrusiveness. (7) Other adequate conditions have been placed on the wireless communication facility which will minimize any adverse impacts of the facility on adjoining properties. Conditions. The Planning Board shall consider the following in establishing conditions on the issuance of the special exception approval: (1) In reviewing special exception approval applications required by this section the Planning Board shall consider the Town's policy as stated in this article. (2) In approving a special exception the Planning Board may waive or reduce the criteria in this article, to the extent specified below, if the Planning Board concludes that the goals and stated purposes of this law are better served, and that doing so will have no detrimental effect on adjacent properties or on the public health, safety and welfare, and thereby: (a) Minimize proximity of the tower to residential structures or historic landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies. 10 (b) (c) Modify the planting of surrounding tree coverage and foliage to account for existing vegetation and land contours, but only to the extent that the existing vegetation achieves the purpose of concealing the structure. Modify the design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that reduce or eliminate visual obtrusiveness. (3) (4) Move 280-73D(3) to General Requirements Any special exception approval granted under this article shall have a term of five years, commencing from the grant of the special exception, which may be extended for an additional five-year term upon application to the Planning Board. On a renewal application, the applicant shall demonstrate that the wireless communication facility is in compliance with all applicable laws, roles and regulations and with all of the conditions of the special exception approval and site plan, that the facility is necessary to provide adequate service, and that there is no reasonable alternative available to the owner which will provide adequate service without the continuing use of the facility. Subsequent special exception renewals shall be subject to review by the Planning Board and subject to such standards that shall be included in the Town Code at that point in time. § 280-74. Application requirements A. Fees. The following fees are in place of those required in other sections of the code. a. Building Permit Application Fees 11 Bo i. Minor modification $250 ii. Major modification $500 iii. New facility $750 b. Site Plan Application Fees i. Major modification. $I000 ii. New facility $2000 c. Special Exception Application Fee $1000 Review by independent consultants. In all cases where the Town determines that a review of an application by a qualified expert is warranted, the applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such review, which cost will be assessed as an additional application fee. This payment shall be made to the Town prior to the review commencing and the decision being rendered on the application. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports will be provided to the applicant and an opportunity given to the applicant to respond to the content of the consultants' report prior to any decisions being made. Building Permit Application The following application requirements are in addition to those required in § 144-8 C. (1) Written analysis demonstrating the project complies with the Maximum Permissible Exposure regulations in accordance with § 280-71 J. (1)-(5). (2) Written documentation as to the facility's structural compliance with local, State and Federal Codes. (3) Copies of all applicable FCC licenses, notices of proposed construction or alteration, federal environmental impact statements and other documents verifying compliance with federal, state and local regulations. (4) Report from Planning Department on compliance with the General Requirements, Design Standards for Permitted Use, and any technical consultant reports that may have been required. No building permit for a wireless facility may be granted prior to this report being submitted. Site Plan Application The following application requirements are in addition to those required in §280-133. a. Seven copies of items A. 1-3 listed above for the Building Permit Application 12 b. Aeronautical study or appropriate consultant's report demonstrating that the proposed facility will not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. c. Visual Impact Analysis - renderings or computer graphics illustrating the appearance of the completed facility from all residential and public vantage points. d. Adjacent land uses, structures and zoning within 500 feet. e. The location in latitude and longitude, type and height of the wireless communication facility. f. A list of other carders already located on the facility with the number and type of antennas for each, and the capacity of each carder at that location, including the proposed. g. Digital information about the facility (AutoCAD, Shapefile) that can be imported into a geographic information system depicting the search ring of each carrier already located on the facility, including the proposed. h. A photo of the facility, if already existing. i. Location of landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies within 300 feet. j. Distances between the proposed facility and the following: i. the nearest residential structure, ii. the nearest property line with a residential use, iii. all other structures. iv. Roads, rights of way, driveways k. Fall-zone radius and distance 1. Proposed means of access m. Elevation drawings with dimensions clearly indicated, including diameter of the structure at its widest and narrowest, and the tallest point including antennas or lightening protection. n. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. Special Exception Application 13 To make the above-described determination, the Planning Board shall require the following in addition to the requirements of Article XXV: (1) Each application shall include a. One copyies of the building permit application (2) do Once copy of the site plan application Each application shall include a written site location alternative analysis describing the location of other sites considered, the availability of those sites, the extent to which other sites do or do not meet the provider's service or engineering needs and the reason why the subject site was chosen. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. The applicant shall document to the satisfaction of the Planning Board that a good-faith effort has been made to locate or co-locate on existing towers or other available and appropriate buildings and structures, that it is not feasible to co- locate on an existing facility and that the proposed location is necessary to provide adequate service to the public. The documentation shall include a notarized statement by the applicant as to whether construction of the wireless communication facility will accommodate co-location of additional antennas for future users (3) (4) Each application shall include a plan which shall reference all existing wireless communication facility locations in the Town of Southold, any such facilities in the abutting towns which provide service to areas within the Town of Southold, any changes proposed within the following twelve-month period, including the applicant's plans for new locations and the discontinuance or relocation of existing wireless facilities. Alternatively, at the beginning of the year the applicant may submit an annual wireless communication facility plan containing the aforementioned information for the calendar year. The Planning Board and Planning Department may retain technical consultants as they deem necessary to provide assistance in the review of the needs and site location alternatives analyses and other matters that the Board deems necessary. The applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such consultation, which cost shall be assessed as an additional application fee. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports shall be made available to the applicant upon acceptance of the final draft of the report by the Planning Board. 14 (5) A copy of the deed or lease agreement establishing applicant's right to use the parcel on which the wireless communication facility is to be located. [Comment: The following part (6) appears to be redundant as it is already part of General Requirements.] [Comment from Walter Cooper: (7) thru (9) should be part of basic site plan requirement, not just special exception.] The Planning Board does not readily agree that this needs to be part of site plan requirements - site plan approval does not typically involve a discussion about whether the proposed site is the only feasible location for the project. (--7-)(6) . . propagation maps shall be submitted for existing coverage from existing surrounding and/or approved sites, coverage from all alternative sites considered and coverage from the proposed site. Propagation maps shall include a minimum of three signal strength depictions (-75dBm, -85dBm and -95dBm) and any other signal strength levels deemed appropriate by the Applicant based on the Applicant's documented coverage and reliability needs. 6g-)(7) A "gap map" prepared and signed by a qualified radio frequency engineer and overlaid on an "existing coverage" background propagation map demonstrating 15 (-99(8) the area(s) within which the applicant's existing service is not adequate. In addition, a search ring shall depicted indicating where the wireless communication facility needs to be located in order to provide adequate signal strength and/or capacity to the target gap area. The applicant must explain and document its standards and criteria for adequate signal strength, capacity and reliability and must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Board why these standards and criteria are applicable to the Town of Southold. · . The applicant must also explain to the Planning Board why it selected the proposed site, discuss the availability or lack thereof of a suitable structure within the search ring for collocation, and the extent to which the applicant has explored locating the proposed tzweffacility in a more intensive use district. Correspondence with other telecommunication providers concerning collocation is part of this requirement. The applicant shall also provide evidence supporting the existence of inadequate service. This may include the propagation maps cited above, drive test maps, traffic studies, customer complaint logs and similar data. The applicant must also demonstrate to the Board that the proposed facility satisfies the demonstrated service deficiency to an equal or greater degree than any of the reasonably available alternatives. § 280-75. Historic buildings and districts. No wireless communication facility is allowed on any designated landmark property or district listed by federal, state or Town agencies, except as specified below, and subject to §170 Landmark Preservation: Bo Any wireless communication facility located on or within an historic structure listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall not alter the character-defining features, distinctive construction methods or original materials of the building. Any alteration made to an historic structure to accommodate a wireless communication facility shall be fully reversible. Wireless communication facilities within an historic district listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall be concealed within or behind existing architectural features, so that they are not visible. § 280-76. Site design standards. The following design standards shall apply to all wireless communication facilities installed or constructed pursuant to the terms of this chapter: Camouflage on buildings. Wireless antennas, if mounted on a building fagade, shall be flush mounted and painted or otherwise treated to blend with the fagade. When a wireless communication facility extends above the roof height of a building on which it is 16 mounted, every effort shall be made to conceal the facility within or behind existing architectural features to limit its visibility from public and residential vantage points, yet permit the facility to perform its designated function. Facilities mounted on a roof shall be stepped back from the front facade in order to limit their impact on the building's silhouette. If antennas are part of the stepped back facility, the applicant shall submit an access control plan that precludes inadvertent access to the front faces of the antennas by building workers and the general public. The wireless communication facilities shall blend in with the existing building's architecture and shall be painted or shielded with material which is consistent with the design features and materials of the building. Setbacks. Towers and equipment facilities shall adhere to the setbacks for principal uses in the Bulk Schedule applicable to the zone in which the structure(s) are located, unless otherwise indicated elsewhere in this chapter. Signs. Signs shall not be permitted on facilities except for signs displaying contact information and safety instructions, which are required. Safety signs shall be in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for radio frequency radiation warning signs. Contact signs shall identify all service providers located on the facility and shall include normal and emergency contact information for each. Such signs shall not exceed five square feet in surface area. Base equipment shelter. Equipment accessory to the wireless communication facility may be located within an existing building or in an underground vault. For newly constructed wireless facilities, a base equipment shelter is limited to 500 square feet in floor area. If the newly constructed wireless facility is designed for co-location, the facility may be up to 1,000 square feet. The base equipment shelter shall be constructed with a finish similar to that of adjacent structures on the property and integrated into the architectural style. The shelter and associated fencing must be entirely screened from view by evergreen plantings. The new plantings must be of sufficient size to accomplish the screening within six months. Any newly constructed base equipment shelter shall be located in accordance with the minimum height and yard requirements of the zoning district applicable to the site, and up to two adjacent off-street parking spaces may be provided for service vehicles. Site lighting. The lighting permitted shall be the minimum required to protect the public welfare. Facilities sited on existing developed sites shall be incorporated into the lighting plans of those sites. Outside lighting shall use fully-shielded fixtures so that the light source is not visible from beyond the property line, and no light is reflected or shone towards the sky, except in the case of structures required to follow FAA guidelines for safety lighting. Access. Access to wireless facilities shall be from already established site access points whenever possible. 17 Dish antennas. Dish antennas shall be colored, camouflaged or screened to the extent that they are as unobtrusive as possible, and in no case shall the diameter of a dish antenna exceed six feet. Electric line setback. Except for wireless facilities specifically designed for mounting on electric transmission towers, or within the footprint of such towers, no wireless communication facility shall be located nearer to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than 220 volts than a distance equal to the facility's height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached. Co-location. Wireless communication facilities shall be designed to provide for co- location by multiple providers or designed so that they can be retrofitted to accommodate multiple providers, wherever possible. § 280-77. Appearance and visual impacts on character of community Scenic landscapes and vistas. All antenna support structures which are not concealed inside of buildings or screened by existing trees or buildings, must be surrounded by a planted buffer of dense tree growth. An antenna support structure that is located within a scenic vista or scenic landscape or within 300' of a scenic road, as designated by the Town, shall not be taller than ten feet above the height of trees within a 300' radius of the proposed location, or 35' maximum in the absence of trees. Bo Base landscaping. A screen of evergreen trees shall be planted outside the fence of the telecommunication tower base area to provide a visual screen or buffer for adjoining private properties and the public right-of-way or other vantage points accessible to the public. The screen shall consist of a double row of evergreen shrubs and trees that are of sufficient density and height to immediately screen the base equipment from view. Required front yard setback areas shall be landscaped and include shrubs and trees. Survivability of the landscaping shall be guaranteed and maintained by the applicant for the life of the installation. Co Color. Antenna support structures in the form of monopoles or other towers shall either be blue/gray in color, or be colored appropriate to the context of the structure's location so that the tower is as unobtrusive as possible, unless otherwise required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). If a wireless communication facility is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the colors of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. Wireless facilities sited within new structures meant to mimic some other structure or natural feature must be designed at a scale compatible with the community, be unobtrusive, and characteristic of the area. 18 Ho Camouflage by vegetation for residential screening. Where the site proposed for a freestanding tower structure is located within a residential zone or has one or more property lines abutting or on the opposite side of a street from a residential zone or use permitted in a residential zone, no antenna support structures may be constructed unless adequately screened from view of those residential zones by existing buildings or large trees, including evergreens. The structure may protrude no more than 10' above screening buildings md/or trees. In the absence of existing large trees or buildings to provide camouflage, the height of the proposed structure may be no more than 35', and the base equipment must be buried in an underground vault. Two rows of evergreen trees must be planted encircling the structure, one row at a distance from the structure of 50% of the height of the structure, and the other at 90% of the height of the structure. Transplanted trees shall have a minimum caliper of three inches, spaced thirty-feet on center. The trees must have an expected height at maturity of 10' less than the height of the structure to be screened. Smaller evergreen shrubs must be used to fill in the gaps in between for screening during the time the trees are filling in and maturing. A written guarantee from the wireless facility's owner shall be required to ensure that the plantings survive and are maintained throughout the existence of the installation. Alternate screening. The location of a cellular wireless communication facility on an existing water tower, silo or equivalent vertical structure, including an existing cellular, radio or television tower, is permitted without the need to meet the conditions in Subsections A, B, C and D above, provided that the height of the existing structure is not increased as a result of the attachment of the cellular structure. A decorative disguising structure such as a clock tower may also be approved as an alternative to the conditions in Subsections A, B, C and D at the discretion of the Planning Board. If the height of the existing structure is to be increased by the attachment of the new structure, all of the conditions herein shall apply as to a new freestanding structure. Commemial and industrial siting. Towers to be sited on developed commercial or industrial properties shall be located to the rear of other principal buildings and shall not encroach on planting buffers, parking areas or otherwise impair the operation of previously approved systems such as stormwater drainage basins. Existing buildings and structures should be used in the siting of freestanding towers to contribute to the visual screening of the tower. Commercial districts. Towers to be sited on undeveloped properties in the commercial districts shall apply the standards of the condition in § 280-72C herein to all property lines, including the streetline, except that a driveway shall be permitted to gain access to the facility for maintenance personnel and equipment. Federal Aviation Regulations. All towers shall comply with applicable airport hazard and/or obstruction regulations. Any facility that would be classified as an obstruction or 19 hazard under current federal aviation regulations or would otherwise interfere with the operation of radio navigation aids, communications and/or airport operations is prohibited. § 280-78. Removal. A. Any wireless communication facility that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall be deemed abandoned. At that time the owner of the wireless communication facility shall remove same within 90 days of such deemed abandonment. In the case of a wireless communication facility on preexisting structures, this provision shall apply to the wireless communication facility only. If the wireless communication facility is not removed within the said 90 days, the Building Inspectors may, with the approval of the Town Board, give the owner notice that unless the removal is accomplished in 30 days, the Town will cause the removal at the owner's expense. The grant of a site plan approval under this article shall include requiring the applicant to post a decommissioning bond and irrevocable permission to the Town to accomplish removal of the wireless communication facility under this article. § 280-79. Nonconforming uses. Preexisting telecommunication towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. New construction, other than maintenance on a preexisting tower, shall comply with the requirements of this article. § 280-80. Severability. The various parts, sections and clauses of this article are hereby declared to be severable. If any part, sentence, paragraph, section or clause is adjudged unconstitutional or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of the article shall not be affected thereby. 2O COUNTY OF SUFFOLK DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING STEVE LEVY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE January 27, 2009 THOMAS A. ISLES, A.I.C.P DIRECTOR OF PLANNING ~CEIV~D Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, New York 11935 Att: Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Clerk 2008 Applicant: Zoning Action: Public Hearing Date: S.C.P.D. File No.: Town of Southold Amendments: 280-67 to 280-82 "Local Law in relation to Wireless Communication Facilities" February 3, 2009 SD-09.01 Dear Ms. Neville: Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14 14-23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the above referenced application which has been submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is considered to be a matter for local determination as there is no apparent significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapproval. Very truly yours, Thomas A. Isles, AICP Chief Planner APF:ds LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H. LEE DENNISON BLDG. - 4TH FLOOR P.O. BOX 6100 (631) 853-5191 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER (631) 853-4044 #9166 STATE OF NEW YORK) ) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Karen Kine of Mattituck, in said county, being duly sworn, says that 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 week(s), successively, commencing on the 22nd day of January, 2009. -- ,/ " Principal Clerk Sworn to before me this day of NOTARY pUBLiC-STATE OF NEW YORK No. 01-V06105050 Qualified in Suffolk County [ (!m~ct of wi el ss communicat on ~es wh e protecti~ng the hca!~ and a!l~wire`!~ pr0¥i~ and aDoroved in keet~ing with the Town's existina zonina and historic develonmefil vatterns, including the size and soacin? Df structures. The coals of the followino sections are to accomplish the followiq~ Site wireless facilities in these pre- ferred locations: Within or on existine buildings and structures where the antennas are iqvLs- ible (or nearly so/from nublic and resi- dential vantaee noints: Industrial area~; Take into account the aesthehc as- pects of the Town. includin~ open vis las. scenic byways and historic districts other than a wireless facility e.a. water tower, electric utilitv pole. or church steeple. I~ASE EOUIPMENr Ground- mounted euuipment integral to the. e0uinment typically includes, but is not limited to. communications eauthm~l~i cabinet/shelter, backup vower surmlie~ eenerators, electric and telecommuni- cations backboards, wirine, aroupdino loons, eauioment enclosures, security without auv wires and eround anchor~ MODIFICATION The addition, re.- moral or chanae of any of the vhvsical and visually discernible comoonents or aspects of a wireless facility, such as an- tennas, canine, radios, eauivment shel- ters. landscainna, fencina, utditv feedq chanaine th~ color or materiald of a~v visually discernible comvonents, vehict;- lar access, varkine and/or an uoerade revlacement of the eouinment for better or more modern euuinment. Addine a new wireless carrier or service orovider (co-location/ to a wireless communica lions tower or site is a modification. A GROUND-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the eround~, ORDINARY MAINTENANCE - Work done to an existine wireless communications facility and ante~fi~ supoort structure for the vuroose of maintainine them in Mood omsratine con- dition. Ordinary maintenance inc!-~o~ inspections and testine to maintain func- tionality, aesthetic and structural inte.g- ritv. and involves the normal remir of a wireless facility without addine~ rem~v~ t~ 280-'/0. Auallmbilit*. uermitted uses No wireless communication faciljw shall be used. erected or altered in the Town of Southold exceot in accordance with the provisions of this article and any other avnlicable sections of the Town Code. Ail wireless communication facilities and modifications to such facilities (as defined in §280-69~ shall reouire a build- ing hermit, excent in cases of ordinary maintenance, as defined in 6280-69. Buildin~ Permit Reouired' A wireless communication facility is a %rmmi. t.~e~d,~usemr.e~i~n~nn~a~o~llv a bali!d- Lands vurchased with Community Preservation Funds; . Coastal Erosi n Hazar Area · Desienated oarkland. Antenna suooort structures may not exceed 80 feet in height. Antenna suonort structures may not be located within 500' of residenee~ The fall zone of an antenna SUODOrt structure must not include, areas where neot~le conereeate, and must be clear of all structures exceDt the base e0uiBme.n_t fencine and liehting, int. or chanaine anvthine and therefore shelter COLLOCATION The use of a single d6es not inc ude m bur ~ ~i ~tenna suonort xtrlmt ~r -XO aq A ~~;~-' ~,)lU M ~ ~n~g'i~;~ ~. a smaller tine'riehl, ssaooJ~,~d, on the roe. nd i~ed ~.to the and equ? . LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 20th day of January, 2009 a I,ocal Law entitled "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" and NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Iown Board of the Town of $outhold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 3rd day of February, 2009 at 4:35 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. The proposed Local La~v entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. OF 2009 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities". BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Article XVII entitled "Wireless Communications Facilities" is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced as follows: §280-67. Purpose A. It is the express purpose of this article to minimize the visual and environmental impacts of wireless communication facilities while protecting the health, safety and welfare of Southold's citizens and allowing wireless service providers to meet their technological and service obiectives. This article allows wireless communication facilities, to be reviewed and approved in keeping with the Town's existing zoning and historic development patterns, including the size and spacing of structures. Thc goals of the following sections are to accomplish the following: a. Site wireless facilities in these preferred locations: i. Within or on existing buildings and structures where the antennas are invisible (or nearly so) from public and residential vantage points: ii. Industrial areas; b. Take into account the aesthetic aspects of the Town, including open vistas, scenic byways and historic districts, when designing and siting wireless communication facilities. §280-68. Scope. The regulations of this article shall govern and control the erection, enlargement, expansion, alteration, operation, maintenance, relocation and removal of all wireless communication facilities. The regulations of this article relate to the location and desigt3 of these facilities and shall be in addition to the provisions of the Southold Building and_ Zoning Codes and any other federal, state or local laws or Federal Communication Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other regulations pertaining to such facilities. Nothing herein shall be construed to, apply to, prohibit, regulate or otherwise affect the erection, maintenance or utilization of antennas or support structures by those licensed by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to Chapter 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, to operate amateur radio stations. §280-69. Definitions As used in this article, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below: ANTENNA Any transmitting or receiving device, including whip (omnidirectional antenna), panel (direct~l antenna), disc (parabolic antenna) or similar device, mounted in or on a tower, monopole, building or structure and used in communications that radiate or capture electromagnetic 'waves, digital signals, analog signal, radio frequencies (excluding radar signals), wireless telecommunications signals or other communications signals. ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE Any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for wireless telephone, television, radio and similar communication purposes~ including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers and monopoles. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, camouflaged tower structures, and the like. The term includes the structure and any support thereto. The term does not include wireless facilities located in or on existing buildings or structures that previously existed or are being constructed tbr a primary purpose other than a wireless facility e.g. water tower, electric utility pole, or church steeple. BASE EQUIPMENT Ground-mounted equipment integral to the operation of an antenna system. Base equipment typically includes, but is not limited to, communications equipment cabinet/shelter, backup power supplies, generators, electric and telecommunications backboards, wiring, grounding loops, equipment enclosures, securi_~ fencing and lighting. CO-LOCATION The use of a single mount on the ground by more than one provider (vertical co-location) and/or several mounts on an existing tower, building or structure _by more than one carrier for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals tbr communications purposes. EQUIPMENT SHELTER An enclosed structure at the base of the mount within which is housed the base equipment for a wireless communications facility. FALL ZONE The area on the ground within a prescribed radius from the base of a wireless communications facility. The fall zone is the area within which there might bca potential hazard from falling debris or collapsing material, including the antenna suppo~l_ structure. GUYED ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that is supported, in whole or in part, by guy wire and ground anchors. HEIGHT When referring to a tower or other antenna support structure, the distance measured from the average preexisting grade level within a radius of 300' to the highest point on the tower or structure, including antennas, lightening protection devices or any other apparatus attached to the top of the tower or antenna support structure. LATTICE ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that has open-framed supports on three or four sides and is constructed without guy wires and ground anchors. MODIFICATION The addition, removal, or change of any of the physical and visually_ discernable components or aspects of a wireless facility, such as antennas, cabling, radios, equipment shelters, landscaping, fencing, utility feeds, changing the color or materials of any visually discemable components, vehicular access, parking and/or an upgrade or replacement of the equipment for better or more modem equipment. Adding_a new wireless carrier or service provider (co-location) to a wireless communications tower or site is a modification. A modification shall not include ordinary maintenance, as defined herein. Modifications shall be classified as major or minor. A~. MAJOR MODIFICATION -- Improvements to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure that result in a substantial change to the facility or structure. Major modifications include, bu_l are not limited to, (1) Extending the height of the antenna support structure by more than 5 feet above its current height; (2) Replacement of the structure; (3) Expansion of the base equipment or compound area beyond ten percent of the current floor area. (4) Addition of antennas to an existing carrier's antenna array (5) Co-location B~. MINOR MODIFICATION - Improvements to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure, that result in a material change to the facility or structure but of a level, quality or intensity that is less than a substantial change. Such minor modifications include, but are nor limited to, replacement of antennas and accessory equipment on a like-for-like basis within an existing wireless telecommunications facility and relocating thc antennas of approved wireless telecommunications facilities to different heigh_[ levels on an existing antenna support structure upon which they are currently located. MONOPOLE A freestanding antenna support structure consisting of a single pole, without guy wires or ~round anchors. MOUNT The structure or surface upon which antennas are mounted and/or the location of the antenna, e.g.: A. ROOF-MOUNTED Mounted on the roof of a building. B. SIDE-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the side of a building. C. STRUCTURE-MOUNTED Mounted on a structure other than a building. D. FLUSH-MOUNTED - Mounted very close on a building or structure so that the profile of the antenna(s) is not readily apparent. E. INTERIOR-MOUNTED - Mounted within a building or other structure so that the antennas are not visible from the outside. F. GROUND-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the ground. ORDINARY MAINTENANCE - Work done to an existing wireless telecommunications facility and antenna support structure for the purpose of maintaining them in good operating condition. Ordinary maintenance includes inspections and testing to maintain functionality, aesthetic and structural integrity, and involves the normal rep? of a wireless facility without adding, removing, or changing anything and therefore docs not include minor and maior modifications. RADIO FREQUENCY {RF} PROFESSIONAL A person who specializes in the study of radio frequency engineering and has expertise in radio communication facilities. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF} EMISSIONS or RADIATION The electromagnetic field of radiation emitted by wireless antennas. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) SIGNAL The actual beam or radio waves sent and received by a wireless facility. A signal is the deliberate product of a wireless antenna. The RF radiation is the by-product. WIRELESS CARRIER - A company that provides wireless telecommunications services. WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY - Antenna or antenna support structure and base equipment, either individually or together, including permanent or temporary moveable facilities (i.e. wireless facilities mounted on vehicles, boats or other mobile structures) used for the provision of any wireless service. WIRELESS SERVICES - Commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange services, including, but not limited to, voice, da!a_. images or other information, cellular telephone service, personal communications service (PCS), and paging service. §280-70. Applicabilitv~ permitted uses A. No wireless communication facility shall be used, erected or altered in the Town of Southold except in accordance with the provisions of this article and any other applicable sections of the Town Code. B. All wireless communication lhcilities, and modifications to such facilities (as defined in §280-69) shall require a building permit, except in cases of ordinary maintenance. as defined in §280-69. C. Building Permit Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring only a building permit, without the requirement of site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Minor modifications (defined in 280-69); or (2) Design standards for permitted use in §280-72, as applicable to specifications in (3) below; and (3) Location and design: i. New wireless facility that is interior-mounted in an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII zoning districts: or ii. Maior modification, including co-location, on an existing antenna support structure or other wireless facility holding all valid permits and causing essentially no visible change to the exterior. D. Site Plan Approval Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring a building permit and site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Design Standards for Permitted use as applicable to specifications in (2) below. (2) Location and design: i. ii. New wireless facility that is roof or side-mounted to an existing building or existing structure in the L1, LIO, B, HB, MI, or Mil zoning districts; or Major modification, including co-location, to an existing wireless facility holding all valid permits in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MIl zoning districts and causing a visible change to the exterior. E. All other wireless communication facilities, major modifications, and co-locations require a building permit, site plan approval, and a special exception approval by thc Planning Board. §280-71. General requirements for all wireless communication facilities A. No new antenna support structures may be constructed without a carrier licensed by the FCC as co-applicant. An FCC-licensed provider of wireless communications services must be the applicant or the co-applicant for any proposed new wireless communication facility, co-location or modification. B. Guyed or lattice antenna support structures are prohibited C. Antenna support structures shall not be located in the following areas: (1) Wetlands, tidal and freshwater; (2) Land above high groundwater (within ten feet of the surface). (3) Within 500' of residences; (4) Lands purchased with Community Preservation Funds; (5) Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas; (6) Designated parkland. D. Antenna support structures may not exceed 80 feet in height. E. Antenna support structures may not be located within 500' of residences F. The thll zone of an antenna support structure must not include areas where peop_ie congregate, and must be clear of all structures except the base equipment shelter. G. Antenna support structures shall not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. }t. Antenna support structures are allowed in the following zoning districts: I,I, 1,I~()~ MI, Mil, B, and HB, with the following restrictions: ( 1 ) Minimum lot size i. L1, L10, B & HB - in accordance with the bulk schedule tbr each zone ii. MI &MII five acres Antenna support structures are not allowed in AC, R-40, R-80, R-120, R-200, R- 400, LB, RO, RR, HD, or AItD zoning districts, except under the lbllowinp~ conditions (these are in addition to any other applicable conditions): (1) Minimum area surrounding the proposed location: five contiguous acres of vacant land restricted from future residential development bx deed; and (2) Maximum height: 45'; and (3) The structure is a monopole with interior-mounted antennas, or a (4) (5) (6) suitable unobtrusive camouflage structure; and Structure is screened t¥om view from surrounding properties by dense vegetation and trees, either planted or existing, and meeting the site design appearance criteria for residential zones in Section 280-77 Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at an outside location 10 feet from the equipment shelter: and Minimum distance of all wireless equipment to adiacent residential properly lines or street shall be no less than 500 feet. J. Radio emissions must fall within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC. (1) A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless communication facility must be provided by the applicant. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional specializing in radio communication facilities. (2) The results from the analysis must clearly show that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public acccss) are within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC which are in effect at the time of the application. (3) The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must ci3_e the specific formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and must include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co-located with an existing facility~ or is designed for future expansion or co-location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, or likely to be on, thc facility in the future must also be analyzed. (4) The power density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. (5) The conclusions of the power density analysis must be corroborated an independent radio frequency engineer retained by the Town to provide such determinations. §280-72. Design standards for permitted uses (these are in addition to the General Requirements listed above) a. Fall-zones. An antenna support structure must include an area surrounding it that is tree of other structures and uses, except the base equipment, wit_.h_ a radius equal to a distance of two times the height of the structure. A smaller fall-zone may be allowed if supported by a report submitted by a qualified structural engineer, and corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town, that demonstrates that a smaller fall zone is Major modifications causing essentially no visible change in the appearance of the exterior means that the antennas are interior-mounted itl the existing structure and are not visible from the outside alter installation. The base equipment area is expanded by no more than 10% of its existing floor area, and is entirely screened from view from any public or residential vantage points, including all roads, yards, and commercial buildings the public enters. Exceptionally well-designed flush-mounted antennas may also fall into this category if they present no visible profile protruding from the surface to which they are mounted, and are camouflaged to blend in with the background surface to which they are mounted. Interior-mounted facilities in existing buildings shall be constructed so that the outward appearance of the building or structure before and after the installation is complete is identical or nearly identical. The addition of a significant architectural feature on to an existing building that is visible from outside for the purpose of accommodating interior-mounted antennas shall require a special exception. d. Roof-mounted facilities shall conform to the following requirements: i. Visual impact minimized to the greatest extent possible; ii. Height limited to no more than 10 feet above the highest point the building Side-mounted facilities shall be flush-mounted and painted or otherwise camouflaged to blend with the facade or background materials of the structure. Co-locations shall not extend the height of the structure more than ten fcct over the original approved structure. To prevent the incremental extension of height over time, any subsequent application with a proposed extension beyond the first ten feet shall require special exception review and approval. g. Base equipment i. Located within an existing shelter or building, not to be expanded beyond an additional ten percent of floor area; or ii. Located in an underground vault, with any above-ground components screened from view with evergreen planting; or iii. Entirely concealed from view with dense evergreen planting so that all equipment, shelters, fences, gates and other associated structures are not visible from any vantage point. Plantings shall be of sufficient size to achieve this screening effect immediately upon planting. iv. Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at the nearest property lines of all adjacent residences. §280-73. Special exception approval. A. Authority. For the purposes of this section, the Planning Board shall be empowered to issue a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, subject to the provisions of this chapter. This supercedes Article XXV in that the Planning Board is the reviewing board in place of the Zoning Board of Appeals for wireless communication facilities that require Special Exception approval. The remainder of Article XXV remains in effect and shall apply to the Planning Board's consideration of a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, together with the additional standards and requiremenls in this section. Standards. In addition to the standards in Article XXV of this Code, no special exception approval shall be granted unless the Planning Board specifically finds and determines the following: (1) The applicant is a public utility duly authorized to provide service in the Town of Southold. The proposed carrier shall be identified as the applicant or co- applicant. (2) (3) Construction of the proposed facility or modification of the existing facility js a public necessity, in that it is required to meet current or expected demands of the telecommunications provider and to render adequate service to the public. The applicant has made substantial effort to co-locate with existing wireless facilities, or, thiling that, has made substantial effort to locate on municipally- owned land or structures, or within or on existing buildings or structures. (4) Thc facility conforms with applicable regulations of the FCC, FAA and other authorities having jurisdiction. (5) There are compelling reasons which make it more feasible to construct the proposed facilities rather than alternatives. Matters to be considered. In addition to the matters to be considered in Article D. XXV of this Code, the Planning Board shall give consideration to the fbllowim~_in issuing a special approval for wireless communication facilities: (1) The proposed structure must be demonstrated to be the lowest height above the ground feasible to achieve the service needs of the carrier(s). The rationale behind the explanation by the applicant must be corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town. (2) The wireless communication facility has been situated to minimize its proximity and visibility to residential structures, residential district boundaries and landmarks designated by Town, federal or state agencies. (3) The wireless communication facility is designed and situated to be compatible with the nature of uses on adiacent and nearby property. (4) The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding topography to minimize its visual impacts. The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding tree, building or foliage coverage to minimize its visual impacts. (6) The wireless communication facility maximizes design characteristics reduce or eliminate visual impacts and obtrusiveness. (7) Other adequate conditions have been placed on the wireless communication facility which will minimize any adverse impacts of thc facility on adjoining properties. Conditions. The Planning Board shall consider the following in establishing conditions on the issuance of the special exception approval: (1) In reviewing special exception approval applications required by this sectkm the Planning Board shall consider the Town's policy as statcd in this article. (2) In approving a special exception the Planning Board may waive or reduce the criteria in this article, to the extent specified below, if the Planning Board concludes that the goals and stated purposes of this law are bcttcr served, and that doing so will have no detrimental effect on adiacent properties or on the public health, safety and welfare, and thereby: (3) (4) (a) (b) (c) Minimize proximity of the tower to residential structures or historic landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies. Modify the planting of surrounding tree coverage and foliage to account tbr existing vegetation and land contours, but only to the extent that the existing vegetation achieves the purpose of concealing the structure. Modify the design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that reduce or eliminate visual obtrusiveness. At the request of the Building Inspectors, xvhich shall be no more frequently than annually, the provider shall have each wireless communication facility inspected at its own expense, and a copy of the inspection report shall be promptly transmitted to the Building Inspector. Radio emission inspections shall be performed by a qualified person specializing in radio frequency engineering with expertise in radio communication facilities. The radio emission report shall describe the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the facility, including the cumulative effects of collocated antennas. In the event that the radio emission inspection indicates that the electromagnetic energy generated from the facility is above the allowable limits stated within the applicable FCC or ANSI standards or other applicable state or federal guidelines in effect, the applicant shall cease all use of the facility until such time as it proves to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy to be generated are below the applicable standards. Additionally, at the request of the building inspector, which shall be no more frequently than every three years, the provider shall provide a structural inspection report prepared by a structural engineer. Any special exception approval granted under this article shall have a term of five years, commencing from the grant of the special exception, which may be extended for an additional five-year term upon application to the Planning Board. On a renewal application, the applicant shall demonstrate that the wireless communication facility is in compliance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations and with all of the conditions of the special exception approval and site plan, that the facility is necessary to provide adequate service, and that there is no reasonable alternative available to thc owncr which will provide adequate service without thc continuing use of the facility. Subsequent special exception renewals shall be subject to review by the Planning Board and subject to such standards that shall be included in the Town Code at that point in time. §280-74. Application requirements A. Fees. The following fees are in place of those required in other sections of the code. a. Building Permit Application Fees i. Minor modification $250 ii. Major modification $500 iii. New facility $750 b. Site Plan Application Fees i. Major modification. $1000 ii. New facility $2000 c. Special Exception Application Fee $1000 Review by independent consultants. In all cases where the Town determines that a review of an application by a qualified expert is warranted, the applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such review, which cost will be assessed as an additional application fec. This payment shall be made to the Town prior to the review commencing and the decision being rendered on the application. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports will be provided to the applicant and an opportunity given to the applicant to respond to the content of the consultants' report prior to an,/decisions being made. B. Building Permit Application The following application requirements are in addition to those required in §144-8 C~. (1) Written analysis demonstrating the proiect complies with the Maximum Permissible Exposure regulations in accordance with § 280-71 J. (1)-(5): (2) Written documentation as to the facility's structural compliance with loca_l, State and Federal Codes. (3) Copies of all applicable FCC licenses, notices of proposed construction or alteration, federal environmental impact statements and other documents verifying compliance with federal, state and local regulations. (4) Report from Planning Department on compliance with the General Requirements, Design Standards for Permitted Use, and any technical consultant reports that may have been required. No building permit for wireless facility ma,/be granted prior to this report being submitted. Site Plan Application The following application requirements are in addition to those required in §280- 133. a. Seven copies of items A. 1-3 listed above for the Building Permit Application Aeronautical study or appropriate consultant's report demonstrating that the proposed facility will not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. Visual Impact Analysis renderings or computer graphics illustrating the appearance of the completed facility from all residential and public vantage points. d. Adjacent land uses, structures and zoning within 500 feet. e. The location in latitude and longitude, type and height of the wireless communication facility. A list of other carriers already located on the facility with the number and type of antennas for each, and the capacity of each carrier at that location~ including the proposed. Digital information about the facility (AutoCAD, Shapefile) that can be imported into a geographic information system depicting the search rinp of each carrier already located on the facility, including the proposed. h. A photo of the facility, if already existing. i. Location of landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies within 300 feet. j. Distances between the proposed lhcility and the following: i. the nearest residential structure, ii. the nearest property line with a residential use, iii.all other structures. iv. Roads, rights of way, driveways k. Fall-zone radius and distance 1. Proposed means of access m. Elevation drawings with dimensions clearly indicated, including diameter of the structure at its widest and narrowest, and the tallest point including antennas or lightening protection. n. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. Special Exception Application To make the determination on an application tbr special exception, the Planning Board shall require the following in addition to the requirements of Article XX V: (1) Each application shall include a. One copies of the building permit application b. Once copy of the site plan application c. Each application shall include a written site location alternative analysis describing the location of other sites considered, the availability of those sites, the extent to which other sites do or do not meet the provider's (2) service or engineering needs and the reason why the subiect site was chosen. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. The applicant shall document to the satisfaction of the Planning Board that a good-faith ef/brt has been made to locate or co-locate on existing towers or other available and appropriate buildings and structures, that it is not feasible to co-locate on an existing facility and that the proposed location is necessary to provide adequate service to the public. The documentation shall include a notarized statement by the applicant as to whether construction of the wireless communication facility will accommodate co- location of additional antennas for future users (3) Each application shall include a plan which shall reference all existing wireless communication facility locations in the Town of Southold, any such facilities in the abutting towns which provide service to areas within the Town of Southold, any changes proposed within the following twelve- month period, including the applicant's plans for new locations and the discontinuance or relocation of existing wireless facilities. Alternativel~, at the beginnin~ of the year the applicant may submit an annual wirelcss communication facility plan containing the aforementioned information tbr thc calendar year. (4) The Planning Board and Planning Department may retain technical consultants as the,/deem necessary to provide assistance in the review of the needs and site location alternatives analyses and other matters that thc Board deems necessary. The applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such consultation, which cost shall be assessed as an additional application tee. The consultants will work under the directio~n of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports shall be made available to the applicant upon acceptance of the final draft of the report by the Planning Board. (5) A copy of the deed or lease agreement establishing applicant's right to use the parcel on which the wireless communication facility is to be located. (6) A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless communication facility. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional specializing in radio communication facilities. The results from the analysis must clearly show that the power' density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public access) arc within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by thc F('C which are in effect at the time of the application. The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must cite the specitic formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and must include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co-located with an existing facility, or is designed for future expansion or co-location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, likely to be on, the facility in the future must also be analyzed. The pov~er density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. (7) Propagation maps shall be submitted for existing coverage from existing surrounding and/or approved sites, coverage from all alternative sites considered and coverage from the proposed site. Propagation maps shall include a minimum of three signal strength depictions (-75dBm, -85dBm and -95dBm) and any other signal strength levels deemed appropriate by the Applicant based on the Applicant's documented coverage and reliability needs. (8) A "gap map" prepared and signed by a qualified radio frequency engineer and overlaid on an "existing coverage" background propagation map demonstrating the area(s) within which the applicant's existing service is not adequate. In addition, a search ring shall depicted indicating where the wireless communication facility needs to be located in order to provide adequate signal strength and/or capacity to the target gap area. The applicant must explain and document its standards and criteria for adequate signal strength, capacity and reliability and must demonstrate the satisfaction of the Planning Board why these standards and criteria applicable to thc Town of Southold. (9) The applicant must also explain to the Planning Board why it selected thc proposed site, discuss the availability or lack thereof of a suitable structtlr¢ within the search ring for collocation, and the extent to which the applicant has explored locating the proposed tower in a more intensive usc district. Correspondence with other telecommunication providers concerning collocation is part of this requirement. The applicant shall also provide evidence supporting the existence of inadequate service. This may include the propagation maps cited above, drive test maps, traffic studies, customer complaint logs and similar data. The applicant must also demonstrate to the Board that the proposed facility satisfies the demonstrated service deficiency to an equal or greater degree than any of the reasonably available alternatives. §280-75. Historic buildings and districts. No wireless communication facility is allowed on any designated landmark property or district listed by federal, state or Town agencies, except as specified below, and subjecLto § 170 Landmark Preservation: A. Any wireless communication facility located on or within an historic structure listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall not alter the character-defining features, distinctive construction methods or original materials of the building. B. Any alteration made to an historic structure to accommodate a wireless communication facility shall be fully reversible. Wireless communication facilities within an historic district listed by federal, st~,.tc or Town agencies shall be concealed within or behind existing architectural features, so that they are not visible. §280-76. Site design standards. The following design standards shall apply to ail wireless communication facilities installed or constructed pursuant to the terms of this chapter: A. Camouflage on buildings. Wireless antennas, if mounted on a building faCade, shall be flush mounted and painted or otherwise treated to blend with the fa~adc When a wireless communication facility extends above the roof height of a building on which it is mounted, every effort shall be made to conceal the facility within or behind existing architectural features to limit its visibility from public and residential vantage points, yet permit the facility to perform its designated function. Facilities mounted on a roof shall be stepped back from the front lhcade in order to limit their impact on the building's silhouette. If antennas are part of the stepped back facility, the applicant shall submit an access control plan that precludes inadvertent access to the front faces of the antennas by building workers and the general public. The wireless communication facilities shall blend in witk the existing building's architecture and shall be painted or shielded with materittl which is consistent with the design features and materials of the building. I3. Setbacks. Towers and equipment facilities shall adhere to the setbacks fbr principal uses in the Bulk Schedule applicable to the zone in which the structure(s) are located, unless other~vise indicated elsewhere in this chapter. Signs. Signs shall not be permitted on facilities except for signs displaying contact intbrmation and safety instructions, which are required. Safety signs shall be in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for radio frequency radiation warning signs. Contact signs shall identify all service providers located on the facility and shall include normal and emergency contact information for each. Such signs shall not exceed five square feet in surface area. Base equipment shelter. Equipment accessory to the wireless communication facility may be located within an existing building or in an underground vault. newly constructed wireless facilities, a base equipment shelter is limited to 500 square feet in floor area. If the newly constructed wireless facility is designed co-location, the facility may be up to 1,000 square feet. The base equipment shelter shall be constructed with a finish similar to that of adjacent structures on the property and integrated into the architectural style. The shelter and associatc~d fencing must be entirely screened from view by evergreen plantings. The new plantings must be of sufficient size to accomplish the screening within six months. Any newly constructed base equipment shelter shall be located in accordance with the minimum height and yard requirements of the zoning distri_ct applicable to the site, and up to two adiacent off-street parking spaces ma,/be provided for service vehicles. Site lighting. The lighting permitted shall be the minimum required to protect thc public welfare. Facilities sited on existing developed sites shall be incorporated into the lighting plans of those sites. Outside lighting shall use fully-shielded fixtures so that the light source is not visible from beyond the property line, and no light is reflected or shone towards the sky, except in the case of structures required to follow FAA guidelines for safety lighting. Access. Access to wireless facilities shall be from already established site access points whenever possible. Dish antennas. Dish antennas shall be colored, camouflaged or screened to the extent that they are as unobtrusive as possible, and in no case shall the diametc~ of a dish antenna exceed six feet. It. Electric line setback. Except for wireless facilities specifically designed for mounting on electric transmission towers, or within the footprint of such towers. no wireless communication facility shall be located nearer to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than 220 volts than a distance equal to '.he facility's height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached. Co-location. Wireless communication facilities shall be designed to provide for co-location by multiple providers or designed so that they can be retrofitted to accommodate multiple providers, wherever possible. §280-77. Appearance and visual impacts on character of community A. Scenic landscapes and vistas. All antenna support structures which are not concealed inside of buildings or screened by existing trees or buildings, must be surrounded by a planted buffer of dense tree growth. An antenna support structure that is located within a scenic vista or scenic landscape or within 300' ora scenic road, as designated by the Town, shall not be taller than ten feet above the heigl3t of trees within a 300' radius of the proposed location, or 35' maximum in the absence of trees. Base landscaping. A screen of evergreen trees shall be planted outside the fence of the telecommunication tower base area to provide a visual screen or buffer adjoining private properties and the public right-ol:way or other vantage points accessible to the public. The screen shall consist of a double row of evergreen shrubs and trees that are of sufficient density and height to immediately screen the base equipment from view. Required front yard setback areas shall be landscapqd_ and include shrubs and trees. Survivability of the landscaping shall be guaranteed and maintained by the applicant for the life of the installation. Color. Antenna support structures in the form of monopoles or other towers shall either be blue/gray in color, or be colored appropriate to the context of the structure's location so that the tower is as unobtrusive as possible, unless otherwise required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). If a wireless communication facility is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the colors of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. D. Wireless facilities sited within new structures meant to mimic some other structure or natural feature must be designed at a scale compatible with the community, be unobtrusive, and characteristic of the area. Camouflage by vegetation lbr residential screening. Where the site proposed for a freestanding tower structure is located within a residential zone or has one or more property lines abutting or on the opposite side ora street from a residential zone or use permitted in a residential zone, no antenna support structures may bc constructed unless adequately screened fi'om view of those residential zones by existing buildings or large trees, including evergreens. The structure may protrude no more than 10' above screening buildings and/or trees. In the absence of existing large trees or buildings to provide camouflage, the height of the proposed structure may be no more than 35', and the base equipment must be buried in an underground vault. Two rows of evergreen trees must be planted encircling the structure, one row at a distance from the structure of 50% of the height of the structure, and the other at 90% of the height of the structure. Transplanted trees shall have a minimum caliper of three inches, spaced thirt35- feet on center. The trees must have an expected height at maturity of 10' less than the height of the structure to be screened. Smaller evergreen shrubs must be used to fill in the gaps in between tbr screening during the time the trees are filling and maturing. A written guarantee from the wireless facility's owner shall be required to ensure that the plantings survive and are maintained throughout the existence of the installation. Alternate screening. The location of a cellular wireless communication facility o_n an existing water tower, silo or equivalent vertical structure, including an existing cellular, radio or television tower, is permitted without the need to meet the conditions in Subsections A, B, C and D above, provided that the height of thc existing structure is not increased as a result of the attachment of the cellular If. structure. A decorative disguising structure such as a clock tower may also be approved as an alternative to the conditions in Subsections A, B, C and D at thc discretion of the Planning Board. If the height of the existing structure is to be increased by the attachment of the new structure, all of the conditions herein shall apply as to a new freestanding structure. Commercial and industrial siting. Towers to be sited on developed commercial or industrial properties shall be located to the rear of other principal buildings and shall not encroach on planting buffers, parking areas or otherwise impair the operation of previously approved systems such as stormwater drainage basins. Existing buildings and structures should be used in the siting of freestanding towers to contribute to the visual screening of the tower. Commercial districts. Towers to be sited on undeveloped properties in the commercial districts shall apply the standards of the condition in § 280-72C herein to all property lines, including the streetline, except that a driveway shall be permitted to gain access to the facility for maintenance personnel and equipment. Federal Aviation Regulations. All towers shall comply with applicable airport hazard and/or obstruction regulations. Any facility that would be classified as an obstruction or hazard under current federal aviation regulations or would otherwise interfere with the operation of radio navigation aids, communications and/or airport operations is prohibited. §280-78. Removal. A. Any wireless communication facility that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall be deemed abandoned. At that time the owner of the wireless communication facility shall remove same within 90 days of such deemed abandonment. In the case of a wireless communication facility on preexisting structures, this provision shall apply to the wireless communication facility only. If the wireless communication facility is not removed within the said 90 days, the Building Inspectors may, with the approval of the Town Board, give the owner notice that unless the removal is accomplished in 30 days, the Town wiI1 cause the removal at the owner's expense. The grant ora site plan approval under this article shall include requiring the applicant to post a decommissioning bond and iIrevocable permission to the Town to accomplish removal of the wireless communication facility under this article. §280-79. Nonconforming uses. Preexisting telecommunication towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as the,,, presently exist. New construction, other than maintenance on a preexisting tower, shall comply with the requirements of this article. §280-80. [ReservedI. §280-81. Severability. The various parts, sections and clauses of this article are hereby declared to be severable. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part of this Local Law shall be adiudged/~ any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. §280-82. Effective Date. This Local ][,aw shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, Town Clerk of the Town of Southold, New York being duly sworn, says that on the 21st day of Janaur¥, 2009, she affixed a notice of which the annexed printed notice is a true copy, in a proper and substantial manner, in a most public place in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, to wit: Town Clerk's Bulletin Board, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York. Re: Wireless communications Facilities. Sworn before me this ~/¥_~ day of .ff~ ?~, 2009. Notary Publi[ LINDA J CooPER NOTARY pur;"-IC' Stz~ ' nf New York NO. 01C - 20 ~' Term Exp~e~ Decen,ber 31 - (0 Elizal3eth X. Neville Southold Town Clerk Southold Town Board - Letter Board~eet~ing of January 20, 2009 RESOLUTION 2009-113 ADOPTED Item # DOC II): 4684 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOVONG RESOLUTION NO. 2009-113 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON JANUARY 20, 2009: WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 20th day of January, 2009, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" and now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold wilt hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on February 3, 2009 at 4:35 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities" reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. OF 2009 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in Relation to Wireless Communications Facilities". BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: Article XVII entitled "Wireless Communications Facilities" is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced as follows: §280-67. Purpose A. It is the express purpose of this article to minimize the visual and environmental impacts of wireless communication facilities while protecting the health, safety and welfare of Southold's citizens and allowing wireless service providers to meet their technological and service obiectives. This article allows wireless communication facilities, to be reviewed and Generated January 22, 2009 Page 38 Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 Southold Town Board - Letter approved in keeping with the Town's existing zoning and historic development patterns, including the size and spacing of structures. The goals of the following sections are to accomplish the following: a. Site wireless facilities in these preferred locations: i. Within or on existing buildings and structures where the antennas are invisible (or nearly so) from public and residential vantage points; ii. Industrial areas; b. Take into account the aesthetic aspects of the Town, including open vistas, scenic byways and historic districts, when designing and siting wireless communication facilities. §280-68. Scope. The regulations of this article shall govern and control the erection, enlargement, expansion, alteration, operation, maintenance, relocation and removal of all wireless communication facilities. The regulations of this article relate to the location and design of these facilities and shall be in addition to the provisions of the Southold Building and Zoning Codes and any other federal, state or local laws or Federal Communication Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other regulations pertaining to such facilities. Nothing herein shall be construed to, apply to, prohibit, regulate or otherwise affect the erection, maintenance or utilization of antennas or support structures by those licensed by the Federal Communications Commission pursuant to Chapter 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 97, to operate amateur radio stations. §280-69. Definitions As used in this article, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below: ANTENNA Any transmitting or receiving device, including whip (omnidirectional antenna), panel (directional antenna), disc (parabolic antenna) or similar device, mounted in or on a tower, monopole, building or structure and used in communications that radiate or capture electromagnetic waves, digital signals, analog signal, radio frequencies (excluding radar signals), wireless telecommunications signals or other communications signals. ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE Any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for wireless telephone, television, radio and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers and monopoles. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, camouflaged tower structures, and the like. The term includes the structure and any support thereto. The term does not include wireless facilities located in or on existing buildings or structures that previously existed or are being Generated January 22, 2009 Page 39 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 constructed for a primary purpose other than a wireless facility e.g. water tower, electric utility pole, or church steeple. BASE EQUIPMENT Ground-mounted equipment integral to the operation of an antenna system. Base equipment typically includes, but is not limited to, communications equipment cabinet/shelter, backup power supplies, generators, electric and telecommunications backboards, wiring, grounding loops, equipment enclosures, security fencing and lighting. CO-LOCATION The use of a single mount on the ground by more than one provider (vertical co-location) and/or several mounts on an existing tower, building or structure by more than one carrier for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. EQUIPMENT SHELTER An enclosed structure at the base of the mount within which is housed the base equipment for a wireless communications facility. FALL ZONE The area on the ground within a prescribed radius from the base ora wireless communications facility. The fall zone is the area within which there might be a potential hazard from falling debris or collapsing material, including the antenna support structure. GUYED ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that is supported, in whole or in part, by guy wire and ground anchors. HEIGHT When referring to a tower or other antenna support structure, the distance measured from the average preexisting grade level within a radius of 300' to the highest point on the tower or structure, including antennas, lightening protection devices or any other apparatus attached to the top of the tower or antenna support structure. LATTICE ANTENNA SUPPORT STRUCTURE An antenna support structure that has open- framed supports on three or four sides and is constructed without guy wires and ground anchors. MODIFICATION The addition, removal, or change of any of the physical and visually discernable components or aspects of a wireless facility, such as antennas, cabling, radios, equipment shelters, landscaping, fencing, utility feeds, changing the color or materials of any visually discemable components, vehicular access, parking and/or an upgrade or replacement of the equipment for better or more modern equipment. Adding a new wireless carrier or service provider (co-location) to a wireless communications tower or site is a modification. A modification shall not include ordinary maintenance, as defined herein. Modifications shall be classified as maior or minor. A~. MAJOR MODIFICATION -- Improvements to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure that result in a substantial change to the facility or structure. Maior modifications include, but are not limited to, Generated January 22, 2009 Page 40 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 (l) (2) (3) (4) (5) Extending the height of the antenna support structure by more than 5 feet above its current height; Replacement of the structure; Expansion of the base equipment or compound area beyond ten percent of the current floor area. Addition of antennas to an existing carrier's antenna array Co-location B. MINOR MODIFICATION - Improvements to existing wireless telecommunications facility or antenna support structure, that result in a material change to the facility or structure but of a level, quality or intensity that is less than a substantial change. Such minor modifications include, but are not limited to, replacement of antennas and accessory equipment on a like-for-like basis within an existing wireless telecommunications facility and relocating the antennas of approved wireless telecommunications facilities to different height levels on an existing antenna support structure upon which they are currently located. MONOPOLE A freestanding antenna support structure consisting of a single pole, without guy wires or ground anchors. MOUNT The structure or surface upon which antennas are mounted and/or the location of the antenna, e.g.: A. ROOF-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the roofofa building. B. SIDE-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the side of a building. C. STRUCTURE-MOUNTED -- Mounted on a structure other than a building. D. FLUSH-MOUNTED - Mounted very close on a building or structure so that the profile of the antenna(s) is not readily apparent. E. INTERIOR-MOUNTED - Mounted within a building or other structure so that the antennas are not visible from the outside. F. GROUND-MOUNTED -- Mounted on the ground. ORDINARY MAINTENANCE - Work done to an existing wireless telecommunications facility and antenna support structure for the purpose of maintaining them in good operating condition. Ordinary maintenance includes inspections and testing to maintain functionality, aesthetic and structural integrity, and involves the normal repair of a wireless facility without adding, removing, or changing anything and therefore does not include minor and maior modifications. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) PROFESSIONAL A person who specializes in the study of radio frequency engineering and has expertise in radio communication facilities. Generated January 22, 2009 Page 41 Southold 'gown Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) EMISSIONS or RADIATION The electromagnetic field of radiation emitted by wireless antennas. RADIO FREQUENCY (RF) SIGNAL The actual beam or radio waves sent and received by a wireless facility. A signal is the deliberate product of a wireless antenna. The RF radiation is the by-product. WIRELESS CARRIER - A company that provides wireless telecommunications services. WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY - Antenna or antenna support structure and base equipment, either individually or together, including permanent or temporary moveable facilities (i.e. wireless facilities mounted on vehicles, boats or other mobile structures) used for the provision of any wireless service. WIRELESS SERVICES - Commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, and common carrier wireless exchange services, including, but not limited to, voice, data, images or other information, cellular telephone service, personal communications service (PCS), and paging service. §280-70. ApplicabiliB,~ permitted uses A. No wireless communication facility shall be used, erected or altered in the Town of Southold except in accordance with the provisions of this article and any other applicable sections of the Town Code. B. All wireless communication facilities, and modifications to such facilities (as defined in §280-69) shall require a building permit, except in cases of ordinary maintenance, as defined in §280-69. C. Building Permit Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring only a building permit, without the requirement of site plan approval if it conforms to the following: (1) Minor modifications (defined in 280-69); or (2) Design standards for permitted use in §280-72, as applicable to specifications in (3) below; and (3) Location and design: i. New wireless facility that is interior-mounted in an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII zoning districts; or ii. Maior modification, including co-location, on an existing antenna support structure or other wireless facility holding all valid permits and causing essentially no visible change to the exterior. D. Site Plan Approval Required: A wireless communication facility is a permitted use requiring a building permit and site plan approval if it conforms to the following: Generated January 22, 2009 Page 42 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 (1) Design Standards for Permitted use as applicable to specifications in (2) below. (2) Location and design: i. New wireless facility that is roof or side-mounted to an existing building or existing structure in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or MII zoning districts; or ii. Major modification, including co-location, to an existing wireless facility holding all valid permits in the LI, LIO, B, HB, MI, or Mil zoning districts and causing a visible change to the exterior. E. All other wireless communication facilities, major modifications, and co-locations require a building permit, site plan approval, and a special exception approval by the Planning Board. §280-71. General requirements for all wireless communication facilities A. No new antenna support structures may be constructed without a carrier licensed by the FCC as co-applicant. An FCC-licensed provider of wireless communications services must be the applicant or the co-applicant for any proposed new wireless communication facility, co-location or modification. B. Guyed or lattice antenna support structures are prohibited C. Antenna support structures shall not be located in the following areas: (1) Wetlands, tidal and freshwater; (2) Land above high groundwater (within ten feet of the surface). (3) Within 500' of residences; (4) Lands purchased with Community Preservation Funds; (5) Coastal Erosion Hazard Areas; (6) Designated parkland. D. Antenna support structures may not exceed 80 feet in height. E. Antenna support structures may not be located within 500' of residences F. The fall zone of an antenna support structure must not include areas where people congregate, and must be clear of all structures except the base equipment shelter. G. Antenna support structures shall not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. H. Antenna support structures are allowed in the following zoning districts: LI, LIO, MI, MII, B, and HB, with the following restrictions: ( 1 ) Minimum lot size Generated January 22, 2009 Page 43 Southold Town Board - I,etter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 i. L1, LIO, B & HB - in accordance with the bulk schedule for each zone ii. MI &MII - five acres Antenna support structures are not allowed in AC, R-40, R-80, R-120, R-200, R-400, I,B, RO, RR, HI), or AHD zoning districts, except under the following conditions (these are in addition to any other applicable conditions): (1) Minimum area surrounding the proposed location: five contiguous acres of vacant land restricted from future residential development by deed; and (2) (3) (4) (5) Maximum height: 45'; and The structure is a monopole with interior-mounted antennas, or a suitable unobtrusive camouflage structure; and Structure is screened from view from surrounding properties by dense vegetation and trees, either planted or existing, and meeting the site design appearance criteria for residential zones in Section 280-77 Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at an outside location 10 feet from the equipment shelter; and (6) Minimum distance of all wireless equipment to adjacent residential property lines or street shall be no less than 500 feet. Radio emissions must fall within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC. (1) A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless communication facility must be provided by the applicant. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional specializing in radio communication facilities. (2) (3) The results from the analysis must clearly show that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public access) are within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC which are in effect at the time of the application. The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must cite the specific formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and must Generated January 22, 2009 Page 44 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co- located with an existing facility, or is designed for future expansion or co- location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, or likely to be on, the facility in the future must also be analyzed. (4) The power density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. (5) The conclusions of the power density analysis must be corroborated by an independent radio frequency engineer retained by the Town to provide such determinations. §280-72. Design standards for permitted uses (these are in addition-to the General Requirements listed above) Fall-zones. An antenna support structure must include an area surrounding it that is free of other structures and uses, except the base equipment, with a radius equal to a distance of two times the height of the structure. A smaller fall-zone may be allowed if supported by a report submitted by a qualified structural engineer, and corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town, that demonstrates that a smaller fall zone is safe. Major modifications causing essentially no visible change in the appearance Of the exterior means that the antennas are interior-mounted in the existing structure and are not visible from the outside after installation. The base equipment area is expanded by no more than 10% of its existing floor area, and is entirely screened from view from any public or residential vantage points, including all roads, yards, and commercial buildings the public enters. Exceptionally well-designed flush-mounted antennas may also fall into this category if they present no visible profile protruding from the surface to which they are mounted, and are camouflaged to blend in with the background surface to which they are mounted. Interior-mounted facilities in existing buildings shall be constructed so that the outward appearance of the building or structure before and after the installation is complete is identical or nearly identical. The addition of a significant architectural feature on to an existing building that is visible from outside for the purpose of accommodating interior-mounted antennas shall require a special exception. d. Roof-mounted facilities shall conform to the following requirements: Generated January 22, 2009 Page 45 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20. 2009 i. Visual impact minimized to the greatest extent possible; ii. Height limited to no more than 10 feet above the highest point of the building Side-mounted facilities shall be flush-mounted and painted or otherwise camouflaged to blend with the fa~:ade or background materials of the structure. Co-locations shall not extend the height of the structure more than ten feet over the original approved structure. To prevent the incremental extension of height over time, any subsequent application with a proposed extension beyond the first ten feet shall require special exception review and approval. g. Base equipment i. Located within an existing shelter or building, not to be expanded beyond an additional ten percent of floor area; or ii. Located in an underground vault, with any above-ground components screened from view with evergreen planting; or iii. Entirely concealed from view with dense evergreen planting so that ail equipment, shelters, fences, gates and other associated structures are not visible from any vantage point. Plantings shall be of sufficient size to achieve this screening effect immediately upon planting. iv. Noise from base equipment, including any backup generator, measures less than 45dB at the nearest property lines of all adjacent residences. §280-73. Special exception approval. A. Authority. For the purposes of this section, the Planning Board shall be empowered to issue a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, subject to the provisions of this chapter. This supercedes Article XXV in that the Planning Board is the reviewing board in place of the Zoning Board of Appeals for wireless communication facilities that require Special Exception approval. The remainder of Article XXV remains in effect and shall apply to the Planning Board's consideration of a special exception approval for wireless communication facilities, together with the additional standards and requirements in this section. Standards. In addition to the standards in Article XXV of this Code, no special exception approval shall be granted unless the Planning Board specifically finds and determines the following: Generated January 22, 2009 Page 46 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 (1) The applicant is a public utility duly authorized to provide service in the Town of Southold. The proposed carrier shall be identified as the applicant or co-applicant. (2) Construction of the proposed facility or modification of the existing facility is a public necessity, in that it is required to meet current or expected demands of the telecommunications provider and to render adequate service to the public. (3) The applicant has made substantial effort to co-locate with existing wireless facilities, or, failing that, has made substantial effort to locate on municipally-owned land or structures, or within or on existing buildings or structures. (4) The facility conforms with applicable regulations of the FCC, FAA and other authorities having jurisdiction. (5) There are compelling reasons which make it more feasible to construct the proposed facilities rather than alternatives. Matters to be considered. In addition to the matters to be considered in Article XXV of this Code, the Planning Board shall give consideration to the following in issuing a special approval for wireless communication facilities: The proposed structure must be demonstrated to be the lowest height above the ground feasible to achieve the service needs of the carrier(s). The rationale behind the explanation by the applicant must be corroborated by an independent consultant hired by the Town. (2) The wireless communication facility has been situated to minimize its proximity (3) (4) (5) (6) and visibility to residential structures, residential district boundaries and landmarks designated by Town, federal or state agencies. The wireless communication facility is designed and situated to be compatible with the nature of uses on adjacent and nearby property. The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding topography to minimize its visual impacts. The wireless communication facility has been designed to use the surrounding tree, building or foliage coverage to minimize its visual impacts. The wireless communication facility maximizes design characteristics to reduce or eliminate visual impacts and obtrusiveness. Generated January 22, 2009 Page 47 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 (7) Other adequate conditions have been placed on the wireless communication facility which will minimize any adverse impacts of the facility on adioining properties. Conditions. The Planning Board shall consider the following in establishing conditions on the issuance of the special exception approval: (1) In reviewing special exception approval applications required by this section the Planning Board shall consider the Town's policy as stated in this article. (2) In approving a special exception the Planning Board may waive or reduce the criteria in this article, to the extent specified below, if the Planning Board concludes that the goals and stated purposes of this law are better served, and that doing so will have no detrimental effect on adjacent properties or on the public health, safety and welfare, and thereby: (a) Minimize proximity of the tower to residential structures or historic landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies. (b) Modify the planting of surrounding tree coverage and foliage to account for existing vegetation and land contours, but only to the extent that the existing vegetation achieves the purpose of concealing the structure. (c) Modify the design of the tower, with particular reference to design characteristics that reduce or eliminate visual obtrusiveness. (3) At the request of the Building Inspectors, which shall be no more frequently than annually, the provider shall have each wireless communication facility inspected at its own expense, and a copy of the inspection report shall be promptly transmitted to the Building Inspector. Radio emission inspections shall be performed by a qualified person specializing in radio frequency engineering with expertise in radio communication facilities. The radio emission report shall describe the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the facility, including the cumulative effects of collocated antennas. In the event that the radio emission inspection indicates that the electromagnetic energy generated from the facility is above the allowable limits stated within the applicable FCC or ANSI standards or other applicable state or federal guidelines in effect, the applicant shall cease all use of the facility until such time as it proves to the satisfaction of the Building Inspector that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy to be generated are below the applicable standards. Additionally, at the request of the building inspector, which shall be no more Generated January 22, 2009 Page 48 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 frequently than every three years, the provider shall provide a structural inspection report prepared by a structural engineer. (4) Any special exception approval granted under this article shall have a term of five years, commencing from the grant of the special exception, which may be extended for an additional five-year term upon application to the Planning Board. On a renewal application, the applicant shall demonstrate that the wireless communication facility is in compliance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations and with all of the conditions of the special exception approval and site plan, that the facility is necessary to provide adequate service, and that there is no reasonable alternative available to the owner which will provide adequate service without the continuing use of the facility. Subsequent special exception renewals shall be subject to review by the Planning Board and subiect to such standards that shall be included in the Town Code at that point in time. §280-74. Application requirements A. Fees. The following fees are in place of those required in other sections of the code. a. Building Permit Application Fees i. Minor modification $250 ii. Major modification $500 iii. New facility $750 b. Site Plan Application Fees i. Major modification. $1000 ii. New facility $2000 c. Special Exception Application Fee $1000 d. Review by independent consultants. In all cases where the Town determines that a review of an application by a qualified expert is warranted, the applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such review, which cost will be assessed as an additional application fee. This payment shall be made to the Town prior to the review commencing and the decision being rendered on the application. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports will be provided to the applicant and an opportunity given to the applicant to respond to the content of the consultants' report prior to any decisions being made. Generated January 22, 2009 Page 49 Southold Town Board - I,etter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 Building Permit Application The following application requirements are in addition to those required in §144-8 C. (1) Written analysis demonstrating the project complies with the Maximum Permissible Exposure regulations in accordance with § 280-71 J. (1)-(5). (2) Written documentation as to the facility's structural compliance with local, State and Federal Codes. (3) Copies of all applicable FCC licenses, notices of proposed construction or alteration, federal environmental impact statements and other documents verifying compliance with federal, state and local regulations. (4) Report from Planning Department on compliance with the General Requirements, Design Standards for Permitted Use, and any technical consultant reports that may. have been required. No building permit for a wireless facility may be granted prior to this report being submitted. Site Plan Application The following application requirements are in addition to those required in §280-I 33. a. Seven copies of items A. 1-3 listed above for the Building Permit Application b. Aeronautical study or appropriate consultant's report demonstrating that the proposed facility will not constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. c. Visual lmpact Analysis renderings or computer graphics illustrating the appearance of the completed facility from all residential and public vantage points. d. Adjacent land uses, structures and zoning within 500 feet. e. The location in latitude and longitude, type and height of the wireless communication facility. f. A list of other carriers already located on the facility with the number and type of antennas for each, and the capacity of each carrier at that location, including thc proposed. g. Digital information about the facility (AutoCAD, Shapefile) that can be imported into a geographic information system depicting the search ring of each carrier already located on the facility, including the proposed. Generated January 22, 2009 Page 50 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 h. A photo of the facility, if already existing. i. Location of landmarks listed by federal, state or Town agencies within 300 feet. Distances between the proposed facility and the following: i. the nearest residential structure, ii. the nearest property line with a residential use, iii. all other structures. iv. Roads, rights of way, driveways k. Fall-zone radius and distance 1. Proposed means of access m. Elevation drawings with dimensions clearly indicated, including diameter of the structure at its widest and narrowest, and the tallest point including antennas or lightening protection. n. Other in~bnnation deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. Special Exception Application To make the determination on an application for special exception, the Planning Board shall require the following in addition to the requirements of Article XXV: (1) Each application shall include a. One copies of the building permit application b. Once copy of the site plan application c. Each application shall include a written site location alternative analysis describing the location of other sites considered, the availability of those sites, the extent to which other sites do or do not meet the provider's service or engineering (2) needs and the reason why the subiect site was chosen. Other information deemed by the Planning Board to be necessary to assess compliance with this law. The applicant shall document to the satisfaction of the Planning Board that a good-faith effort has been made to locate or co-locate on existing towers or other Generated January 22, 2009 Page 51 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 (3) (4) (6) available and appropriate buildings and structures, that it is not feasible to locate on an existing facility and that the proposed location is necessary to provide adequate service to the public. The documentation shal} include a notarized statement by the applicant as to whether construction of the wireless communication facility will accommodate co-location of additional antennas for future users Each application shall include a plan which shall reference all existing wireless communication facility locations in the Town of Southold, any such facilities in the abutting towns which provide service to areas within the Town of Southold, any changes proposed within the following twelve-month period, including the applicant's plans for new locations and the discontinuance or relocation of existing wireless facilities. Alternatively, at the beginning of the year the applicant may submit an annual wireless communication facility plan containing the aforementioned information for the calendar year. The Planning Board and Planning Department may retain technical consultants as they deem necessary to provide assistance in the review of the needs and site location alternatives analyses and other matters that the Board deems necessary. The applicant shall bear the reasonable cost associated with such consultation, which cost shall be assessed as an additional application fee. The consultants will work under the direction of the Town Planning Director. Copies of the consultants' qualifications, findings and reports shall be made available to the applicant upon acceptance of the final draft of the report by the Planning Board. A copy of the deed or lease agreement establishing applicant's right to use thc parcel on which the wireless communication facility is to be located. A power density analysis of the radio emissions for the proposed wireless communication facility. The power density analysis shall be prepared and signed by a qualified professional specializing in radio communication facilities. The results from the analysis must clearly show that the power density levels of the electromagnetic energy generated from the proposed facility at the nearest point(s) of public access and the point(s) of greatest power density (if other than the nearest point of public access) are within the Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) limits established by the FCC which are in effect at the time of the application. The power density analysis must be based on the most recent edition of FCC Office Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, must cite the specific formulas and assumptions used and must show all calculations and must include simple sketches showing the spatial relationships between the facility and the points of interest. If the wireless communication facility would be co-located Generated January 22, 2009 Page 52 Southold ]'own Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 with an existing facility, or is designed for futura expansion or co-location, the cumulative effects of all emitters now on, or likely to be on, the facility in the future must also be analyzed. The power density analysis shall be based on the assumption that all antennas mounted on the proposed facility are simultaneously transmitting radio energy at a power level equal to the maximum transmitter power rating specified by the manufacturer. (7) Propagation maps shall be submitted for existing coverage from existing surrounding and/or approved sites, coverage from all alternative sites considered and coverage from the proposed site. Propagation maps shall include a minimum of three signal strength depictions (-75dBm, -85dBm and -95dBm) and any other signal strength levels deemed appropriate by the Applicant based on the Applicant's documented coverage and reliability needs. (8) (9) A "gap map" prepared and signed by a qualified radio frequency engineer and overlaid on an "existing coverage" background propagation map demonstrating the area(s) within which the applicant's existing service is not adequate. In addition, a search ring shall depicted indicating where the wireless communication facility needs to be located in order to provide adequate signal strength and/or capacity to the target gap area. The applicant must explain and document its standards and criteria for adequate signal strength, capacity and reliability and must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Planning Board why these standards and criteria are applicable to the Town of Southold. The applicant must also explain to the Planning Board why it selected the proposed site, discuss the availability or lack thereof of a suitable structure within the search ring for collocation, and the extent to which the applicant has explored locating the proposed tower in a more intensive use district. Correspondence with other telecommunication providers concerning collocation is part of this requirement. The applicant shall also provide evidence supporting the existence of inadequate service. This may include the propagation maps cited above, drive test maps, traffic studies, customer complaint logs and similar data. The applicant must also demonstrate to the Board that the proposed facility satisfies the demonstrated service deficiency to an equal or greater degree than any of the reasonably available alternatives. §280-75. Historic buildings and districts. No wireless communication facility is allowed on any designated landmark property or district listed by federal, state or Town agencies, except as specified below, and subject to §170 Landmark Preservation: Generated January 22, 2009 Page 53 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 Any wireless communication facility located on or within an historic structure listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall not alter the character-defining features, distinctive construction methods or original materials of the building. Any alteration made to an historic structure to accommodate a wireless communication facility shall be fully reversible. Wireless communication facilities within an historic district listed by federal, state or Town agencies shall be concealed within or behind existing architectural features, so that they are not visible. §280-76. Site design standards. The following design standards shall apply to all wireless communication facilities installed or constructed pursuant to the terms of this chapter: Camouflage on buildings. Wireless antennas, if mounted on a building fa~iade, shall be flush mounted and painted or otherwise treated to blend with the facade. When a wireless communication facility extends above the roof height of a building on which it is mounted, every effort shall be made to conceal the facility within or behind existing architectural features to limit its visibility from public and residential vantage points, yet permit the facility to perform its designated function. Facilities mounted on a roof shall be stepped back from the front facade in order to limit their impact on the building's silhouette. If antennas are part of the stepped back facility, the applicant shall submit an access control plan that precludes inadvertent access to the front faces of the antennas by building workers and the general public. The wireless communication facilities shall blend in with the existing building's architecture and shall be painted or shielded with material which is consistent with the design features and materials of the building. Setbacks. Towers and equipment facilities shall adhere to the setbacks for principal uses in the Bulk Schedule applicable to the zone in which the structure(s) are located, unless otherwise indicated elsewhere in this chapter. Signs. Signs shall not be permitted on facilities except for signs displaying contact information and safety instructions, which are required. Safety signs shall be in accordance with American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standards for radio frequency radiation warning signs. Contact signs shall identify all service providers located on the facility and shall include normal and emergency contact information for each. Such signs shall not exceed five square feet in surface area. Base equipment shelter. Equipment accessory to the wireless communication facility may be located within an existing building or in an underground vault. For newly constructed wireless facilities, a base equipment shelter is limited to 500 square feet in floor area. If Generated January 22, 2009 Page 54 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 the newly constructed wireless facility is designed for co-location, the facility may be up to 1,000 square feet. The base equipment shelter shall be constructed with a finish similar to that of adjacent structures on the property and integrated into the architectural style. The shelter and associated fencing must be entirely screened from view by evergreen plantings. The new plantings must be of sufficient size to accomplish the screening within six months. Any newly constructed base equipment shelter shall be located in accordance with the minimum height and yard requirements of the zoning district applicable to the site, and up to two adiacent off-street parking spaces may be provided for service vehicles. Site lighting. The lighting permitted shall be the minimum required to protect the public welfare. Facilities sited on existing developed sites shall be incorporated into the lighting plans of those sites. Outside lighting shall use fully-shielded fixtures so that the light source is not visible from beyond the property line, and no light is reflected or shone towards the sky, except in the case of structures required to follow FAA guidelines for safety lighting. Access. Access to wireless facilities shall be from already established site access points whenever possible. Dish antennas. Dish antennas shall be colored, camouflaged or screened to the extent that they are as unobtrusive as possible, and in no case shall the diameter of a dish antenna exceed six feet. Electric line setback. Except for wireless facilities specifically designed for mounting on electric transmission towers, or within the footprint of such towers, no wireless communication facility shall be located nearer to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than 220 volts than a distance equal to the facility's height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached. Co-location. Wireless communication facilities shall be designed to provide for co- location by multiple providers or designed so that they can be retrofitted to accommodate multiple providers, wherever possible. §280-77. Appearance and visual impacts on character of community Scenic landscapes and vistas. All antenna support structures which are not concealed inside of buildings or screened by existing trees or buildings, must be surrounded by a planted buffer of dense tree growth. An antenna support structure that is located within a scenic vista or scenic landscape or within 300' of a scenic road, as designated by the Town, shall not be taller than ten feet above the height of trees within a 300' radius of the proposed location, or 35' maximum in the absence of trees. Generated January 22, 2009 Page 55 Southold ]'own Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 Base landscaping. A screen of evergreen trees shall be planted outside the fence of the telecommunication tower base area to provide a visual screen or buffer for adjoining private properties and the public right-of-way or other vantage points accessible to the public. The screen shall consist of a double row of evergreen shrubs and trees that are of sufficient density and height to immediately screen the base equipment from view. Required front yard setback areas shall be landscaped and include shrubs and trees. Survivability of the landscaping shall be guaranteed and maintained by the applicant for the life of the installation. Color. Antenna support structures in the form of monopoles or other towers shall either be blue/gray in color, or be colored appropriate to the context of the structure's location so that the tower is as unobtrusive as possible, unless otherwise required by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Ifa wireless communication facility is installed on a structure other than a tower, the antenna and supporting electrical and mechanical equipment must be of a neutral color that is identical to or closely compatible with the colors of the supporting structure so as to make the antenna and related equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible. Wireless facilities sited within new structures meant to mimic some other structure or natural feature must be designed at a scale compatible with the community, be unobtrusive, and characteristic of the area. Camouflage by vegetation for residential screening. Where the site proposed for a freestanding tower structure is located within a residential zone or has one or more property lines abutting or on the opposite side of a street from a residential zone or use permitted in a residential zone, no antenna support structures may be constructed unless adequately screened from view of those residential zones by existing buildings or large trees, including evergreens. The structure may protrude no more than 10' above screening buildings and/or trees. In the absence of existing large trees or buildings to provide camouflage, the height of the proposed structure may be no more than 35', and the base equipment must be buried in an underground vault. Two rows of evergreen trees must be planted encircling the structure, one row at a distance from the structure of 50% of the height of the structure, and the other at 90% of the height of the structure. Transplanted trees shall have a minimum caliper of three inches, spaced thirty-feet on center. The trees must have an expected height at maturity of 10' less than the height of the structure to be screened. Smaller evergreen shrubs must be used to fill in the gaps in between for screening during the time the trees are filling in and maturing. A written guarantee from the wireless facility's owner shall be required to ensure that the plantings survive and are maintained throughout the existence of the installation. Generated January 22, 2009 Page 56 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 Alternate screening. The location of a cellular wireless communication facility on an existing water tower, silo or equivalent vertical structure, including an existing cellular, radio or television tower, is permitted without the need to meet the conditions in Subsections A, B, C and D above, provided that the height of the existing structure is not increased as a result of the attachment of the cellular structure. A decorative disguising structure such as a clock tower may also be approved as an alternative to the conditions in Subsections A, B, C and D at the discretion of the Planning Board. If the height of the existing structure is to be increased by the attachment of the new structure, all of the conditions herein shall apply as to a new freestanding structure. Commercial and industrial siting. Towers to be sited on developed commercial or industrial properties shall be located to the rear of other principal buildings and shall not encroach on planting buffers, parking areas or otherwise impair the operation of previously approved systems such as stormwater drainage basins. Existing buildings and structures should be used in the siting of freestanding towers to contribute to the visual screening of the tower. Commercial districts. Towers to be sited on undeveloped properties in the commercial districts shall apply the standards of the condition in § 280-72C herein to alt property lines, including the streetline, except that a driveway shall be permitted to gain access to the facility for maintenance personnel and equipment. Federal Aviation Regulations. All towers shall comply with applicable airport hazard and/or obstruction regulations. Any facility that would be classified as an obstruction or hazard under current federal aviation regulations or would otherwise interfere with the operation of radio navigation aids, communications and/or airport operations is prohibited. §280-78. Removal. Any wireless communication facility that is not operated for a continuous period of 12 months shall be deemed abandoned. At that time the owner of the wireless communication facility shall remove same within 90 days of such deemed abandonment. In the case of a wireless communication facility on preexisting structures, this provision shall apply to the wireless communication facility only. If the wireless communication facility is not removed within the said 90 days, the Building Inspectors may, with the approval of the Town Board, give the owner notice that unless the removal is accomplished in 30 days, the Town will cause the removal at the owner's expense. The grant of a site plan approval under this article shall include requiring the applicant to post Generated January 22, 2009 Page 57 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of January 20, 2009 a decommissioning bond and irrevocable permission to the Town to accomplish removal of the wireless communication facility under this article. §280-79. Nonconforming uses. Preexisting telecommunication towers shall be allowed to continue their usage as they presently exist. New construction, other than maintenance on a preexisting tower, shall comply with the requirements of this article. §280-80. [Reservedl. §280-81. Severabili ,ty. The various parts, sections and clauses of this article are hereby declared to be severable. If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section or part of this Local Law shall be adiudged by any court of competent iurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. §280-82. Effective Date. This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Thomas H. Wickham, Councilman SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Krupski Ir., Wickham, Evans ABSENT: Scott Russerl Generated January 22, 2009 Page 58