Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4022 I-/9r 23 9.a-c JJ - 6 SL &Jf �/EL1r�ecls+/ram /E-!. La, �/e/a e'7E-ireo yJrvc � ' Niyy�iuNCJ �:LG�oa!<=1c�.y.�.l3Tior✓S �U�L,J.�� l+/tii/ /a5t' �-lo�vo/�oLr- r9,+sTE�vvfa _�2,ve.e.rcr��c:ax•2• z,�:/mp �-Gn-mot a�k � ����`�'� 110 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �D�OS�FFO(,f-earn SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P. Goehringer,Chairman c y` Supervisor NJ O .g Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. 'ff� �! Robert A. Villa al �� Southold,New York 11971 Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone (516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD Appl. No. 4022SE. CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. Request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B( 1) , and Article III, Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: 415 Westerly side of Elijah's Lane, Mattituck, NY; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15, 1990, Map 8937; Parcel #1000-108-4-11.1 (part of 11) . WHEREAS, action was taken, after proper notice and public hearing, by the Board of Appeals on July 25, 1991 denying the applicant' s request for a Special Exception under the "public right-of-way" provision of the residential zone district, and due to impropriety of the selection of the zone district as it relates to residential uses; WHEREAS, an Article 78 proceeding was commenced seeking to reverse and annul the Board' s denial of the Special Exception; and on May 28, 1992, a true copy of the court judgment decided by Justice Robert W. Doyle reversing the Board' s decision was delivered; and WHEREAS, the time for the Town to appeal this Court decision, as requested, has passed; and WHEREAS, the public utility installations are essential for providing services to the public interest devoting its property and its right-of-way to such public use and service and stands ready to serve all the public; WHEREAS, the public utility company has guaranteed the Town and the unrestricted public of its telecommunications services to the public, NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that a Special Exception for telecommunication use for utility services directly for public use, as applied under Appl. No. 4022, and re-confirmed at the Board' s July 29, 1992 meeting, be and hereby is GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: Page 2 - Appl. No. 4022 Cellular Telephone (Metro One) - August 18, 1992 1. The height of the proposed accessory monopole radio tower shall not exceed 100 feet, as requested; 2. The fall-down radius of the tower shall be as submitted, with the following setback distances: a) 95 feet from the proposed tower to the northerly property line; b) 70 feet+- from the proposed tower to the southerly property line; c) 69 feet from the rear wall of the accessory one-story block building. 3 . Any future expansion for the storage of the telecommunications equipment to areas outside of the existing one-story block building located in the rear yard will require further application for Special Exception consideration; and 4. In the event this transmission tower becomes obsolete or its use is discontinued for the telecommunications purposes requested in this application, the tower shall be removed within three months of its obsolescence, and it shall be the responsibility of the owner, subsequent owners, successors, assigns, and/or the applicant herein to comply with this condition, at their own expense; and 5. No other structures, buildings, or uses shall occupy or be located on the premises unless further application is made to this Board under this Special Exception, as well as the Planning Board under the site plan regulations, in order to re-consider all zoning standards, including safety, health, and welfare standards and concerns; and 6. Lighting shall be placed near the top of the tower for aircraft safety purposes; and 7. Appropriate screening and site plan approval from the Southold Town Planning Board for this Limited Business (LB) Zone District; 8. Written covenants and restrictions shall be submitted in recordable form; and after acceptance by the Town, the original shall be recorded by the applicant in the office of the Suffolk County Clerk and a copy of same furnished with the Office of the Board of Appeals. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen and Page 3 Appl. No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone (Metro One) Decision Rendered August 18 , 1992 Villa. (Member Dinizio abstained. ) This resolution was duly adopted with a quorum vote of the Board. lk GERARD P. GOEHWNGER, C IRMAN RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK DATE �;A,, //�i , HOUR //,'yy-A Town Clerk, Town of Southold APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS p$UFFO(�C SCOTTL.HARRIS p� OG Gerard P. Goehringer,Chairman Supervisor�� y Charles Grigoms,Jr. o= Serge Doyen,Jr. C= = Town Hall,53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. Oy �� Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa ?j�l �p0 Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. No. 4022. Application of CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE requesting Special Exception approval under Article VIII , Section 100-81B(1) and Article III, Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a 104 ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, Ny; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15, 1990, Map No. 8937 . County Tax Map No. 1000-108-4-11. 3 (part of 11. ) WHEREAS, after due notice, public hearings were held on April 30, 1991 and June 7 , 1991 and at said hearings, all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding areas; and WHERES, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. The premises in question is located along the westerly side of Elijah' s Lane in the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold, is more particularly identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 108, Block 4, Lot 11. 3 (part of 11) , for which lot lines have been the subject of approval by the Town Planning Board on or about April 9, 1990. 2. For the record it is also noted that the subject parcel contains a total lot area of 80, 495. 5 square feet, is located in the Limited Business (LB) Zone District, and is surrounded on three sides by residential communities. To the south is a plot of land also owned by William J. Baxter and others improved with a large one-story building and, although unoccupied, is also located in the Limited Business Zone District. PAge 2 - Appl. No. 4022-SE Matter of CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 3 . By this application, it is requested by Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One, with the consent of the landowners, William J. Baxter and others, that a Special Exception be granted for: ( 1) a proposed unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building, and ( 2) construction of a 104 ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. The section of the Code under which this application has been made is Article III , Section 100-30B( 6) of the Agricultural-Conservation and Low-Density Residential Zone District provisions of the Code which reads as follows: 100-31B. Uses permitted by special exception by the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as herein- after provided, and . . . are subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: . . . ( 6) Public utility rights-of-way as well as structures and other installations necessary to serve areas within the town, subject to such conditions as the Board of Appeals may impose in order to protect and promote the health, safety, appearance and general welfare of the community and the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed. . . . 4. The proposed unmanned telecommunications building is shown on the site plan maps prepared by Juengert Grutzmacher Associates, P.A. dated February 6, 1991. Also, the tower structure for telecommunications transmissions is shown to be proposed at approximately 103 feet from the northerly side property line, 238+- feet from the westerly rear property line, 62+- feet from the southerly side property line, and 233+- feet from the easterly front property line. The height of the tower, inclusive of antenna mast, is proposed at 104 feet from ground level. The nearest building (telecommunications building) is located approximately nine feet to the east from the proposed tower, and 69 feet to the existing barn structure from the tower. Buildings therefore are within the direct fall-down area of the proposed tower. Also, distances have not been provided on the radius map to show building envelopes for future principal structures and accessory structures on the five residentially zoned lands adjacent to this parcel to the north and west. It does appear, however, that future homes on these lots could be located outside of the fall-down range, i.e. 104 feet from the proposed tower location. Page 3 - pppl. No. 4022-SE Matter of CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 5 . The land uses of the Low-Density Residential Zone District, under which this application is made, is intended to provide open rural environmental areas so highly valued by residents and to reasonably regulate the subdivision and development of the lands while honoring the legitimate interests of farmers and farmland owners (Article III , Section 100-30 Purpose) . The uses permitted under these provisions are limited to principal residential uses, agricultural uses, and accessory uses incidental thereto. 6 . The land use provisions of the Limited Business (LB) Zone District are intended to provide limited business activities that are consistent with the rural and historic character of surrounding areas and uses and that have been designed to protect the residential and rural character of the area. Permitted uses in the LB Zone are limited to antique, art and craft shops and galleries; custom workshops and machine shops; wholesale or retail and display of garden materials and plants, including nursery operations; library; museum; professional office; business office; funeral home; restaurant; barbershop, professional studios, travel agency and other personal service stores and shops; plumbing shop, carpentry shop, motorcycle shops, landscaping and other service businesses; wholesale and warehousing. Other uses permitted by Special Exception would include those uses as may be permitted in the Low-Density Residential and Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts and provided under Article III (ref. paragraph #5 above) . 7 . The uses proposed under this Special Exception request are for commercial telecommunications and radio transmission services by Metro One through Cellular Telephone Company, a company who has received approvals from the Public Service Commission to operate a cellular radio system (see Order issued April 18, 1985 for a "Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to Construct and Operate a Cellular Radio Telecommunication Service in the New York Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area" ) . 8. On January 10, 1989, a new Zoning Code and Master Plan were adopted by the Town of Southold, and many zoning provisions and requirements were modified or created which are quite different from the previous zoning codes. In applying the provisions of the new master plan and zoning code, one of the first considerations by this Board in a Special Exception request is to determine whether the uses requested fall within the meaning of the Zoning Code as applied. 9 . Article XIII, Section 100-130 of the Light Industrial (LI) and Light-Industrial-office (LIO) Zoning Provisions Page 4 - pppl. No. 4022-SE Matter of CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 duthorize this type of use by Special Exception. The purpose of the LIO and LI Zone Districts is to provide for commercial activities which are not appropriate for those uses permitted in residential, agricultural, and limited business use zone districts. It is apparent that the use proposed herein will be a principal use involving commercial telecommunications activities. The purpose and intent of Section 100-30B( 6) is to permit only those uses which are not of a business or commercial nature and which are clearly consistent with the rural, residential or agricultural character of the immediate area. A telecommunications use is not a residential or agricultural use. 10. It is, therefore, determined that the meaning of Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) shall apply only to those public utility towers, structures and uses congruently associated with residential or agricultural uses; i.e. TV, VHF, CB, Ham Radio, accessory and incidental thereto, by Special Exception approval by the Board of Appeals. Telecommunication systems such as that proposed herein which are of a commercial nature could be permitted as a principal use under only Article XIII and Article XIV, by Special Exception in the LIO and LI Industrial Zone Districts. This commercial use cannot be authorized by Special Exception under the current zoning code under this particular ( residential/agricultural) provision (Article III , Section 100-30B(6) ) . ACCORDINGLY, on motion by Mr. Villa, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for commercial telecommunications activities and structures as applied under Article III , Section 100-30B( 6) , (ref. Article VIII , Section 100-81B) , be and hereby is DISMISSED, for the reasons as noted above. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Messrs. Villa, Doyen and Goehringer. (Member Dinizio abstained and did not participate in discussions or vote. ) (Member Grigonis was absent due to illness. ) This resolution was duly adopted. RECEIVED AND FILED BY /�i�% Z5 - lTHE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK GERARD P. GOEH INGER HAIRMAN DATE �/ HOUR / Town Clerk, Town of Southolc', i APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS r�^v� fj'� SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman ?�~ < Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. a Serge Doyen,Jr. ' Town Hall,53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 Robert A.Villa �1 .;' w� Southold,New York 11971 Fax(516)7654823 Telephone (516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following matters will be held for public hearings before the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on WEDNESDAY, JULY 29, 1992 commencing at the following times: 7: 32 p.m. Appl. No. 4118 - GLADYS J. MILNE. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, and Article XXIII, Section 100-239. 4B for permission to construct deck addition with insufficient side yard setback, insufficient setback from existing bulkhead, and with lot coverage at more than 20% of the code limitation. Location of Property: 240 Knoll Circle, East Marion; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 37, Block 5, Lot 15; Gardiners Bay Estates Lot No. 31. 7:37 p.m. Appl. No. 4115 - STEPHEN AND ELLA SCHMIDT. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244B for permission to construct deck addition with an insufficient rear yard setback at 340 Bay Haven Lane, Southold, "Map of Bay Haven" Lot No. 27; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 088, Block 04, Lot 24. Rage 2 - Legal Notio • Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals 7: 40 p.m. Appl. No. 4023 - d/b/a METRO ONE. This is an Appeal of the March 14, 1991 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector for an Interpretation under Article XXIII , Section 100-230 concerning a proposed 104 ft. height of a monopole structure for radio transmission, and in the alternative, appellant requests a variance from the height restriction. Location of Property: ( #415) Westerly side of Elijah's Lane and the Northerly Side of w+t l the Main Road (NYS Route 25) , m , NY; also shown on Planning Board subdivision-approved map of May 15 , 1990; property now or formerly of William J. Baxter and Others; y County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-108-4-part of 11. 7: 50 p.m. Appl. No. 40225E - CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE. Request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B( 1) and Article III, Section 100-31B(6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: ( #415) Westerly side of Elijah' s Lane and the Northerly Side of the a iTucK NY, also shown on Planning Main Road (NYS Route 25) , , g Board subdivision-approved map of May 15, 1990 ; property now or formerly of William J. Baxter and Others; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-108-4-part of 11. 8: 00 p.m. Appl. No. 4116 - LINDA TAGGART. This is an Appeal of the March 13, 1992 Notice of Disapproval issued by the "'age 3 - Legal Noti� • . Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals Building Inspector under Article XIV, Section 100-142 and Article XXIII, Section 100-239. 4B for approval or recognition of lot with a substandard size of 15,285 sq. ft. , lot width (frontage) along the Main Road 76. 46 feet, and lot depth 125. 0 feet. At the time of transfer of title, the property was located in the B-Light Business Zone. Today, the property is located in the Light Industrial (LI) Zone District. Location of Property: 68320 Main Road, Greenport; Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2. 8: 15 p.m. Appl. No. 41175E - LINDA TAGGART. Request for a Special Exception under Article XIII, Section 100-131B, as referenced from Article XIV, Section 100-141B for permission to establish retail gift shop in this Light Industrial (LI) Zone District. Location of Property: 68320 Main Road, Greenport; Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2. 8: 25 p.m. Appl. No. 4120 - WILLIAM GOODALE AND MATTITUCK AUTO CENTER, INC. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXI, Section 100-212B for relief from the front yard landscaping provisions of the zoning code. Location of Property: 7655 NYS Route 25 (Main Road) , Laurel, near Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-122-06-30. 1 (previously 30) . 8: 30 p.m. Appl. No. 41195E - RICHARD GOODALE AND MATTITUCK AUTO CENTER, INC. (Tenant) . Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article X, Section 100-101B(12 ) for a permit page 4 - Legal Not • Hearings for July 2 T, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals authorizing: (a) a new car sales establishment; (b) an establishment of an accessory use incidental to the proposed new car sales establishment for the sale and/or lease of used vehicles; (c) outside display of vehicles, (d) accessory office use incidental to the new principal use as a new car sales establishment. Location of Property: 7655 Main Road (NYS Route 25) , Laurel, near Mattituck, NY: County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-122-06-30. 1 (prey. 30) . 8:45 p.m. (Reconvened from June 30, 1992) Appl. No. 4091- EUGENE M. LACOLLA. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31A and B, requesting permission to change use of a portion of the subject premises, from residential to non-residential. Location of Property: Location of Property: North Side of Main Road (State Route 25) , at Arshamomoque near Greenport, (abutting properties of Hollister's Restaurant, Mill Creek Liquors, The Pottery Place, etc. ) ; County Tax Map Parcel Nos. 1000-56-4-24 and 19. 9: 00 p.m. Appl. No. 4072 - Appl. No. 4072 - VARUJAN AND LINDA ARSLANYAN. Appeal of the November 26, 1991 Notice of Disapproval of the Building Inspector for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, Section 100-239. 4A and Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, or Article III, Section 100-32, for permission to construct swimming pool and deck addition with insufficient sideyard(s) and with insufficient setback from sound bluff/bank along the Long Island Sound. Location of Property: 54455 (North Side) of County Road 48, Greenport; page 5 - Legal Notl, • Hearings for July 2 , 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-52-1-8. The Board of Appeals will at the above time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring to be heard concerning these applications. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before the times designated above. For more information, please call 765-1809. Dated: July 14, 1992. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski --------------------------------------------------------------x • -GiRM NO,3 • TOWN OF SOCPI:IOLD BUILDING DEP,lIZTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date . . . �.ah . . . . J. `�. . . . .. I� .9. 1 To � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOT ICE that your application dated . ,,a ) � . . . . . , , , . . 19 . . . . . . For permit to ° at Location o:Property : . . � +Cel LG(i1[ House 1Jo. . . . S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Street '' `` Lot . �1. Ccurity ax dap No. 1000 Section . . .1 .Q. . . . . . . . Block . . .Q.`i. . . . . . . Hamlet . . . . . . . . . . Subdivisio,^. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . is returned 1:erewith and disapprov ed on the ;ollowing grounds U Di J O . . . . . . . . . . . . lam.". . . . . . . . S h�eR r� e IV=�x.Q .errl7 -A R �. s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , off E. ing Inspector RV i/EO TOiVN Oc-- SOiJTiiOLD BIALDENG DEPARTMENT TOiVN CLERK'S OFI TCE 1 SOuTiIOLD, \.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date MARCH 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 9.1. . . To WILLIAM D. MORE (ATTORNEY) WILLIAM BAYAY2Y .IYt'.' ik' OTHERS' ' ' . ' ' ' • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated . . .FEB. 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 .91 . . for permit to CONSTRUCT ANTENNA FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Location of Property ti 15 N EI,ISAHS LANE MATTITUCK Ha use o. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . County Tax Map No. 1000 Section .I08 Harrier . . . . . . . . . . . Block .Oti. . . . . . . . . . . Lot .7 t:3 . . . . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . filed Map No.' � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds . .W'N .ARTICLE VIII SECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 100-81 PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS WYTH ANTENNA IS NOT A PERMITTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , .USE IN THIS DISTRICT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ACTION REQUIRED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS i ild ' , q Inspector T}iOMAS S. FI ER ' RV 1/80 •TOWN OF SOIIFA�t.�,l1YE�YOR• APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING IrAPFUS91 APPEAL NO. q 6) 3 / Sri DATE .............................. Southold Town Clerk TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. Metro One 1, (We) .Ce.Uular...Te.1.eAh-Q-ne... ...cLA..KQQr.Q...&..XQA.z0...... F Name of Appellant Street and Number Matti ......NY.................HEREBY APPEAL TO ........................tuck..................................................................... Municipality State THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON APPLICATION FOR PERMIT NO. .................................... DATED ...................................................... WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO Wi1.1 iam...D.,...M.RQFe.......................................... Name of Applicant for permit of Clause Commons , Suite 3 Mattituck NY ... ......... ........................i.. ..... r............ Street and Number Municipality State ( ) PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY (x ) Building permit for telecommunications building with 104 foot monopole 1. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY .>;]i]ah..T�ar7�.••Mdtk]kuCk..........Un1it(PdJP1 P.in9n............. Street /Hamlet / Use District on Zoning Map District 1000 Section 1o8Block 4 Lot 11 ..Current Owner William J. Baxter & others Mop No. Lot No. Prior Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article viii ;xx Section 100-230; 100-82 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) (x ) A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ( ) A VARIANCE due to lack of access (State of New York Town Low Chap. 62 Cons. Laws Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 ( y) Interpretation regarding applicability of section 100-230 4. PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous appeal (kosk(hos not) been made with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector or with respect to this property. Such appeal was ( ) request for a special permit ( ) request for a variance andwas made in Appeal No. ................................Dated ...................................................................... REASON FOR APPEAL ( ) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 ( x) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (x ) Interpretation of zoning ordinance is requested for the reason that proposed 104 foot monopole radio tower with antenna exceeds 35 foot height restriction for buildings . * Appellant seeks determination that proposed 124 foot monopole radio tower with antenna is exempt from height restriction pursuant to section 100-230 (D) . In the alternative, appellant requests a variance from the height restriction. Form zsi (Continue on other side) REASON FOR APPEAL a I v ) I x40ngnued • 1. STRICT APPLICATION OF THJVDWtd8E+would produce practical difficulties or unneces- sary HARDSHIP because proposed structure is ' fl k*VY4y structure permitted by special exception of the zoning board of appeals . The proposed structure is inoperable and of no use if the tower.-cannot be constructed at the height proposed. 2. The hardship created is UNIQUE and is not shared by all properties olike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in this use district because no similar public utility use and structure is proposed or existing on the properties in the immediate vicinity of this property. 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT because proposed structure will satisfy the need for reliable cellular telephone radio signal transmission as required by thb, Public Service Commission. The proposed structure will be located within a wooded area 6f the parcel , and all trees will remain on the property to provide natural screening of the structure to the extent possible. STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss .. . . . COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) ign re Attorney for Appt)/icant Swornto this ..................../....................... day of... . .. .......... .. Notary Public DORIS AIARE HARRIS4H vmary Put.a,Stet of Ka:v Yotk 10,s Sv w-Suffolk MAY Gomm,:.;'rn G;:1;aa i�pri130,99�/ *N OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK i APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION Application No. Date Filed: TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK: Metro One c/o Moore & Moore I (We) , Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a of esi ence, ouse No. and Street Mattituck New York 11952 298- 6 am a to e, ip ode a ep one Number) hereby apply to THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS for a SPECIAL EXCEPTION in accordance with the ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE viii , SECTION 100-81 , SUBSECTION (B) (1) for the below-described property for the following uses and purposes (and as shown on the attached plan drawn to scale) : Property with Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-108-4-11. 3 (Northwest of intersection of Elijah ' s Lane and Main Road (NYS Rt. 25) , Mattituck Proposed use is a public utility unmanned telecommunications building to be located in existing concrete block building and construction of 104 foot monopoleeantenna. A. Statement of Ownership and Interest. propar y known and referred to estheXQ H (are) the owner(s) of o e No. , 1 t"Aebt,a am e identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 108 , Block Lot(s) 11. 3 which 119 (is) on a subdivision Map (Filed —5715/go "Map of Filed Map 0. 8937 , and has been approved by We Southold Town Planning Board on April g iegn as a L&N9x1KiCWu1A"Ayck RRix lot line change and merger The above-described property was acquired by the owner onGpp etrarhpd dppda Fxhihit A B. The applicant alleges that the approval of this exception would be in harmony with the intent and purpose of said zoning ordinance and that the proposed use conforms to the standards prescribed therefor in said ordinance and would not be detrimental to property or persons in the neighborhood for the following reasons:APplicant will use existing concrete block building to retain established compatibility of structures with surrounding properties. Proposed antenna will be located in a wooded area; all trees will remain on the property to minimize any visible impact. Building will be unmanned resulting in no traffic impacts. Proposed use will not affect the ordinary and reasonable uses of neighboring properties. C. The property which is the subject of this application is zoned Limited Businessand [ ] is consistent with the use(s) described in the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith. [x ] is not consistent with the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith for the following reason(s) : change of use and zoning has changed several [ ] times since certificate of occupancy issued is vacant land. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Cellular TeLephon Co. d/b/a Metro One STATE OF NEW YORK) ss. : By: _erg a . l,William D. Moore, A orAy for Sworn to before me this day of ��� / p, , Applicant c(,66`� o t a ry u i c DORIS MARIE HARRISON ZB2 (rev. 2/6/86) NaleryPul.�io,SfabofNawYork No.62,4605206-Suffolk County CommltN;n Exphs Ap i 30,1021 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD � oe- _ � � _- . OWNER STREET VILLAGE DIST.1 SUB. LOT a ;' FORMER OWNER N / ACR. S W_ TYPE OF BUILDI r RES. ! �p SEAS. VL FARM COMM. CB. MIC Mkt. Value / � K LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS , 0 0 0 0 pu; c�co G41I� Rio 4 rnitC t gd ) . 0'5$' AGE BUILDING CONDITION NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE v ' FARM Acre Value Per Vclue ,,� + Acre Tillable FRONTAGE ON WATER /9 l b 1970 Woodland FRONTAGE ON ROAD__.._1_e.T S.. __�.. �-/^----- I]FDTH Flearx Plot. '--7-- � BULKHEAD / V`K•` +� s4 Total ; -1 DOCK - r + .i r Et R,ka `,t ' jyE^ •■■■.■■.■■■■■■■■■■■■.■■■■■■.■. ■.■■■■.■.■■.■.MEN..■.■MEN.■■.■ ■■MEMO■MEMO■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ENE■■■SEMEN■MEN■.■■.■■ONE■SEEN .�■■■■■■■■■■MEN■■■E■■�=■■■SOME ■_....MEE..ENE" .■■■. ..MEMO ■■■��■■■■■i■M■i■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■E ■�R911■■■0.!■■■�.■■■■■■■■■■ENE ■N■ Ci■.■MIN■■M■i.Emil......... y ..at1■..■.I■lM■L.ME■.■■..■■..■■■ ■.■1IMENE.ili11 min.■■.■E■■.■■EM■■S .■■■■■M■■■■■■■■■■■■.■■■■MOM■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■ ■■■.■.■.■■■■ES■.M■N■■■�■■■■rL ■E IN so ME ME LIM . Ali I S_ '• - ' - ���� .. x MOM ---� :w TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD ' OWNER STREET VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT (,FOR ER ANER N E ACR. n S 01 W OF TYPE OF BUILDING c_. R S. SEAS. FARM C!MN CB. MICS. Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS _ ' 0 d n 0 70 ,4g00 I Cl 1e.00 4 Iz eI 2 _ r 5 , 0 cc ` 411a 0 onLhrna AGE BUILDING CONDITION ,` NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE s FARM Acre Value Per Value Acre Tillable FRONTAGE ON WATER Woodland FRONTAGE ON ROAD Meadowland DEPTH House Plot BULKHEAD Total DOCK as y'z 1 t � — 7 'Jv A. ,r z i 1 11 1 1 1 I _00 > 1 tic tri *- 777 17 r , M. Bldg. �a 10 = $B6 /iT5' `fd0 Foundation cewjATBaths: ° ., Extension /a Lr(o�O r 3 Basement Floors Extension _ _ Ext. Walls Interior Finish c Ct 1C h Extension Fire Place Heat / R Porch Roof Type Porch Rooms 1st Floor Breezeway Patio Rooms 2nd Floor r }` Garage - — Driveway Dormer . 0: B. o ..I .9 71ir A G � P � 'fa I��a � 'a ffn` �y +�.'� E'Z V" •., � u -ooa - aP- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD � - o OWNER STREET VILLAGE DISTRICT LOT . _.f,�... FORMER OWNER 5L Nj' y p EC ACREAGE q t.A�( � ✓A �t_ �� S W TYPE OF BUILDIN \ j7 t.0 RES. �g SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. I IND. I CB. I MISC. I Est. Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS oa OOO 5 , _ LA 96n - -1 �j add O OU 00�I- _ g306 boo / 2- 7 Oo / t F ' OD 0 ^ a Y AGE BUILDING CON ITI% ;r NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FRONTAGE ON WATER O Form Acre Value Per Acre Value FRONTAGE ON ROADL12-L ' Tillable 1 - a`2T6 -87JLIEtiEAD *° . - — Tillable 2 DOCK Tillable 3 — Woodland Swampland `A, 1 /"><ca.Y� C�� ttrw S'p o O Brushland _ House Plot, Total rY � i «" JA i t t Y a c ! M. Bldg. �d �--0 : 1{ $0(1 /i?� fj{�O Foundation Cps y Both Q Extension - d O �/LCdO 30' Basement $ Floors �x Extension Ext. Walls Interior Finish I U t: o C. rt Extension Fire Place Heat `x`� Porch Roof Type Porch Rooms lst Flocr s l Breezeway Patio Rooms 2nd Flocr Garage Driveway Dormer i ♦ ♦ r' I ♦ � y �?Jw o ..; ,•4u1 �u, 1.., � I ♦ f'� \ W W.' � �� t.M41 Tbt- •umm r v.°YP,. s v"uww^a � u... 1/ �„y� 551 . } A , WILLIAM D. MOORE, an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of the State of New York hereby certify that the attached site plan certification for NYNEX/Arthur Junge signed by Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector dated March 3 , 1992 has been compared by me with the original filed in the offices of the Southold Town Planning Board and found to be a true and complete copy. Dated: Mattituck, New York July 23 , 1992 Wil i m D. Moore :: REQUN REMENTS FOR SITE PLAN ELEMENTS & CERTIFICATION y I V ;- SECTION—BLOCK—LOT TAX MAP NUMBERS I' 1,1NAPIE & ADDRESS OF OWNER OF RECORD v !' NAME & ADDRESS OF PERSON PREPARING MAP LiDATE, NORTH POINT AND WRITTEN & GRAPHIC SCALE : jDESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY & INFORMATION TO DEFINE BOUNDARIES iLOCATIONS, NAMES & EXISTING WIDTHS OF ADJACENT STREETS & CURBS ILOCATION & OWNERS OF ALL ADJOINING LANDS , AS SHOWN ON TAX RECORDS i iILOCATION & PURPOSE OF ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED EASEMENTS !COMPLETE OUTLINE OF EXISTING DEED RESTRICTIONS APPLYING TO PROPERTY v ' EXISTING ZONING 'AREAS SUBJECT TO FLOODING OR STORM WATER OVERFLOWS : ;WATER COURSES, MARSHES, WOODED AREAS, TREES 8" IN DIAMETER OR MORE 'ANY BUILDING WITHIN 100 ' OF PROPERTY. \� iPAVED AREAS, SIDEWALKS, VEHICULAR ACCESS TO PUBLIC STREETS v jEXISTING SEWERS, CULVERTS, WATERLINES WITHIN OR ADJACENT TO PROPERTY iFENCING LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING L: PROPOSED BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURAL IMPP.OVIiMP M TOFF STREET PARKING AND LOADING AREAS ' OUTDOOR LIGHTING OR PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEMS i ( OUTDOOR sti., SOUTHOlDTOYJN SIGNS PLANNING BOARD ':i239K SIDEWALKS LOCATIONS WIDTHS : SIZE OF WATER AND SEWER LINES aylk Qlu .+:.i.-4�.,.Ns-..V6:I::w.»Ji`+�.. .....'�.4:.JJFHs,aW7G"��-- - •+.ir`i�::.. .1. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD- - - - - - - - - -X In the matter of the Application of Cellular One for an Interpretation and/or AFFIDAVIT a variance concerning the height of a monopole structure at Main Application No. 4023 Road and Elijah' s Lane, Cutchogue, New York - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss. . COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) SCOTT FOX, being duly sworn deposes and says that: 1. I am the Director of Engineering for the applicant Cellular One. Attached hereto (marked Exhibit A) for the Board's reference is a copy of my professional resume. I am fully familiar with the site under consideration. The facts and opinions recited herein are from my own knowledge and based upon the files of Cellular One reviewed by me. 2 . The issue before this Board is the appropriate height of the proposed monopole at the intersection of Elijah's Lane and Main Road in the hamlet of Cutchogue, New York. 3 . The previous hearing before this Board established that the applicant, Cellular One is a public utility under the laws of the State of New York and that it holds a franchise from the Federal Communications Commission to serve the public within the Town of Southold. Cellular One' s FCC franchise requires that Cellular One provide cellular telephone service within the geographic boundaries of the Town of Southold. The regulatory mandate for this franchise is that Cellular One provide a quality service consistent with PSC requirements. It is this standard which has determined the height of the monopole in question. 4. The efficiency of the subject site is a function of the "coverage" of the adjoining Southold site at Peconic. The site at Peconic is a given for this analysis. The most westerly portions of the Town of Southold are covered by a site in Riverhead at Northville. 5. To understand the efficiency of the subject site requires that the members of this Board understand certain basic concepts of the technology attendant to cellular telephone communications. Cellular Telephone is a method of mobile communications by radio consisting of mobile units either mounted in vehicles or hand- carried sending to and receiving signals from fixed base sites. The sites are engineered to cover a very limited area so that any particular cell will cover the local area but at the same time will not interfere with another cell operating on the same frequency some distance away. Neighboring cells operate on a difference frequency set to provide a buffer between cells of the same frequency. This concept, frequency re-use, allows the necessary system capacity to be achieved which is required to provide a quality GRADE OF SERVICE to the public. If the coverage between cells provides good overlap, a customer can move from one cell to an adjacent cell through a process called "HAND-OFF" . As a customer making a call in the vicinity of a cell moves about and, as he or she begins to move out of the range of the cell, the coverage becomes weaker. (An analogy of this is a television reception on the fringe of the stations coverage area) . When this happens, the call transfers (hands-off) to the adjacent cell, if that cell is present and has a channel available for use. To establish the necessary distribution of cells and to help insure that coverage is uniform, cells are located through the use of a hexagonal grid pattern. When a cell is missing, coverage is not uniform and service can seriously deteriorate in that region. Customers typically hear noise, popping, crackling and other interference. The quality of the call can become so poor that it finally terminates through a process known as a "Dropped Call". 6. The height of the antennas for a Cellular Telephone Cell Site is determined by a process of which the following components apply: 1) Establish the proper general area for the site (known as the "Search Area") ; 2) Estimate the appropriate height for locations in the "search area" by use of computer modeling tools; 3) Locate candidate sites; 4) Examine the terrain and land cover features in the region; 5) Using computer modeling methods study the potential performance of the candidate cell ; 6) Analyze the predicated performance of the site, determining if it will provide quality performance. 7. The determination of the search area is crucial to the process. It is determined by inspection of the grid, a partitioning of the Metropolitan Service Area (MSA) with uniform hexagons whose size is appropriate to the performance of the cellular system, and by use of the performance statistics collected within the switching system. 8. Computer Modeling Tools which use physical principals to calculate the coverage of a given height at a given location are made using a data file of ground elevation which have been determined from maps published by the United States Coast and Geodetic Survey. Ground cover is determined mostly by physical inspection of the locality. Cellular One uses computer modeling tools written by several companies. The primary one has been prepared by LCC, Incorporated, a company that does cellular telephone systems design and frequency coordination throughout the radio industry. 9. The predicated coverage information is analyzed to determine the optimum height needed for the site. Proper balance is sought between the widest coverage and the minimum interference with the operation of other cells and cellular companies. In the case of the North Shore of Long Island, the several cellular operators in Connecticut are affected when a Cellular One site is not designed well and interferes with cells in their territory. The reverse case is, of course, true. Minimum antenna height is crucial in controlling interference. If the antennas are place at a elevation which is lower than optimum, coverage is reduced and more sites will be required to provide reliable service. Therefore, an optimum height is selected integrating reliable coverage and minimizing interference. 10. In the case of the proposed site at Cutchogue, an assessment of the relationship to the site at Peconic was made. The distance from the proposed location to the Southold (Peconic) site is about 4. 2 miles. This requires a cell radius of just over 2 miles. The computer modeling study results are attached as Exhibit B with the coverage contours of the cells traced on a map. Attachment A indicates contiguous coverage with overlap, indicated by hatching, with the tower at 100 feet. At 75 feet, shown on Attachment B, the linkage with Southold (Peconic) becomes weak and at 50 feet, shown on Attachment C, calls can be expected to be dropped. At 35 feet, shown on Attachment D, the coverage is not continuous. Calls will not be "handed-off" properly, cellular terminology for the process that moves a call from the signal of one cell to the next, with reliability at less than 100 feet. 11. The coverage (efficiency) provided by the proposed structure at Mattituck is optimum at 100 feet above ground. ott Fox Sworppt�o before me this OC( "`day of July, 1992. GZQ�\t_�_ (` Notary Public NOTARY ',', 9aew Ysrx Iz� 15%4 SCOTT FOX 16 Woodmere Drive • Eatontown, N.J. 07724 • (908)389-5520 EDUCATION Bachelor of Science Electrical Engineering (BSEE) • 1981 College of Engineering • University of Florida •Gainesville, FI Specialization: Communications EXPERIENCE CELLULAR ONE RO HELLE PARK N J 1990 to Director of Engineering Present Responsible for the coordination and implementation of all engineering aspects of the New York / New Jersey non-wireline cellular system. Directly manage the activities of the following departments: • RF Optimization Engineering • Cell Implementation Engineering • Systems Engineering (Network, Switch, Traffic, Telco, etc..) • Fraud Engineering Major Accomplishments: • Managed the growth of the Engineering Department and support staff from 3 people (in 1989) to 35+ Engineers in four separate groups (in 1992). • Managed the growth of the system from 1 switch and 46 cell sites to 9 switches and 200+ cell sites. • 'High-site' reduction projects • Complete New York system conversion from Motorola to Ericsson (July 1991). • Implementation of Digital Technology into the New York market (TDMA). • IS-41 Rev. 0 Field Trials between Motorola and Ericsson systems. • Developed and implemented extensive Fraud identification and elimination programs and projects. 1989 to Director of RF Engineering 1990 Responsible for all RF optimization and implementation aspects of the system. Directly manage the team of engineers responsible for the following: • Optimize and maintain the integrity of the existing system while rapidly growing the system to meet subscriber growth. • Develop and implement frequency assignments which allow maximum capacity and minimum interference. • Develop short and long-term expansion plans which provide additional capacity and improved coverage. Evaluate and implement sectorization, cell splitting, and new site implementation to meet these plans. Page 2 Resume of Scott Fox METROMEMA PAGING SERVICES SECA CUS N J 1988 to Director of Engineering 1989 Corporate staff position, primary duties and responsibilities as follows: • Provide consultation and analytical support to the operating branches nationwide related to all technical aspects of the business. • Identify new technologies with the potential to benifit the company. • Interface with the vendors to implement these new technologies into products and equipment to be utilized by the operating branches. • Coordinate the development and maintenance of uniform technical standards to ensure optimal technical performance. • MFJ compliance liaison - Primary liaison between Metromedia Paging and Southwestern Bell lour parent company) regarding all technical issues related to ongoing MFJ compliance. 1987 to Engineering Manager 1988 • Responsible for all technical aspects of Metromedia Paging Services' largest system, the New York/New Jersey operation. • Managed the Network Operations Center and the Field Service operations. • Assisted in the development of the annual Capital and Expense budgets for the New York/New Jersey operating branch. Managed with full Profit and Loss responsibility (greater than $ 5 million annually). • F.C.C. license responsibility. • Site acquisitions, lease negotiations, and payments. • Systems Engineering: Coverage and channel capacity planning; RF control link/repeater design; simulcast optimization procedures; paging formats and preamble management. Telco traffic engineering. 1986 to Systems Engineer 1987 Resoonsibilities: • Evaluation and optimization of regional and national paging and conventional Mobile Telephone systems. • Integration of common RF resources between dissimilar markets. • Development and standardization of technical procedures and documentation. • Alpha-Numeric 'front-end' processor development. • Remote-site monitor and alarming project management. Page 3 Resume of Scott Fox WESTSIDE COMMUNICATION GAINE�VILLE FL 1984 to Chief Engineer 1986 Managed all technical aspects of numerous regional and state-wide analog and digital paging systems. Maintained and operated eight conventional mobile telephone systems and two 5-channel Trunked SMR systems. Designed and implemented the first true "Talk-Back" paging system on the East Coast utilizing satellite comparators/voting receivers, simulcast transmitters, and miniature UHF hand-held transceivers. RADIO TELEPHONE COMPANY GAINESVILLE FL 1981 to Communications Engineer 1984 Responsible for all aspects of numerous paging and mobile telephone systems throughout the state of Florida. Base station repair and paging terminal maintenance. 1979 to Technician 1981 Repair and maintenance of all types of pagers, radios, and base station equipment. The majority of this work was performed while putting myself through college. PERSONAL Marital Status: Married One Child Citizenship: United States Other: Commercial Radio Telephone License Amateur Radio License Private Pilot License ATTACHMENT A SOUTHOIJ) SITE AS INSTALLED PROPOSED MATTITUCK SITE AT 100 FEET pero a_ TOP OF ANTENNAS V— fXl "q..P tf ------- - .... 17 C� T ftch dw So? MON.& Little say Little I MON r4oVack Bay NATIONAL WLDIJFE EFUGE tAcl Eli I L) en ATTACHMENT B 1 SOUTHOLD SITE AS INSTALLED w PROPOSED MATTITUCK SITE AT 75 FEET a TOP OF ANTENNAS 1 P ''� ipt __ SSttl OnrinP Ael NortmH �\ ` rid,-.. ro nvu ��( C \..�/�ti)�\;heYal �r.� _.� � f•, _ _ ..—_. .. .._ ... ..._ _ .. .. /�. .._ 1_ S s,✓ L '7snnn9s Pt ��• III \ /EOM \ r / f r A � i � e� r,�• }G i - ^ S•u!Iu AA Ifs r q_ , f .. ../ ee.• P�reAise ! /SmdA C0�4 OckpmWR. ,L . xawh Orea.on r c ` oge C. Ndtw k St a Iwlx ° \� Lt1Ne Peconic i Noyock Bay y rs c ♦ MFIO AL WIMME E Pay rryack 2 — -;�.��5y;f�/ -`,, I ID r� 6 )1���.[� \' �"• � a N 5. .I AJ�./'�• / � 9 r J 1 . L, £.1, J '..% \ \ 9 \ I • h fr rit�� � 1,�. O , rJ/ ! t !y� ! 0 1 - �f o J . . .` �'.'7FJ=VJ v i� r I,,` ) .I ���D •�' �Ir _ ,1 .i Y�� -r o' f L .. '.p \\. J'! 1� i �///��+'�r� _ � • ! �a1 I yYti �i 1, cQ e/j S`i"ll�oi' i r .7) ,� `\�1 �41 F 00 y �\ �,t2 f a ✓ ;, i r ?11 la�e4Pr� �o ^� .C3 fS�_ 01 �..s d f . •� �.1� � 1 j I ,mf \ - ko �`Y. IE ATTACHMENT C I� I Intel Pi 1�•' �lf< Lan '� Ha,'Reacn ft SOUTHOLD SITE AS INSTALLED PROPOSED MATTITUCK SITE AT 50 FEET P` wA. 11 4J,` �-,lGmna,ius TOP OF ANTENNAS s _ t s a � 1 q f III -1__ __—_-____—_.. ._—_—___ --___—__.�_ ____._— I•...__._. _ _. ..__� (! �.._ .-f �1 /S,i`l� _ yt� _��4\ ' f(.a.y - i - \ v - 'Smuti kaav' 7YnCa/Pr a,dsanen.i� �� yd%: Lm Baech GNeran SI arm wrsinfCAe, /l ':I. �� tifJle Peconic n ,: Bay Novock Boy J .ry RCON, o NAM wIDSIM t CwLaya Vack �,ii PIW . � s '. ,�'.'yt a K rhiaarr dma �•v y. •; ,�J�Yyrr i .5bna:/ f� ' � I i rJ if{i'1�"{ �r soak' < �} �;a Off( Y:�J'';�' '. � ;(�+,a�u !)� , N1 •.p� � } �1" 1'• i �OtY 'ST � '\ k �nP- :- �" 2'\ YI /,�.''r��f t L/ .5 . .r �J° 5 , .-aSi-n� I2P(7 � ." "f'! ..n n A� � l FUO o: 1 c..m1e � 7 v�lyi r t )/ ATTACHMENT D SOUTHOLD SITE AS INSTALLED f ` AAA ft PROPOSED HATTITUCK SITE AT 35 FEET TOP OF ANTENNAS 7bo. ��.� r�_ \✓\Celt � rM ( 1_- 7br/on R r wy I � S�u n it 1_Pamr �P' � D.earardn,� �S�oryy v ; 1 V' Gbeeoc . Sot, uc .Mmlllhrf« /i !`y �� Little say en , Napaek Boy �BaV tIRYON NIIIIDNm wMIFF. EFVGE _ n -•�LJf:rldrgr:e •��. LF ��• ` r ItJm" { iV � , 7rT.�1 1 \ � .`I\$I1a,gtdl e :�f i b / ©Cti} e3o,■ l'f q'I`?,.i' l�f l' J 'v��1}��Il���ar}i�Al_ °•jh`'�F_ be �•_x�'!���f}/� r '„I t1 I 1 ��J`.'I' t r cA�did.J.ie°/r... �/^I rl I�-• 5 HOUR" \ ,Rol,A 11 1. 1 Z.�r1 /ter/t K. �!l ltM�/i-Sf J ��e '..Jaloxepon ( '• '�' y ..,+ - - tt\ 1 ' l Nl-3` Ir. >,t+Y.. v 1 l n r '; �r,;•r \f f:''i ,.t�,I il .. p rVo C &AT 4 er5 h ° - �1 U S.Deoortnlertt Eastern Region RIZgerald Federal Budding Of Transportation John F.Kennedy International Airport Administration tration Jamaica.New York 11400 Administration E X T E N S I O N ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION -------------------------------------------------------------------------- CITY STATE LATITUDE/LONGITUDE MSL AGL AMSL MATTITUCK NY 40-59-56 . 00 072-30-39 . 00 30 100 130 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- METRO ONE CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. AERONAUTICAL STUDY GLENN WITTE No: 91-AEA-0108-OE 365 WEST PASSAIC STREET NEW ROCHELLE, NJ 07662-3015 Type Structure: ANTENNA TOWER The Federal Aviation Administration hereby acknowledges receipt of notice dated 01/11/91 cunceLhing the proposed construction or alteration contained herein. A study has been conducted under the provisions of Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations to determine whether the proposed construction would be an obstruction to air navigation, whether it should be marked and lighted to enhance safety in air navigation, and whether supplemental notice of start and completion of construction is required to permit timely charting and notification to airmen. The findings of that study are as follows: The proposed construction would not exceed FAA obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. Obstruction marking and lighting are not necessary. This determination expires on 08/13/92 unless application is made, (if subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission) , to the FCC before that date, or it is otherwise extended, revised or terminated. If the structure is subject to the licensing authority of the FCC, a copy of this acknowledgement will be sent to that Agency. NOTICE IS REQUIRED ANYTIME THE PROJECT IS ABANDONED OR THE PROPOSAL IS MODIFIED SIGNED tx ""C1;' V.w Specialist, Systems Management Branch Robert P. - Alexander (718) 553-1230/1228 ISSUED IN: Jamaica, New York ON 02/12/92 SIS-298-8841 MATTITUCK FIRE DIST 962 P02 MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT P 0 BOX 666 MATTITUCK , NY 11952 July '?7 , 1992 Ms . uynn Lorimer Cellular One Communi cat ione, 15 E . Midland Ave . Paramus , NJ 076,52 Dear Ms . Lynn Lorimer , It has come to the attention of thrs Eorrd of Fire Commissioners of the Mattituck Fire District Lhot YOUV company is seeking permission to install a 100 ' Mu!iu Poly oil thhr Fa.xter property located on Elijah 's La . , Mattit.:-,ck , N''y 11 "?S2 . The Board feels that this inrst.a] latiui, would assist. in the use. of the cellular phones now bring used by our dray-Aitmen,t and eliminate some of the "dead" s;pc:te� that. now exist . A„; I am sure you know , that we use our phonra in emergency fi ,-e dnd rescue situations aru:1 are a vital, c.om orient F:<rfio mii,U i.hcEr. services to the public . ncei ely , John M . Div. 11o Vice Chairman SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a CELLULAR ONE, Petitioner, -against- CERTIFICATION Index No. 91-17944 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, JR. , ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondents. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X S I R S: I, ALLEN M. SMITH, an attorney admitted to practice in the State of New York hereby certify pursuant to Section 2105 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules that I have compared the annexed copy of the Judgment with Notice of Entry with the original on file in the Office of the Clerk of Suffolk County (Index No. 91-17944) and have found that said paper is true and complete copy thereof. Dated: Riverhead, New York July 29, 1992 Allen M. Smith, Esq. William D. Moore, Esq. Attorneys for Petitioner 737 Roanoke Avenue Post Office Box 1240 Riverhead, New York 11901 By: Allen M. Smith SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE, Petitioner, NOTICE OF ENTRY -against- Index No. 91-17944 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, JR. , ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondents. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X S I R S: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the within is a true copy of a judgment signed by Honorable Robert W. Doyle duly entered in the Office of the clerk of the within named court on April 15, 1992 . Dated: April 17, 1992 Riverhead, New York Yours, etc. Allen M. Smith, Esq. William D. Moore, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff 737 Roanoke Avenue Post Office Box 1240 Riverhead, New York 11901 TO: Harvey Arnoff, Esq. Attorney for Respondents 16 West Main Street Riverhead, New York 11901 Town of Southold Main Road Southold, New York 11971 at asps Tarm of the Sunrame Court of the State of New York held in and for the County of Suffol:< at the Courthouse thereof Grzffinq avenue, Riverhead New York on the day of �L-199Z . PRESE., (,�/•/yt c.C. CNCRa3LE ROSERT W. OOYr-z Justice CELLULAR I= ?HONE COPt?aPIY - - - - d/b/a %C-TRc ONE, assigned to : Petitioner, Robert W. Doy' _, J.S.C. , -against- JUDG.4ENT GERARD ?. GOE'32IVGc'R, Chairman C Index No. 91-17944 HaRLcS GRIGCN=S, JR. , SERGE OCT N, JR. , 2CSERT V=LL1, Ja2r5 DINIZIO, JR. , cons t' tutinq the SOUTHOLD :OWN ZCNING 30ARD 0? ENTERED .APR 1 S 1992 - - - - - - - - - - Zasnondents .- - - AT: /.•Sa Upon reading and f___ :ng her=_in tee No�ica of ?eti- __cn dated Saotamber S, 199:, the ?eti_ _'zcn var._>ed Santamcer 5 , 19 affidavit of Diana amedeo swcrn to Sa?tarcer 5, 1991; tee affirmation of Allan HI. Smita dated November 18 , 1991; the affirmation of William D. Koora dated November 20, 1991; the affidavit of Christopher Resav*r sworn to November 1,9 , 1991; ?et lit iore=Ia Xemcrandum of Law submittad November 20 1991 and sunnlementad by lettar dated 'ab uarr 4, 1992, all 1II SuDCaY"_ of the ?etit-on; ReS70ndent5 , lerl " ' oA,_ answer va_-find October 2" , 1991 and the affidavit of Gerard P. Gee:^sinter sworn a Cctcber 22 , 1991 in ant -os__icn to the ?et-=zon and t ..is pr aed OC _nCj ndV4g3 Jee.^, 3ub u1_ ":8d tee CJL1Z't and ne ur Lo hd dint rendered its Memorandum decision dated February Il, 1992 . 'TCW on motion of alien M. Smith, Esq. and Wiliia m D• XOO-a of counsel, _t is ORDERED, aDJLTDGED AND DECREED that '��"--��'='_" Deletion is granted and it is WR ORDE_'v°D, ADjUCGED WD DECREED that Respcndent 's determination numbered 4022 is annulled and it is �R"-VAR CRDERED, ADj-JDGZ0 A.40 DECREED that ?et • 1.__oner is determined to be a p T ub_ic utility' the criteria for a special exception approval pursuant to tie Soutioid Zoning Code have been met and that the proposed radio tower is permitted pursuant to Section i00-31(B) (i) of the Zoni:.g Cade of the Town of Southold and it is F RT ER CROERED, -XZ'7UDGE0 aND DECK E0 tbat th:' s matter is herebv re_anded to the Responde,,t Board for consideration of t!e _ema =nci pp- -Lpns of Paz; ,oner' s 30DIiCa tipn. R08ER7 W L J ► s J. S. C. Y -- f FILED APR 13 1,M 'CUY•INM P.;1CAj[Nlij'E CLEM CF SUF—ax.'c CCtwN SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY -g d/b/a METRO ONE, Plaintiffs, AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE -against- Index No. 91-17944 GEROARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, JR. , ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondents. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -X STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) ss. : ALLEN M SMITH, being duly sworn, deposes and says, that deponent is not a party to the action, is over 18 years of age and resides at Jacobs Place, Aquebogue, New York 11931. That on the 17th day of April, 1992 deponent served the within NOTICE OF ENTRY and JUDGMENT upon the following: Harvey Arnoff, Esq. 16 West Main Street Riverhead, New York 11901 Harvey Arnoff, Esq. Town Attorney Town of Southold- Town Hall 53095 Main Road (Box 1179) Southold, New York 11971 The addresses was designated by said attorney for that Purpose. Deponent served the within by depositing a true copy of same enclosed in a postpaid property addressed wrapper in a post office official depository under the exclusive care and custody of the United States post office department within the State of New York. Allen M. Smith Sworn to before me this 17th day of April, 1992. Notary Public rEFFIE W SINCLAIR Notary Puehe.Slate of New York No. 52 4823904 Commrsslon txo.s.Sao, 30. 19 a� CELLULAR TELLPIIO,I4,; COMPANY d/o/a 1•,LTRO OiQL vs . GLRe�RD P. GOGFiRIi,Gi:R, CHAIRMANCIIARLLi ; vklcoivl.i, JR. l et Index wo. 91-17944 1 tti APR 29 1992 cii'Pire?-;D P.ROMAINE CLERK OF SUFFOLK COU14TY COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ,Q ya p L � RRj ., �` �� SEP 1 51992 (I ROBERT J.GAFFNEY L SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING ARTHUR H. KUNZ DIRECTOR OF PLANNING September 10, 1992 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Applicant: Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One Mun. File No.: 4023 6 4022SE S.C.P.D. File No.: SD-92-11 Gentlemen: Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 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. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapproval. Comments: Restrictions are necessary for public safety purposes. Very truly yours, Arthur H. Kunz Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:mb H.LEE DENNISON BUILDING 0 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY 0 HAUPPAUGE. NEW YORK 11788 111 (516) 853-5I92 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman as Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. " ,`'� Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. ` '� P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. Robert A.Villa 'q Southold,New York 11971 Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Pursuant to Article XIV of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, The Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold, New York, hereby refers the following to the Suffolk County Planning Commission: Variance from the Zoning Code, Article Section Variance from Determination of Southold Town Building Inspector XX Special Exception, Article VIII Section 100-81B ( 1 ) and Article III Section 100-31B (6 ) Special Permit Appeal No : 4022SE Applicant : Cellular Telephone Co . d/b/a Metro One Location of Affected Land : 415 Elijah ' s Lane , Mattituck , NY County Tax Map Item No . : 1000- 108-4-11 . 1 Within 500 feet of: Town or Village Boundary Line Body of Water (Bay, Sound or Estuary) XX State or County Road, Parkway, Highway, Thruway Boundary of Existing or Proposed County, State or Federally Owned Land Boundary of Existing or Proposed County, State or Federal Park or other Recreation Area Existing or Proposed Right-of-Way of any Stream or Drainage Channel Owned by the County or for which the County has established Channel Lines, or Within One Mile of a Nuclear Power Plant Within One Mile of an Airport or Comments : Applicant is requesting approval telecommunication use for utility services directly for public use. Copies of Town file and related documents enclosed for /your review . Dated : ��� trQ(�f d APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS� r%y� Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman o � M A ,,. Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. ®� `p� �� P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. •% O Robert A.Villa �� Southold,New York 11971 Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 21, 1992 Allen M. Smith, Esq. 737 Roanoke Avenue P.O. Box 1240 Riverhead, NY 11901-1240 Re: Appl. No. 4022 - Special Exception - Metro One Dear Mr. Smith: Please find attached a copy of the Board' s determination rendered in the above matter. In accordance with the rules of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the file has been transmitted to the Suffolk County Department of Planning for their response. Copies of this determination have also been furnished today to the Planning Board for their site plan file and the Building Department for their update and permanent recordkeeping. The decision rendered under Appl. No. 4023 concerning the height issue is being transmitted under separate cover. Very truly yours, Linda Kowalski Enclosure Copies of Decision to: Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Planning Board Suffolk County Department of Planning William D. Moore , Esq . 3 1, No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone (Metro One) ,,vision Rendered August 18, 1992 Villa. (Member Dinizio abstained. ) This resolution was duly adopted with a quorum vote of the Board. lk / GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, C IRMAN RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK DATE HOUR Town Clerk, Town of Southold_ ' MOORE & MOORE ' U Attorneys at Law I p�i 0251992 315 Westphalia Road U P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 Tel: (516) 298-5674 (516) 298-5664 Fax William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary Thomas F. Moore Of Counsel September 23, 1992 Southold Town Zoning Board Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Cellular One / Mattituck site Dear Members of the Board: Enclosed please find a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions to be executed by the owners of the above referenced property. These are being submitted for your review and approval prior to the execution of same. VWl Noo&re , W WDM/mr Enc. cc: Harvey A. Arnoff, Esq. v , PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L. HARRIS Y Bennet[ Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. ,:y° Richard G. Ward Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD �.__.. __... a ,{ _.$23 December 15 , 1992 �; 16196ft William D. Moore Moore & Moore P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 RE: Proposed Site Plan for Cellular One d/b/a Metro One, Mattituck SCTM#1000-108-4-11. 3 Dear Mr. Moore: The following resolutions were adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, December 14, 1992. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, make a determination of non-significance, and grant a Negative Declaration. WHEREAS, William Baxter, Jr. is the owner of the property known and designated as Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One SCTM#1000-108-4-11. 3 , located at Route 25 and Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was completed on September 30, 1992; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8) , Part 617, declared itself Lead Agency and issued a Negative Declaration on December 14, 1992; and WHEREAS, an interpretation and variance were granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on August 18, 1992 ; and page 2 Cellular One d/b/a Metro One WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; Be it therefore, RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final approval on the final survey last revised on October 19, 1992, subject to Certification by the Principal Building Inspector. This condition must be met within six ( 6) months of the date of this resolution. Please contact this office if you have any further questions. Very truly yours, *WX&-a Aze- // Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman y �a PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS r SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman `� �.,, y,',�: Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. t Richard G. Ward Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards Southold. New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 State Environmental Quality Review NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance November 2, 1992 This notice is issued pursuant to part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Law. The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Name of Action: Proposed site plan for Cellular One d/b/a Metro one SCTM#: 1000-108-4-11 . 3 Location: Elijah' s Lane and State Route 25 SEQR Status: Type I ( ) Unlisted ( X) Conditioned Negative Declaration: Yes ( X) No ( ) Description of Action: Reuse of existing one story block building for use as unmanned telecommunications equipment room and construction of 100 foot high monopole antenna. Page 2 Cellular One d/b/a Metro One SEQR Negative Declaration Cont. Reasons Supporting This Determination: This project involves the construction of a 100 foot high monopole antenna and reuse of existing block building for use as a communications room. The applicant has received a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the use and height of the antenna, thus the proposed action is consistent with zoning. The applicant has complied with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Code, having obtained an exception due to the fact there will be no water supply or sewage disposal facilities on the premises. An environmental assessment has been submitted, reviewed and it was determined that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. For Further Information: . Contact Person: Robert G. Kassner Address: Planning Board, P.O. Box 1179, Main Road, Southold Telephone Number: ( 516) 765-1938 cc: Suffolk County Department of Health Services NYS DEC Commissioner, Albany Judith Terry, Town Clerk Southold Building Department Board of Appeals Applicant a APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS - . Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman �' j Supervisor Serge Doyen,Jr. l` Town Hall,53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 Robert A. Villa -✓ C Southold,New York 11971 Richard C. Wilton a Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone (516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 14, 1992 William D. Moore, Esq. Moore & Moore 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, Ny 11952-1424 Re: Cellular One, Baxter and Others Telecommunications Use and Tower at Elijah' s Lane Dear Mr. Moore: Please accept this as a follow-up to re-confirm that the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions must be corrected at paragraph 6 by deleting the words "if any. " This would then conform to the Board' s resolution adopted on August 18, 1992. Once the Declaration has been revised to conform with the above and our previous letter mailed to you on October 9, 1992, and recorded with the County Clerk' s Office, we ask that you forward a conformed copy to our office for our permanent recordkeeping. Very truly yours, Linda Kowalski P.S. The Chairman has indicated that the hours for the lighting to be on is 4 p.m. to 6 a.m. daily. cc : Mr . and Mrs . William J . Baxter L� �V 1� PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Supervisor Georee Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Wards .' Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards Southold. New York 11971 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Telephone (516) 765-1939 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 November 2 , 1992 RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request Dear Reviewer: The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following: 1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3 . Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated. Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response. Project Name: Cellular Telephone Co. , d/b/a Metro One Requested Action: To erect a 100 ' (102 ' ) monopole and platform _adjacent to an existin 724 sq. ft. concrete block bldg on a 1 . 848 ac lot in the Limited Business District located on the w/s of ELijah' s La. 299 ' n/o S.R. 25 in Mattituck. SCTM#1000-108-4-11 . SEQRA Classification: ( ) Type I ( X ) Unlisted Contact Person: Valerie Scopaz (516)-765-1938 _ The lead agency will determine the need for an environmental impact statement (EIS) on this project. Within thirty ( 30) days of the date of this letter, please respond in writing whether or not you have an interest in being lead agency. Planning Board Position: ( g ) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. ( ) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. ( ) Other. ( See comments below) . Comments: The site is bordered on the west and north by residentially zoned lots; on the east by Elijah' s La. and beyond residential lots; and to the south by two limited business zoned lots in the same ownership as the subject property. The "fall radius" of the monopole will result in a restriction being placed on part of the adjoining lot to the south which would prohibit any construction within the fall radius. Refer to the attached site plan for more information. Please feel free to contact this office for further information. Sincerely, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. /l�U Chairman �1 CC: Board of Appeals Board-of Trustees Building' Department Southold-Town Board Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services -NYSDEC---Stony Brook -,{ NYSDEC - Albany �-C-. Dept: of -Public--Works -IL-S, -Army--Corp-of Engineers N.Y.S. Dept. of Transportation * Maps are enclosed for your review Coordinating agencies •141"(9,44, _ 1� ')V`EW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVfRONMENTAI( ,E 0.VATION PROIFCT LD.NUMBER ^c DIVISION OF REGULATORY AFFAIRS Stale Environmental Ouallty Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I Project Information (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) ' 1. AppllunVfpomor 7. Project Name I. Project location: Municipality Town of Southold County Suffolk g. it errp�med action: lXl New ❑ Expanflen ❑ Modilicalionlallerallon S. Dnaibe prolecl briefly: Reconstruction of existing one story concrete block building for use as unmanned telecommunications equipment room and construction of 104 foot high monopole antenna 6. Precise location Iroad Intersections,Prominent IarMmalLf,etc.or provide map) Northwest corner of intersection of Elija Lane and State Route 25 Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-108-4-11.3 j 7. Amo ucfe unt of land aed: Inilialiv L 2 �__ acres Uhimalely Sere, a. Will proposed action comply with eaiftim,zoning or ether existing land use refldctlon,t ® Yet ❑ No It No,describe briefly 9. What is present land use In vicinity of projecat up Residential ❑ Industrial ® Commercial Apiculture Describe: ® ❑ PsAIand/open space ❑ Other South of proposed site predominantly agricultural use Abandoned auto repair shop abuts premises 10. Don action involve a DermiW pprova i,or funding. nnw or ultlmatrly, hum pan ny other govemmental agency l,edenl,,ftate er7o ip_ H� a� ® Yes ❑ No If yet, list ai ency(t)and permlt/approvals Southold Town Planning Board - Site Plan Suffolk County Planning .C. c. 11. Does any aspect 0o�nft the action have a cunenlly valid permit or approval, ❑ yes U No If Yet.tilt agency name and ermi a D V DDrowl type 17. As result of propmed action will existing permit/approval require modilicatlont ❑ Yes ® No 1 CERTIFY TIIAT TtIE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO TIIE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE LAPPlic-ni/Sisom,, 2-91nature: - 1 ' ant =Coastal Is In the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Assessment Form before proceeding with Ihls assessment ' OVER - y}a� MOORE & MOORE n Attorneys at Law G 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax: (516) 298-5664 William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary Thomas F. Moore Of Counsel DEC '91992 December 9, 1992 BY HAND Southold Town Zoning Board Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Cellular One (Mattituck site) SCTM # 1000-108-4-11.002 SCTM # 1000-108-4-11. 003 Dear Ladies/Gentlemen: Enclosed please find copies of the Covenants and Restrictions which have been filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office for each of the above referenced parcels. Very truly yours, "0C re WDM/mr Encls. D[',:('I,ARA'IION (W COVENANTS AND RFSTRV I V )NS DEC -91992 This Declaration made the 13 clay of r1oJ€ M4 V 1992, by \Villi�—? ). Baxter, Jr. and Patricia Baxter residing at 1030 East Puttann Avenue, Grecn • Il 11. Connecticut, and Robert . Goeller and Jane P. (;oeller resitting a.l 341) Ridge Crest. Barham, California (hereinafter referred to ns "Declarants") WITNF.SSF I'l I WIIEREAS, Declarants are the owners in fee sim(rle of certain premises sibr❑i, nt Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, descrihr d on the Suffolk ( '(,,,niv "fax Map as District 1000, Section INS, Block 01. F rut 11.2 and tv more fully descrd- d i;r the attached "Schedule A" and, WHEREAS, the Southold 'Town Zoning Board of Appeals, by resolution moll,. —t nnn August 18, 1992 granted special exception approval to the Cellvinr 'Telephone Coml-mv d/b/a Metro One for construction nd use. of n 10,? foot mohopole radio lrursmission I-, --r r ^ on property abutting the premises floscribed in the attached Sehcdnle A, as shown on f1w I, attached Schedule B and, WHEREAS, the approval v ;is conditional upon the filing (if certain covenants: and restrictions, (P V� r NOW, TFII REPFORF, in cnmpliancc with the resolution of said Southold "I it Zoning Board of Appeals, Declarants herein declare that the land described in Schedt le DEC 4; 199k is held and shall be conveyed subject to the following covenants and restrictions which shall run with the land: 1. No building shall be constructed within the "fall doom radius" shown on the attached Schedule B to the extent such radius includes property within the premises described in Schedule A. This covenant shall not prohibit the us,., trf file affected arr;, Io, parking motor vehicles. 2. These covenants and restrictions can be modified only fit the request of tile. lholl owner of the premises with the approval of a majority plus one of the Zoning Board of I lw Town of Southold after a public hearing. Adjoining property owners shall be entitlyd to notice of such public hearing but their consent to such modifications shall not be required. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the foregoing Declaration has been executed by Ihr Declarants on the day and year first above written. 'WilliamSTATE OF Patricia Baxter COUNTY OF vt r<tit ,S10 On the -K day of R " - t 't' , 1992, before me personally came William J. Baxter, Jr. to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. b. Notary Public rILOA D. F11 My Gmmmd:;ion Expirco April :P, 1996 STATE OF �`s,, G� •� COUNTY OF =� r ti,:.r •_>z<4', l' On the J 5"k`day of 1992, before me personally came Patricia Baxter to me known to be the individual described in and whtt executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that she executed the same, Notary Public l+I' A Q. FI:") Cnriry rubli;,I FrJ ro,i Cocnty 1.)y Commi;;ioir tplrc; April 30. i996 Robert f}. Goeller (J ne P. Goeller STATE OF �/�C i�s ru^��► COUNTY OF .Sitn� 9 On the �3e,f f, day of AICCI ,rv;c ,2 1992, before me personally came Robert Goeller to me known to he the individual described in and who executed the foregoing, instrument, and acknowledged that he executed life same. Notary Public ti GLORIA C0111F. ?L\ _ /_•�� COMM. F967.12P x Nokn d Y Public-California Iy SANTA BARBARA COIJNTV cornrn eapir ;Il1fJ 19,14.ii STATE OF(�qc COUNTY OFSoo,74/9 P,,912Xx ,„ On the clay of /14 I ;;,iiw rP, 1992, before me personally carve Janv 1'. Goeller to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that she executed the same. Notary Public I ..i 71 Pbtnr 1 i 1 li. rl rlilprnln �. 4 k7 Comm r:.Ln i.11!N IA,Iri: ..t . w s ALL, that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements the-i-inn erected, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, "Town of Southold, Suffolk County, Slot,- (d New York, and being more particularly bounded and described a8 follows: BEGINNING at a monument located at the intersection of the westerly side of Flij:ih'�; lane and northerly side of Main Road (NYS R(. 25); I IIENCE North 84 degrees 45 minutes 40 seconds,West 395.38 feet along the north. its side of Main Road to a point; 'IHENCE North 85 degrees 36 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 91.49 feet to a monnm-'nt; TIIENCE North 85 degrees 30 minutes 40 seconds West a diclance of 69.74 feet i,) monument at the boundary of property now or formerly of Joseph Neville; IIiP,NCE North 23 degrees 08 minutes 10 seconds West 122.49 feet along said land f Neville; TI If-NCE South 77 degrees 06 tninntes 00 seconds West 483.05 feet along other prop- tI now or formerly of Baxler and others to a point along the westc.i ly side of Elijah's I nu ; THENCE South 25 degrees 09 minutes 10 seconds Fast 298.50 feet along the westerly of Elijah's Lane to the point or pla(_e of BEGINNING. SCHEDULE A • I I'ItOPOSF 0 102' HIGH t (11101,01 F uNl-1AlIIIFn _ _ I II 1 ' I,,r�• � , rtpllP'I.IFtIT " III I xIST. FLOCK \J 4 I II I iJj III i i• i / 1h11 e � ' 1. I �• ,-III — � �'i � '...1.. 1 I.II f 1 . I. 1 7. � 1'l 11 ll111 Y 1 r I - x i h PARK 1140 II FUTURE C04STRUC110N Ip (�,._ - NOT PERMITTED WIT11111 THE HAtOHED AREA SHOW11 I SCHEDULE B s I r I J i STATE OF NEW YORK) )ss. t COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) I, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the Courts of New York State, certify that the within covenants and restrictions are a true copy of same which were recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office on December 4, 1992 WILLTAIC D. MOORE Sworn to before me this a9th of December, 1992 . NOTARY PUBLIC LYNN M. BARAUSKAS Notary Public-State of New York Suffolk County- No.472067 Commission Expires Jan.31M& PAPAY ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION, INC. 41 WASHINGTON AVENUE, HILLSDALE, NJ 07642 201-666-9510 201-768-7677 PETER E. PAPAY P.E. , P.P. EDUCATION: B.S. Civil Engineering - June 1982 Newark College of Engineering at New Jersey Institute of Technology; Newark, New Jersey LICENSES: Professional Engineer - New York, New Jersey, Connecticut Professional Planner - New Jersey PROFESSIONAL American Society of Civil Engineers - SOCIETIES: Associate Member National Society of Professional Engineers - Member PUBLICATIONS: Evaluation of Deep Embedment on Seismic Response - January 1987 . Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America EXPERIENCE SUMMARY: August 1991 PAPAY ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION, INC. to Date Alpine, New Jersey As principal, responsible for technical direction, supervision and coordination of engineering design and construction aspects of new and existing communication installations. Responsibilities include feasibility studies, preparation of design and shop drawings, expert testimony and design and analysis of new and existing sites including towers, satellite dishes, buildings and associated appurtenances. Preparation of bid documents and contracts, contractor selection, construction inspection and physical construction. April 1986 TECTONIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS P.C. to August 1991 Highland Mills, New York As chief civil engineer, responsible for technical direction and coordination of structural engineering programs. Performed structural design and analysis of industrial, commercial and communication projects . Also supervision of tower investigations analyses and design of new installations . Other responsibilities included construction supervision, client contact and coordination of consultants. June 1982 BURNS AND ROE ENTERPRISES, INC. to April 1986 Oradell, New Jersey As civil engineer, responsible for structural design and analysis of foundation and superstructure for the development of commercial, industrial power generation and communication facilities. Supervised subsurface inspections, sampling of groundwater and contaminated soils, performed review of geoenvironmental impact of projects and construction inspection. March 1977 PAPAY CONSTRUCTION to June 1982 Montvale, New Jersey As construction manager, responsible for construction projects, field engineers, contractor coordination, construction supervision, scheduling and construction claims preparation. 616-298-8841 MRTTITUCK FIRE DI5T 662 P62 MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT P 0 BOX 666 MATTITUCK , NY 11952 July :,7 ,1992 MS . Lynn Lorimer Cellular One Communications 15 E . Midland Ave . Paramus , N1 076,52 Dear Ms . Lynn Lorimer , It has:: come to the attention of the Eor.•rd of Fire Commissioners of the Mattituck Fire District Lhot your !:ompa'7Y is seeking Pei-mission to install a 100 ' Mono i'e>1<+ oii the 6a.xtei propel t.y located on Elijah 's La . , Mattituck , NY 1J952 . The Board 'feels that thie inr;tallation would a:a_:ist. in the use of the cellular phones now being used by our department and eliminate some of the "dead" spots that now exist . As I am sure you know , that we use our phonrw :• n ewergency fire and rescue situations and are a vital c.on,po ne nt : perfcrmiitU t.heSr. services to the Public . .'.in�ere:ly , John M . Dive,llo Vice Chairman /\� ^/ � •II�ATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT Phone 298-8833 P.O. BOX 666, 1000 PIKE STREET MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND, N.Y. 11952 �� - - J& 3 I i9°i July 29, 1991 Mr. Gerry Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals Town of Southold Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Metro One Communication Tower Dear Sir: It is understood that consideration is being given to the instal- lation of a Metro One Communication tower within the boundries of the Mattituck Fire District. Please be advised that the Board of Fire Commissioners of the Mattituck Fire District beleives that the Metro One Tower will be a vital , and necessary, link in the emergency communication system within the Town of Southold and will enhance the system' s capabilities throughout the entire County. SincerelyYattit n A. Ke ect. uc Fire ist . CC: Southold Town Supervisor Southold Town Board 1 • ! U$Deporm-enr Eastern Region Fitzgerald Federal Bwlding of Tronsoortonon John F.Kennedy O Federai Aviation mernational Airport AdministrationJamaica.New York 11430 E X T E N S I O N ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION -------------------------------------------------------------------------- CITY STATE LATITUDE/LONGITUDE MSL AGL AMSL MATTITUCK----------NY 40-59-56 . 00 072-30-39 . 00 30 100 130 -- ------------------------------------------------------ METRO ONE CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. AERONAUTICAL STUDY GLENN WITTE No: 91-AEA-0108-OE 365 WEST PASSAIC STREET NEW ROCHELLE, NJ 07662-3015 Type Structure: ANTENNA TOWER The Federal Aviation Administration hereby acknowledges receipt of �otice dated 01/11/91 cunueiiing the proposed construction or alteration contained herein. A study has been conducted under the provisions of Part 77 of the Federal Aviation Regulations to determine whether the proposed construction would be an obstruction to air navigation, whether it should be marked and lighted to enhance safety in air navigation, and whether supplemental notice of start and completion of construction is required to permit timely charting and notification to airmen. The findings of that study are as follows: The proposed construction would not exceed FAA obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. Obstruction marking and lighting are not necessary. This determination expires on 08/13/92 unless application is made, (if subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission) , to the FCC before that date, or it is otherwise extended, revised or terminated. If the structure is subject to the licensing authority of the FCC, a copy of this acknowledgement will be sent to that Agency. NOTICE IS REQUIRED ANYTIME THE PROJECT IS ABANDONED OR THE PROPOSAL IS MODIFIED SIGNED x*� i .• ( ` r,' �-µ r, Specialist, Systems Management Branch Robert P. -Alexander (718) 553-1230/1228 ISSUED IN: Jamaica, New York ON 02/12/92 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS a 7 �tr�L y> SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman '�� F" ��l Supervisor .4 - Serge Doyen,Jr. w 4 '' Town Hall,53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 f?• o� Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa '° 'J� Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OFSOUTHOLD ob October 8, 1992 William D. Moore, Esq. Moore & Moore 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952-1424 Re: Cellular One, Baxter and Others Telecommunications Use and Tower at Elijah's Lane Dear Mr. Moore: This will confirm that the Declaration of Covenants, which was required by the Board at the time of rendering its determination, is acceptable, except however that the "in perpetuity" clause should be added as well as a clause binding all owners, subsequent owners, tenants and assigns. Once the Declaration has been revised and recorded, please forward asconformed copy to our office for our permanent file. Very truly yours, Linda Kowalski DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS This Declaration made the day of , 1992, by William J. Baxter, Jr. and Patricia Baxter residing at 1030 E. Putnam, Greenwich, Connecticut, and Robert P. Goeller and Jane P. Goeller residing at 349 Ridge Crest, Santa Barbara, California (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Declarants") WTTNESSETH WHEREAS, Declarants are the owners in fee simple of certain premises situate at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, described on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District 1000, Section 108.00, Block 04.00, Lot 011.1 (p/o 011.00) and as more fully described in the attached "Schedule A" and, WHEREAS, the Southold Town Zoning Board, in Appeal No.4023 rendered August 18, 1992 granted a height variance on the property described in Schedule A to permit construction of a 100 foot monopole radio tower and, WHEREAS, the granting of the variance was conditioned upon the filing of certain covenants and restrictions, NOW, THEREFORE, in compliance with the resolution of said Southold Town Zoning Board, Declarants herein declare that the land described in Schedule A is held and shall be conveyed subjectto the following covenants and restrictions which shall run with the land: c*-^off `^ - �6-t_'�� . �d ry6tit c�lJl. -c3.._li a u��'� �.� rg....o cc-o�d1 Grx- 1. The height of the proposed accessory monopole radio tower shall not exceed 100 feet, as requested; 2. The fall-down radius of the tower shall be as submitted, with the following setback distances: a) 95 feet from the proposed tower to the northerly property line; b) 70 feet +- from the proposed tower to the southerly property line; c) 69 feet from the rear wall of the accessory one-story block building. 3. Any future expansion for the storage of the telecommunications equipment to areas outside of the existing one-story block building located in the rear yard will require further application for Special Exception consideration; and 4. In the event this transmission tower becomes obsolete or its use is discontinued for the telecommunications purposes requested in this application, the tower shall be removed within three months of its obsolescence, and it shall be the responsibility of the owner, subsequent owners, successors, assigns, and/or the applicant herein to comply with this condition, at their own expense; and 5. No other structures, buildings, or uses shall occupy or be located on the premises unless further application is made to this Board under this Special Exception, as well as the Planning Board under the site plan regulations,in order to re-consider all zoning standards, including safety, health, and welfare standards and concerns; and 6. Lighting, if any, shall be placed near the top of the tower for aircraft safety purposes and in accordance with applicable Federal Aviation Administration regulations and requirements. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the foregoing Declaration has been executed by the Declarants on the day and year first above written. William J. Baxter, Jr. Patricia Baxter Robert P. Goeller Jane P. Goeller STATE OF COUNTY OF On the day of 1992, before me personally came William J. Baxter, Jr. to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. Notary Public STATE OF COUNTY OF On the day of , 1992, before me personally came Patricia Baxter to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that she executed the same.. Notary Public STATE OF COUNTY OF On the day of 1992, before me personally came Robert P. Goeller to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. Notary Public STATE OF COUNTY OF On the day of 1992, before me personally came Jane P. Goeller to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that she executed the same. Notary Public Al!that certain piece, pl*r parcel of land,with the buildings Aprovements situate thereon, known as and by Lot 2 on a certain map entitled " Map of Alteration of Boundary Lines prepared for William J. Baxter, Jr., Patricia Baxter, Robert P. Goeller and Jane P. Goeller situated at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and filed in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffolk on May 15, 1990 as file No.8937 and being more particularly bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of Elijah'B Lane,said point being 298.50 feet northerly from the intersection of the northerly line of the Main Road (New York State Route 25) and the westerly line of Elijah's Lane, said point also being the southeasterly comer of Lot 2 as shown on the aforementioned map; Running thence South, 77' 06'00" West along the southerly line of Lot 2, 488.05 feet to land now or formerly I,of Joseph Neville; Running thence North 23' 08'10" West along said land 39.46 feet to a point; Running thence North 23' 52'10" 01 West still along said land'and partially along land now or formerly of the County of Suffolk, i 101,47 feet to a point; Running thence North 70' 30'50" Easi along land now or formerly of the County of Suffolk,land now or formerly Chung Ja Choi and,,land now or formerly Cornelius L. Maston, 475.60 feet to the westerly line of Elijah's Lane; Running thence South 25' 09'10" East 197.50 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. SCHEDULE A PAGE 30 • PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 APPEAL # 4023 AND 4022SE Applicant(s) : Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One Location of Property: (415) westerly side of Elijah's Lane and northerly side of Main Road, Mattituck, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-108-4-part of 11. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:50 p.m. and read the Legal Notice and application for the record. Member Dinizio left room for this hearing. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Smith do you have any objection if I open both hearings at the same time. I know you want to address the issue of one particular hearing. MR. ALLAN SMITH, ESQ. : I do not mind Mr. Goehringer, as long as you allow me to reserve the points made in my correspondence to you, that we have a standing objections to the opening of the Special Exception. We believe that that has been resolved and was finalized between the parties. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Thank you. We have a copy of a new site plan that we have just received on July 27, 1992 indicating the major concerns of the Board through the prior hearing process and they are still indicated and after a discussion with attorney Bill Moore, they shall remain and have remain, thank God. And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. We are all set Mr. Smith, I apoligize for the timely that it took to read the Legal Notice. MR. SMITH: Thank you Mr. Goehringer, thank you to the Board for the opportunity to again appear before you. As a preliminary matter, I have reduced the testimony of the professional that is involved in the height issue to writing. And, I will submit his testimony and he will also speak. Additionally from a previous hearing, you had before you Mr. Papay, who is the structural engineer, although I do not intend to have him add to the testimony that he has previously made in this matter should, in the context of the height consideration, an issue arise with reference to structural safety of the tower, he can step forward and answer those questions. I will pass up his resume and Mr. Scott Fox's testimony. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. (Mr. Smith hands up papers.) Six is fine. You owe me one more. Oh, we do have it, I apologize. MR. SMITH: Mr. Goehringer, I would renew the motion, if you will, that is contained in various correspondence that I have sent to you over the PAGE 31 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 MR. SMITH (con't. ): past several months. That ' in fact, in that this is a radio tower, as has been defined by the judgment between the parties, which is now pliant as between us. That the exemption contained in your code for heights of such structures makes the hearing on a might inappropriate for this evening. In support of that, I will file with the Board several documents. One is the certification of Mr. William Moore relating to a record of the Southold Town Planning Board relative to the review of the NYNEX tower that was built up by the dump, wherein, you will see the following language: "height of the tower exempt from the variance under Section 100-230(d) of the Code of the Town of Southold", which is the section I have cited to you in several pieces of correspondence. Secondarily, I will offer to you a certified copy of the final judgment as between the parties, which in its findings defines this particular tower as a radio tower, which is the language used in that particular section. Additionally, I would offer copies of the action of the Board with reference to the NYNEX Mobile, excuse me, NYNEX Mobile Communications application with Arthur V. Junge, Inc. , which additionally reinforces the position that the hearing this evening is unncessary and inappropriate. (Hands up documents). Is the Board prepared to make a ruling as to whether or not this particular code section has absolute power? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, I have had a discussion, well, firstly, let us go back to square one and just discuss the situation entirely. And I do feel badly, okay, and I know Mr. Baxter is here and I have known Mr. Baxter, in fact I was fighting a fire on his property and I had seen him this past him this past summer, being a member of the Mattituck Fire Department. Originally, this application came before us and we were processing the application as if we were going to approve the application. The main concern of the Board was that, we no longer had a more intensive business use, we now had a lesser intensive business use, as of the new inception of the new Code in 1989. And that's were the concern came to be. I am going into this issue. Now, from that particular point on, there was litigation. The Town lost the litigation. We are at this particular point now dealing with a reaffirmation so to speak. When I had a discussion with Mr. Moore on the telephone approximately a week or so ago, he asked me the reason for the Special Exception, I'll get into the height in a minute, okay. And, I told him at that particular time that we would like to incorporate everything, get it all nicely done, packed up and dealt with so that we know exactly what we are dealing with at this particular time. And that is my particular feeling on the whole situation. In reference to the height, I had a discussion with him on the phone, and it is the same discussion and I bring that to the record that one of the major concerns and you did a very superlative job in presenting this application the first time around. And I did feel very badly about ruling against it, okay. And you indicated the need for fire and emergency services over this telephone system. And, I realize that it's of extreme importance in the rural area that we live in. At the time same time, being a fireman in the Town of Mattituck or the Hamlet of Mattituck for some twenty-four PAGE 32 • • PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't.): (24) years, I' have also gone to many plane crashes of planes that have never made it to or from Mattituck. It is not a landing field, it is not an, whatever you want to call the airport so to speak which is, and that is what our immediate concern is. I did mention that to Mr. Moore. So, not withstanding the fact of our opinions concerning should we be here or shouldn't we be here tonight, we're here to complete the process. I am not here to rule against this, I am not here to put stumbling blocks in the way of this particular situation. The fall down area is there, we don't have to drive to Laurelton to see the antenna, because I assume it is similar to the one that NYNEX has constructed and so on and so forth. We are merely here to ask two or three questions and deal with that, I am in any case, I have no idea on how the rest of the Board, so I can't answer that question at -this point. MR. SMITH: As long as I reserve my rights, I am ready to go forward. Our position is that the height issue was exempted by your Code and you respectfully disagree, that's what makes horse races. So let us go on. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Does that answer your question? I didn't want to be in a round about matter in this situation. MR. SMITH: I have answers for the questions that you have raised and I intend to share them. Going forward, I would like with the permission of the Board to incorporate the testimony of the prior proceedings into this proceeding. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No problem. MR. SMITH: I have provided you with a certified copy of the Order. I should offer, although I sent down to you by hand, the drawings S1 and S2 that came to evidence to this hearing. Lastly, I would share with you the FEA determination, which was an open issue last year and has since been decided. I guess that while I am introducing things, the other thing that I would put in and I am not sure I put it in this stack, but I will get it for you. We do have a letter at this time from the Mattituck Fire Department confirming the advice that I gave you in the earlier hearing relative to the telemetry of the head, I guess it is the head of rescue. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the ambulance. MR. SMITH: And ambulances. Last time I did this verbally, this time I put it in writing. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I had discussed that issue with the Chief, who at that time was Norm Reilly and he had indicated me, of course, we have a new chief, Chief George Lessard and he had indicated to me that since the construction of the antenna at the Highway Dept, the Fire Department has not had a problem with transmission. PAGE 33 • • PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 MR. SMITH: The experience that has occurred; although I am not a witness, I am a volunteer, the experiences that have occurred and one we have needed the celluar services have been on those occasions of having to establish a command center, such as for the brush fires over on Riverhead-Moriches Road for the Eastport Fire House and/or with reference to those, volunteer ambulance services that provide a AEMT services and they need the telementry all for the EKGs through the County system out to I believe it is South Side or Mather, where they get obstruction on dealing with heart patients. With that being said, I will introduce you to Mr. Scott Fox, as you can tell from Mr. Fox's resume, he is the chief of engineering and can explain to you the issue of height as it relates to this type of a service. Mr. Fox would you explain to these folks how this works, why it has to be the height it has to be. MR. SCOTT FOX: Good evening Mr. Chairman and members of the Board, just in very simplistic and to start the discussion I wanted to just reiterate, I know it has been on some of the prior record, but just in very simple terms, celluar telephone is based on a radio technology. It is very much radio based. Radio waves at the frequency that we are talking about travel line of sight. In our business, unlike many other businesses, we, the optimal height of the antenna is critical to the success of this system. And by optimal I don't mean the higher the better. In our case, we need to be at a certain height, that is high enough to provide coverage of the community, yet not too high so as to cause unwanted coverage, which we would refer to as interferrence into adjacent communities. Basically, celluar again works on the premise, I think you probably heard the term in previous testimony of frequency reuse, where cells sitting right next to one another use different frequencies, and maybe the next cell over uses yet another frequency. And the next one uses that same frequency again. So basically, again height is a critical requirement for the proper design of the celluar system. In our case, I am very, very much familiar with this case, the design criteria is to provide what we call overlap with the adjacent cell which is the Peconic cell site. We also refer to this as Southold Cell Site to the northeast of this location. It is about four point two (4.2) miles, I believe from the Mattituck Cell site. Again, the design criteria is to provide just enough signal strength so that there is sufficient overlap to ensure a hand-off to the next cell. And, one of the things that I wanted to stress this evening is that again unlike other technologies, it's in our best interest not to be too tall. Too tall is bad for us, and so we have every incentive to be at and designed for just high enough to provide what we call that effective hand-off. As you are traveling from community, or as you are traveling down a roadway, or as you are walking from place to place, as you walk away from one cell site, the signal tends to fade, very much as if you are driving outside of the coverage area, say from a FM station. The signal gets weaker and weaker and weaker to the point where it becomes unintelligible and it no longer provides the information that you need. At celluars designed such that the next cell site provides a hand off PAGE 34 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 MR. FOX (con't.): and allows that continuous conversation to go on. As part of my submittal for the record before each of you is part of our analysis. The engineering process is an iterative process. We start at low heights, we look for again, the optimal coverage, yet we don't go beyond where we can achieve that objective. In the case of this, there were a number of enervative steps through the process, but for the sake of the explanation this evening, we've detailed four separate cases. We've looked at the Mattituck Cell Site operating at thirty-five (35) feet. And it is clear from our analysis and also again the attachments to my presentation this evening, which you have in front of you, that it does not provide proper overlap with the adjacent cell sites. The next case has shown there is an analysis performed at fifty (50) feet, again it is very clear through the analysis, not quite enough coverage for the purpose of this cell site. Seventy-five (75) feet again, the same case. And then if you look, again it is Exhibit"A", I believe in the package. It is the one on top, you can see the coverage shown for the hundred foot proposed height. To us this is the optimal height, we do not require any more than a hundred feet to effectively provide a quality signal to the community. And it truly will not work to the quality levels that we need to provide to the community at anything less than one hundred (100) watts. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Whom might I ask in the field of endeavor that you brought for us, the question of any disturbance caused by this transmission tower. MR. FOX: I would be glad. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We are, of course, in the world today of the East End and I can remember thirty (30) years ago and we did not have Cablevision, and that is the reason why one of our members has left because he does work for a cable organization, alright. And some people still have regular antennas on their houses, some of them have FM antennas, some of them CB antennas, and so on and so forth, okay. Is there any interference with these? MR. FOX: That is a very good question. The FCC gave that very very careful considersation when allocating us the frequencies that we operate on. We take great pains to properly engineer our system. I can state, just by way of example, I hope this would address the concern. Interference can happen, however, we are currently operating well over six thousand (6,000) transmitters within the New York/Metropolitan area with no known reported cases of interference. And we as a matter of fact have a letter from the Federal Communications Commission stating this. It is part of the mandate of our license that we operate on an interference free basis. And, again, it's attributed to the engineering and as well as the setup. And the designation of the frequencies by the PAGE 35 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 MR. FOX (con't.) :Federal Communication Commission so as there is no overlap between adjacent services. We have our own unique frequency on which we operate we are the only ones allowed to operate on it, and we maintain as required by our license very, very strict tolerances to those operating parameters. It's just day to day business, it is what we do. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Two other quick questions, the approximate or the exact height of the tower itself is one hundred and four (104) feet? MR. FOX: No, to the tip of the antennas, it is one hundred (100) feet. To the very top of the highest point, it is one hundred (100) feet even. One hundred (100) feet, nothing more than that. It's a very highest piece on the structure. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't know if it was NYNEX or if it was Celluar One, we are referring to as Celluar One now or Metro One, or doesn't make any difference. MR.SMITH: Same nose and face. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have two antennas that are going up like this on one or two of these units, is this similar to the one that would be constructed here. MR. FOX: Not in this case. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It will be a flat top. MR. FOX: It will be a flat top, it does not have, like the night . . . I observed the NYNEX tower, they do have an antenna protruding from the top of the structure, not at all is the case. We have nine (9) antennas around the base of the structure, that is it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Similar to the one in Calverton or somewhere up the Island. MR. FOX: I am not familiar with that one. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. And the wind resistance--150 mph wind? MR. FOX: Mr. Papay is here to address any of the concerns therein, I believe, that it's spoken to in the past, however, I am not the expert there. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Very good. Thank you. MR. FOX: Thank you very much. MR. SMITH: Do you want me to have Mr. Papay address the. . . . PAGE 36 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, just address that for anybody here that is interested. MR. SMITH: Mr. Papay I believe was sworn the last time he was here. He is a professional engineer of structures. It is his type of thing. MR. PETER PAPAY: Good evening. As I had stated previously, the design of the manifolds or other towers supporting antennas is decreed by a national standard. It has been adopted by the American National Standards Institute. It's entitled, actually it is numbered 222 current division Where they set forth the design speeds for the design of tower's manifolds. For this portion of Long Island, the design wind speed, or sustain speed, now would be 85 mph. Celluar One has opted to design air towers or manifolds for a wind speed of 100 mph. These wind speeds are not gusts, these wind speeds are sustained speeds or the wind that would occur over a mile or more in time or distance. It will sustain gusts of higher than 100 mph and that is incorporated within the design itself. Due to conservative and the mechanics of design, it will sustain winds of even greater than gusts of over 125 mph. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much. MR. PAPAY: Your welcome. MR. SMITH:Mr. Goehringer, the young man that gave you the engineering ease, he said it differently the last time we were together, I believe we asked him whether or not could it blown over, he said, of course anything made by man can be blown over, but that our concern at that velocity is not the tower coming down, it's your neighbor's car blowing through the side of your house. So, they are built to withstand the hurricane forces that we may see out here on Eastern Long Island. I would like the professionals answer any other questions you may have. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: My only other; I have two other quick concerns that maybe you might not want to sit down, but then you can address them. Assuming that some time in the future, Metro One/Celluar One no longer wanted to lease this property, what would happen to the tower? And what would be the timely fashion of removing it? MR. SMITH: Yes, I can probably .address that. I like to, yours is not the technology question, but it is the lease that he may have with Mr. Baxter's finite. I believe that this particular lease, although I'm not sure I drafted it, it is a ten (10) plus ten (10) or twenty (20) . The lease language states that the tenant will restore the property to it's condition prior to their entering onto the property. I'm not sure if Mr. Baxter or his heirs would want us to put it back the way it is today, but I can assume that the tower would come down and the building would be restored without the equipment in it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the only other concern I have is that little PAGE 37 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't.): word in the Code which refers to primary, secondary. Would we construe this to be a primary use on the property since it is the newest use, or the use that will be continually used? Or would we construe this as an accessory use? MR. SMITH: Well, I'm not sure which it is, because it is not an issue that I've analyzed for this particular presentation. I can only say that the use of the property, now as a Special Exception use, is the issue that we have already been through in this particular instance. And whether we have done it rightly or wrongly, I don't think fault to right or wrong is the issue, that is behind us. The property is identified as a property upon which its use can be, however characterized and the remand of dusty soil, is for the puposes of considering height. And beyond that, I am not sure I can comment. In the abstract, I could analyze for you those things. As a professional, I don't have to here. I have a decision, I have a judgment, the judgment is final. It is not a question anymore. Thank you sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. I will be right with you sir. Does anybody have any questions of either one of these or any of these people? MEMBER VILLA: Yes, I was looking at the attachment, Exhibit "B" I guess it is, Attachment "A & B" where you've got the different heights, diagrammed here with the towers with at one hundred (100) feet and seventy-five (75) feet. It doesn't really appear to be that much difference between the hundred foot and the seventy-five (75) foot coverage, you still have areas that aren't covered by either. And what surprises me is you say you don't want to much overlap and yet, with the seventy-five (75) foot height, you come right up to the Southold cell, With the hundred foot height, you really don't show any more coverage to that east side, which doesn't seem to make much sense. It would appear to me that the seventy-five foot height would pretty much satisfy your desires here. MR. FOX: I would be glad to address that I don't know if. . . If you look closely and again, our design criteria is the minimal height necessary to meet our criteria. If you look very closely at the seventy-five (75) foot model, you can see that there is a stretch along Route 25 that does not meet the criteria. Also, I would say that again the contours are shown, they are not circular, as you might expect from a set up like this and that is because of the varying terrain. Terrain obviously limits radio. And so, it is not possible to cover everywhere you want to. We can't control the laws of physics and get the signals to go exactly where we want and exactly where we don't want them to go. But, I can tell you though very specifically, the decision looking at the seventy-five (75) feet is that there is a stretch of Route 25 that just is not covered, just does not meet the criteria. If you go upwards from that, just a bit more to the hundred foot level, again you can see by the Exhibit"A" that that criteria is met through the communities major, major highway, where the majority of the traffic is at least and PAGE 38 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 MR. FOX (con't) : emergency vehicles predominately travel. As well as, again overlap between cells is not by itself undesirable. What the objective there is there is really no need for too much of it, anything beyond that becomes undesirable. So then to answer your question directly, if you look closely at Attachment "B", you can see that the Neg 85 DBM contour which this represents, just doesn't quite match up there. North and south, again, we could go higher to cover those areas and cover everything, but it gets to the point of diminishing returns, it gets to the point of where it starts interferring in other areas. And, so it is a process of trade offs in the engineering criteria. And, again I would state it's very clearly in our benefit to design just up to the height necessary to cover the target area. So, again, you can see the differences between the two. MEMBER VILLA: That leads to a question--what would be the minimum height that you need to cover that gap on Route 25? Twenty (20) feet off the tower would possibly bring it down almost a tree height, which would be less visibility. We're in a rural atmosphere, and we are trying to keep it that way and you are starting to spring these towers up all over the place. And, you know, we are going to end up looking like windmill farm. MR. SMITH: Mr. Villa so that we don't get an assumption in here that may or may not be correct. In asking Mr. Fox to prepare for this evening, I had him focus because we were talking about Southold and Southold people, but providing service with the south. You see to do the map modeling for you relative to the given site, you need Southold, which is Peconic. You gain the advantages of Southold folks probably the tower at Northville, it was involved with the Laurel side of the line. I understand your concern, but to adequately address it and if you want to talk about dropping the tower height, you have to also ask what the effect of that may be with reference to the tower to the west. I am not cutting him off, but he should be reminded that although I have asked him to couch his testimony in terms of Southold Town, in answering this question what you do in going from a hundred to ninety-five, ninety-eight (95, 98) whatever, has an effect upon the coverage and/or the efficiency required by his licenses to the west. And with that caveat I have a little problem with his answering the question. MEMBER VILLA: Well, to throw it. back in that aspect, I would like to see the coverage then from the west and how it effects this cell as well? (Tape changed) MR. FOX: Well, again, it is a very good question, and I appreciate council indicating as is very much the case, celluar design is very, very complicated. Not overly so, such that professionals can deal on the field can understand it very straight forward. However, in this case it's not possible, looking at the situation and the situation within Southold, we need sufficient overlap to hand off between cell PAGE 39 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 MR. FOX (con.t.): sites. To go below one hundred (100) feet, falls below the design criteria for the quality which we are required to provide. There are again certain tollerances in this criteria, however, it would not be in the community's best interest or ours to construct a single cell site within the community that doesn't serve the community at really what is known through the industry as an acceptable level of signal strength. Further, again we could easily argue that we could lower the height of any towers, that is possible, I have been asked that many other times, can you lower that tower, the answer is yes. But, to provide the same quality of service as mandated by the FCC, it would require additional towers, additional burden to the community to have to go through a similar hearing as this. The issue is, I think, very straight forward for us, from the engineering perspective. At this particular height, at this particular location to provide a quality signal to the location, to the target areas here, we do need to be a hundred feet. It takes more to build a higher tower, it costs more. We are very, very much sensitive. At Celluar One are part of the communities all throughout the areas we serve. We're sensitive to these issues, we are sensitive to the community. We understand that the lower the better. That is in our best interest, the lower the better. And this is thoroughly been looked at. I can assure of that. It is a very very good question. MEMBER VILLA: Isn't this designed although for a hundred foot pole to standard kind of design? MR. FOX: I don't know what you mean by that, a standard kind. ... . MEMBER VILLA: I mean a hundred foot is one of your standards that you use. MR. FOX: Not necessarily, not necessarily. You know, even numbers tend to work out, it could have been. . . . Again, we are talking about degrees of differences. It could have easily have been a hundred and five feet or ninety-nine feet, but, again, I am not exactly sure how many different iterations were looked at. But, again, as shown by the Attachment "A", it does meet the criterion. If we could go lower and trust me in when I say that we would, because of the cost and the time, and all of the other issues, but from the engineering prospective, again, one of the objectives is to .cover the main roads, the community in which we serve and the hundred feet level meets that objective and that criterion. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. MR. FOX: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else, I know you want to ask a question back there sir, I will be right with you. Oh, you don't want to ask a question, oh okay. Is there anybody else who would like to PAGE 40 • • PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD ZBA 7/29/92 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't.) : speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to speak against this application? Any further questions from any Board members? Hearing no further questions, I will make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later on both hearings. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. All in favor - AYE. End of hearing. Lorraine A. Miller (Transcribed by tapes recorded 7/29/92) PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS W SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward O'� 41 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD LS { (SI69/76i _LS LJ l L5 MEMORANDUM JUL 2 41M TO: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman �I Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. , Chairman �3.0.?'/P/5 RE: Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One SCTM # 1000-108-4-11. 3 DATE: July 22, 1992 In response to your recent request for Planning Board input, we have reviewed the site plan. Our comments are as follows: The Planning Board is concerned about the aesthetic impact of the monopole on the residential neighborhood to the north. Also, the site plan is missing some required information. These elements of concern will be addressed during the Planning Board' s environmental and site plan review. Allen M. Smith • �� Attorney and Counselor at Law �L �l O 737 Roanoke Avenue, Poet Office Box 1240 Tel: (516) 727-39 Riverhead, New York 11901 2222Fax�(516) 727-3950 July 17 , 1992 D LS l7i L5 1K 201992 I. Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer ' Chairman Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Application No. 4022SE Dear Mr. Goehringer: I thank you for your letter undated and the enclosure therein (copies of which are enclosed for your reference) scheduling the above referenced for Wednesday, July 29, 1992 for 7 :50 p.m. If the purpose of this hearing is limited to your Board's receipt of a copy of the Judgment signed by Justice Doyle and entered April 15, 1992 such that your Board confirms that "the criteria for a special exception approval pursuant to the Southold Zoning Code have been met and that the proposed radio tower is permitted pursuant to Section 100-31 (B) (a) of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold" , I have no objection to the same. If the Notice is an attempt to reopen this application, I object to the same. The judgment is final between the parties and is dispositive of the Special Exception use on the basis of the record before the Court including all drawings, testimony, stipulations, etc. It is my client's position that we are before your Board pursuant to the last decretal paragraph of the judgment to consider the height issue and the height issue only. The height issue and our exception to the hearing on the same has been the subject of earlier correspondence. (v t 1 N: yours, Allen M. Smith AMS:TWS Enc. cc: Diane Amedeo William D. Moore, Esq. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ���OS�FFO(,�-cOG SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman c y` Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. y x ,v � Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. O James Dinizio,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 Robert A. Villa �l �� Southold,New York 11971 Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone (516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time, date and place of the public hearing concerning your recent application is a copy of the Legal Notice, as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman, Inc. and Suffolk Times, Inc. Please have someone appear in your behalf at the time specified in the event there are questions brought up during the same and in order to prevent a delay in the processing of your application. Your public hearing will not start before the time allotted in the attached Legal Notice. Additional time will, of course, be available. A drafted or final written copy of your presentation, if lengthy, is always appreciated. Please feel free to call our office prior to the hearing date if you have any questions or wish to update your file. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski Enclosure APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ✓ SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman ' <2 Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. �� ? ,�c i P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. '� > Robert A.Villa 1 `��, Southold,New York 11971 Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 ` Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following matters will be held for public hearings before the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on WEDNESDAY, JULY 29 , 1992 commencing at the following times: 7: 32 p.m. Appl. No. 4118 - GLADYS J. MILNE. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, and Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4B for permission to construct deck addition with insufficient side yard setback, insufficient setback from existing bulkhead, and with lot coverage at more than 20% of the code limitation. Location of Property: 240 knoll Circle, East Marion; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 37, Block 5, Lot 15; Gardiners Bay Estates Lot No. 31. 7: 37 p.m. Appl. No. 4115 - STEPHEN AND ELLA SCHMIDT. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244B for permission to construct deck addition with an insufficient rear yard setback at 340 Bay Haven Lane, Southold, "Map of Bay Haven" Lot No. 27; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 088, Block 04, Lot 24. Page 2 - Legal *ice Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 4023 - CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE. This is an Appeal of the March 14, 1991 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector for an Interpretation under Article XXIII, Section 100-230 concerning a proposed 104 ft. height of a monopole structure for radio transmission, and in the alternative, appellant requests a variance from the height restriction. Location of Property: (#415) Westerly side of Elijah's Lane and the Northerly Side of the Main Road (NYS Route 25) , Cutchogue, NY; also shown on Planning Board subdivision-approved map of May 15, 1990; property now or formerly of William J. Baxter and Others; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-108-4-part of 11. 7: 50 p.m. Appl. No. 40225E - CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE. Request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B( 1) and Article III, Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: ( #415) Westerly side of Elijah' s Lane and the Northerly Side of the Main Road (NYS Route 25) , Cutchogue, NY; also shown on Planning Board subdivision-approved map of May 15, 1990; property now or formerly of William J. Baxter and Others; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-108-4-part of 11. 8 : 00 p.m. Appl. No. 4116 - LINDA TAGGART. This is an Appeal of the March 13 , 1992 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Page 3 - Legal Notice• • Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals Building Inspector under Article XIV, Section 100-142 and Article XXIII, Section 100-239. 4E for approval or recognition of lot with a substandard size of 15, 285 sq. ft. , lot width (frontage) along the Main Road 76. 46 feet, and lot depth 125. 0 feet. At the time of transfer of title, the property was located in the B-Light Business Zone. Today, the property is located in the Light Industrial (LI ) Zone District. Location of Property: 68320 Main Road, Greenport; Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2. 8: 15 p.m. Appl. No. 41175E - LINDA TAGGART. Request for a Special Exception under Article XIII, Section 100-131B, as referenced from Article XIV, Section 100-141B for permission to establish retail gift shop in this Light Industrial (LI ) Zone District. Location of Property: 68320 Main Road, Greenport; Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2. 8: 25 p.m. Appl. No. 4120 - WILLIAM GOODALE AND MATTITUCK AUTO CENTER, INC. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXI, Section 100-212B for relief from the front yard landscaping provisions of the zoning code. Location of Property: 7655 NYS Route 25 (Main Road) , Laurel, near Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-122-06-30. 1 (previously 30) . 8: 30 p.m. Appl. No. 41195E - RICHARD GOODALE AND MATTITUCK AUTO CENTER, INC. (Tenant) . Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article X, Section 100-101B( 12 ) for a permit Page 4 - Legal •lice • Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals authorizing: (a) a new car sales establishment; (b) an establishment of an accessory use incidental to the proposed new car sales establishment for the sale and/or lease of used vehicles; (c) outside display of vehicles, (d) accessory office use incidental to the new principal use as a new car sales establishment. Location of Property: 7655 Main Road (NYS Route 25) , Laurel, near Mattituck, NY: County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-122-06-30. 1 (prey. 30) . 8: 45 p.m. (Reconvened from June 30, 1992) Appl. No. 4091- EUGENE M. LACOLLA. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31A and B, requesting permission to change use of a portion of the subject premises, from residential to non-residential. Location of Property: Location of Property: North Side of Main Road (State Route 25) , at Arshamomoque near Greenport, (abutting properties of Hollister's Restaurant, Mill Creek Liquors, The Pottery Place, etc. ) ; County Tax Map Parcel Nos. 1000-56-4-24 and 19. 9:00 p.m. Appl. No. 4072 - Appl. No. 4072 - VARUJAN AND LINDA ARSLANYAN. Appeal of the November 26, 1991 Notice of Disapproval of the Building Inspector for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4A and Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, or Article III , Section 100-32, for Permission to construct swimming pool and deck addition with insufficient sideyard(s) and with insufficient setback from sound bluff/bank along the Long Island Sound. Location of Property: 54455 (North Side) of County Road 48 , Greenport; Page 5 - Legal Notice . Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-52-1-8 . The Board of Appeals will at the above time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring to be heard concerning these applications. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before the times designated above. For more information, please call 765-1809 . Dated: July 14, 1992. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski --------------------------------------------------------------x ;� ; L� LSO�' l= • 171 �S �QJ7i� AW ' Z/ IZ& c PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS W , SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman O Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. �1,7 i6� Richard G. Ward �; r- P� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald = P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax( (516) 765-1823 July 22, 1992 L William D. Moore41992 Moore & Moore � 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 -- Mattituck, New York 11952 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Cellular Telephone d/b/a Metro One W/s Elijah' s La. , 299' N/o SR 25, Mattituck, N.Y. SCTM # 1000-108-4-11.3 Dear Mr. Moore: our review of the above-noted site plan application shows that this application is incomplete, meaning that the site plan is missing information required by the Site Plan ordinance, and it states incorrect information. A revised set of plans are needed before the Planning Board can proceed with its review. The following list is intended to assist you in completing the application: 1. The site plans must be at the 1" = 20' scale. 2 . An elevation drawing of the proposed facades of the concrete block building is needed. The drawing should indicate exterior colors and materials for the sides and the roof. 3 . A screening and landscaping plan is needed. This plan must show how the concrete block building and the tower base will be screened from view of the adjoining residences to the north. Further, Section 213 of the Zoning Code requires a twenty foot buffer between the Light Business and residential zones. 4. Parking calculations and correct dimensions of spaces shall be shown. The minimum allowed dimensions for a standard parking space is nine ( 9) by nineteen ( 19) . A handicapped space in accordance with the requirements of the American Disabilities Act is required also. 5. Indicate on the site plan the radius within which the tower may fall. 6. A sketch of any proposed sign and its location should be included with the revised site plan. 7 . The required front yard setback is 601 , not 301 . The required side yard setbacks are 20' and 25' . 8. Show the location, type and wattage of proposed outdoor security lighting on the revised site plan. All lighting must be designed so that light does not shine off the site. Pole heights of a maximum of twelve ( 12) feet are preferred. 9. The proposed use of the existing barn Upon receipt of all of the above-noted information and items the environmental review will start. Sincerely, Bennett Orlowski, Jr. / Chairman s✓ cc: Zoning Board of Appeal Building Department z G APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ti ^�� � � SCOTT L.HARRIS 9t Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. "' r wze Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. ` , -"_ .S a ` James Dinizio,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 �'' _ O Robert A.Villa ��� ,r' �e Southold,New York 11971 Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone (516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 9, 1992 Allen M. Smith, Esq. 737 Roanoke Avenue P.O. Box 1240 Riverhead, NY 11901-1240 Re: Application(s) of Cellular One (Metro One) Interpretation, Variance for Height and Special Exception Dear Mr. Smith: As confirmed recently by the town attorney's office, the appeal on the above Article 78 proceeding was not perfected within the time limitations. The Building Inspector has confirmed that his Notice of Disapproval concerning the need for an interpretation on the height issue is still in effect. Assuming that you wish to proceed with the Appeal on this interpretation request, we have calendared the applications for public hearings to be held on Wednesday evening, July 29, 1992, as well as the Special Exception concerning the use of the tower. The exact time of the hearing(s) will be confirmed within the next couple of days by way of a copy of the Legal Notice as published by us in the official newspaper (Long Island Traveler-Watchman) . Very truly yours, �G � EHRINGER CHAIRMAN Allen M. (Smith Attorney and Counselor at Law 737 Roanoke Avenue, Poet Office Box 1240 Tel: (516) 727-3947 Riverhead, New York 11901 Fax (516) 727-3950 July 1, 1992 i Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: ; Application of Cellular One (Metro One) Dear Mr. Goehringer: I am advised that there will be no appeal of the judgment previously mailed to you. I respectfully request that this matter be restored to your calendar. Very truly yours, Allen M. Smith AMS:TWS cc: Harvey Arnoff, Esq. Matthew Kierman, Esq. William D. Moore, Esq. Michael Gerard OWE . Allen M. Smith JUN 15 M Attorney and Counselor at Law 737 Roanoke Avenue, Post Office Box 1240 Tel: (516) 727-3947 Riverhead, New York 11901 Fax (516) 727-3950 June 12, 1992 Mr. Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman Southold Board of Appeals 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Cellular One (Metro One) Dear Mr. Goehringer: I am in receipt of your letter dated June 8, 1992 . Please be advised that there is no appeal pending from the judgment herein dated April 2 , 1992 and entered April 15, 1992 directing that this matter be restored to your calendar. Notice of entry was served on the Town Attorney April 17, 1992. No notice of appeal was served within the allowable period. I respectfully submit that this matter should be considered by your Board as directed by the judgment. Very truly yours, Qm-- Allen M. Smith AMS:TWS cc: Harvey Arnoff, Esq. William D. Moore, Esq. Michael Gerard APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �1O Gy SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. Serge Doyen,Jr. Town Hall,53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. >> 'a,L 7!� P.O.Box 1179 Robert A. Villa ��1 a �?' Southold,New York 11971 Telephone(516)765-1809 �" Telephone )hone(5 7 5?1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD July 24, 1992 Mr. Allen M. Smith, Esq. 737 Roanoke Avenue P.O. Box 1240 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Appeal No. 4022SE - Metro One Dear Mr. Smith: Please find enclosed a copy of a memo this office received on the above referenced matter. Sincerely yours, lam Lorraine A. Miller Enc. rr rrr0(� C APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS S1� �Ci SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman " c t yc Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. .yi u ,= Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. O, James Dinizio,Jr. +�` �! P.O.Box 1179 Robert A. Villa Ol ey �a Southold,New York 11971 Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone (516)765-1809 Telephone (516)7654800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 8, 1992 Allen M. Smith, Esq. 737 Roanoke Avenue P.O. Box 1240 Riverhead, NY 11901-1240 Re: Your Letter of May 27, 1992 - Cellular One (Metro One) Dear Mr. Smith: This letter will confirm receipt of your letter requesting that the above matters be restored to the meeting calendar. Before re-advertising this matter for the hearings calendar of our June 30, 1992 meeting, it will be necessary to receive authorization from the Town Attorney. A copy of this letter was not forwarded to Mr. Arnoff, and it is possible that this matter has been, and may still be, the subject of an appeal by the Town of Southold. We expect to consult with the Town Attorney shortly upon his return and receive a response on the status of the outstand- ing appeal within a short time. Very truly yours, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Cc: Harvey A. Arnoff, Town Attorney and k L)0,11110KC Plat offi,70, 15ox 240 Tel: (-,!L) 39 7 Q;veihcid. Nc,x, York 1001 fax (51o) 7 May 27, 1992 Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Application of Cellular One (Metro One) Dear Mr. Goehringer; Please find enclosed a true copy of the judgment in favor of Cellular one. I call to your attention the remand provided for in the last paragraph of the judgment. I hereby request that Cellular One's applications be restored to your agenda as directed by Justice Doyle. I further submit that Section 100-230 (D) (1) of the Southold Code is dispositive of the height issue and that a building permit should be issued. I thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, Allen M. Smith AMS:TWS cc: Michael Gerard William D. Moore, Esq. At aTerm of the Supreme Court of the State of New York held in and for the County of Suffolk at the Courthouse thereof Griffing Avenue, Riverhead New York on the L day of He -1992 . PRES ENT: /y,•�f HONORABLE ROBERT W. DOYLE Justice - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CELLULAR TELEPHONE COM?ANY d/b/a METRO ONE, Assigned to: Petitioner, Robert W. Doyle, J.S.C. JUDGMENT GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman Index No. 91-17944 CHARLES GR:GONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, JR. , ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF ��R 5 ��� APPEALS, MITERED APR - - - - - - - - Respondents.- - - AT': f.' $02 �/9 Upon reading and filing herein the Notice of Petition dated September 5, 1991; the Petition verified September 5, 1991; the affidavit of Diane Amedeo sworn to September 5, 1991; the affirmation of Allen M. Smith dated November 18, 1991; the affirmation of William D. Moore dated November 20, lSS1; the affidavit of Christopher Resavv sworn to November 18 , 1991; Petitioner's Memorandum of Law submitted November 20, 1991 and supplemented by letter dated February 4 , 1992 , all in sunport of the Petition; the Return; Respondents ' Verified Answer verified October 23 , 1991 and the affidavit of Gerard P. Goehrincer sworn to October 2-1 , 1991 in opaosition to the Petition and this proceeding having been submitted to the Court and the Court having f � ; rendered its Memorandum decision dated February 11, 1992 . NOW cn motion of Allen M. Smith, Esq. and William D. Moore of counsel, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that -milt P 's Petition is granted and it is FLIRT E.R ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Respondent 's determination numbered 4022 is annulled and it is FL'RTF—R ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Petitioner is determined to be a public utility, the criteria for a special exception approval pursuant to the Southold Zoning Code have been met and chat the proposed radio tower is permitted pursuant to Section 100-31 (B) (1) of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold and it is FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that this matter is herebv remanded to the Respondent Board for consideration of the remaining portions of Petitioner's application. GgT0 4 ROBERT W J. S. C. S1: : __;y FILED APR 15 1992 EDWA RD P.RC4AQ E CLEW OF SUFRXX COUNTY 5A, '�(� • Allen M. Smith Attorney and Counselor at Law 0 737 Roanoke Avenue, Post Office Box 1240 Tel: (516) 727-3947 Riverhead, New York 11901 Fax (516) 727-3950 June 8, 1992 Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Application of Cellular One (Metro One) Dear Mr. Goehringer: I an advised by my co-counsel that this matter has been scheduled for a hearing June 30th. I appreciate this action by your Board. However for the record I wish to take exception that this hearing is being held in light of Section 100-230 (D) (1) of the Southold Code cited in my letter of May 27, 1992. In furtherance of my position, I enclose a copy of the Building Department' s Notice of Disapproval dated March 14, 1991. Please note that the Building Department's position is stated that the application "may" need a height variance. The Town records show the height variance is not needed. Please review your decisions in appeals numbered 4058 and 4062 entitled NYNEX Mobile Communications with Arthur V. Junge Inc. (a copy of which are enclosed) . Height was not an issue. The obvious reason is Section 100-230(D) (1) . I respectfully submit that the variance scheduled to be heard June 30, 1992 is not necessary under the Southold Zoning Code. yours, U�Allen M. Smith AMS:TWS Enc. cc: Michael Gerard William D. Moore, Esq. * l_, ra — �: - -. � riora Na r•t �_� oRE « r•ionR � F• _ ._� _ TOtVN OF SOUnIOLD BUILDING DL•PARTMCNT TOWN CLERK'S OrFlCC SOUTHOLD, N.Y, NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAAL/� n ,o 0.! Date . . . I/I.Wt�C,w. . . . . �. . , . , PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated . . . . . for permit to `' �"'4�`�!9 . . �i u?�cF .`f. . R- t'a w — . . . . . . . . . . . . at Location or Property , ,�, l,S, , , �. � House No. Smoot County Tax Map No. 1000 Suction .� �rmn�er . . . . . . ©lock . . .Sa.�. . . . . . . Lot . ��. . . . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . is returned herewith and disappr o v ed on the following grounds . . . . . ,4�n_ 9-m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ing Inspector RV 1/80 7 9 o��g>JFFO(,�Co SCOTT L. HARRIS SUPERVISOR o Town Hall, 53095 Main Road y x P.O. Box 1179 FAX (516)765 - 1823 0 ® Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE(516) 765 - 1800 BOARD OF APPEALS : Gerard P . Goehringer OFFICE OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Chairman TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 765- 1809 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 4058: NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS/ARTHUR V. JUNGE, INC. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XIV, Section 100-142 for permission to construct monopole radio tower and accessory equipment-storage building with insufficient side and rear yard setbacks. Zone District: Light Industrial (LI) . Location of Property: 21855 County Road 48, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-96-1-19.1. WHEREAS, after due notice, a public hearing was held on October 24, 1991, and at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. The premises in question is located in the Light Industrial (LI) Zone District in the Hamlet of Cutchogue, Town Of Southold, and is more particularly identified as County Tax Map District 1000, Section 96, Block 1, Lot 19. 1. 2• The subject premises consists of a total area of 1. 04 acres (or 45,598 sq. ft. ) with a frontage of 168 feet along the north side of County Route 48 and a lot depth of 252+- feet. This parcel is improved with an existing building and uses which were the subject of a conditional approval by the Board of Appeals under Appl. No. 3835 rendered April 27, 1989 and Appl. No. 3705 rendered March 3, 1988 (Arthur L. Junge, Inc. ) , as well as site plan approval by the Southold Town Planning Board. 3. By this application, reduced setbacks are requested: (a) from the northerly rear yard and westerly side yard at 14 feet and 24+- feet, respectively for the 13 ' by 27 ' foundation Of the proposed accessory--storage\building, and (b) from the northerly rear yard of 3 at 9+- feet-and from the westerly side yard ,f eet for the €e+tndation of the J proposed monopole tower Page, 2 - Appl. No. 058 Matter of NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 structure, all as more particularly shown on map of proposed site plan and details prepared by Richard E. Tangel, P.E. dated July 31, 1991. 4. The subject premises is located in the Light-Industrial (LI) Zone District, and the setbacks applicable are noted for a principal use structure at 70 from the rear property line and 20 for the side yard. 5. The following documentation and site plan information are noted for reference and consideration: (a) an existing tree (screening) line is shown along or very near the northerly and southerly lines of the subject property; pine-tree screening must be located along the westerly property line, as shown on the site plan maps; (b) also proposed is a stockade fence along the northerly and easterly sections of the proposed equipment storage building; (c) Certificates of Occupancy have been found of record for the existing uses as follows: ( 1) #Z17295 issued on September 13, 1988 for the electric shop/building of Arthur V. Junge; ( 2) #Z18981 issued on April 23, 1990 for a wholeale bakery and for Local Talent, Inc. in the existing light-industrial building; (d) the proposed equipment storage building and tower structure will be unmanned, not requiring active daily parking for additional on-site personal or any increase of on-site customers related to the establishment of this public utility use; (e) other site plan elements are to be placed as conditioned by the Planning Board under its simultaneously Pending site plan application {see PB letter of 11/7/911 ; ( f) New York SMSA Limited Partnership and NYNEX have furnished information for the record concernings its licensing as a public utility to provide cellular radio transmission serving to its full extent the public interest, convenience and necessary as per written consent and order authorized by the N.Y.S. Public Service Commission, Federal Communications - Commission, etc. , which includes limitation on the Effective Radiated Power for mobile transmitters up to 7 watts, and output Power for mobile transmitters up to 60 watts. It is also not permitted to be assigned or transferred to any person, firm, company, or corporation without the written consent of the Commission; and it is understood that upon any future proposal of this applicant or owner(s) to transfer or assign this Paye 3 - Appl. No. 8 Matter of NYNEX Mobile Communications/Junge Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 authorization, subsequent application to this Board must be filed for consideration. 6 . Other relevant technical information considered in this Project are also noted below for the record: (a) cellular communication systems must operate through a network of cell sites, the first for this applicant in the Town of Southold at the subject premises in Cutchogue. (b) this cell site has two principal components, a 12 ' by 26 ft. (13 ' by 27' foundation) structure for computer equipment storage, and transmitting/receiving antenna-tower structure, both of which are incidental and necessary to operate a wire line telephone communications use. The top of the tower is 12 ft. equilateral triangle, 40 inches high, 36 inches at the base and 18 inches at the top. There would be two whip antennas that are 10 ft. above that, and one below. (c) the tower and building are monitored seven days a week, 24 hours per day per FCC mandates, although it is unmanned physically at the site. applicant/publicis h utility and wille tower and not na a notbe rented orre solely r leased use ytohany other corporation, person, firm or company. Also, it is expressly understood that no new cell, or expansion will be established, unless further application and approvals by this board and the regulating commissions, on this site in order that appropriate criteria may be evaluated, including engineering data relative to wind pressures, wind loads and other safety considerations for such future utility expansion; (e) the design of the tower and antenna submitted is not a steel lattice design; this monopole structure must, however, be designed to withstand continuous wind loads in excess of 150 mph and wind peaks of 190 mph or more (sufficiently mounted with wires and brackets capable to support these pressures) . 7. This date, a Special Exception was conditionally approved by this Board concerning the applicant' s request under Article XIII, Section 100-130 of the Light Industrial (LI ) and Light Industrial-Office (LIO) Zoning Provisions for authorization to establish a telecommunications use by a public utility. Page 4 - Appl. No. 08 Matter of NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 8. In considering this application, the Board also finds that the relief requested: will not be adverse t the neighborhood andis theminimumnecessaryeto1 characteral afford relief under the circumstances; (b) will not in turn be adverse to the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience or order of the town, or be adverse to neighboring properties; (c) will not increase dwelling unit density or cause a substantial effect on available governmental facilities; (d) cannot be obviated by another method feasible to appellant to pursue, other than a variance (e) is uniquely related to the property and is not personal in nature; (f) in considering all of the above factors, the interests of justice will be served by granting the variance, as conditionally noted below. Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT relief for the reduced setbacks requested and noted above on the first page, paragraph #3, in the Matter of the Application of NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for the establishment of a public utility for the construction of a cellular telephone communications tower and accessory equipment-storage building as applied under Appl. No. 4062 in the Matter of NYNEX/ARTHUR V. JUNGE, INC. , BE AND HEREBY Is APPROVED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. No excessive (disturbing) noise levels; 2. No expansion or additional construction (with the exception of emergency, fire or police necessities which serve the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience and order to the town) , unless further application and approvals are obtained, and for which engineering certifications will be required concerning increased loads, winds pressures and other safety considerations for such expansion; - 3. No microwave dishes, as agreed by the applicants (none of which are proposed during the consideration of this application) ; Page 5 - Appl. No. 8 Matter of NYNEX Mobi a Communications/lunge r Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 application) ; 4. No disturbing emissions of electrical discharges, light, vibration or noise, or harmful distribution levels of radiation, as agreed. 5 . The setbacks shall be not less than that applied for and shown on the plan dated October 18 , 1991 (Drawing No. 92-8012) prepared by Richard E. Tangel, P.E. , from the northerly property line. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: MESSRS. GOEHRINGER, GRIGONIS, DOYEN AND VILLA. (MEMBER DINIZIO ABSTAINED FROM DISCUSSIONS AND FROM VOTE) . This resolution was duly adopted. * a lk ' GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, C✓HAIRMAN l i ,CEIVED AND FILED BY ME SOUTI.GLD TOWN CLZRAK DATE Ia//31F HOUR F"304/� Town Clerk, Town of Southold APPEALS 130ARD MEMBERS O g�FF�(� co SCOTT Supervisor �L.HARRIS Gerard P. Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. cam° "Serge Doyen,Jr. Town Hall,53095 Main Road ti = .+- n, P.O.Box 1179 James DA.VilJr. O Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa y?��l �� Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTH OLD ACTION OF THE BOARD Appl. No. 4062. NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS/ARTHUR V. JUNGE, INC. Request for Special Exception approval under Article XIV, Section 100-141B( 1) for permission to establish public utility use and construct monopole radio tower and accessory equipment-storage building. Zone District: Light Industrial (LI) . Location of Property: 21855 County Road 48, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-96-1-19. 1. WHEREAS, after due notice, a public hearing was held on October 24, 1991, and at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact and determination: 1 . The premises in question is located in the Light industrial (LI) Zone District in the Hamlet of Cutchogue, Town of Southold, and is more particularly identified as County Tax Map District 1000, Section 96, Block 1, Lot 19. 1 . 2 . The subject parcel contains a total area of 1. 04 acres (or 45, 589 sq. ft. ) with a frontage of 168 feet along the north side of County Route 48 and a lot depth of 252+- feet. This parcel is improved with an existing building and uses which were the subject of a conditional approval by the Board of Appeals under Appl. No. 3835 rendered April 27, 1989 and Appl. No. 3705 rendered March 3, 1988 (Arthur L. Junge, Inc. ) , as well as site plan approval by the Southold Town Planning Board. 3 . By this application, a Special Exception is requested for " . . .construction of an equipment building and monopole for cellular mobile communications. . . ", both of which are public Page. 2 - November � 1991 Matter of NYNEX/ARTHUR JUNGE, INC. Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 utility structures providing a public telephone communications service. 4. Reference is made to the following documents and site plan information submitted for the record: (a) Certificate of Occupancy #Z17295 issued by the Building Inspector on September 13 , 1988 has been provided for the existing electric shop of Arthur V. Junge and building. (b) Certificate of Occupancy #Z18981 issued by the Building Inspector on April 23, 1990 has been provided for a wholesale bakery and in the existing light industrial building to Local Talent, Inc. (c) the proposed equipment storage building and tower structure will be unmanned, not requiring active daily parking for on-site personnel or customers related to this use. (d) an existing tree line is shown along or very near the northerly and southerly lines the property; pine-tree screening shall be along the westerly property line. (e) also proposed a stockade fence along the northerly and easterly sections of the proposed radio equipment storage building; ( f) other site plan elements will be provided as may be determined by the Planning Board under its simultaneously pending site plan application (see PB letter of 11/7/91) . (g) New York SMSA Limited Partnership and NYNEX have furnished information for the record concerning its licensing as a public utility to provide cellular radio transmission serving to its full extent the public interest, convenience and necessity as per written consent and order authorized by the N.Y.S. Public Service Commission, Federal Communications Commission, which includes limitation on the Effective Radiated Power for mobile transmitters up to 7 watts, and output power for mobile transmitters up to 60 watts. It is also not permitted to be assigned or transferred to any person, firm, company,. or corporation without the written consent of the Commission, and it is understood that upon any future proposal of this applicant or owner( s) to transfer or assign this authorization, subsequent application to this Board must be filed for consideration. 5 . Also noted are the following data: Page, 3 - November 1991 Matter of NITIEX/AR�R JUNGE, INC. Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 (a) cellular communication systems must operate through a network of cell sites, the first for this applicant in the Town of Southold at the subject premises in Cutchogue. (b) this cell site has two principal components, a _ 12' by 26 ft. structure for computer equipment storage, and —transmitting/receiving antenna-tower structure both of which are incidental and necessary to operate a wire line telephone communications use. The top of the tower is 12 ft. equilateral triangle, 40 inches high, 36 inches at the base and 18 inches at the top. There would be two whip antennas that are 10 ft. above that, and one below. (c) the tower and building are monitored seven days a week, 24 hours per day per FCC mandates, although it is unmanned physically at the site. (d) the tower and antenna are solely for use by this applicant/public utility and will not be rented or leased to any other corporation, person, firm or company. Also, it is expressly understood that no new cell, or expansion will be established, unless further application and approvals by this board and the regulating commissions, on this site in order that appropriate criteria may be evaluated, including engineering data relative to wind pressures, wind loads and other safety considerations for such future utility expansion. (e) the tower and antenna shall not be constructed of steel lattice design, but shall be a monopole structure designed to withstand continuous wind loads in excess of 150 mph and wind peaks of 190 mph or more ( sufficiently mounted with wires and brackets capable to support these pressures) . 6. Article XIII, Section 100-130 of the Light Industrial (LI) and Light Industrial-Office (LIO) Zoning Provisions authorize this type of telecommunications use by Special Exception. The use of this proposed monopole tower and --ment s — — - accessory equipment storage wo_ul�include to --some extetr��eph6he exchanges. Although a telephone exchange is listed as a permitted use in the Light Industrial (LI) Zone District, this application for public utility structures and uses does require a special exception as provided by Article XIV, Section 100-141B( l) and Article XIII , Section 100-131B( 4) for " . . . Public Utility Structures and uses . . . ." The Special Exception provision is applicable to this proposed project, and has been filed and considered under this provision. 7 . In passing upon this application, the Board Members have also considered Sections 100-264, subsections A through P, and have found and determined the following: .age 4 - Appl. No. 2 Matter of NYNEX Mob a Communications/Junge Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 (a) That the proposed use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacent properties or of properties in adjacent use districts; (b) That the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of permitted or legally established uses in the district wherein the proposed use is to be located or of permitted or legally established uses in adjacent use districts; (c) That the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience, or order of the town will not be adversely affected by the proposed use and its location; (d) That the use will be in harmony with and will promote the general purposes and intent of this chapter; (e) That the use will be compatible with its surroundings, with the character of the neighborhood and of the community in general, particularly with regard to visibility, scale and overall appearance and the fact that the property is bounded on the north by the Town Landfill, south by a major dual-lane highway, and bounded by other properties also located in the Light-Industrial Zone District. NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for the establishment of a public utility for the construction of a cellular telephone communications tower and accessory equipment-storage building as applied under Appl. No. 4062 in the Matter of NYNEX/ARTHUR V. JUNGE, INC. , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1 . No excessive (disturbing) noise levels; 2 . No expansion or additional construction (with the exception of emergency, fire or police necessities which serve the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience and order to the town) , unless further application and approvals are obtained, and for which engineering certifications will be required concerning increased loads, winds pressures and other safety considerations for such expansion; 3 . No microwave dishes, as agreed by the applicants (none of which are proposed during the consideration of this Page ,5 - Appl. No. 62 • Matter of NYNEX MobTle Communications/Junge Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 application) ; 4. No disturbing emissions of electrical discharges, light, vibration or noise, or harmful distribution levels of radiation, as agreed. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: MESSRS. GOEHRINGER, GRIGONIS, DOYEN AND VILLA. (MEMBER DINIZIO ABSTAINED FROM DISCUSSIONS AND FROM VOTE) . This resolution was duly adopted. lk 7-r GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOV114 CLMK DATE/a//t / 9/ HOUR /o :/o q r� 0.4 • �� '0'i Town Clerk, Town of Southold • • _ .ron&l oft.a T TOtVN OF SOIMIOI.D BIULDING DEPARTAIENT TOIVN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD. N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date . . . . . .AUGUST I5, To ,MARIE ONGIONI, ESQ. (AGENT_) NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATION (LESSEE) ARTHUR JUNGE, INC. 218 FRONT STREET BOX 562 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GREENPORT, N.Y. 11944 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE. that your application dated .4ULY.9 1 S REC. AUG. 13, 91 for permit to CONSTRUCT MONOPOLE RADIO TOWER 6 EQUIPMENT BUILDING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at Location of Property . . 2�855, COUNTY ROAD 48 CUTCHOGUE, N.Y. House No. Srrccr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . County Tax A1ap No. 1000 Section . . . . 96 tiamrer Block . . . Lot .19. 1 . . . . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Alap Vp, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . is returned hcretvitlt and disapproved on the following grounds . .UNDER ARTICLE %IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SECTION . . . . . . . PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION WILL HAVE INSUFFICIENT SIDE YARD AND REAR YARD SETBACKS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ACTION REQUIRED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL.IS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REQUIRED BY. THE PLANNING BOARD. • . . . . . • . • . . . . .. . . . . . • �l(lilylifig Inspector ' T110MAS J. FISIIF.R RV 1/80 Allen M. e5mith T L Attorney and Counselor at Law \� \� 737 Roanoke Avenue, Post Office Box 1240 Tel: (516) 727 47 Riverhead, New York 11901 Fax (516) 727-3950 May 27, 1992 r, MAY 2 81992 Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Application of Cellular One (Metro One) Dear Mr. Goehringer: Please find enclosed a true copy of the judgment in favor of Cellular One. I call to your attention the remand provided for in the last paragraph of the judgment. I hereby request that Cellular One' s applications be restored to your agenda as directed by Justice Doyle. I further submit that Section 100-230(D) (1) of the Southold Code is dispositive of the height issue and that a building permit should be issued. I thank you in advance for your attention to this matter. VeFx truly yours, Allen M. Smith AMS:TWS cc: Michael Gerard William D. Moore, Esq. At a6 Term of the Supreme Court of the State of New York held in and for the County of Suffolk at the Courthouse thereof Griffing Avenue, Riverhead New York on the ,L- day of Herctr -1992 . PRESENT: /ys-wC HONORABLE ROBERT W. DOYLE Justice CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY- - - - - - d/b/a METRO ONE, Assigned to: Petitioner, Robert W. Doyle, J.S.C. -against- JUDGMENT GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman Index No. 91-17944 CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, JR. , ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APR 1 5 1992 APPEALS, ENTERED Respondents. - - - AT: f,' 5a PI-)-? Upon reading and filing herein the Notice of Petition dated September 5, 1991; the Petition verified September 5, 1991; the affidavit of Diane Amedeo sworn to September 5, 1991; the affirmation of Allen M. Smith dated November 18 , 1991; the affirmation of William D. Moore dated November 20, 1991; the affidavit of Christopher Resavv sworn to November 13 , 1991; Petitioner's Memorandum of Law submitted November 20, 1991 and supplemented by letter dated February 4 , 1992, all in support of the Petition; the Return; Respondents ' Verified Answer verified October 23 , 1991 and the affidavit of Gerard P. Goehrincer sworn to October 23 , 1991 in opposition to the Petition and this proceeding having been submitted to the Court and the Ccurt having rendered its Memorandum decision dated February 11, 1992 . NOW on motion of Allen M. Smith, Esq. and William D. Moore of counsel, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that .�^s po*i�; �-on is granted and it is FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Respondent 's determination numbered 4022 is annulled and it is FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Petitioner is determined to be a public utility, the criteria for a special exception approval pursuant to the Southold Zoning Code have been met, and that the proposed radio tower is permitted pursuant to Section 100-31(B) (1) of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold and it is FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that this matter is hereby remanded to the Respondent Board for consideration of the remaining portions of Petitioner's application. Enr,04-� ROBERT W rVNV Lj i J. S. C. r .:;l�yi':, . . YQfi"'. � 3!'= FILED APR 15 M EDWARD P.ROMAINE CLERK OF SUFFOLK COUNTY APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. ' Serge Doyen,Jr. :3 Town Hall,53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN O'F SOUTHOLD August 26, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons, Suite 3 P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone d/b/a Metro One Dear Bill: Transmitted herewith for your information and file is a copy of the determination from the Suffolk County Department of Planning in response to our referral under Section A14-23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code. Very truly yours, Linda F. Kowalski Enclosure ^ OCOUNTY OF SUFFOLK � � � PUG231991 PATRICK NG HAEPIN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE ARTHUR H. KUNZ DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING August 21, 1991 Town Of Southold Zoning Board of Appeels Applicant: Cellular Telephone d/b/a Metro One Mun. File NO.: #4022 S.C.P.D. File No.: SD-91-15 Gentlemen: the above referenced application which has been Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, Planning Commission is considered to be a submitted to the Suffolk County A decision of local determination should not matter for local determination- 1 or disapproval* be construed as either an apP anent provisions in the as there are no app District. Comments:o Appears uthoinappropriate zoning ordinance authorizing such uses in the Limited Business (LB) Very truly yours, Arthur H. Kunz Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:mb VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY _ HAUPPAUGE. L.L.NEWI YORK 11780 W 61360-818E APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ' l ` SCOTT L.HARRIS r, Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. ''j r 1' Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. _; P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOAR OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 Pursuant to Article XIII of the Suffolk County Charter , the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold , New York , hereby refers the following to the Suffolk County Planning Commission : Variance from the Zoning Code , Article , Section Variance from Determination of Southold Town Building Inspector, _ X Special Exception , ArticleVIII , Section100-81B Special Permit 1 III , 100-31Bl6 ; Appeal No . : 4022 Applicant : Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One Location of Affected Land : 415 Elijah ' s Lane , Mattituck , NY County Tax Map Item No . : 1000- 108-4- 11 . 1 (part of 11 ) Within 500 feet of: Town or Village Boundary Line Body of Water (Bay , Sound or Estuary) X State or County Road , Parkway ,' Highway , Thruway Boundary of Existing or Proposed County , State or Federally Owned Land Boundary of Existing or Proposed County , State or Federal Park or Other Recreation Area Existing or Proposed Right-of Way of Any Stream or Drainage Channel Owned by the County or for Which The County Has Established Channel Lines , or Within One Mile of a Nuclear Power Plant Within One Mile of An Airport . COMMENTS: Applicant is requesting permission to annelecommuhica- tions building and construction of 104 ft. high monopole radio tower wit antenna to transmit and receive radio signals for cellulartelephones . Copies of Town file and related documents enclosed for your review. Dated : Aug . 8 , 1991 - dge 4 - Appl. No. 40&,SE Matter of CELLULAR TE HONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 authorize this type of use by Special Exception. The purpose of the LIO and LI Zone Districts is to provide for commercial activities which are not appropriate for those uses permitted in residential, agricultural, and limited business use zone districts. It is apparent that the use proposed herein will be a principal use involving commercial telecommunications activities. The purpose and intent of Section 100-30B( 6) is to permit only those uses which are not of a business or commercial nature and which are clearly consistent with the rural, residential or agricultural character of the immediate area. A telecommunications use is not a residential or agricultural use. 10. It is, therefore, determined that the meaning of Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) shall apply only to those public utility towers, structures and uses congruently associated with residential or agricultural uses; i.e. TV, VHF, CB, Ham Radio, accessory and incidental thereto, by Special Exception approval by the Board of Appeals. Telecommunication systems such as that proposed herein which are of a commercial nature could be permitted as a principal use under only Article XIII and Article XIV, by Special Exception in the LIO and LI Industrial Zone Districts. This commercial use cannot be authorized by Special Exception under the current zoning code under this particular (residential/agricultural) provision (Article III, Section 100-30B(6) ) . ACCORDINGLY, on motion by Mr. Villa, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for commercial telecommunications activities and structures as applied under Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) , (ref. Article VIII , Section 100-81B) , be and hereby is DISMISSED, for the reasons as noted above. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Messrs. Villa, Doyen and Goehringer. (Member Dinizio abstained and did not participate in discussions or vote. ) (Member Grigonis was absent due to illness. ) This resolution was duly adopted. RECEIVED AND FILED BY lTHE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK GERARD P. GOEHRINGER . CHAIRMAN DATE lq/ HOUR `� A PX Town Clerk, Town of Southol- Aj� APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman D��� Charles Grigonis,Jr. , E e` Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. a- • rr ,t P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. J Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa .7 aJ� ,r Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OIF SOUTHOLD August 8, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Moore & Moore Clause Commons P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 4022 - Metro One (Special Exception Request) Dear Mr. Moore: Please find attached a copy of the decision rendered by the Board of Appeals at our July 25, 1991 Meeting, the original of which has this date been filed with the Office of the Town Clerk. Very truly yours, Linda Kowalski Enclosure 2 3% saI 737 1x Ye APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ✓� J �L.Y„"„ SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman '�� �✓,F Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. ( V , Serge Doyen,Jr. �n a `t s . Town Hall,53095 Main Road i P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. nJ Robert A.Villa Southold,New York 11971 -�P, ,� Cr Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 _ Telephone(516)765-1800 >_ BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN dF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. No. 4022. Application of CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE requesting Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B(1) and Article III , Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a 104 ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, Ny; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15, 1990, Map No. 8937 . County Tax Map No. 1000-108-4-11.3 (part of 11. ) WHEREAS, after due notice, public hearings were held on April 30 , 1991 and June 7, 1991 and at said hearings, all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding areas; and WHERES, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. The premises in question is located along the westerly side of Elijah' s Lane in the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold, is more particularly identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 108, Block 4, Lot 11.3 (part of 11) , for which lot lines have been the subject of approval by the Town Planning Board on or about April 9, 1990. 2. For the record it is also noted that the subject parcel contains a total lot area of 80,495. 5 square feet, is located in the Limited Business (LB) Zone District, and is surrounded on three sides by residential communities. To the south is a plot of land also owned by William J. Baxter and others improved with a large one-story building and, although unoccupied, is also located in the Limited Business Zone District. Page 2 - Appl. No. 4�-SE • Matter of CELLULAR TB'LEPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 3 . By this application, it is requested by Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One, with the consent of the landowners, William J. Baxter and others, that a Special Exception be granted for: ( 1) la proposed unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building, and (2) construction of a 104 ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. The section of the Code under which this application has been made is Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) of the Agricultural-Conservation and Low-Density Residential Zone District provisions of the Code which reads as follows: 100-31B. Uses permitted by special exception by the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as herein- after provided, and . are subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: . . . ( 6) Public utility rights-of-way as well as structures and other installations necessary to serve areas within the town, subject to such conditions as the Board of Appeals may impose in order to protect and promote the health, safety, appearance and general welfare of the community and the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed. . . . 4. The proposed unmanned telecommunications building is shown on the site plan maps prepared by Juengert Grutzmacher Associates, P.A. dated February 6, 1991. Also, the tower structure for telecommunications transmissions is shown to be proposed at approximately 103 feet from the northerly side property line, 238+- feet from the westerly rear property line, 62+- feet from the southerly side property line, and 233+- feet from the easterly front property line. The height of the tower, inclusive of antenna mast, is proposed at 104 feet from ground level. The nearest building (telecommunications building) is located approximately nine feet to the east from the proposed tower, and 69 feet to the existing barn structure from the tower. Buildings therefore are within the direct fall-down area of the proposed tower. Also, distances have not been provided on the radius map to show building envelopes for future principal structures and accessory structures on the five residentially zoned lands adjacent to this parcel to the north and west. It does appear, however, that future homes on these lots could be located outside of the fall-down range, i.e. 104 feet from the proposed tower location. Page 3 - Appl. No. 40--SE Matter of CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 5. The land uses of the Low-Density Residential Zone District, under which this application is made, is intended to provide open rural environmental areas so highly valued by residents and to reasonably re%ilate the subdivision and development of the lands while honoring the legitimate interests of farmers and farmland owners (Article III, Section 100-30 Purpose) . The uses permitted under these provisions are limited to principal residential uses, agricultural uses, and accessory uses incidental thereto. 6. The land use provisions of the Limited Business (LB) Zone District are intended to provide limited business activities that are consistent with the rural and historic character of surrounding areas and uses and that have been designed to protect the residential and rural character of the area. Permitted uses in the LB Zone are limited to antique, art and craft shops and galleries; custom workshops and machine shops; wholesale or retail and display of garden materials and plants, including nursery operations; library; museum; professional office; business office; funeral home; restaurant; barbershop, professional studios, travel agency and other personal service stores and shops; plumbing shop, carpentry shop, motorcycle shops, landscaping and other service businesses; wholesale and warehousing. other uses permitted by Special Exception would include those uses as may be permitted in the Low-Density Residential and Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts and provided under Article III (ref. paragraph #5 above) . 7 . The uses proposed under this Special Exception request are for commercial telecommunications and radio transmission services by Metro One through Cellular Telephone Company, a company who has received approvals from the Public Service Commission to operate a cellular radio system (see Order issued April 18, 1985 for a "Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to Construct and Operate a Cellular Radio Telecommunication Service in the New York Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area" ) . 8. On January 10, 1989, a new Zoning Code and Master Plan were adopted by the Town of Southold, and many zoning provisions and requirements were modified or created which are quite different from the previous zoning codes. In applying the provisions of the new master plan and zoning code, one of the first considerations by this Board in a Special Exception request is to determine whether the uses requested fall within the meaning of the Zoning Code as applied. 9. Article XIII, Section 100-130 of the Light Industrial (LI) and Light-Industrial-Office (LIO) Zoning Provisions Page 4 - Appl. No. *-SE Matter of CELLULAR TE EPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 authorize this type of use by Special Exception. The purpose of the LIO and LI Zone Districts is to provide for commercial activities which are not appropriate for those uses permitted in residential, agricultural, and aimited business use zone districts. It is apparent that the use proposed herein will be a principal use involving commercial telecommunications activities. The purpose and intent of Section 100-30B( 6) is to permit only those uses which are not of a business or commercial nature and which are clearly consistent with the rural, residential or agricultural character of the immediate area. A telecommunications use is not a residential or agricultural use. 10. It is, therefore, determined that the meaning of Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) shall apply only to those public utility towers, structures and uses congruently associated with residential or agricultural uses; i.e. TV, VHF, CB, Ham Radio, accessory and incidental thereto, by Special Exception approval by the Board of Appeals. Telecommunication systems such as that proposed herein which are of a commercial nature could be permitted as a principal use under only Article XIII and Article XIV, by Special Exception in the LIO and LI Industrial Zone Districts. This commercial use cannot be authorized by Special Exception under the current zoning code under this particular (residential/agricultural) provision (Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) ) . ACCORDINGLY, on motion by Mr. Villa, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for commercial telecommunications activities and structures as applied under Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) , (ref . Article VIII , Section 100-81B) , be and hereby is DISMISSED, for the reasons as noted above. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Messrs. Villa, Doyen and Goehringer. (Member Dinizio abstained and did not participate in discussions or vote. ) (Member Grigonis was absent due to illness. ) This resolution was duly adopted. i GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,ICHAIRMAN lk Southold Town Board *Appeals _ 34-Re ular Meet*g July 12 , 1991 l DELIBERATIONS, continued: Appl. No. � CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. The Board Members deliberated. No action was taken, and deliberations were postponed for an undetermined time, but within 60 days of the public hearing (which was June 7, 1991) . OTHER UPDATES/RESOLUTIONS: (Agenda Item IIIA) Appl. No. 4021 - MICHAEL CHOLOWSKY at E/s Horton' s Lane, Southold. There were several residents present who had questions concerning the status of this application and the concerning SEQRA. The Board answered procedural questions, most of which are noted in the file, and briefly discussed SEQRA. It was the consensus of the Board to coordinate the Long Environmental Assessment Form to involved agencies for comments from the public and agencies not later than August 5, 1991. The Board indicated that a further Determination, either of Significance or Non-Significance under SEQRA, will need to be determined by Resolution (not later than the Board' s next meeting on or about August 15, 1991) . (Agenda Item IIIC) Appl. No. 3970 - MCDONALD' S CORPORATION at Mattituck. Copies of this afternoon' s response from Planning Board concerning ZBA referral under alternative site plan map submission was transmitted to the ZBA Members, reviewed and made a part of the ZBA file. (Agenda Item IIIF) Appl. No. 4037 - METRO/808 REALTY (canopy) . Motion was made by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, to request comments from the Planning Board and copies of maps and/or files pertinent to this pending project for the ZBA record. VOTE OF THE BOARD: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Dinizio and Villa. (Member Grigonis was absent. ) This resolution was duly adopted. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS � Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman V, Charles Grigonis,Jr. b Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. " '> . x P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. Y Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 _ ':,.� Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OIF SOUTHOLD TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON JUNE 7 , 1991 Appl. No. 4022-SE - CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. This hearing was recessed from the April 30, 1991 meeting, and the statements made during the hearing are as follows: 8: 12 p .m. - Hearing reconvened . CHAIRMAN: Ok. We ' ll go back to the application for Metro One, Cellular Telephone, which was opened at the last regularly scheduled meeting, and we had some questions of Mr. Smith at that point. Mr. Smith, are you going to continue . ALLEN M. SMITH, ESQ . : I was going to defer to my young friend whose name is really on this application (William Moore, Esq.) and is now back from (a journey) with his wife . But to take the lead, I shall. When we left off last together, there were a number of items that you wished addressed. The first was to move the tower as such that it would not fall down on the property to the north if it were to come down, and we 've done that. And I understand that Mr. Moore had provided you with a stipulation from Mr. Baxter relative to the parcel to the south. He has a drawing I believe he may have drawn that depicts that for you. One of the board members or member of the audience asked a question relative to the structural integrity of the antenna as distinct from the structural integrity of the monopole, and I have sent Mr. Goehringer the information that relates to the fact that the antenna will take at least as much force, wind force, as with the pole . Relative to the FAA, the position of the FAA remains the same, such that you can understand both the Page 2 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 ALLEN SMITH, continued: engineering and legalistic gobbilly-gook that contained in the FAA letter. It says that it, be lighted with a white strob light during daylight hours, and lighted with a red light during the evening. We supplied for you to location of not only the JFK tower, the monopole that was referenced. - in the earlier testimony that I provided you, although not owned by Metro but are of a similar design. The last thing that I sent to Mr. Goehringer since our last meeting was a decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Town of Riverhead, which has considered similar applications to the one that is before you for whatever it is worth as I said in the letter. I believe that is the checklist that we left off with the other day. If there are any additional questions, we will answer them. I do recall one. Mr. Moore has in fact spoken with some representatives of the AEMTs associated with the Mattituck Fire Department. I believe that we ' re authorized to say that they consider the enhancement of the cellular mobile facilities on the North Fork to be an advantage to them. The reason is that if I were to have a heart-attack and they were to come get me with their more sophisticated apparatis, they actually hook me into certain monitoring of devices. A heart monitor, block pressure and the like. And that data is relayed by Cellular Telephone, I believe, to a hospital on the South Side. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: South Side Hospital in Bay Shore. MR. SMITH: South Side hospital on Long Island, where if I 'm being transported to Central Suffolk (Hospital) or if I 'm being transported to wherever the emergency system dictates on , the AEMTs in the Mattituck ambulance or rescue vehicle can in fact buy As I understand it, by reason of the fact that we do not have in this area on the North Fork a detailed telephone system. There are sometimes difficulties in doing the transmitting back to South Side Hospital, and I believe we ' re authorized to say that. Other than that I think we 've answered everything that we had left open from the earlier meeting. If there are any other questions, I ' ll attempt to answer them. Page 3 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The approximate, and I apologize for this- but the approximate height of the antenna is 104 feet, is that not correct? t MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN: We 're at 104 feet, is that correct? Ok. And we are 95 feet from the northerly property line . Ok. Now we 're at 103. MR. SMITH. Yes (referring to map) . CHAIRMAN: So we 're right on, approximately. And this is going to be the fall-back area right in here (referring to map) . MR. SMITH: Yeah, and he ' s going to sign a covenant to that effect. MR. (neighbor) : I just wanted to see that. CHAIRMAN: Now, what did you want to look at, Bob? BOB That; I just wanted to see it for what it-- Let ' s see. It would impinge on that one. This one would definitely. This was the one that I was concerned about. Ok. CHAIRMAN: All right. Good. Did you have anything else for the record? MR. SMITH: I tried to be responsive as best I could. I don't have anything more or less to say. I 'd appreciate a decision at the board's convenience . CHAIRMAN: I have not gotten to Laurelton yet. I tried to go today, and I didn' t make it. What I 'm going to ask is both the indulgence of both you and Mr. Moore and what I 'm going to do is request the board that we close this hearing as to any further verbatim testimony, and that we just close the hearing as a matter of formality at the next regularly scheduled meeting, when I do make it up there and if I do have further questions, I can communicate with you by mail. Does anyone have any objec- tions to that? MR. SMITH: Very good, sir. None. Thank you. Have a good evening. Page 4 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in behalf of this application? (No response.) Hearing no further questions, I' ll make a motion recessing this until the next regularly scheduled meeting, at which time we will close it as a matter of formality (written record to be closed and file sealed at next regularly scheduled meeting) and-- BOARD CLERK: Closing all verbatim testimony? CHAIRMAN: And we are closing all verbatim testimony (at thi s time) . MEMBER VILLA: Second. The verbatim portion of the hearing was declared closed and the written portion of the record was permitted to remain open for questions and answers, by mail, until the next regularly scheduled meeting at which time the file would be sealed (record concluded) . VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES : Messrs. Goehringer, Villa, Doyen and Grigonis . (Member Dinizio was absent from this particular hearing. ) Respectfully submitted, Linda F. Kowalski, Board Clerk Post-it"brand fax transmittal memo 767 of pages . To From Co. Co. Dept. Phone# ;26r 1jP6 q Fax# �— Fax# J— May 9 , 1991 Ii Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold JUN - 7 '` Town Hall Main Road u Southold , NY 11971 `-- Gentlemen : I have become aware of a proposal to erect a 104 foot tower or antenna on a parcel at the intersection of Elijahs Lane and Main Road , Mattituck. I live nearby and am greatly concerned both with respect to safety and the prospect of diminished property value. In particular , the character of the surrounding area is entirely residential and I do not believe that the applicable parts of the Town Code authorize the erection or construction of an antenna of this size in a residential setting . It is one thing to have a utility right-of-way across a parcel . It is entirely inimical to the character of the area to construct a tower in excess of 100 feet on the basis of permitted utility rights-of-way . I therefore request that the application be denied . Very truly yours , R .� , MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law E .M — 6 i991 U p Clause Commons Suite 3 ` Main Road P.O. Box 23 i _. �✓ Mattituck, New York 11952 I( d Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax: (516) 298-5664 William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary June 6, 1991 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One Special Exception Application Dear Chairman Goehringer and Members of the Board: Enclosed please find a proposed Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions to be imposed upon the Baxter property located to the south of the parcel which is the subject of this special exception application. This Covenant and Restriction prohibits the construction of any buildings within the fall down radius on that southerly parcel. Mr. Baxter has indicated his willingness to accept such a Covenant and Restriction on his property, and has signed a copy of this covenant. The covenant makes reference to two schedules. Schedule A is a legal description of the southerly parcel which is being prepared. Schedule B is a survey of the subject parcel showing the fall down radius of the proposed transmission tower. If the proposed Covenant and Restriction is satisfactory to you, I would suggest that the recording of same be made a condition of the approval for special exception and interpretation/variance if granted. Engineers from Metro One have consulted with the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) and have been advised that the original determination from the FAA will stand. A copy of the determination has previously been provided to you. If you have any questions or need any additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. V ery WDM/mr e cc: Allen M. Smith, Esq. Metro One DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS This Declaration made the day of 1994, by William J. Baxter, Jr. residing at 1030 East Putnam, Greenwich, CT and Jane P. Goeller residing at 349 Ridge Crest, Santa Barbara, CA (hereinafter referred to as "Declarant") WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Declarant is the owner in fee simple of certain premises situate at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, described on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District 1000, Section 108, Block 04, Lot 10 and as more fully described in the attached "Schedule A" and, WHEREAS, the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals, by resolution made on 1991 granted special exception approval to the Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One for construction and use of a 102 foot monopole radio transmission tower on property abutting the premises described in the attached Schedule A, as shown on the attached Schedule B and, WHEREAS, the approval was conditioned upon the filing of certain covenants and restrictions, NOW, THEREFORE, in compliance with the resolution of said Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals, Declarant herein declares that the land described in Schedule A is held and shall be conveyed subject to the following covenants and restrictions which shall run with the land: 1 . No building shall be constructed within the "fall down radius" shown on the attached Schedule B to the extent such radius includes property within the premises described in Schedule A. This covenant shall not prohibit the use of the affected area for parking motor vehicles. 2. These covenants and restrictions can be modified only at the request of the then owner of the premises with the approval of a majority plus one of the Zoning Board of the Town of Southold after a public hearing. Adjoining property owners shall be entitled to notice of such public hearing but their consent to such modifications shall not be required. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the foregoing Declaration has been executed by the Declarant on the day and year first above written. William J. Baxter, Jr. Jane P. Goeller STATE OF COUNTY OF On the day of 1991, before me personally came William J. Baxter, Jr. to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same. Notary Public STATE OF COUNTY OF On the day of 1991, before me personally came Jane P. Goeller to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that she executed the same. Notary Public Page 3 - Minutes Special Meeting - MaP23, 1991 Southold Town Board of Appeals III. RESOLUTION DECLARING SEQRA ON THE FOLLOWING MATTERS CALENDARED FOR JUNE 7, 1991 and RESOLUTION CONFIRMING HEARINGS FOR JUNE 7, 1991 as published: On motion by Chairman Goehringer, seconded by Member Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, to declare the following SEQRA declarations and confirm that these matters are hereby authorized to be held for public hearings at the Board's June 7, 1991 Regular Meeting: A. TYPE II ACTIONS: 1. Richard Oliveri 2 . James and Patricia Boyle 3 . Estate of Jennis Harris 4. Halsey A. Staples 5. Ronald Stritzler, M.D. 6. Charles and Angela Kyriakoudes 7 . Estate of Charles Morgan (now Goldman) . B. UNLISTED ACTIONS - SEQRA finalized previously on the following: 7. Joseph and Linda Fischetti 8. Cellular Telephone. (SEQRA determinations on #1 through #7 above are continued on the following pages. ) Page 4 — Minutes Special Meeting - MaP23, 1991 1 Southold Town Board of Appeals (ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATIONS, continued: ) Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Dinizio, Villa and Goehringer. (Members Doyen and Grigonis were absent. ) This resolution was duly adopted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. On motion by Chairman Goehringer, seconded by Member Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, to approve the Minutes of the following ZBA Meetings: A. Wednesday, April 10, 1991 Special Meeting B. Friday, February 22, 1991 Regular Meeting Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Dinizio, Villa and Goehringer. (Members Doyen and Grigonis were absent. ) This resolution was duly adopted. Brief discussion: CELLULAR TELEPHONE Application. Mrs. Johanna Northam (NFEC) indicated she wished to speak in opposition to this application. Mrs. Northam was advised that the Board could not hear her comments tonight since the comments must be received either in writing or during the public hearing which will continue on June 7, 1991. Mrs. Northam was questionning a radio tower proposal in Orient which she indicated was denied. No application for the same was found to be either filed or otherwise pending before this Board. The Secretary assured Mrs. Northam that if she would like reference to previous files which may have been filed during the past, that assistance is available for research Monday through Friday during normal business hours, and to the best of our knowledge (based upon the information given by Mrs. Northam) , no decision on a denial of a tower in Orient was recalled to be of record with the Office of the Board of Appeals. (This may have been a matter brought before the Town Board or other town department for the Orient Fire Department. ) PD �'gE,a "' L tE ♦` n � " 1 F asu rx p WILLC,6 qp g �uvq I on , py� •�a W lEie oP , i�a•P� �Ov S,s i j O ' ' S y n' iM •ny �f�cO'p' n NMI, Ic 8 Wlvalln ^Ils )P +wru rvs �/J ✓' ao5!:t ; R�O� F�Sg � LI�IiI���',J'�. Ldl % S W " 3 � U • �Q W��� �� �P� . rD/Pt.�� • E E W (q M. t Al Ak 3,1 t £ .ip Sctwnnr 3 io �s y v Y E y^iQ QF `awn c 4� '48a. INry t E ..E ' �W.ar ' � m ���vnS af• S1 O �QJ-a C: ��•7 a�a 0 V R R RFI4N Y•LL� e QF M 15 �• vOEJn IIEP ' }• a.n °��� / NISS°U COUNTY ` FUL PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS N SCOTT L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Supervisor George Ritchie Latham, Jr. a Richard G. Ward �OI J Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 TO: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Board of Appeals FROM: Bennett Orlowski, Chairman -,oAr' 1Js it ,> DATE: MAY 9, 1991 j ow 151s91 RE: Metro One SCTM# 1000-108-4-11 .3 — The Planning Board is not in favor of granting the special exception for the radio tower for Metro One. This property is surrounded by residential zones and dwellings ( see attached zoning map) . The Board believes that the social, economic and aesthetic benefits of the residential area will be compromised by the granting of this special exception. The Board would recommend alternate locations for the tower in a Business zoned or Industrial zoned district, or at the Landfill site. %1j�1111 �i C ■ I��"aU�!•�p• Ins 1 f ■E! / �i/1n• i�������1/� I'lll �1 fit' "'_ alb', � �:=c=.•i.'._.. IN MIN PI US cooM IMPS NANW, Rif MIN J� MO•��/ �`1���\-• „y , �/rim l� �I�� . -- - - __ T - T - t. 41 't ALLEN M. SMITH AN� ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW 17 - I -U�1 � �t 737 ROANOKE AVENUE, POST OFFICE BOX 1240 l� RIVERHEAD. NEW YORK 1 1901 ` (][] 516-727-3947 } MAY I 51991 .1 FAx 51 6-727-3950 [l7 May 14, 1991 Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer Board of Appeals Town of Southold Post Office Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Appeal No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone Co. Dear Mr. Goehringer: Please find enclosed the documents from which the facsimile copies transmitted to you on May 13 , 1991 were made. VeY Yours, Allen M. Smith AMS:TWS Enc. r O MAY 1 5 1 IJ�j i ' C/ear/y, The Better Ce/ ar NetbWl* DIRECTIONS TO 100 FOOT MONOPOLE — LAURELTON, QUEENS GEORGE WASHINGTON BRIDGE TO GRAND CENTRAL PKWY. TO VAN WYCK TO BELT PKWY. EASTBOUND. GET OFF AT BROOKVILLE EXIT GO TO LIGHT AND MAKE LEFT. GO THROUGH NEXT LIGHT AND MAKE FIRST LEFT PAST A RAILROAD BRIDGE. GO DOWN TO EDGEWOOD STREET AND MAKE RIGHT TO 141ST ROAD, MAKE LEFT,THE BUILDING IS ON YOUR RIGHT ACROSS FROM TRAIN STATION. 365 West Passaic Street, Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662-3015 9 (201) 587-7886 o MAY 15 C/eal* The Better Ce/w/ar Netbwl*. / C C /US S 71A 365 West Passaic Street, Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662-3015 •(201) 587-7886 A ALLEN M. SMITH ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW 1.// 737 ROANOKE AVENUE. POST OFFICE BOX 1 240 RIVERHEAD. NEW YORK 1 1901 \ d � 516-727-3947 - - �� F"51 6-727-3950 MAY 1 41991 May 13, 1991 Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer Board of Appeals Town of Southold Post Office Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Appeal No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone Co. Dear Mr. Goehringer: Please find enclosed the following: 1) Directions to the 100 foot high Metro Monopole in Laurelton, Queens 2) Directions to NYNEX Monopole on Stewart Avenue, Nassau County 3) Technical information on wind loads of antennas. This submission leaves Mr. Baxter's stipulation not to erect structures in the fall down area as the only open item from the April 30th hearing. Very truly yours, An M. Smith AMA� Encs. cc: Lynn Lorimer TOWN OF RIVERHEAD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - DETERMINATION ----------------------------------------------- Appeal No. 91-33 In the matter of the application of LOCATION: 390 Route 25, Ltd. Route 25 Manorville, New York for a special exception to Chapter 108, Section 108-54 of the Code of the Town of Riverhead, requesting permission to erect public utility structures on the subject premises; also a variance to Section 108-22, requesting permission to erect a tower 150 feet in height instead of the permitted thirty-five (35) feet ----------------------------------------------- MRS. TORMEY: In the matter of 390 Route 25, Ltd. , the Board has reviewed all information and evidence brought before it and has heard all parties who have appeared either in favor of or opposed to the granting of the variance. Members of the Board have made a personal inspection of the subject premises . In addition, they have relied on their personal knowledge. The following findings of fact have been made: 1. The subject premises are located in Business CR and Agriculture A Use districts; 2 . Testimony was offered as follows: a. Metro One operates a cellular telephone system; b. In order to reach the travelling population, cell sites must be located close enough to each other to prevent lapses in communication; c. The use of cellular telephones is increasing rapidly; d. The subject premises are ideal for a cell site since, the elevation is higher than much of the surrounding terrain and there are no nearby structures to be threatened by the tower; e. The cell site antenna emits a nonionizing radiation at a level lower than ANSI exposure standards; f. Metro One is considered to be a public utility subject to the authority of the Public Service Commission; g. The tower would be 104 feet high; h. Approval of the tower has been granted by the Federal Aviation Agency; i. All power lines from the road to the site will be underground; J . There are other cell sites now in Riverhead but they utilize existing structures such as a water tower; k. The towers are constructed to meet and exceed all stresses, winds, or other such demands; 1. The equipment runs automatically so there is no appreciable traffic generated by the use; m. All applicable codes and requirements will be met; n. There are some plans for developing the adjacent property; this will include a warehouse; o. More land cannot be set aside for the tower; 4 . The Environmental Quality Review Board has recommended that this action be classified as Type II under the criteria of Section 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS&DETERMINATION • 7Lppearl No. 91-33 - 390 ate 25, Ltd. April 25, 1991 Page 2 Therefore, I move that the appeal of 390 Route 25, Ltd. , Route 25, Manorville, New York, for a special exception to Chapter 108, Section 108-54 of the Code of the Town of Riverhead, requesting permission to erect public utility structures on the subject premises; also a variance to Section 108-22, requesting permission to erect a tower 104 feet in height instead of the permitted thirty-five (35) feet be GRANTED in accordance with application as filed with the Building Inspector together with sketch as AMENDED subject to the following conditions : 1. All power lines going from the public road into the site shall be underground; 2 . No buildings or structures shall be erected in the area known as the "fall-down" area of the tower. Further I move that the recommendation of the Environmental Quality Review Board that this action be considered to be Type II under the criteria of Section 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act be adopted. following reasons: The appeal is granted as amended for the 1. Metro One is regulated and subject to control by the Public Service Commission; 2. The Tower will be constructed so as to withstand all possible stresses; 3 . The nonionizing radiation emitted from the cell site is less than United States exposure standards; 4 . No structures will be built in the fall down area; 5. FAA approval has been granted; 6 . Based upon this Board's review of the environmental assessment form, the recommendation of the Environmental Quality Review Board, and its own analysis, it has determined that the application is Type II and it has no environmental significance. MR. KELLER: I second the motion. MRS. TORMEY: May I have your vote, please? MR. WELLS ; Absent MR. KELLER: Aye MRS. KUCERA: Aye MR. KOBYLENSKI: Aye MRS. TORMEY: Aye The motion was duly adopted by a roll call vote of all members present. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a motion duly adopted on the 25th of April, 1991 and o the whole thereof. DATED:- PATRICIA S. TORMEY, CHAIRIgAN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS spy ALLEN M. SMITH y ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW \/ 737 ROANOKE AVENUE. POST OFFICE Box 1240 RIVERMEAD. NEW YORK 1 1901 / j5 1 6-727-3947 FAx 51 6-727-3950 May 7, 1991 Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer Board of Appeals Town of Southold Post Office Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Appeal No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone Co. Dear Mr. Goehringer: Again, please accept my thanks for the courtesies extended to me during this hearing last week. I have not forgotten the open items I am to supply to your Board. Those items are being assembled and will be forwarded to you as soon as possible. During my presentation to your Board, I mentioned similar applications before the Zoning Board in Riverhead. The Riverhead application on the north side of Route 25 in Manorville is analogous to that before your Board. I enclose Mrs. Tormey' s resolution of approval in that matter for your reference. Very� truly yours, Allen M. Smith AMS:TWS Enc. cc: Lynn Lorimer E _ MAY 14 1':;�1 O CJearry, The.8ettter Ce//u/ar�]/etwnnir. DIRECTIONS TO 1CO FOOT MONOPOLE - LAURELTON, QUEENS GEORGE WASHIDIGTON BRIDGE TO GRAND CENTRAL PKWY. TO VAN WYCK TO BELT PKWY. EASTBOUND- GET OFF AT BROOKVILLE EXIT GO TO LIGHT AND MAKE LEFT. GO THROUGH NEXT LIGHT AND MAKE FIRST LEFT PAST A RAILROAD BRIDGE. GO DOWN TO EDGEWOOD STREET AND MAKE RIGHT TO 141ST ROAD, MAKE LEFT,THE BUILDING IS ON YOUR RIGHT ACROSS FROM TRAIN STATION. 365 West Passaic Street. Rochelle Park. New Jersey 07662-3015 • (201) 587-7886 rOO ' 3eHd 3HO-ud13W Wildj S [ :3I 16 , 01 ht+W {- •. t: �� . ����. ��,� '' �. > � > �• "R .�1-3Fi i� �`` .�; �� � _ { .,,;, a � s _�. �: ks � , ryM_ .� �-� 9 mil. i s`:. a �- ,� ,,�• �! , . i r r � � 7 J My � `Z a / �A �A3� .� .�. d 3' l' 1 ( Y M'� M ' ,� t 1 � ,h, f. 'L� �'� 4,. ` . �� � �=� p yT T J" �Y V M•� T- � .�h'vy'[yg�f�f. yy�TC 'S-.� � � ,III c ..�.is- �.� X p :,,_ ..���._ iy:,v _ MAY a Ckar* The Better Ce//a/ar Netivar* Ce,)62 365 West Passaic Street, Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662-3015 • (201) 587-7886 990 ' 30dd 3N0-0.313W WOdd 02 : 01 16 , Of Adw - SWEDCOM CORP. Pn � April 17, 1991 MAY 14 1 Swedcom Corporation 851 Surlway Road, suits 300 Burlingame, California 94010 Phone: (415) 348-1190 Fax: (415) 348-1261 TO: Christopher J. Resavy (201) 368-7776 FAX: JOFO 91-288 FROM: J.Forsman PAGE: 1 (4) SUBJ: Wind Load CC: S-E KJAERSGAARD REF: PLS. FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME IF YOU HAVE ANy QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS MESSAGE. SQBJSC'P: y7lm LOADS g(q t►r.v a�i�,/„�L The ALP 9212 & ALP 110 11 antennas are designed to withstand continuous wind loads of up to 156 mph. (250 km/h) . and wind peaks of up to 190 mph. (306 km/h) . The manufacturer recommend a min. 3 .9 inch pipe for the above specified example. Please note that the antennas themselves will withstand even higher wind loads. However, in order to accept higher wind loads you will need a enforced mounting brackets in order to support these higher wind loads. Also please bare in mind that snow & ice (1.2 in. ) will increase the wind area about 10%. Please find the attached pages including wind load calculations. Sincerely SMSDCaK CORPORATION Johan Forsman 800 ' 39Hd 3N0-Od13W WOdd c :01 16 , Of 'lHW TeK 1 �• 'WIND LOADING * " ° ALLGON 9i Blad ( 2. WIND LOAD: The wind load F Is determined by; F ` gxAd [N] MAY 14 q - Dynamic Wind Pressure A d - Drag Area 2.1 DYNAMIC WIND PRESSURE is calculated as: W ` q • -Qx2-V7 [N/mi] - where the air density 4 - 1.25 [Nxsec2/m2] [with 150C and 101.3 kPa 0 atm)] And dynamic wind pressurs q - 0,625 x V2. Example. At V = 45 m/s (162 km/h), wind load F is given by: Cy F gxAd= 0.625xV2xA - 1 A.- 265.E x Ad [N] (As V Is the short-time mean value wind speed, a gust factor is not included). 3. SURVIVAL WIND SPEED: The majority of the antennas are rated at survival wind speed of V - 70 m/s (250 km/h. 1S6 mph). 4. ICE LOADING is with radial ice tha maximum survival wind speed will be reduced and calculated as: vice - 70 x (m/s] �Ad j.ce where Adice is the new drag area inCluding the ice layer.HPR 17 ' 91 13: 55 _ _ GOO ' 39Hd 3NC-0d13W WOd3 : c1 16 , of aNW ALL{.7fJ1Y _ ..• Blad 1 13) taloulatlon of the Drag Area and the Wind Load of Antennas I. DRAG AREA: 1 Ag - CXA, C - Drag Coefficient Ap - 'Protected' Area Note 1 Drag Areas (or Wind Forces) on open strukt,:res !s being estimafed by adding fngethar ccicutCted oracs (or farces) On individual members. 1.1 PROJECTED AREA for effective 'frontal area') is calculated simply with help of the mathemoticat ;ormLics. Example: 0 Aa= LxL) im2l 1.2 DRAG COEFFICIENT The evaluation of the drag coefficient for ❑n'enno structures is most complicated to determine. Sharp-edged members ore independent of Reynolds number effects (Re - VxD/u). but spheres, cylinders and all structures with rounded edges have drag coefficients varying with wind velocity (Re). f number and by surfaca roughness. The vclue que L%d are for Re fl For Re > 3.Sx1o', the coefficients cry widely. Exorple: For round antenna members, drag factor C - 1.2, and the drag area Is Calculated as: Ao = CXAo . 1.2xLxD [m2] 010 ' 39hd 3NO-Od13W WOd3 83 :a1 16 , 01 � dw f11 i. .``y� �, ! � �¢U•�r,�_ ��+5"j��'b��l;�•m '�' aa�a2�hW��1a l a� 1� k.]al�� �� �U 1 Gam, •• n\ ���`•'—.may R a b � ryxa6 _ i LL 1/04 A �l S I, It�;I a1Vl U a tl LL R .. •� � r .:r .�tA Yt 000 (' eta*[�-,ors un t �•_.� i• {1}'[IS' �A?'�4 ;�,A.�' , a: ',+� yr, .-. OJ • .� �� �U4Ul u Y�f` a tU1ltV'S- Y •,.1 f I�1 °.s ;.. as ✓ !.`.•a .0 a .3 p 171 _ OP LL �/� LOD >CE r ♦ 4� cam, r�a b , l �` . .r . . ... .. / a� Qf '�/`'S`k•S���\�.s•,•,a.- ���i-`[F'.oc�xr _ G��+�cE3�. p;//�t/ti✓5 c���9, + � }f�� � , :.�� _ 04. 17. 91 11 : 01 km * SWEDCOM CORP. P 0 1 April 17, 1991 M Swedcom Corporation 851 Burlway Road, Suite 300 Burlingame, California 94010 Phone: (413) 348-1190 Fax: (415) 348-1261 wwwwwwwwwwwvwwwwwwwwvwwrwwwpwwwwwww�awvwwwwwwwsssxwawwwwwsmw TO: Christopher J. Resavy (201) 368-7776 FAX: JOFO 91-288 FROM: J.Forsman PAGE: 1 (4) SUBJ: Wind Load CC: S-E &7AERSGAARD REF: PLS. FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS MESSAGE. e�wvavvwwwwwwv�vwv�wv�wv��v��vwvwvwwwvvvwwewavwvwwv SEMU=: WIND LOADS ON AID$ 9aiailia 11 The ALP 9212 & ALP 110 11 antennas are designed to withstand continuous wind loads of up to 156 mph. (250 km/h) . and wind peaks of up to 190 mph. (306 km/h) . The manufacturer recommend a min. 3 .9 inch pipe for the above specified example. Please note that the antennas themselves will withstand even higher wind loads. However, in order to accept higher wind loads you will need a enforced mounting brackets in order to support these higher wind loads. Also please bare in mind that snow & ice (1.2 in. ) will increase the wind area about 10%. Please find the attached pages including wind load calculations. Sincerely SWBDCOM CORPORATION Johan Forsman v r8 511 - WIND LOADING,~, " °"° ALLGON 91191 G' Blad f3) 2. WIND LOAD: The wind land F Is determined by: F . gxAd CN] q - Dynamic Wind Pressure Ad - Drag Area 2,1 DYNAMIC WIND PRESSURE Is calculated as: q . xV2 [N/m2] - where the air density 8 - 1.25 [Nxsec2/m2] [with 156C and 101.3 kPa 0 atm)] And dynamfc wind pressure q - 0.625 x Vz. Example: At V = 45 m/s (162 km/h), wind load F is given by: F = gxAd= 0.625xV2x Ad- 1265.6xAd [N] (As V Is the short-time mean value wind speed, a gust factor �v is not included). 3. SURVIVAL WIND SPEED: The majority of the antennas are rated at survival wind speed of V • 70 m/s (250 km/h, 156 mph). 4. IOE LOADING With radial ice the maximum survival wind speed will be reduced and is calculated as: vice = 70 xQ�d [m/s] 'ce / - where Ad,.-, is the new drag area including the ice layer, u RPR 17 ' 91 13 : 56 415 348 1261 PP,P . naq ALLavn - Blod 1 (3) Calculation of the Drag Area and the Wind Load of Antennas I. DRAG AREA: 15 Ad - CxAp N21 C - Drag Coefficient Ap - 'Projected' Area ♦r Note 1 Drag Areas (or Wind Farces) on open struktures is being estimated by adding tngether calculated arecs (or forces) on individual members, 1.1 PROJECTED AREA (or effective 'frontal area') is Calculated simply with help of the mothematicat formulcs. Example: v 0 Ap- LxD [mzj 1.2 DRAG COEFFICIENT The evaluation of the drag coefficient for antenna structures is most complicated to determine. Sharp-edged members are independent of Reynolds number effects (Re - VxD/p), but spheres, cylinders and all structures with rounded edges have drag Coefficients varying with wind velocity (Re). number and by surface roughness. The value quoted ore for Re < 3.5x105. For Re > 3.5x105, the coefficients vary widely. Example: For round antenna members, drag factor C - 1.2. and the drag area is calculated as: i Ad = CxAp - 1.2xLxD [m2] v 1108 i109 r sons or corporations charged with the duty to supply use rules col .otice to "public benefit' accrues sufficient to constitute a closure. public use. Montana Power Co. v. Bokma, Mont, the public with the use of property or facilities owned to open spt 457 P.2d 769, 772, 773. or furnished by them. Buder v.First Nat. Bank in St. to ns, and , in constitutional provisions restricting Louis, C.C.A.Mo., 16 F.2d 990, 992. To constitute a moderate in Public use .. A enter- true "public utility," the devotion to public use must [Went. the exercise of the right to take private property in special- be of such character that the public generally, or that Pudieity /pyu• virtue of eminent domain, means a use concerning [duce to cart of it which has been served and which has modesty; t'. the whole community as distand every m from f rticti-socie- ununity, accepted the service, has the legal right to deman commerce c lar individuals. But each and every member e, or be comps- that that service shall be conducted, so long as it is ty need not d equally interested in such use,object be aria[ion. continued, with reasonable efficiency under reasons- Pudzeld /wtid personally and directly affected by it; if the object is t is one ble charges. The devotion to public use must be of a corruptloi to satisfy a great public want or exigency, that is ppropri- such character that the product and service is avalla- freedom fro sufficient. Rindge Co. v. Los Angeles County, 262 �.ecessity ble to the public generally and indiscriminately, or any forest. U.S. 700,43 S.Ct. 689, 692, 67 L.Ed. 1186. The term cable of there must be the acceptance by the utility of public pueblo /p(yu) essor; , and may be said to mean public usefulness, utility, or franchises or calling to its aid the police power of the or advantage, or what is productive of general benefit. the inhabit, class of It may be limited to the inhabitants of a small or state. Unction. c special restricted locality, but most be in common, and not I'•ablic Utility Holding Company Act. Federal statute small settle to public for a particular individual. The use must be a needful enacted in 1935 designed to free local operating com- community See also one for the public,which cannot be surrendered with- games from the control and domination of absentee settlement out obvious general loss and inconvenience. A"pub- and uneconomic holding companies. it caused the ans. Puebi lic use" for which land may be taken defies absolute breakup of huge utility combines and sought to re- 12 F.2d 33: .mvssion definition for it changes with varying conditions of strict the operations of utility holding companies to significatio. if super- society, new appliances in the sciences, changing one or more systems whose operations are integrated used in the r public conceptions of scope and functions of government, and confined to a single state and states which are the indefin ency es- and other differing circumstances brought about by contiguous. 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 79-79Z. times appli (te rates an increase in population and new modes of commu- ing at a p: id other nication and transportation. Katz v. Brandon, 156 ?ublic vessel. See Vessel. well as to 1,admin- Conn. 521, 245 A.2d 579, 586. nouth v. S n of car- Public Vessels Act. Federal law which provides for Commur Patent law. "Public use" within statute providing libel in personam against the United States or a adobe,rest lower to that patent is invalid if invention was in public use petition impleading the United States for damages required more than one year prior to date of application for caused by public vessels of the United States. 46 United Sta to deter- patent is defined as any nonsecret use of a completed U.S.C.A. § 781-790. such dwell -ate. and operative invention in its natural and intended uw- Puer /py privately way. Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc. v. Moraine Public welfare. The prosperity, well-being, or conve- the age fi may sell Products, C.A.Mich., 509 F.2d 1, 4. In patent law, a nience of the public at large,or of a whole commum- sense, a g tablished public use is entirely different from a use by the ty, as distinguished from the advantage of an i social shed fr :ompany. public. If an inventor allows his machine to be used ual or limited class. It embraces the primary social Public by other persons generally, either with or without interests of safety, order, morals, economic interest, Puerility /p( compensation,or if it is,with his consent,put on sale and non-material and political interests. In the Bevel- intermedis for such use, then it will be in "Public use" and on opment of our civic life, the definition of "public ing in boy I by Con- public sale. welfare" mo- has also developed until it has been held to their age, cret, one bring within its purview regulations for the pro Pueri san[ d extent, Public utility. A privately owned and operated busi- Lion of economic welfare and public convenience. Is largely ness whose services we so essential to the general non sunt Hampton public as to justify the grant of special franchises for Publish. To make public; to circulate; to make known sa:0gwmn the use of public property or of the right of eminent to people in general. To issue; to put into circula- diy ssegg� domain, in consideration of which the owners must tion. To utter; to present (e.g. a forged instrument) blood of t )y which serve all persons who apply, without discrimination. for payment. To declare or assert, directly or indi- not of the :al courts It is always a virtual monopoly. rectly, by words or actions, that a forged instrument Paeritia /p r A business or service which is engaged in regularly is genuine. An advising of the public or making childhooc supplying the public with some commodity or service known of something to the public for a purpose. from birt' which is of public consequence and need, such as Estill County v.Noland,295 Ky. 753, 175 S.W.2d 341, the femai :.ed to act electricity,gas,water,transportation,or telephone or 346. See also Publication; Utter. rah service. Gulf States Utilities Co. v. State. Puffer. A A. telegraph P Publisher. One who by himself or his agent makes a which is civil law, Tex.Civ.App., 46 S.W.2d 1018, 1021. Any agency. thing publicly known. One whose business is the the price tte of the instrumentality,business industry or service which is manufacture and sale of books, pamphlets, maga- used or conducted in such manner as to affect the zines, newspapers, or other literary productions. puffing. A community at large, that is, which is not limited or One who publishes, especially one who issues, or as a repr ional and restricted to any particular class of the community' causes to be issued, from the press, and offers for Trade C( lain. For The test for determining if a concern is a public utility sale or circulation matter printed, engraved, or the aggerati( ne which is whether it has held itself out as ready, able and like. goods (r iblic; it is willing to serve the public. The term implies a public usually c measured use of an article, product, or service,carrying with it P.U.C. Public Utilities Commission. Term I facilities the duty of the producer or manufacturer, or one Park ; s long as attempting to furnish the service, to serve the public PUD. Planned Unit Development. In zoning, a device on by one or and treat all persons alike,without discrimination. It which has as its goal a self-contained mini-commum- s-D s-D mage" or is synonymous with "public use," and refers to per- ty, built within a zoning district, under density and 612, 617 Rigel 730 ring _T Rigel (ri'i%I;d'sPl), n. CAB. roil font"] A GrsL-magnitude star in merchant vessel of a neutral start on the Kish seas and make search zA:He¢too,e - the left foot of fire constellation Orion. to determine whether she low become liable to capture by violation of I concentric u rigege[(rig'"et, n. 1. One who Boss;also,one who erects scaffolding. the laws of war,as by carping contraband;-usually called in British -I.A;oat, fine whose occupation is fitting the rigging of Shins. b works riahx of vial ,or more properly,right of visit (or visita- I with a Bonn dero as naufics. One employed 'e assembling ad aligning aircraft. ticn)Ga deeereh. Hurt.&for 3. In building operations,a scaffold to protect passers-by from falling right of way or right!-of-wayr,n.;Pt.RIGHTS or BAS or RIGHTS- dos arc tea gbiec[s. uy-was, aLaw. A right of passage over another Dersgn'S ground. To movefa:. [r`. rig'gmg(-one),to 1. The rupee,chains,etc.,that support or raise b The laud occupied by a railroad for its tracks,esp.for its main line; 2.To form 4 :rid lower the masts and spars of a vessel,or serve to set and trim the also,the strip of land over which a public road is built,oil the strip rmg(Bin),r ails,etc. 2. Tackle;sear. over which ao electric power transmission line passes. c A precedence hrin+pa. Y1g'ging,n. Scot. A ridge or roof of a house. in passing accorded to oas wagon,car,tram,boat,etc.,over another, reverberatin Am,dentist.! either In custom or by statute. such a scum Rigg^s"d[s-eese'(,rwG Loiter J.Al.Riggs(1610-85), right triangle. A right-angled triangle. See TRIANGLE,IRISH. mons. 4. right Pyorrhea akin!.ris. xi ht (ri[) d'. CAS.Bohr.] 1. Straight;not crooked;as,a Baehr right whale. Any whalebone whale of the family whalers a the with his for line. 2. �[ipnghq erect from a base;having its is nc,pc.dmular to said by whalers to games,b so called because regarded ,o whalers as tie. words mop the base;not oblique;as,a riot l Pyramid. 3. Conformed to justice; wo k ief ar edgeccall be dobably named as the banalogand R.I.I n 2.To make carding with data,;upright-,- mw commonly of acts or things only. Two chief species can be distinguished: (D the bowhead fRaieena if by ringing 4. Fit,suitable;also,most convenient. 5.Archaic. Real;not spuri- mpslicelus7 confined to arctic seas;(2)the southern right whale TOPit, as,to s. 6. Not mistaken or wrong' correct; as,a right solution. 7. (Auhalaena glacialis)of temperate seas. To present l\'ell in body,mind,spirits,or the dike;in good condition;also normal rigid(riirid),adj. IL.rioidus,fr.risers to be still.] 1. Not pliant; n. 1.A c mentalb';sane. 8. Designed to be placed or worn outwanl;hence, sUH;unyielding;firm. 2. Inflexibly fixed or set in opinion,conduct1 2.Any tom .si al�y,most ornamental;as,the right side of a rug. 9. Designation, etc;not lux or indulgent;strict. 3. Precise and accurate;as,riBia bells. See or of or pert.to,that side of the body in man on which the muscular "A...i.e. 4.Aerorauhcs. Of an airship having the gas containers utterance it action is .,Bully inure Skilled the.o. the other side;-unposed to endosed within compartments of a rigid bull which carries the cabins, defiance. left;hence,naming a side which corresponds to the right side of the gondolas, motors,etc. See Anuilnv.-ri-gid'i•ty(II-iid'i•ti), e.- phone,etc.: bbdv. 10.a Designation an ansle bounded by rev.lines perpendicu- rigeid-ly,adv.-rig'idmess,n. ringrbolt'0 lay to each other;as,a right angle. See AHGLE,Idlest. b Deal...t- Syn.(1) See STAFF, ringtUoae'I ing a triangle one of whose angles is a right angle;as,a right triangle. (2) Rigid,rigorous,strict,Millions mean extremely severe or stem. bones of the See TRA10" 3hisl.-Syn-See c....oT.-Ant.Wrong. Rietd implies uncompromnsmg inflexibility; rigorous, imposition of ring dove'( -ado. [AS.rihp, 1. In a right,or straight,It.,;directly;hence, severities or hardships and,usually,their acceptance;strict,undeviat- having on c immediately; next; as, right before me. 2. According to right; Prig conformity to rules,standards,requirements,etc.;atriinevt,im- Pella riser. righteously;as,to act right. 3. In a suitable,desired,or fortunate positions which limit,curb,or cceme. turtledove. manner;well. 4. According to fact or truth;correctly. 5.Colluq. rig maole (rig'md-rid), n. IF., ragman all, fr. ME. rageman ringed(Ante Exactly;precied,;as,right here and now. 6. In a great degree;very; do acument}roll.] A succession of confused or foolish statements; ring;Eurmu extremely. 7. Toward the right hand;as,some turned right,some ambling talk. a wedding left. rig'ol(rie'b17,n. CF.rip-le Rroove.7 A ring:circle. Shak. rin'genl(IT 1. That which is right or correct. Specif.:a Adherence to duty; !lg'or Yig'our(rig'¢q,n. [GF.rigour,fa,.L.rigor,fa,.riper¢to be gape.) Ga obedience to lawful authority: freedom from guilt, Spmif.,Ethics, stiR.j 1. Rigidity; stiffness. 2. Strictness; seventy; harshness. mouth;as, that which is warranted by..,at approval,the ideal of moral vrapd- 3. An act or instance of severity,oppression,or cmel[y. 4. (rig'- ring ex :I ety. is Just ur nghtems action or dccisfon;justice;as,to Petition as [•q Borger,-sdr7 CL.7 Jfed. A convulsive tremor,as in the chill pre- lodges w a: a matter of right. .2. That to which one has a just claim;any power ceding a fever. 5.Phyaioi. A state of rigidity in organs,tissues,or An some Fah or privilege vested m a person by the law,custom,etc. 3.aThe side, cells,duringwhichthey are incapableoErespondin costimuli.-Syn. B pact,or the likee that is on or toward the right side(see RIGHT,adj., See mnTAcutxs. ring er,n. q. b The outward, or most finished,surface, as of a fabric. 4. Iig'ax;ism, ri om-ism (rig ea,ii m), n. Rigidity in principle or One that or Politics. Iv some legislative bodies of Europe (as in France),those g' identity,he practrcq strictness;austerity as of life.-rig or•isl ng'om•tat l-isU, tiles a.oNe members conger conservative r me rearats to[he right of theccup ing ties Sears; n.&Hell.-rig ax is lit,rtg'om-is'tie(-Ts LSc),adj. leader also, the conservative or monarchical croups occupying these seats; ri'go[ mgi'tis (rig ea,m3dHs; d'g"ea,,-got,. [L., rigor of death.] rainy body hence,political conservatives or monarchists collectively. 5.Finance. The rigidity of the muscles that occurs at death. A Dim'go to the stockimiders of a corporation to purchase proper- violation a tfonate amounts of a new issue of securities generally at par or at a rig ar-sus (rlet'er•us),adj. 1. Manifestins,exercising,or favoring, ring let(dr price below that Prevmhne in the market;also,the negotiable certifi- neon, s[ric4 2. Harsh; severe' as, rvporoua winter.-Syn. See esp.,a tome care evidencing such privilege.-by right or by rights. Rightly; RIGID.-rig or-omp y,adv.-[�g ar oua•neas,n. [ingluas tt justly;properly.-to rights. In order;as,to put a room to rights. Rigs dag'(rigz'dagib H. The legislature of Denmark. within the -v.t. 1.To bring or restore to the proper or..total position;to set tigs'dater(riez'da'Pr),n. [Dan.] =Rix-voLLAR. - Ring of the Aright;adjust. 2.To set in order;as,to right the room. 3. To Rig-Veeda(rig-va'dd),n. [Skr.Slovenia.] See VEDA, Alberich fa, do justice to;to restore rights to;to assert the rights of;also,to vindi- rig•wid'die Wil-Brld'1' riggtwidR), rig•wood98 (rig•wdbd'i; rigr- music drat care;ave.ge"as,to right a wrong. -F.i. To recover the proper or woteFT),adj. Scot. Kcaselfke;scrawny. bear this. natural condition or position;to become upright. riiks'daal'der(rile'daPdii,,collo,-dal'"er),B. [D.] =Rtx-DOLLAR. ring ooze!. 1' Va•bouP(,it'd-boutq,n. Also righPa;bo•lt'-face'. A turning Riks'dag'(rlketh gh,n. (SIG.] The Swedish legislature,or Parha- blackbird a directly about so as to face I.the opposite direction;also,the quarter eat. the breast. directly opposite;as,to turn to the rightabout.-right'a.boul',adj. rile (Fit),P.I. [See ROM.] Coiloq.,Chiefly U.S. To rail;specif.: rlag'aidee( &ado. a To make turbid or muddy. b To irritate;vex. a contest 0 right angle. The aisle bounded by two radii that intercept a quarter Piety,(ril'I),adj. Colloq.,U.S. Roiled;specif.:a Turbid;muddy. ring star or m a circle. Two lines forming right angles are perpendicular to each b Irritated;also,irritable. a political other. See ANGLE,Most. pridie'yo(rc•Iy1'v57,n. [IL] =eELtas,n.,6. ritt6-saes righf�n'gled (-engtg'Id; 2), V. Curtaining r iormins a right sill(rlh,n. C6G.rille,D.rit.] A very small brook. Marked w: angle or right angles; ris, aright---pled triangle. See IMANGLn, rill,title fall),n. [G.rite a furrow.] Astron. One of certain long ringewarm /!lull. narrow valleys on the moon. tasitr s di. right asceMion. Astron. The distance eastward or counterclockwise rill'et(r1Vep XU,B. A little rill fungi,and aloe the celestial equate,,from thefirstpoint of Aries totherteridian rim(dm) n. CAS.Boma.) 1. The bordegedge,ormarsinofa[hinR with..let passing through any celestial body. Abby. R.A. and AL., also w usually olsome[hing circular or curving. 2.Theouter Dart.fRnlgwl, rude(ringk (alpha). joined to the hub by the spokes;specif.,a removable outer band on an 1. A smog n�Ryhfe0ua(ri'ch6s),adj. [AS.Bohr win,fr.rihl right}wig wise,pro- automobile wheel,to which the tire is attached.-Syn.See BORDER. }rowhva e' dent.] Doing,or according with,that which is right;upright;equi- Rra'uaaG. 1.To furnish with a rim; to bowls,the v.a.; sAmsieD friend); table;asp.,ire¢from wrong or sin;vmtuous.-Syn.See MORAL.- border. 2. To run around the rim of;as,in golf,a putt that rimmed usually ail Ant. Iniquitous.-right'eaualy,ado. the cup. also,a con A ri,liou ce act n. 1. The quality to State of lily o righteous.igrig 2. rime(rim),n. [AS.Ivim.] White hastthoarfrost. -v.t. To cover rinse(Bins 1 A righteous act or quality. 3. The state or quality of being rightful with time. in al ar or just. rime,Antler,rime'sler. Vats.of Hostile,etc. w ding lc righter(Ca er),n. One who sets right or redresses wrong. ri'mose(ritmos d•mfis') dj. Also riotous(rimeGs7. [L.rimosus, used Iw rightful(-foul;41),adj. 1.Rare. Righteous. 2. Equitable;lust. it.rime chink.) Full of fissures or chinks. 3. Having a right or lust claim according to laws. 4. Belonging, yjrgry(rimtl),adj. Abounding with rime;frosty. prtpara[i- held,or possessed,by right or by just claim.-righttfubly,ado.- Yin(roil, Tingeing W righttful-neaa,n. H.sing.&pl. CJap.] A Japanese money of account,eauiv- hence,the right]rand. 1. The hand on one's ritht hence,right side. 2. A reli- .lent to Sio of a Sen. ri of(ri uC able uo indispensable Person. 3. The)rand of greeting;hence,wet- rind(rind)),n. [AS.,bark,crust of bread.] The bark of a tree,the 1. l\"ild r come;friendship. peel of a E'Bit q the crust of broad,or the outer layer of anything,as of 3. A vivid riahl'-hand',adj. 1.Situated on the right. 2. Right-banded. 3. aside of bacon. 4. hobo. Chiefly relied on;as,his right-land man. rin'denpesl(rin'd'cr•PIst),n. [G.,fr.rind PI.tinder,cattle}past lawful His right-handed(seeYmn. §2) adj. 1. Using the right hand habit- nest.] Veto,. An infectious disease of cattle,less often of sheep and private ob .ally or mare dully than tote 2) l 2. Of,pert.to,adapted to,an or done gouts,marked by diphtheritic inflammation of the mucous membranes, the Ifor;b wi in the right hand. 3. a Havi no the same direction or course as the asp.of the intestines. -v.t. Ti ring movement of the hands of a watch vicw.d from in front-clockwise;- (ring),n. [AS.bring.] 1. A circlet of metal;now,a small air- Riot Act. said of a twist,rotary motion,or Spiral curve as viewer(from a given let of precious metal to be worn oa a finger. 2. Ann circular band of d any two direction with respect to the axis of rotation. b Having a structure in- metal,wood etc.,used for holding,hanging,etc.;as,curtain rings;a the place, volvinR a clockwise direction;as,a right-handed screw. key mr a. •P it rim or border of a disk or wheel. 4. ir cut made if they do right-hand rape. Rope laid up and twisted in the same direction into r, amend the trunk or a limb of a tree. S. Any circular ling cap.) A s a,plain-laid rope. figure,ve object,a inofcircular aiiaroam,for a s of things or persons. 8.A. to his son. Politics. a A member of the right. San RIGHT, exclusive combination of persons for a selfish,and often corrupt,put- YPD[•otu righl'iat(dtRst),n. {1oae,as to control the market. 7. A racecourse,usually .,color; Wanton;A 4. b A conservative,royalist,or the like,in politics.-rightist, IrenCe,;m arena for competition or display. Speed.:a The arena of a rip (tip),t adj. circus horse show,etc. b An endosed space in whicb pugilists con- ngm.] right line. A straight line. test;hence,prize fighting. 8. An enclosure devoted to betting at a 2. on Oak r'ight'ly ado. CAS. rdiflnes.] 1. Justly; uprightly. 2. Properly; horse race;hence,Ihose who bet there,esp.the bookmakers. 9.The split(woo fitly. 5. Correctly:exactly. field of a contest,On.a political contest;as,be is in the ring for the torn apart rught'ness,it. Quality or state of being right;sped(.:a Slraightnss. governorship. 10.Rol. Any one of the rings(annual rings)seen stitches. b Rectitude; uprightness. c Correctness; accuracy. If Suitability; in cross sections of the stems of meet treys,r,rLhPr the annual growth To break e uosq'i.teness, of spring and summer wood. 11. Chem. An arrangement of atoms oop ris,lit r right or such. Mar.Law. The right of a belligerent to Stop any represented in formulas or models as a ring;a closed chain. Cf.BEN- made by r PT boat 683 pudendum PT boat (pa'tei No'). IF., patrol ImOvdo Coal.] U.S.Navy. A pub'li-cation(pubRi•ka'sii im n. [F. tr.1.. Onblico/,u,) 1. Act of motor torpedo boar Publishing,or state of being pnhlislwd;public notification. 2. 1'he used far coastal patrol i.-meg to the public of copies of a book,engraving or the like;hence, .ad convoy. See no- the business of Dimling, etc.,such copies. 3. That which is Pnb- TOR TORPEDO BOAT, lisped;esp.,any book,pamphlet,one.,offered for sale or to public an. pter'i•dol'ogy hcr'1'- -� rice. dSl'S•iT; D[d-; 581, - - Publiodomain. Therealmembracingpropertyrightsbelomingtothe dos,[fir. Pieria,t�fee community at large, subject to appropriation by anyone; epech., fern f -dopy.] - status u.Prolec[ed by copyright or patent. The ideate or Sim ly P r 6o., public house. In n general sense,any inn or hotel;esp.'In British us- of ferns.-ppter'i•do- age,any house where intoxicating liquors are sold by retail to be con- 0g'i•. (-dc'-I51'1•kirl7 Raj.-pter3•dol'o-gist(-AGPE•lTstl,n, rauncd on the premises. pter'I•do•phytN itSr'M1JS•fit';pVr'-),n. [(:r.pteri.v -ridoa,fern} Pub'Ibofst(pub'IT•Tst),n. A writer on,or one versed in,international -ph le.l Bat. Any of a phylum(Pteridopiwia)of plants,including law,or law of nations; hence,loosely,any writer,as a Journalist,on the ferns and their allies. Theyy represent the highest type of flowerless matters of public policy. plants.-pter'i•do•phyllie tire),pter'i-doph'ytGus (-doPi•tus), pub•Ile7dy(Pub•lis'i•tT),n. 1. Quality or state of being public. 2. t ady' a Advertising of say kind. b Informatioa designed to advance the iv- 1( Ptex'o•deo'tyl(tSr'S•dak'til;dt8r�;�),n. (Or.pteron feather,WV terests of a place,person,cause,etc.,usually appearing in Public Print. }daktploa finger,toe.] Any of an order(Pterosauna)of U'WV a Any matter which secures Public attention;also,the attention At mR reD[iles,existivR From the Lower]urassic nearb to[he close of the gained. Mesovaic. Then were destitute of feathers anal the sup.o+ting surface Pub'li•Cize(o`ub'IT-sim,v.E. To give Publicity to. of the wingsw samembrane which extended from the side of the body pub'lic•ly (pbb'Irk-li), ady. 1. In a public manner, openly. 2. along the arm to the end of the enormously develwed fourth digit. Through tire agency or consent of the Public;as,publicly managed Z Pter'o•pod(['eN3-noel;p'[er'-7,adi. CGr.pleroppo a arinq-footed,Er, utilities. pteron feather,wing}pone,podoa,[ooL7 Zool. Of or pertaining to pub'lic•ness,n. Quality or state of being public. a group(Pleropmfal,of 8astronod mollusks having the anterior lobes of the toot developed in the form of broad thin,winglike organs,with Puhlle xelatiens. 1. The activities of a corporation,union,eovam- which then swim at or near the surface of the sea.-pteroo•pod,n.- sent,or other oreaviza[ion in building avd maintaining somd and pte•xop'Otlaa(tF•rbp'E•ddn;o'tF-),adj.tr n. productive relations with special publics such as customers,employees, ptei'o•satu(-sdr),n. [Gr.pteron feather}sauros Il-ard.] A ptiro- or stoekho:ders,and with the public at large,so as to adapt itself to dacbl• its environment avd in[emret itself to society. 2. The state of such -plexaus. [Gr.pteron wing.] Bot.&Zoo(. A combining farm dent- activities or the art of organizing them. mg having iso many or such)wings,as in brachypterous. Public school. a In Great Britain,any of various schcols maintained Pter'ygofd(t&1r-gold-P'thl-;Slit adj. Mr. Eeryx,pleryBos,wins, by the community,wholly or partly under public control, or main- + Y tamed larseb by endowment avd not carried ov for Profit;specif. Bud tin -Did.] Anal. b"ignadng,Pert.to,or m the region of the commovb,avv of various select and usually expensive endowed schools in- ferior portion of the sphenoid bone of the vertebrate skull. It com- prises high give a liberal education or Drenare pupils for the universities. two pterygoid processes,each consisting of lateral and medial p In the livited J'[ates,Scotland,and British colonies avd dominions, pterygoid element, in front but diverging posteriorly. -n. Any an elementary or secondary school,now usually Eree,maintained bythe Pteo'goid a ement,as a muscle,nerve,or bone. local eovecnmev[al authorit ptis an(tfa'd.;tT•za.tl,n. [F,P'''Rne,heave,fr.L.ptieana peeled Y.-Pub'iio-school'(age Pron.,§2),adj. barley,bbarley water,fr.Gr.pEisanee,ir.plisaein to peel,Dusk.] 1. A Public servant. 1;Ai>w ot5cer or employee of a governmental body. decoction of barley with other ingredients. 2.Pimrm. Adecoction, 2. U.S. Arty individual or corporatiov,ass Dubli<utility,renderings as of an herb,containing little if any medicinal aamt. Cf.zrsase. Public service. Ptol'e•ma'iC([SYB•ma'Ib,adp'. 1. Of or pert.to Ptolemy,the ocura- Pub!!0 service. The business of suPPIYiM serve commodity(as oleo- pher avd astronomer who tlourished at Alexandria about A.P. 130. f tricity,RAS,water)or of providing some service(as transportation or 2. OE or Dert.[o the�'tolemies,Greco-Eg;'Dtian ru!ecs of Egypt from communication?to any or all members of a community,where exercise 323 B.C.m 30 B.C. o the calling involves some legal Privilege or a natural or virtual Ptolemaic system. Ast,.B. The system maintained by Ptolemy, monopoly. supposed the earth to be the fixed center of the universe,about which Pub.-service cor'podn'tion. A civil Corporation organized to the sun and stars revolve. The system was fivsib superseded by die render a Public service(which see). Copemican system. public spirit. A spirit inspiring a.interest in,and active efforts for, Ptol'e 11111'isl(-Tst),n. A supporter of the Ptolemaic system. the Public welfare. pto'Ineine(to'ma.;tS•man' now rarefy Co'mfl•en;2).S. Also ptog- politic utility. Also utility. I. A business mRa.biatiov,such as a maul CIt.piomaioa,Er.dr.ploma dead body.] Biochem. ABY of public-service corporation,Performing some Public service and subject a class of organic bases or alkaloids formed by the action of Putrefactive to special governmental regulation. 2.StoekEzchanpe. Usually pl. -§ bacteria ov vurogenous matter, Most are harmless;some may be The shares of public-utility companies.-Pub'lio-u•til'i•ty (.Be poisonous. Pron., 2),adj. ptomaine polsmdng. Poisoning caused by ptomaines, or by sob- Public arks Administration. U.S. A government agency(otB- stances once Supposed to be Ptomaines but now known to be specific dam,the Federal Emergency Administmtiov of Public Works)to Pro- bacterfal poisons I.spoiled food. vide employment through work on public Prolvers,created by act of DlNsls([o's1s;P'td!;gg),n. CNL.,fr.Gr.p:dss a falling.] Med. Congress,June 18,1733,and administered by the secretary of the in- The fallias down or pro Pes o any Part'specif„the dr..Ping of the ferior. Lwuidated me"n0,1044. .Poet eyelid,as from Paralysis of a muscle. Publish(,id'Ilsh),v.t. [OF.public,,Er.L.public.,.,p.blic.tum.] a ply'a•Ifn(ti'd•lin;P'tl'-b n. [Gr,puyalon spittle.] Biochcm. The 1. To make Public;to divulge;to proclaim. 2. To bring before the ntvlase of saliva in may. Public,as far sale-esp.:a To print aad issue from the press as a book, ptyy'a•lisim (-11z'm),n. [Gr. ptyaiiamoa.] Salivation, or excessive yea sP.D,r,etc. b U.S. To Put into circulation;as to publish coun- 9ow of saliva. Sys See Paper.-Sy See DECLARE.-pub'hsh•a-ble(-d b'0,adj. pub(pub),S. Brit.Slang. A public house;hotel o:tavern. Pub'Itslose(-'e),D. One who publishes;esp.,one who issues from the p¢'bOpty (.E'b"eMI) n. [F.or L.; F.pssbe,14,ir.L.pvbertas ir. press,and offers for sale,books,Periodicals,music,maps,and the like. get Pr v A.Bit.o The state or aual(ty owhich first l inateotbe- =,Rn' (PiohOon'), n, [See 1st POKE,n.] Big. Any of several get- I or.'A.Bi oHsprive; the period at which sexual maturity is American Plants Yielding a red or yellow Pigment;also,the pigment. .ached. The age of uberb is commonly designated Iegaky as four- Sp cif.,the bloodroot, teen Eor boys and twelve roc girls. Pnae(Pus),n. CF.,Er.puce a flea Er.L.puler pulicis.] Angler red pu•bart u-Is ut(Pu•bFrind Bit-db-1 nt),pu•ber'u•Ious P!Gs),adj. Bel. in hns,of low saturation aad low brilliance. $ ,not...-puce,adj. Minutely downy;covered with fine Pubescence. puck(puk7,n. [Also pook,fr.ME.pouke,fr.AS. uca.] 1.One of a pulling(Pu'beea7,n. [L.,Pubes(i.sense 1 a),fr. pubes adult.] 1. bass of evil spirts;a mischievous sprit,,specif. [Pap,],RON.Good- ] Anot. a The hair which appears upon the lower part of We hvoogastric fellow. 2. Adjsk of vulcanized rubber use din the.ameodechock", region at the age of Puberty. b The pubic region. 2.Bot. Pubes- Puok'a, pukka (puk'a7, adj. [!find. Pakba cooked, ripe, solid.] cence. Col(aa.,Ae do-Indian. God of its kind;genuine. S p! b cent(Pg4SZ5s'9.t''nt),adj. CF.or L.;F.,fr.L.pubeseens, Puek'er(Puk'eq,U.i.h E. [Free.It.P...has.] Tomntractordraw -enAia,ores.Part.of pubesce,e to reachh Duberty,,Rrow hairy.] 1. A,. or into folds or wrinkles. -n. A bulge,told,or wrinkle,made by riving at Puberty; characteristic of or pertaimng to this state. 2. puckering. Downy or hairy;covered with .it fine hairs.-pu-besIcence(4m; puck'er. (4),ad)'. 1. That Puckers easily;also,Puckered;ns,pnik- -a-),U. Pry cloth. 2. That causes P.ekecl.R of the mouth. pu'bi0(pd'liTk),adj. Anat. Pertaining to or designating the region of P.Ck7sh 1phkRsh),adj. [also cap.] Mischievous. the pubes,or the Pubis;as,the Mir svmphysis, Pnd'rifng(pdbd4og),n. [SI E:m'.ddinp,pedinp.] 1. A Piece of in- Pu'bis (pa'bTs),n.;pl.Pones(-bU). [NL. See eves.] Anal.& tcstine Eroded with e.asoncd chonned meat,or the like,and boiled. Zool. The ventral and amerim of the three Principal bones comprising 2. A dessert having flour or some other cerc9 as a foundation,with either half of the Pelvis. added eggs,mdk,iruiq sugar,spices,etc CL YoxRsniae ewmsc. pub'Bc (pi36'111), adj. [F., fr. L. 9 b1no. (after pubee adult),fr. Pudding stone. =cosy.uassaserE,n.,2. • yyoplicus,fr.p.pu(us people.] 1. of or pertaining to the People;re- Pnd'dle food"I,n. [�fE, pudde(, pod.(,dim.fr.AS. Dodd ditch, latins to,belonging to,or affecting a nation,state,or community at furrow.] 1. Avery smxll Dool of stmainR water. 2. Clay,or a mu - large;-opposed to private. 2.Open to common or general use,en- lure of clay End sand,kneaded or worked,when wep to render it im- �; joyevenq etc.;as,a public meeting. 3. Open to the knowlerke or pervious to water. v.t;-Du.n(-'Id);-Dust(-Qna�. 1. To make view of all;generally seen,known,or heard. 4. Froutzed fit activities, muddy;to muddle. 2. a To make puddle(sense 2)o.ldar or loam). i esp.ueoHrcial activities,carried on for or before the public;as,men in b To make impervious to livuids by means of D.ddle. 3. To subject PDubuc life. 5. Having a civil,or official,status representing the Pub- (iron] to the process of Puddling. 4.Apric. '1'o work white wet,as c;as,a public prosecutes. -n. 1. The RBBc,.i body of mankind, the sail in rice fields.-pud'dlet(-ter),n. or of a nation state or community;the People,indefnitely;as,the pud'dling 1phd'Ileg),n. 1. !lydrnul.En pin. a The process Of work- Eire,PURP,;arso,a Particular body of people;as,the reading ins clay,loam,pulverized ore,etc.,with water)to render it compactor public. 2.G.lbul.,Brit. A public house;an inn. impervious. b Puddle. See rwote,n.,2. 2. Metal. The process pub lie-address sys tem. An apparatus for broadcasting speech, of cOrve+ting pig iron into wrought iron or,now rarely reel by sub- oun ac,or other sounds to a large audience,as in an auditorium or out iectinq rt to heat..d frequent stirring in a furnace(puddling iantaee) of doors. It includes one or more microphones or other pickup de- in the presence of oxidizing substances. 1 vices,an audio-freq.eRv arvpBdey and one or more loud speakers. pud'doek(r5dibk). Dial.var.of PADDOCK,toad. Called aiso P.1,P.A. or p.aa system. pu'den•ey (pa'de..sl) ELL. pudenda it. pudens.Pres.part.of pub'lf•ean umb'll•kilm,n. LOF.publi.ain,fr.L.publicanus.] 1. oudere to be ashamed.]� Modesty;shamefacedness;extreme prudish. Bom.Antigg. A farmer aI the Public revenues;hence,.collector of toll. ass. 2. Brit. Scree+of a public Souse. ,pudendum(Pd•dEa'ddm),n.,pl.Pooepro,(-des). [NL.,need.of m. I i o AV A98ft VP Cellular nip,* p April 29 , 1991 Allen Smith Attorney and Counselor at Law 737 Roanoke Ave Post Office Box 1240 Riverhead, N. Y. 11901 Subj = CPCN coordinate Clarification The coordinates (latitude and longitude) that appear in the New York CPCN for Metro One reflect the original system design. Between the time the original design was filed with the State of New York and system went into service many changes were made in the Final design. Four years elapsed between the time the original system design was filed with the FCC and the system went into commercial service. As a result of that timeframe many changes were made due to the availability of sites and finally, contractual obligations to coverage requirements by the equipment vendor. The resultant approval of the CPCN from the State of New York stipulated which counties Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One had "Utility" status. Those counties are Rockland, Putnam, Westchester, Bronx, New York, Richmond, Kings, Queens , Nassau, and Suffolk. Metro One retained all rights to make system design changes or enhancements at any time that benefits its customers. If you should have any further questions regarding this subject, please don't hesitate to call me at ( 201) 587-7952. Sincerely, Christopher J. Resavy Engineering Manager - Systems Implementation CJR:cr cc E. Weingart File 365 West Passaic Street, Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662-3015 •(201)587-7886 Page 31 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. Appl. No. : 4022 .,,Applicant(s) : Cellular Telephone Company Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-108-4-11 . 3 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for coming in, it' s pleasure meeting you gentlemen. Are you going to leave? MEMBER DINIZIO: Yeah. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are you going to sit here or are you going to leave? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I 'm going to leave. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. MEMBER DINIZIO: I just want to make a public statement that I work for a company that perhaps could compete with you gentlemen so I would like to beg off if you don' t mind. I 'm going to leave the room. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a declaration and in the file, also for Mr. Smith that I have a Metro One Telephone. Do you have any objection to that, to my sitting on this hearing, please voice your opinion at this point. The Chairman opened the hearing at 8: 48 pm and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties and I have a copy of a plan produced for Metro One indicating the one story framed barn that presently exists and the concrete building as it presently exists and we will ask Mr. Smith if he would like to continue. MR SMITH: Thank you Mr. Chairman for the record my name is Allen Smith, I appear as counsel to William D. Moore the Attorney of record in this matter. Mr. Moore has had the good fortune of having the local Rotary Club sponsor his trip to Europe and God bless him. He even took his wife who is a rotarian and their baby of less than six months I think or So. For the record this evening, I have with me to address various aspects of this application, Christopher Resavy, Glenn Witte both are engineers with Metro One and both of which I have supplied the resumes for, to you. Mr. Ronald Petersen is an engineer with AT&T and can and will as this matter progresses address any radiological effect questions. Mr. Peter Papay is a licensed engineer who deals with the Page 32 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: issues of the pole, its ability to withstand wind and the like. Mr. John Nickles is a local appraiser in this particular matter and I will introduce his opinion letter in a moment, relative to the effect that the proposed use on the neighborhood. And lastly Roger Grutzmacher is the architect who will address those issues attending to the visual aspects of the proposed use. I will admit readily how provincial I am relative to Metro One and/or Cellular Telephones. The first time that I became aware of the importance of Cellular Telephone was about four or five years ago. Some of you know I 'm a member of the Red Hook and Ladder Company of Riverhead Fire Department. As you may recall, all of us in the fire service were called to a rather large brush fire during the tenure of Chief Richard Gadzinski when the Pine Barrens burned between Eastport and Riverhead. It was at that particular time that they called out our truck 629, which had a Metro One type device in it, in that all the trucks that were responding to the area were unable to communicate, because everybody was stepping all over everybody and on both of the channels that were available to us. You may know that the fire service moved a comparable unit to 629 on the west end of the fire and in fact that particular fire in our locality was coordinated through the use of the cellular telephones because our ordinary radio communications were so messed up they were ineffective. That experience in talking to these gentlemen and the equal at Metro had been duplicated for instance in the Avianca crash. The plane took down all the standard land lines that were available and in fact at the varying units responded and they cluttered the airways yet again, but for the fact that the citizens in that particular area and the chiefs in Nassau County generally have cellular telephones in their chief cars communications was handled in that particular regard. Another particular example was the San Francisco earthquake that we all witnessed during the World Series. Again if there was not a cellular network to coordinate the emergency response there would have been no response because of the severing of all cables on the ground. I have on occasion used car phone, as maybe some of the rest of you have, calling fires. I recall calling in a signal 13 at the Walsh asphalt plant one day. The point of all of this is to say that although this technology is coming to Southold it is not a new technology. It is very much a cart of the utility system both of our area and San Francisco, Nassau County and other places . I find that in the examination of the fire safety manual for the county of Nassau that most of the police in Nassau county and the ambulance service in Nassau County have cellular now. I know that the wading Department has cellular in every chief ' s car. In fact as you may know the 911 system is integrated into the Metro service, Page 33 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont' d: such that as we travel up and down the road with our cellular telephone we do not have to know the particular phone number for the Southold P.D. if you will or this tower up, we would simply punch in 911 and we would end up with Southold P.D. Of I suppose the last point in dealing with where this technology is and how integrated it has gotten into our society is to point out how it has become part of commerce and industry of our area. of one of the customers of Metro One is one of the off-shore boats. As you may know he cannot use his ship to shore to radio for the purposes of commerce, because it violates the rules among other things and if he did he would populate the airwaves to the detriment of everyone else. This particular captain uses about $500 a month in services from Metro One. Essentially coming off the towers in the south fork, so that he knows the market, where he should bring his boat in with his catch, when to bring it in, things of that particular nature. Which he cannot do with the ordinary ship to shore radio. All that being said, I have one tape to show you should you wish, and I 've raised the one issue that brings these people here as exemplified by the coverage issue. At the moment if I were to get into my car this evening and see an accident on the North Road and I dial in 911 the chances are that I would not get a local police station. I would bounce over to Connecticut. There is a gap in service with reference to the Metro One system, this is within their franchise area and that is why they are here and that is why they are building a tower at the police station in Peconic and they propose to build this tower in Mattituck. I have a tape, it' s not a good tape, I can save it for the end, I can show it now. What it shows on the tape, if you are in fact interested, is a testimony of why a police chief in New Jersey, whose radio tower was struck by lightning and he tells you as one municipal board to another how much more in fact that he had cellular capacity. He would have been out of service and out of touch with his cars, but because he had cellular and the redundancy that it provided to his vehicles that he was able to function. The other one that you see is the technology that' s coming into the fire service where a particular town in New Jersey is installing the Metro One service with fax machines, such that as we get an alarm and we respond on our trucks that the fax, there will be pre-plans, say the old Perkins Motel in my community such that pre-plans will be fed into the fax machine by the dispatcher and they would turn out on the trucks as we responded to the alarm. Lastly, on this particular tape, and again I ' ll play it if you wish or I ' ll hold it till the end, is the testimonial by the people in East Hampton, who are doing very much the same thing that the Town of Southold was doing with Metro One at the police station in terms, in Southampton they've already done it, • • " . Page 34 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: where Metro One has in fact built a tower and has brought the police communications up onto the tower. I suppose the last thing that I would say in that particular regard is not a fire service thing. It relates to the, I think it' s called A.L.S. System, that is now part of our ambulance service and is becoming more a part of our ambulance service, advanced life support system. As those E.K.G. ' s and the other more sophisticated monitoring systems come into the ambulances as our E.M.T. ' s and A.M.T. ' s respond from areas such as Southold and Riverhead to Good Samaritan Hospital, I think you understand that all of that telemetry is not done on the radio wave it is done over cellular, just simply because of the capacity and the refinements that cellular technology affords as opposed to the standard emergency treatments we simply operate. The issue before you this evening has been properly defined by the chairman and by Mr. Moore and I 'm to deal in this first instance with the special exception nature of the application. Many of us know Judge Stark, who' s probably one of the better or best judges that we have in Suffolk County, and is someone that grew up here in this particular community and as Mr. Moore has provided to the chairman a particular decision where Judge Stark writes about the special nature of dealing with a public utility structure and a zoning ordinance. He wrote, public utility structures serving the entire community have historically been recognized as reasonable and proper uses in all types of use districts, because of the technical and engineering requirements particular to such structures in the area serve. That' s the whole issue that' s before us on the special exception nature. I have for you, I will hand out your decisions some years ago, with reference to the AT&T towers in the community. As the Board Members will note, one of the Board Members was in fact present during these particular decisions, at the bottom of the first page that I have handed up to you, Mr. Douglas recites, that we couldn' t find any reason to attempt to obstruct you in the communications here, we have very strict rulings in fact to go by in the State of New York rulings on public service utilities, etc. There were two hearings that particular evening. On the last page that I have handed up to you, Mr. Douglas immediately prior to that particular resolution. Again I make a statement that we are controlled very strongly by law and public utilities with that as our guidelines. I will again make a motion, etc. So, although I am dealing somewhat with a new technology in terms of the cellular aspects of what is before the Board this evening, it is not an a new issue to this particular Board. There is a certain logic that is inherent in dealing with utilities in this particular regard as it relates to zoning. I suppose the easiest example would be to deal with electric utilities and Page 35 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: if in fact height restrictions, architecture review and things of that nature were to apply in the strictest sense to electric utilities, in some of your more restricted residential zonings, we could not supply people with electric utilities, the sewer, water, things of that particular nature have this special kind of special exception, if you will, such that the boards state, this Board in particular have granted the right under the ordinances to examine the particular application and make a determination on the particular application whether or not there is an adverse effect on the environment, neighborhood, all the criteria that' s spelled out in your special exception prevision. The last thing I would say with reference to the public utility issue is this, that I have for you and I will introduce later on if it' s of interest to you, some of more precise definition of the longitudes and latitudes that are called out in licensing the papers that you have been given by Mr. Moore, but in fact these people are compelled as a matter of law to serve their franchise area. They and NYNEX in this particular instance. There are two franchisees, if you will, for the Town of Southold. If it were true that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold were to deny to NYNEX or to Metro One any right to engineer if you will, these towers again they must do so considering the neighborhoods, the effect of the tower and all the rest of that. You could as a local zoning board or a local zoning ordnance frustrate the franchises that have been given by the public service commission of the State of New York to this entity and to NYNEX and by the F.C.C. to these two entities to serve this particular area and I suppose I don' t have to give you a citation necessarily but such a result might be contrary to either common sense or to the federal system under which we work. All that being said I would introduce the architect and I have asked him to please depict for you the existing conditions and as the site will appear with the tower. MR GRUTZMACHER: Good evening. My name is Roger Grutzmacher for the record, I 'm an architect, these drawing are prepared under my supervision in my office. As part of the, I' ll keep the presentation brief, I ' ll just go quickly to where we' re locating the tower in a brink, show you some exhibits that show existing and proposed conditions. Metro One primarily needs two items in order to operate. One is a relatively high spot in which to locate their antennas, in this case we are proposing a monopole tower, the other is an equipment room, to house their equipment which is an accessory structure for that antenna. In this particular site we' re locating both of those facilities, the tower and the building to the rear of this one story framed building which is • • Page 36 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A MR GRUTZMACHER, cont'd: located toward, if there is a front yard, certainly toward the front yard of what we' re proposing. Access to our facility in the rear which is a modification to an existing building, it is not a new building, we' re merely going to give it a face lift and recondition the interior to meet our purposes. The actual building is shielded from the front by this existing frame and access will be by a road toward the rear, we' ll also be introducing two parking spaces back here. We don't really reed a lot of parking because visits to the site are on a nature of possibly two times a month to check equipment. The actual room itself is unmanned. I think at this point I would like to show what this existing structure looks like currently and what we propose to do to it. The building, it' s about 720 square feet, it' s a block structure. It is shielded by some natural vegetation and landscaping. The building, structurally sound is a bit lacking ascetically certainly, we do also have to put a new roof on this structure. We are going to give it a total face lift and I ' ll show you what I mean by that. This is a rendering of that same scene. Let me put them next to one another so you can really see it. The, what we would do to just quickly go through it, the building we know it' s structurally sound, we would sound the block and make sure that .it' s cleaned up and which then we could apply the new stucco finish which is here. Colors, it' s very flexible, we would chose an earth tone brown because it seems to fit in with the area a bit more appropriately than some thing that might be a more in the primary colors or what have you. As I said it' s an existing building, we will not be extending it at all. We are merely giving it a face lift. The building to operate it requires no sewage. There is no water to this site, the utilities that we do bring into the site is telephone and power, electricity. That is all. And it is brought in through ground lines, it would be buried, there are no overhead lines here that we would be adding or bring into the site. Let me show you now the mono-pole. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to see these, we could move the, what I ' ll ask you do is just move the easel back a little bit. Maybe you want to change your set over to this side. MR GRUTZMACHER: Okay, as I mentioned there is an existing, the two existing structures. This is our equipment room which we' re are proposing the face lifting for. This is the existing barn structure towards the front and this is the proposed 100 foot mono-pole. I believe it' s actually 102 feet. Chris is that correct? Okay. Give me an idea, this is pretty accurate because we've transposed it onto an actual Page 37 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR GRUTZMACHER, cont'd: photograph of the site, we've rendered on the new finish here and we've located the mono- pole to scale. To give you an idea of scale, trees in the background are in the area of 45 to 50 feet in height and as I said the mono-pole is about 102 feet in height. Both structures are located to the rear, again, I ' ll give you some dimensions on the mono-pole at the base it' s about, and Pete I guess you could bail me out is this an eight foot base mono-pole? MR PAPAY: The actual base of the steel mono-pole itself would be 37 inches in diameter. But the concrete foundation will be in the neighborhood of six to eight feet. MR GRUTZMACHER: The platform at the top is approximately, it' s three sided, it' s a triangle, each side would be about 12 feet in width. The actual size of the antennas of which there will be nine mounted on the top about four feet in height. If you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have questions Bob? Do you want me to go, okay. There will be some lighting on top of this? MR GRUTZMACHER: That' s, we could check into that. METRO ONE: Do you want me to address that now or? MR SMITH: We' ll get you up in a second I ' ll answer it now and then we' ll answer it again. The lighting is subject to an F.A.A. approval the consulting engineer, not this particular gentlemen but he can testify to it. It says that there shouldn' t, the striping and lighting aspects are not required but this gentlemen will address that in a moment. Whatever the Board does as in the other applications that I have in the east end, I will produce for you and I would have to in any event before any building permit would be issued the F.A.A. determinations relative to lighting and striping if any. They don' t believe at this particular moment that it would be required. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Because of height Allen? MR SMITH: Height is one of the considerations where they actually file with the F.A.A. and different places they don' t have to. For instance, the one that' s somewhat higher nearer the Banks is not going to be particularly lighted because they don' t, it does not effect aviation. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What is the width of the actual Page 38 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: antenna on top of the mono-pole? MR GRUTZMACHER: It' s approximately 12 to 14 inches in that range. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And what is the length? MR GRUTZMACHER: Four feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Four feet total? MR GRUTZMACHER: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Four feet in height? MR GRUTZMACHER: In height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay what is the width this way? MR GRUTZMACHER: Well the whole triangle, the platform, there are three of those antennas mounted on each triangular leg. It' s about twelve feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are there steps leading to that antenna in anyway? MR GRUTZMACHER: What' s usually located on mono-poles are they' re little struts that run up the pole. If Pete, Mr. Papay the structure engineer, he' s more familiar with the actual tower design, but generally the workmen that come out to maintain and actually install the antennas have these legs that they will put in as they go up. Some are located on, but to a certain height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So no one will climb. MR GRUTZMACHER: That' s correct. And the compound we' re going to secure as well with a fence around the entire perimeter. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Have any of these been constructed in an area that we could visit within the next couple of weeks? MR RESAVY: The closest mono-pole we currently have constructed is Laurelton which is right out the JFK Airport. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right outside JFK? MR RESAVY: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would it be easily, could I just have Page 39 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: your name for the record. MR RESAVY: Christopher Resavy. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Would it be easily depicted if I was to see it bearing in mind that there are many antennas near Kennedy Airport. MR RESAVY: Yes you can easily depict which side it is. We can give you exact directions on how to get to the location. That particular pole I believe is only 75 foot and the F.A.A. has requested we put a marked red light on the top for observance features only. It' s not a requirement, but they've asked us to do that as a courtesy. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Very good. Thank you. Do you have any thing else that you'd like. Great thank you. MR SMITH: Mr. Resavy, this young man is the engineer for, together with his comrades on my left who can explain to liberal arts students like myself how these things work and why you need one in Peconic and you need one in Mattituck and you need another in Northville and one over in Montauk. It is somewhat technical on, I thought about reducing it to writing and trying to submit it to you. It just would go on forever. I 'm going to let him try to explain to you how this system works and why they have multiple sites and probably just try to answer your questions there. MR RESAVY: For the record my name is Christopher Resavy, I 'm the engineering manager for Metro One. If I can I want to use some exhibits to try to give you an idea of how the cellular works. The map that' s located on this board is the entire area that Metro One is licensed to serve from the F.C.C. The areas of New York that are outlined here is what' s granted to us both by the F.C.C. and the New York C.P.C.N. to give you public utility status in the State of New York. Cellular is based upon the ability to reuse frequencies and some of you are aware, mobile telephone service has been in operation for many, many years. The first service actually started in 1946 with the Hobockin police, the first ones to use mobile radio as a form of communication. From that it has grown to a mobile telephone service that you needed an operator, operators assistance in order to place a call. A few years later, that was replaced with an automatic type system with one transmitter, located with very high power, with one receiver. From that you could have unlimited amount of users on, because I believe at that time it was only four channels still and that was in the early fifties. From that grew the next generation of mobile Page 40 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY, cont'd: telephone service in which there was still only one high powered transmitter but the service was enhanced to twelve channels and at that time it was also invoked or developed in a point that there was multiple receiver locations because what they found was although that high powered transmitter could get out long distances, the weakest link between the mobile and that transmitter was the received passed back to the people, so they set up a system of multiple receiving locations so that the conversations could be a lot clearer than what they were in the past. Although in about the mid sixties Bell Labs, Motorola, spun the idea of cellular and that' s where it really started and that was the ability to reuse frequencies in a multiple pattern over and over and over again. While working with the F.C.C. , and going through many, many, many years of development and trials and measurements and things that they were trying to do, lone about the mid seventies the F.C.C. granted Bell Labs permission to do trials in a few areas of the system, of the country to get some actual measured data in a much unused, unutilized frequency ban. That frequency ban correlates to what used to be on a lot of the older T.V' s and that was channel 67 to channel 83 on your UHF dial. If you remember those two step dials that we used to have, I still have one in my house although I can' t tune into a frequency I don' t know why. Selectively of the channel I guess. They were re-allocated later to cite. The trials that I mentioned, they were done I think in four parts of the country, one was in Newark, Chicago, L.A. , and I believe some place in Texas, I'm not sure were. But from that cellular was born in 1976, where they actually started to invoke and develop all the specks and everything else that goes into what we have today as you know is cellular. I was lucky enough and I 'm not, I 'm luckily still a young person I think, but I was lucky enough to get into cellular back in 1981, so I got to learn from some of the best designers and engineers of this system, how this stuff actually worked. To give you a little idea, they went through numerous generations of what kind of polyarn was the most regular reuse thing to use, they tried squares, they tried pentagons, hexagons, and it came up that one of the Bell Labs engineers actually wrote a paper on beehive study that he had preformed and he was doing something for the military on structural support. Well it happened that one of the other engineers in Bell Labs was working on Cellular, so that pattern that he had put together and it was so regularly shaped that after a little bit of work with that it was then determined and accepted that a hexagon would be the most regularly reused shape to use for cellular. From that, you can reuse frequencies in a regular patterned shape. We have depicted here on the board is a hexagon in many forms abutting each other and as you can see Page 41 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY, cont'd: they can be readily reused. What we currently have is a situation on the North Fork of Long Island where we have a new site that we are beginning construction in Southold and Peconic, the proposed location here in Mattituck which would be our missing cell site and some of our existing locations. We go back to the ability to reuse these frequencies, this missing cell location here would be the Mattituck site. This could be the site down on the bottom here, site 71, down here site 72 could be out here and this could be Riverhead out here which by way is our water tank, it just happened to fall that way in the plan. The ability to reuse frequencies comes in a regular type pattern, in our particular system, it' s like a chess move, the ability to read it' s frequency and that' s a knight move if anybody remembers that. The knight takes two steps up and one over. So, the same type of example here, one, two over, these two locations would read it' s frequencies. With this site missing, this signal is stretched into this area, thus stretching it' s ability to reuse its frequencies. This guy has a greater potential for interference in here and if anybody is familiar with C.B. ' s, when C.B. ' s first came out with 23 channels, everybody could use it with very readily ease because it wasn' t a lot out there, but as it got more and more popular people got accustom to their own home base channel as it were at the time. If it was channel two, then you had two people trying to talk in the same general location apart from each other, usually the conversations got walked on and you couldn't hear that party that well. Cellular uses the same kind of concept. We have to keep separation distance involved in. That' s how we can't come up with our regularly spaced intervals for the. south side so we currently have located here. It' s done by process of grids placed over the map from which we develop a search area that we look and .we search for. Now we had three criteria for a cell site, availability, owners willing to deal with us, and that the site fits the criteria that we need for coverage. In particular the location that we have picked in Mattituck we were able to find those three criterias. We were able to get a piece of property that was available to us, in a zone that was pretty amenable I guess to our uses, and we were able to get a landlord that was willing to deal with us and the best case, which was the last one that worked for us. So that' s kind of the particulars about this location. MR SMITH: I 'm going to steal a little bit of his thunder and I 've worked on this a little bit. What he' s leaving onset is the glass half full or half empty. Is that as you begin to move the tower to the west, he begins to fall out of these grid patterns that he has described to make the system as he moves to the east he has a similar problem. Page 42 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: As a consequence in the area where they need the town, this is within the area and as he has probably described the issue. Again I suppose the one thing that' s left unsaid is that what makes this work as the gentlemen from AT&T will say in a moment is that the wattages, the power involved in these things are relatively low. They don't bleed over from one area to another. You could probably make a tower in Orient or Montauk big enough to reach all the way back into the city, but it would step on everything in between and the system would be infected. The reason that this works is that these are very low power sites and that actually the signal is transferred by telephone line from station to station and that' s what makes it clear. True? MR RESAVY: Very true. MR SMITH: Why don't you let these folks ask you questions. MR RESAVY: Do you have any questions? Let me clarify the F.A.A. point about light that was brought up earlier. We initially filed this location with the F.A.A. and they came back and gave us a ruling that lighting and marking would be required. We reviewed that we questioned why, because there are particular rules that apply to part 77 for flight aviation patterns. So we contacted a consultant that we use, Mr. James Hennesy a number of years ago was the head of the F.A.A. and for many years ran that organization. We gave all the particulars of this location to him for his review and his opinion. After a very careful review and some contact with the F.A.A. it is his opinion that we do not need lighting nor marking. On our behalf he has re-filed this location with the F.A.A. , he is right now seeking an interpretation of the initial ruling that they gave for the location and we expect that within the next two weeks to thirty days it takes anywhere in between that to get the final answer of the F.A.A. and once we have that we will submit that to the Town, but at this time it is Metro One' s opinion that we will not need lighting and marking. As in the case with Laurelton if the F.A.A. wishes us to light this for safety reasons without the marking we will do so. MR SMITH: That way we will supply that in the contents of the lights consideration. MR RESAVY. And that would be the flashing red lights on the top. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: At all times or only during night time hours? Page 43 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: Whatever they specify for us. That is specified by night we must adhere to it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I tell you the reason why it concerns me having flown in several small airplanes, that is a circling area and having the benefit of having a private airport in the great hamlet of Mattituck, the tower I would assume at being 104 feet in height could be a hazard to pilots, I have not had the luxury of flying, either flying in or flying out of Mattituck either in early hours of the morning prior to the sun coming up or to the sun going down. But those are the times that most concern me. MR SMITH: Certainly if the Board wanted to call out something more than the F.A.A. would require, we would be happy to do so. Certainly we can' t do less, I guess is what I'm saying. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I understand. Okay. Yes, question? (UNIDENTIFIED) : Bill and I live right across the street from the Baxter building and the flight of the planes going to Mattituck Airport is only one block away from our houses. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I know the feeling. There are many more questions we are going to ask here so, you know, and it appears that these gentlemen and ladies have brought a substantial crew of people here so. METRO ONE: We' ll try to answer as many questions as we can. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Believe it or not it' s still a fairly early hour for this Board. Thank you. MR SMITH: I reduced Mr. Nickles' statement to writing, it will make things go a little faster. MEMBER VILLA: Before the engineer sits down I have a question and that question is why do you need the height of 102 feet when you know you said the one in Kennedy is like 75 feet? MR RESAVY: I believe the Southold tank tower is 125 feet, the proposed location out here in Northville is 100 feet and each of the locations here we are an existing 300 footer here that we' re at 150 feet in Southampton, We' re on the Hampton Bays water tank and believe our. MR SMITH: I believe he' s asking why 104 here. Page 44 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: I 'm getting to that. According to the topology, we need vary and different heights, we did actual drive tests in this location to determine the lowest height that we can go for this location and it was evaluated that with the proposed location in both Northville and Southold, the Peconic police station that the 100 foot, 102 foot overall height is what Metro One would require to provide the service that we need to provide to our customers. MR SMITH: The next witness is Mr. Nickles. As I stated to the Chairman when I began to a degree that I could pre-file some of this testimony I would do so, Mr. Nickles is present, the aspect of the special exception that he testifies to is the effect. The letter reads in closing, it is my opinion that the mass would not have any measurable effects upon the neighborhoods fair market value beyond the effect of the existing L.B. use or future L.B. uses as allowed under the Southold Town code. In the brief, that was presented by Mr. Moore, he goes into some detail in mentioning the other possible uses of the Baxter site, Mr. Baxter is in fact present should there be any question about the existing structures and the fact that they remain vacant for some period of time and have been used for commercial purposes. If there are any questions of the Board of Mr. Nickles I can have him answer those questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no specific questions of Mr. Nickles at this time. I do want to address a question to Mr. Baxter later. MR SMITH: This brings us to two of the health issues. Mr. Petersen' s resume has been given to you earlier, he is an expert with AT&T Bell Labs and the, he goes into rather great detail, I 'm not sure that I understand a great deal of the detail, but in the closing paragraph, closing phrase of this particular letter. The proposed Mattituck Cellular Radio installation will not present any health problems to members of the public. He is of course referring to the nature of radio waves and light as the previous engineer stated to the Board this frequency and the strength of the signal is the same as was used in our T.V. sets some years ago so I don' t know that this is an issue. But if anybody has a question, I ' ll have Mr. Petersen answer the questions as health effects and radio waves. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: My only concern is that of disruption to any particular devices that might exist in the local houses around the antenna site. MR SMITH: That' s an engineering question that this young man Page 45 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: can address. MR RESAVY: I can address that. We can provide a document to the Board that we' ll give Allen Smith. We've got a letter from the F.C.C. in charge of the New York area which encompasses all of this location that the five years that Metro One has been in service we have not interfered with any commercial consumer device within our service area. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That includes cablevision in any form? MR RESAVY: That includes cable t.v. , microwave ovens, t.v. service, any consumer electronic device that is made for the market place. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What about a harm radio. MR RESAVY: No. The ability to reuse frequencies is also that we can co-locate in many different areas, so as we are located on the tower in Southampton we are also co-located there with several hamm operators as well. Several other services. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: Mr. Chairman, one of the other gentlemen has given me a copy of a letter dated February 28, 1991, of the F.C.C. which appears to be the letter that was referenced. One of the additional issues that arises here and I did not have the opportunity to pre-file it, is the structural engineers inquiries, Mr. Papay will address those, maybe to save us all I will tell you my experience in briefing this particular matter I said to Mr. Papay, "Can we blow this tower down" , and he said, "Of course we can blow the tower down." I said well oh isn' t that a matter of concern, he says no. He says the force of the winds necessary to blow this tower down you are not going to worry about the tower coming because your neighbor' s car is going to be coming across your yard at the same time. But I ' ll let him say that in his own style of engineering ease and answer any fall down questions that anybody may have. MR PAPAY: The mono-pole itself is very similar to the light posts and transmission towers that you all see along the L.I .E. or what have you. The design of the tower itself forth by E.I.A. which is Electronics Industry Association to 22D which is a national standard what has been also adopted by the American National Standard Institute. The design criteria of the tower itself is a fifty year design storm for this part of Long Island it would be eighty five miles an Page 46 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR PAPAY, cont'd: hour. Metro One has opted for a hundred year design storm which correlates to a one hundred mile an hour wind. So that would be the design wind itself of thirty three feet above the ground surface. You take that wind speed and you apply factors of the thing to basically accelerating the speed and the pressure so that you finally come up with a final design and like Allen has said, if upon failure there would be cars rolling across the landscape. It would take a tremendous force. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the same also with the antenna, I didn' t mean to cut you off, the possibility of the antenna blowing off? MR PAPAY: That' s an interesting question, I would imagine that there would be possibly particles of antennas that would dislodge before failure goes out. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me just tell you the problem that we've had in the past. This Board has wrestled with some interesting situations in reference to wind generating towers. Now we don' t have the sophistication in wind generating towers that we have here it appears and in no way am I enhancing or not enhancing this particular project, however, we've had situations with the Coast Guard on North Dumpling Island in reference to height, wind velocity and so on and so forth, as to the disruption of their particular light which sits on top of an old Coast Guard station. In zones that would effect boating and so on and so forth. However, it has been this Board' s policy in the past and even with that of a prior council person who constructed a tower that if the tower should fall it would at least fall on his own persons' property. We have an unique situation here in the respect that Mr. Baxter owns the piece of property to the south, which I ' ll address in a moment. In this particular case, if the wind was to blow and if we were to have the tornado that we had in the early 80' s and some how dislodge this particular tower, we would of course land on the neighbor ' s property to the north and if it .did it in a very small fashion, you know, maybe ten or fifteen or twenty feet of the tower would end up on that neighbor' s property, being ninety five feet away from the northwesterly property line so to speak. However for the tower to fall on the south side it would definitely fall on Mr. Baxter ' s property since he is the current owner of the property. Is there any need for any tie backs on a tower of this particular nature? MR PAPAY: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Why? Page 47 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR PAPAY: Because the tower itself is designed as a free standing structure. It is not designed as a guy structure. In fact you can get into complications if you were to guy a structure that was intended to deflect under load. If a guy was to restrain it from deflecting and had failed itself, it may cause the tower to fail, where as if the tower was not guyed and was allowed to relieve itself it would not go. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How far is this tower penetrating the ground surface? MR PAPAY: The foundation itself varies depending on the soil conditions, it would be approximately six to eight foot in diameter, would extend about twenty five or so feet into the earth. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Encased in cement, six to eight feet. MR PAPAY: That would be a concrete shell that' s reinforced with steel. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don' t have any further questions unless you do Bill. MR SMITH: I have two things. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. MR SMITH: We can develop for you the engineering relative to the affixing of the antenna, as a distinct object from the pole itself. If the fall down radius is a matter of concern, I think we can safely offer to move the pole to the south to some degree, such that if it came down it would not fall in the yard to the north at all. If that' s a. . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the other question I would ask Mr . Baxter and I 've met Mr. Baxter in the rear at one time, but I would ask him also if he would covenant his piece of property to the south to the same distance so as during the period of this lease that there would be no construction on that particular piece other than it appears to be a concrete building at this time, to the attune of 104 feet to a degree, whatever degree you move it. MR SMITH: I can discuss that with Mr. Baxter and I will get that back to you. The way we have expressed it in other jurisdictions when this issue has arisen, we would detail a fall down pattern and the way those have been expressed in other places, that they would not erect any structures in those areas. They could be parking lots and the like, but no Page 48 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: structures within the fall down area. I ' ll discuss that with him. He has counsel that represents him in dealing with the lease and that is a lease question. So I don' t know that that would be fair of me ask tonight, but, I will get you an answer. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: This young man may be able to answer the antenna issue in terms of fall down. MR RESAVY: I just want to clarify one part about the antennas themselves. The affixing we can supply the details and he can come up with the calculations for the affixing to the tower, but the antennas that we use in our system are made from a manufacturer who has supplied us a letter that they will withstand a 150 mile an hour wind. So we can supply that letter also, we had just applied that to a previous owner of a Town so that' s readily available and we' ll forward that to Allen Smith. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: I 've pretty much have had let the engineers have their say and I' ll let Mr. Baxter jump to his feet in a moment. we've come down at least through my mental recollection of the check list in this special exception portion of the hearing. To the legal end of it, I believe that in submitting public utilities portion to the Board in advance as Mr. Moore has done with the brief, a question was raised relative to some can say in real English whether Southold was within the franchise area and I again have Chris' statement to that fact reduced to writing and I ' ll put it in the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I ask the question of the difference between NYNEX and Metro One, are they interrelated in anyway? Not necessarily at the remainder of the hearing, but. . . MR RESAVY: Since I used to work for NYNEX I think I can' answer that, many years ago. The F.C.C. when they created the cellular franchises or the ability to provide cellular service, they did it a little differently than they did many years ago with the regional Bell operated companies. What they decided to do is provide for not one but two entities that could provide the service to the public. That way there is not a monopoly on one side of the fence, so each company has in its guidelines of its license, operating license to provide the best quality service to its customers that it Page 49 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. METRO ONE, cont' d: can and NYNEX is our competitor in this particular market place. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: That' s pretty much the presentation, Mr. Chairman, I' ll invite Mr. Baxter up, he' s not a witness of mine in such, he is obviously interested and you can ask him any questions you wish to ask him, he wishes to answer. Mr. Baxter. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How are you Mr. Baxter? MR BAXTER: Hi, can I help you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The concern of the Board is that of, my concern, not necessarily the concern of the Board is that of the antenna falling on your property. In that this particular time you do own both parcels. If this organization intends to abide by the normal conditions that we request, and the tower is moved another nine feet to the south, it of course encroaches that much more on your southerly parcel. Our concern is that during the period of the time of the lease that there be no construction within approximately 104 feet of the, except what' s there now which we can' t you know, but that there be no construction within 104 feet of that antenna to the rear of that existing cement block building that you have now and that' s basically one of the requests that we deal with and I 'm just addressing it at this point. It' s not necessarily something that you have to come up with an answer for tonight, as Mr. Smith said that you know, that this is a situation you might want to review with your attorneys but we have found that in the past if we use that as a criteria that we start out with that it usually ends up to be pretty good all the way around. MR BAXTER: What is the distance from the pole to our property line? MR SAMBURG: Let me see the revised statement if that' s all you have. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure no problem. MR SAMBURG: Okay. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the same one? MR SAMBURG: No. Page 50 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. MR SAMBURG: They have already taken the liberty of moving it to the south. The area we are concerned with of course is the fall down below. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Why don' t you show that to Mr. Baxter. MR SAMBURG: Sure. I think he' s familiar. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have a date on that? MR SAMBURG: Yeah, this is a revised date of 4/23/91 . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You can give us a copy of that. MS KOWALSKI : We need about seven of them. MR SAMBURG: Seven? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yeah. MR SMITH: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Baxter will give you a written reply to that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Great. MR SMITH: That is my formal presentation, you have folks in the neighborhood and neighbors to address the Board and if they have concerns that I can answer, I ' ll try to do so. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. At the end of this discussion, I will then recess for about two minutes and discuss with the Board if we' re going to close this hearing or if we' re going to venture up to Laurelton and take a look at this antenna and then if we have any other further questions and we' ll let you know. MR SMITH: Thank you sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you gentlemen like to address the Board in anyway, feel free to do it in whatever fashion you like, I know your concerns, you live close to the property and I would have similar concerns and in no way are we. MR SAMBURG: There are two questions I was going to ask today. Page 51 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I just have your name for the record. MR SAMBURG: Ed Samburg. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Mr. Samburg. Do you have any other questions sir . MR SAMBURG: They answered everything very well. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, I guess at this time we' ll take a short recess and I guess we' ll go over to the office and kick this around. Yes. MR SMITH: I do have that video. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh yeah, that' s right. MR SMITH: It' s nothing much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is it a video? MR SMITH: Yes, it' s, they hate it. If you want to see it, it probably takes a couple, three minutes, it shows how this new technology in the fire trucks works and stuff. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well if you want to sure, if you want to set it up while we' re taking the recess. (Video was shown for approximately 10 minutes concerning Lincoln Park, New Jersey safety services systems. ) MR SMITH: The other two things, I guess that I did mention, it reminds me of it. These are now used by the police in a number of different areas within my experience. I tried to find out whether they used it in the hostage negotiations when the young man took over the place across the street in Mattituck from the theater. The reason that they do it, they supply a discreet channel to the hostage that they can talk to with this where they don' t have everybody and their brother listening in. I 'm also told now that the fire chiefs are liking these better and so are the police when they go to a fatal, because it' s the nature of things such as all of us who have monitors that we pick up the police signal and they don' t get the turnout of people when they start calling in names and things of that nature and asking for the M.E. office, that they do when they use the fire channel to ask for the M.E. and stuff like that. And I guess you guys know all about these things, but I mean that' s the size of it now and the fact is there is some a little smaller. Page 52 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.S.A. MR RESAVY: That' s antique at this point. They have them small enough to fit in your shirt pocket phone. MR SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright the only last two questions that we have are, were there any other alternate sites in Mattituck that were investigated and. . . MR SMITH: Yes, the commercial areas are to the west of this location, westerly generally at the school and up in that area. The degradation of the signal is the problem that happens to us when we get that far west. It is this technology that the wind is testified to earlier. They have made a legitimate effort to identify parcels where they could go that would satisfy the engineering. It begs the question, we've a very similar experience in Riverhead in trying to identify sites. The water towers in Polish Town which is one of the sites that' s existing. They had to go up into essentially a residential farm area, if you will, up on the west end of town of the Brookhaven line. And the last one was in Vernon Well' s field in Northville, towards the tanks as close as we could get. It is the dilemma that this Board faces the technology is such that it dictates certain things if we had our brothers we might do other wise. The problem, I guess , with zoning is nobody had this technology in mind, when we zoned either at Riverhead or Southold or the next place. That' s the problem. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The other point is, I guess it' s the suggestion of the Board to recess the hearing and ask you to come back with that determination if you can give us a 104 foot circumference all the way around. MR SMITH: I have a plan for three items that I 'm getting for you. I have to speak to Mr. Baxter and solve the fall down issue, I've agreed to get you this information on the antenna and when it comes loose, if it comes loose from the tower itself , and lastly we' re going to try to get for you the F.A.A. stuff . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay and you are going to get us the address of the tower that presently exists, which is 75 feet high in Laurelton. MR SMITH: We shall. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: Thank you. Page 53 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Surely. MEMBER VILLA: How many of these are we looking at for the Town of Southold now. Is this going to be the last one or are we looking at more? MR SMITH: I ' ll try to answer and then I ' ll have one of the engineers answer. They' re speaking to the Village of Greenport about going up on the water tower there and are there any other sites in Southold? MR RESAVY: At this time we don't anticipate any for the foreseeable future, that being our forecast for the next three years that we have looked at. And as technology changes that may be extended or it may be brought in. But at this time we do not see anything in the next three years, at this point. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would utilize this antenna, other than yourself . Would you rent space on this antenna to anybody else? MR RESAVY: We will not rent space on this tower to anybody else except for the Town if they so desire to enhance their services in that area. But as a practice of Metro One, we do not do that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What about if the fire district in the immediate hamlet? MR RESAVY: We will be more than happy to support any of the safety net, fire safety, anything in that vain. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: That is already true on the tower that' s going up. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. We thank you very much and we hope to see you at the next meeting or so. MR SMITH: The clerk will advise me or Mr. Moore when it will be back? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, I make a motion recessing the hearing. Page 54 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. All in Favor - AYE. By ��C L �(O\ ( / C G✓ (Transcribed by Tape) (Not Present at the Hearing) , r . LEWIS NICK] S p REAL ESTATE East Main Road.Southold,New York 11971• 15I6)765341ffi April 29, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons, Suite 3 P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Metro One Dear Bill : In confirmation of our telephone conversation, I have investigated what effects, if any, the construction of a monopole radio transmission tower approximately 104 feet in height to be located in a Limited Business zoning district may have on surrounding property values. Specifically, I have addressed the proposed construction to be done on property owned by William J. Baxter, Jr. and others at Elijah's Lane and NYS Route 25 in Mattituck (SCTM# 1000-105-4- 11 .3) which is zoned Limited Business (LB) and which abuts property Zoned R-40 and LB. In this instance, any impact caused is created by "Economic Obsolescence", which is defined generally as follows: Economic Obsolescence is always evidenced or caused by conditions outside of the property lines. Examples: 1. A $100,000 home located in a neighborhood where the typical home is in the value range of $40,000 to $50,000 2. Oversupply of houses on the market in the area 3. Excessively high real estate taxes 4. Changes in the zoning regulations 5. Deferred maintenance or poorly kept up homes in the area. I have personally inspected the proposed mast site, the surrounding neighborhood, similar mast sites and reviewed the Southold Town Zoning Map and uses allowed under the Limited Business Zone, which is the zoning of approximately 4.5 acres on the North West corner of Elijah's Lane and NYS Rt. 25, Mattituck. Based on the premises that this Metro One mast would not be an "attractive nuisance", emit noise, cause electrical disturbances, give off deleterious radio/micro waves or cause any measurable increased vehicular traffic to the area and would be partially obscured by buildings and a backdrop of trees, it is my opinion that the mast would not have any measurable effect on the neighborhood's Fair Market Value beyond the effect of the existing LB use or future LB uses as allowed under The Southold Town Zoning Code. Sincer ly, MEMBER: hn J. tiles, Realtor,New York State Sudety of Real Estate.\pprais rs National. ssociation of RE.\LTORS National Institute of Farm&Land Brokers International Real Estate Federation Commercial and investment Division of NYSAR National Marketing institute � T • AUT AT&T Bell Laboratories 600 Mountain Avenue P.O. Box 636 Murray Hill, NJ 07974.0636 908.582-3000 April 17, 1991 Lynne Lorimer Metro-One System Implementation Department 365 West Passaic Street Rochelle Park,Ni 07662-3015 Dear Ms.Lorimer. In response to your request for an estimate of the levels of exposure to electromagnetic energy associated with a proposed cellular-radio installation located at Route 25 & Elijahs Lane, Mattituck,New York and an opinion regarding the concern for public health associated with long term exposure at these levels,please be advised of the following: The proposed system will ultimately consist of three directional transmitting antennas (Celwave PD 10176) located at an elevation of approximately 100 ft above grade on a monople. Six receiving antennas will also be mounted at approximately the same height. A maximum of twenty-four transmitters will be connected to each transmitting antenna. The maximum effective radiated power(ERP) is 100 watts per channel which corresponds to a maximum antenna input power of less than 12.6 watts per channel. Hence,the actual radiated power will be less than 302 watts per antenna or 906 watts total for the three antennas (assuming all transmitters operate simultaneously which is rarely, if ever, the case). This is an extremely low power system when compared with other familiar radio systems, such as AM, FM, and television broadcast, which operate upwards of 50,000 watts. For the case at hand, the maximum exposure levels associated with the cellular radio system can be readily calculated at any point in a plane at any height above grade. Based on the information provided above and an anterma gain of approximately 13.15 dBi, the maximum power density in a horizontal plane 6 R above a plane that passes through grade directly under the antennas will be less than 3.0 millionths of a watt per centimeter squared (3.0 µW/cm2) and will be less than 4.OµW/cm2 at any point in a corresponding plane 25 ft. above grade. The latter is representative of the maximum power density immediately outside of the upper floor of nearby dwellings (assuming level terrain). Further, the antenna pattern is such that the energy is propagated in a relatively narrow beam (in the vertical plane) which is directed toward the horizon. The reason for this is to provide uniform coverage. Hence, exposure levels directly under the antennas are not remarkably different from the levels at points more distant. v L.Lorimer- 2 The above values are the theoretical maxima that could occur and are not typical values. The calculations include the effect of field reinforcement from in-phase reflections and, the assumption was made that all transmitters operate simultaneously and continuously(which is not the usual case). Although the above values are obtained analytically, experience has shown that the technique used is extremely conservative. That is, the calculated power density levels have always been found to be greater than the corresponding measured levels. In order to put these levels in perspective, the maximum power density at points considered normally accessible, i.e., 3.0-4.0 µW/cm2 can be compared with the current federal occupational exposure guide of 10,000 µW/cm2 (OSHA -29 CFR 1910.97) for continuous exposure or the 1982 ANSI' radiofrequency protection guide (RFPG) of 2,700 µW/cm2, the New Jerse environmental limits of 2,700 µW/cm2 or the Massachusetts environmental limits of 530 µW/cm at cellular-radio frequencies. (There are no applicable State of New York or federal limits for exposure of the public to radiohequency electromagnetic energy.) The total power density at any point a few feet above grade, including contributions from all antennas will be, in fact, considerably lower than any health standard used anywhere in the world. Moreover, at any distance greater than approximately 200 fir. from the antennas, regardless of elevation or direction, the power density will also be below any health standard used anywhere in the world. The levels inside nearby buildings or homes at cellular radio frequencies will be significantly lower than those immediately outside because of the high attenuation of common building materials at these frequencies and, hence, also will be lower than any health standard used anywhere in the world. A possible concern about exposure to electromagnetic energy is understandable. Many people feel uneasy about new technology and often want absolute proof that something is safe. Such guarantees are not possible since one is asking for proof that something does not exist. However, sound judgements can be made as to the safety of a physical agent based on knowledge of the scientific literature. This is exactly how health standards are developed. Because all unequivocal scientific evidence indicates that biological effects associated with exposure to radiofrequency energy are threshold effects, i.e., unless the exposure level is sufficiently high the effect will not occur regardless of exposure duration, it is relatively straightforward to derive safe limits. (Unlike ionizing radiation, e.g., X-rays and nuclear radiation, repeated exposures to low level radiofmquency/microwave radiation, or nonionizing radiation, are not cumulative.) By adding safety factors to the level at which the most sensitive effect occurs,conservative exposure guides have been developed to ensure safety. At present, well over 6,000 reports are in the scientific literature which address the subject of microwave and radiofrequency bioeffects. These reports, most of which describe the results of epidemiological studies and animal studies, have been critically reviewed by leading researchers in the field and all new studies are continuously being reviewed by various groups and organizations whose interest is developing health standards. These include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, the American National Standards Institute, the World Health Organization, the International Radiation Protection Association, etc. All of these groups have recently either reaffirmed existing health standards, developed and 1. American National Standard "Safety levels with respect to human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields 300 kHz to 100 GHz,"ANSI C95.1-1982, American National Standards Institute,New York_,NY. L. Lorimer- 3 adopted new healttr standards or have proposed health standards for exposure to radiohequency and microwave energy. For example, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements has recently (April 1986) published recommended limits for occupational and public exposure2. These recommendations were based on the results of an extensive critical review of the scientific literature by a committee of the leading researchers in the field of bioelectromagnetirs. The literature selected included many controversial studies reporting effects at low levels. The results of all studies selected were weighed and analyzed and an exposure guide of approximately 2,700 µW/cm2 (at cellular-radio frequencies) was recommended for continuous occupational exposure and approximately 530 µW/cm2 for continuous exposure of the public. Similarly, the Environmental Protection Agency recently (July 30, 1986)3 published a notice in the Federal Register, calling for public comment on recommended guidance for exposure of the public. Three different limits, ranging from approximately 270 to 2,700 µW/cm2, were proposed. Further,the latest draft of the ANSI C95.1 standard(July, 1990), which resulted from an extensive critical review of the scientific literature, reaffirmed the 1982 RFPG for occupational exposure and recommends 530 9W/cm2 for exposure of the general public at cellular radio frequencies. Also, the USSR, which traditionally had the lowest exposure guides, has recently revised upward its limits for public exposure. Enough is now known to allow unequivocal judgements to be made as to what power density levels are safe and what levels may be potentially harmful. With respect to the proposed cellular-radio system, be assured that the exposure levels in the vicinity of the Mattituck installation will be below any health standard used anywhere in the world and literally thousands of times below any level reported to be associated with any functional change in humans or laboratory animals. This holds true even when all transmitters operate simultaneously and continuously (which is not the normal operating mode). Power density levels of this magnitude are not even a subject of speculation with regard to an association with adverse health effects. Anyone interested can obtain additional information about the environmental impact of cellular- radio from: Dr.Robert Cleveland,Jr. Federal Communications Office of Engineering and Technology Room 7002 1919 M Street NW Washington, DC 20554 (202)653-8169 2. NCRP - "Biological effects and exposure criteria for radiofrequency electromagnetic fields." NCRP Report No. 86.National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,Bethesda.MD. 3. Federal Register,Vol.51,No. 146,Wednesday,July 30, 1986. L. Lorimer-4 and Norbert Hankin USEPA, Office of Radiation Programs(ANR-461) 401 M Street NW Washington,DC 20460 (202)475-9626 A substantial amount of knowledge exists relating to the health implications associated with exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic energy. However,perhaps because of the anticipated lack of general interest, little of this information is imparted to the public by the media. But you can be assured that based on what is known, the proposed Mattituck cellular-radio installation will not present any health problem to members of the public. Sincerely, R. C. Petersen NIR Manager/Consulting Engineer 516-727-3947 i ALLEN M. SMITH oCOUNSELLOR AT LAW 737 ROANO[[ AVENUE RIVERHEAD. N.V. 11901 5 �esc�v S VJ Qc�ssa � c. 3e.2� 0-1 6� ©�9� y - o cc, n(= no zX L4yl (Doc) C 3� � og3o 1 l9'1 I i i i i -ql 400 TECTONIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS PC, PETER E. PAPAY P.E. , P.P. (Chief Engineer) EDUCATION: B.S. Civil Engineering - June 1982 New Jersey Institute of Technology; New Jersey LICENSES: Professional Engineer - New York, New Jersey, Connecticut Professional Planner - New Jersey PROFESSIONAL American Society of Civil Engineers - Associate Member SOCIETIES: National Society of Professional Engineers - Member PUBLICATIONS: Evaluation of Deep Embedment on Seismic Response - January 1987. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America EXPERIENCE SUMMARY: April 1986 TECTONIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS P.C. to Date Highland Mills, New York As chief civil engineer, responsible for technical direction and coordination structural engineering programs. Performs structural design and analysis of industrial , commercial and communication projects. Also supervision of tower investigations analyses and design of new installations. Other responsibilites include construction supervision, client contact and coordination of consultants. June 1982 BURNS AND ROE ENTERPRISES, INC. to April 1986 Oradell , New Jersey As civil engineer, responsible for structural design and analysis of foundation and superstructure for the development of commercial and industrial facilities. Supervised subsurface inspections, sampling of groundwater and contaminated soils, performed review of geoenvironmental impact of projects; and construction inspection. March 1977 PAPAY EXCAVATION to June 1982 Montvale, New Jersey As construction manager, responsible for field engineers, scheduling, and construction claims preparation. CHRISTOPHER J. RFSAVy Education: 2. Years - Rutgers - College of Engineering 1 Year - Middlesex County College - Engineering Present - Applying at Kennedy western University to complete the required courses. Experience: 1990-Present. METRO ONE Engineering Manager - Systems implementation Responsible for managing the growth of the New York System including the cell site planning and selection, traffic forecasting, propagation tests, largest system conversion in the world and department budgeting. Also responsible for the growth and enhancement of RF Engineers reporting to me. 1987-1990 METRO ONE Senior RF Engineer - Responsible for all engineering of the system, traffic planning, cell planning and placement, testing and budgeting. Developed and implemented the first Signal splitter (Control Channel ) in an operational system. 1986-1987 GTE Mobilenet RF Engineer - Responsible for developing growth plans for eight markets. Supervised growth of four of the markets while actively participated in the San Francisco market. Developed and implemented the first mechanical downtilt in a system to control the RF signals. 1983-1986 Nynex Mobile Phone Service Assistant RF Engineer - Generated search areas for all New York and Massachusetts markets, evaluated potential cell sites for all markets, supervised the RF propagation tests, and developed first system growth plan used as a basis for the rest of the country. 1981-1983 Advanced Mobile Phone Service Engineering Assistant - Assisted in site selection, RF propagation tests with Bell Labs , FCC filings , FAA filings and ran computer based propagation models. AFFILIATIONS: Radio Club of America Eletromagnetic Energy Policy Alliance (EEPA) 'A 1 • • GLENN S. WITTE 194 E. Main Street Annandale, NJ 08801 (201) 638-6404 EXPERIENCE Metro One, Cellular_ Telephone Co. , Rochelle Park, NJ RF ENGINEER, August 1989 - Present - Assisted in implementing expanded spectrum to the Metro One System - Worked on every engineering aspect of implementi_nq new sites into the Metro one System - Familiar with antenna and cable testing as well as trouble-shooting with RF Equipment - Able to analyze and generate handoff and topology parameters - Have kept a constant watch on the system by drive testing and analyzing problems that occur Metro One, Cellular Telephone Co. , Rochelle Park, NJ SWL'tCH TECHNICIAN, July 1998 - August 1989 Maintained the operational performance of the EMX 2500 Digital Switch - Worked on the translations and routing the telephone numbers Chief operator of the Centralized Switch Monitoring System Trouble-shoot problems with T1 Spans Hoechst Celanese Corporation, Somerville, NJ ENGINEERING AIDE, June 1986/87 - August 1986/87 Balanced the air handling system to obtain the correct amount of air changes per hour in each room Examined the velocity and pressure differential of the dust collector system to see if the system needed to be upgraded Monitored the HVAC systems and the water purifica- tion systems BRILLS ACAD FORTRAN WORDPERFECT DBASE BASIC Electrical Wiring PASCAL FORMTOOL Trunk Testing EDUCATION B. S. ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, May 1988 Rutgers University, College of Engineering New Brunswick, New Jersey Dean's List Financed 70% of education by working Motorola EMX 2500 School, February 1989 Plano, Texas and Arlington Heights, Illinois COURSE Communications Systems Digital Signal Processing HIGHLIGHTS Electronics I,I1, & III Automatic Control systems Pulse Circuits Electromagnetic Fields BIOGRAPHICAL SUMMARY 04arch,1991) RONALD C.PETERSEN PRESENT POSITION AND ADDRESS: Nonionizing Radiation Protection Manager/Consulting Engineer Radiation Protection&Product Safety Department AT&T Bell Laboratories 6W Mountain Avenue Murray Hill,NI 07974 908.582-2792 EDUCATION: 1954.1958 Various US Navy radar and communication systems schools including Aviation Electronics Technician School,(NAS Memphis),while on active duty in the USMC 1958-1960 RCA institutes,T-3 Coarse 1964.1968 Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn,Department of Electrical Engineering,BSSE (summa cum laude) 1968.1970 Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn,Department of Electrophysics,MSEP CERTIFICATIONS AND PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES: Member Bioelectromagnetics Society(BEMS) Member Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers(IEEE) Member Microwave Theory and Techniques Society(MEE) PRESENT PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITIES: Member,IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee SCC-28,Secretary Subcommittee IV Member,Accredited Standards Committee Z136,Cochairman SC3 and SC10 Member,Accredited Standards Committee Z311 Member,Advisory Committee on Nonionizing Radiation to the NJ CORP Member,NCRP SC78 and Consultant to SC39 Member,IEC Technical Committee 76,Working Group 5 Member.MEE Woddng Group P1140 Member,IEEE Committee on Man and Radiation(COMAR) Member of Board of Directors of EEPA and Chairman of S&T Committee Member,Center for Office Technology(CO'1)Science and Technology Committee Consultant NJ DOH,NIOSH,NIDEP Associate Editor(Radiated Hazards),IEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: 10 years Technical Aide,Senior Technical Aide and Member of Technical Staff AT&T Bell Laboratories Solid State Device Development Area 20 years Nonionizing Radiation Protection Dept.,AT&T Bell Laboratories Visiting lecturer,Rutgers University,Department of Radiation Science PUBLICATIONS: Over 14 articles in journals and books including American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal,Proceedings of the IEEE,Society of Photo-OpticalInstrumentation Engineers, Journal of Occupational Medicine,Telephony,Applied Optics,Health Physics 42/28/91 15:20 '0212 620 0718 FCC NEW YORR.NY � 2002 FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FIELD OPERATIONS BUREAU February 28, 1991 3 201 Parick Street Nev York NY 10014-4870 Mitchell J Reidinger Metro-One Cellular Telephone Co 365 West Passaic Street Rochelle Paris NJ 07662 Dear Mr Reidinger: This letter is is response to your recent inquiry A review of: our records for the past year. indicates that this office has not received any complaints from the public concerning , interference to television reception due to the operation of a cellular telephone site. Si , sljr Alexander J Zimny Engineer in Charge wr TOWN BOARD OF APJVLS -9- Septoer 27, 1979 , proVc d Installation does not lend itself to the rural atmosphere. It' s much too commercial. Again, we both object. Sincerely, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Boyd, 5400 Gulk Drive, Holmes Beach, Florida 33510. I don' t know when Mr. and :ors. Boyd left Cutchogue but from their hand-written letter here it sounds like they left before the shopping y Cdistrict was built and that I don' t know. -�� MR. SOHN: They wrote to us, Mr: Chairman, and asked us for copies of the plans and we sent them on down. NANCY GILLIES : Just for information, Mr. Chairman, they sold their house just this summer. Yeah, I just happen to know, MR. DOUGLASS: So they are not the owners next door then? MRS . GILLIES : No, no, they sold their home in Southold this summer and moved permanently to Florida. They maintained a Florida address as well as a Southold address and their sons are t living in Southold, they still will continue to be. c MR. DOUGLASS : Would you give your name please, ma 'am? MRS. GILLIES: Oh I 'm sorry, Nancy Gillies, t t t MR. DOUGLASS : Thanks alot for the information. ~ 2 MR. TUTHILL: What did Boyd own? t C MR. DOUGLASS : Ft was the property adjoining it to the east . They sold out. She just said they sold out . They actually don' t own it now. MRS . GILLIES: They sold their home down near Pine Tree, and this is a vacant lot. a MR. DOUGLASS : This is a vacant lot. There is no house on it then, that they own? Y n MRS . GILLIES : (Nodded yes. ) MR. DOUGLASS : Well, we were out there and we took pictures `of it and so on, and the antenna in the back that' s there now I would estimate is about 60-foot high, is that correct? MR. SOHN: No, sir, that's 95 . Five foot higher. MR. DOUGLASS : That ' s 95? It doesn't look it from the road. MR. SOHN: I know, it ' s deceiving. MR. DOUGLASS : We couldn ' t find any reason to attempt to obstruct you in communications here . Ile have very strict rulings in fact to go by under the State of New York rulings on Public Service Utilities, and so under this control I would recommend that this request for the additional height be granted. After investigation and inspection, the Board finds that SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -10- September 27, 1979 the applicant is requestio a 90-foot pole in side yo at the New York 'Telep'hone Company premises, Main Road, Cutchogue in addition to the existing radio pole in the backyard of the subject premises. z The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. K The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties = alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use C district; and the variance will not change the character of the ttr neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the ordinance. c On motion made by Mr. Tuthill, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was z RESOLVED, that the New York Telephone Company, 1095 Avenue of the Americas , New York, New York 10036, be GRANTED a variance to y the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71 for permission to ro install a 90-foot pole with two radio antennas in side yard. Loca- w tion of property: Main Road, Cutchogue , New York; bounded on the north by Sterling, east by Imbriano and Boyd, south by Main Road, west by S & E Realty Co. to approval.CONDITION FOR APPROVAL: Suffolk County Planning Commission Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Douglass, Grigonis, Tut- hill and Doyen. 9'!TUBL='HE'A1X1Lrz' gpealK`1Voc^2596 ° ' Upon application of the K RF ' oY e�`epho e"�ompany, 1095 Avenue of the Americas, New York, Naw' York 10036 , for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, r Section 100-71 for permission to install a 85-foot pole in side yard. Location of property: Main Road and Moore' s Lane, Greenport, New ro York, bounded on the north by Village of Greenport, east by Moore' s z Lane, south by Main Road, and (Cavanagh, west by Zipkas. n The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at 8 : 18 P.M. by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing as ro advertised in the local newspapers, affidavits attesting to its z publication in the official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notifi- > cation to adjoining property owners was made to the Village of ro Greenport, James (Cavanagh and Andrew Zipkas Estate; fee paid $15 . 00. y r MR. DOUGLASS: I also have a section of the County Tax Map showing it and the surrounding area, and we also have a complete Un copy of General Arrangement of the Site Plan and desire of where O they are going to put it. I ask again is there anybody desiring to speak in favor of this application? DAVID L. SOIiN: 188 Main Street, Huntington, New York, re- presenting New York Telephone Company. Many of the comments, as a matter of fact, all of them relating to the technology here we spoke of in respect to the Cutchogue application are on all fours with this. In other words they applv equally to this application. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF TEALS -13- SeWember 27 , 1979 -� MR. DOUGLASS : The only variance that you turn out to need is the one on the height. Is there, is that all you have, sir? Is there anybody else wishing to speak in favor of this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? C (THERE i:AS NO RESPONSE . ) MR. DOUGLASS : Again, I make the statement that we are con- trolled very strongly by the New York Law on Public Utilities and with that as our guidelines, again I will make a motion that this applica- tion for a height from 35 feet to 85 feet of antenna for public service telephone network be granted. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant is requesting a 85-foot pole antenna at the New York Tele- phone Company, Main Road & Moore 's Lane, Greenport for which a variance is required. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. was On motion made by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr . Tuthill, it RESOLVED, that the New York Telephone Company, 1095 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10036, be GRANTED a variance to the zoning Ordinance, Article VII , Section 100-71 for permission to install all 85-foot pole, subject to the following condition: That applicant obtain approval from the Suffolk County Planning Commission. i Location of property: Main Road and Moore ' s Lane, Greenport, New York; bounded on the north by Village of Greenport, east by Moore ' s Lane, south by Main Road and Cavanagh, west by Zipkas. Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Douglass, Grigonis, Tuthill and Doyen. t PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2594 . Upon application of Eileen M. Lembeck, 448 Greene Avenue, Sayville, New York 11782 , for t a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III , Section 100-31 , Bulk :and Parking Schedule, for permission to construct a dwelling with insufficient frontyard and rearyard setbacks. Location of property: IT Deerfoot Path, Cutchogue, New York; bounded on the north by Fitzpatrick, a east by Deerfoot Path, south by Jester, west by Leskody. c r The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at 8 : 33 P.M. by read- t ing the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing as adver- L :ised in the local newspapers, affidavits attesting to its publication + Page 2 - Agenda • Southold Town Board 0 Appeals Regular Meeting - April 30 , 1991 I . PUBLIC HEARINGS, continued: 7 : 48 P.M. Appl. No. 4019 - CHARLES KREPP. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII , Section 100-239. 4B for permission to construct open deck addition with an insufficient setback from the retaining wall along high water mark. Location of Property: 1235 Island View Lane, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map No. 1000-57-2-18. 7 : 52 p.m. Appl. No. 4016 - JULIUS AND KATHERINE RAGUSIN. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Sections 100-242A and 100-244B for permission to construct addition to existing nonconforming dwelling structure, increasing the lot coverage and reducing the rear yard setback. Location of Property: 215 Hummel Avenue, Southold; County Tax Map No. 1000-63-2-14. 7: 58 p.m. Appl. No. 3998 - HENRY AND MARY RAYNOR. (Current Owners: Mr. and Mrs. Albert Mastropaolo) . Variances: ( 1) for approval of access as required by New York Town Law, Section 280A over private right-of-way extending off the north side of Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, to premises identified as County Tax Map Designation 1000-126-04-1, 2, 5; and (2) to the Zoning Ordinance, Article ILIA, Section 100-30A.3, requesting relief under the bulk area requirements of the proposed northerly parcel of 30,162 sq. ft. and the proposed southeasterly parcel of 27,062 sq. ft. The subject land is located in the R-40 Zone District, and is also shown on the "Map of A.L. Downs" as Lots No. 24, 25, 26, 27 , 28, 29, 30. Containing a total combined area of 1. 43+- acres. (Record is reopened to receive additional survey information. ) 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 4012 - WILLIAM AND VIOLA DELUCA. Variances to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III , Section 100-32 for approval of insufficient lot area, depth and width of two parcels in this proposed division of land located along the west �\ side of Luthers Brea ater R , Mattit ck; County Tax Map J\ No. _-1000-99-2-1 7 �%2�D` Gai�`� � ro�iv� STAMINSR7 v. ROME* 169 ll� cite as am N.v.e.ra ies w, applied to 62 Miac.2d 1051 Josephine STAMINSHI, Petitioner, v. Thomas ROMEO, Salvatore Shortino, ig and the lot Hugo Surdi, William Reid, Andrew Muller and Harold Stenerwald, as members of the Board of Appeals of the Town of Brookhaven, Jack in vermin, to- _._ — — Rogers aria Suffolk Cable Corp., Respondents, for Judgment Pursuant gerous to life to Article 78 of the civil Practice Law and Rules. "`°"1 s: Supreme Court, Special Term, Suffolk County, Part I. which would April 22, 1970. s which arise ,nstruction, it Article 78 proceeding seekingto annul grant of special permit for 1 is improper. erection of Community television antenna mast. The Supreme Court, sty under this `,_ Y rous to life or ti Suffolk County, Special Term, Thomas M.,Stark, J., held that master efendant vio- antenna mast erected by community antenna television company was a 's injury the "public utility structure" within meaning of town zoning ordinance and Y Y grant of special permit for its erection was proper. -xception was nd we should , ; Dismissed. everse and to v. Gutekunst, 1. Telecommunications e�449 A.D.2d 904, Community antenna television company incorporated under Trans- 210 N.Y.S.2d = portation Corporations Law as telegraph and telephone corporations and .Y.S.2d 449.) operating its own transmission lines is subject to possible regulation by Public Seri-ice Commission. Transportation Corporations Law § 27; vas improper. Public Service Law § 90 et seq. 9. Telecommunications b449 definitely im- Community antenna television companies can be classified as "pub- :intiff and the , lic utilities" in broad sense of that term. race and color See publication Words and Phrases for other judicial and the bounds constructions and definitions. Iso made some S. Zoning "78, 884 jould act with ' Master antenna mast erected by community antenna television com- pany was a "public utility structure" within meaning of town zoning or- acts and in the dinance and grant of special permit for its erection was proper. See publication Words and Phrases for other judicial constructions and definitions. he interests of 4. Zoning e-877 It must be reasonably assumed that granting of special permit con- and SWEE- stituted.determination of board of appeals required by zoning ordinance. 5. Zoning C-508 Granting of height variance for erection of community television antenna mast was not an abuse of discretion. Bass & Weisberg, Patchogue, for petitioner. APR 29 191 -i , x 170 •310 NEW YORK SUPPLEMENT, 2d SEVIS C. Francis Giaccone, Lake Ronkonkoma, for respondent Board of Appeals. Mars & Burton, Patchogue (Bernard Burton, Patchogue, of coun- sel), for respondent Suffolk Cable Corp. �- THODfAS Al. STARK, Justice. In this Article 78 proceeding petitioner seeks a judgment reversing 3 and annulling two determinations made by respondent'Board of Appeals on December 5, 1968. The first was a grant of a special permit for the erection of an antenna mast or pole by respondent Suffolk Cable Corp. on premises leased by it from respondent Jack Rogers, and the second was a grant of a height variance authorizing a maximum antenna height of 185 feet. ' The premises in question are located in an area classified "J" Busi- ness 1 District (Neighborhood Business) by the Brookhaven Town Zon- ing Ordinance and Map. The structure erected on the premises consists Of a tall pole or mast upon which is mounted the master antenna for a community antenna television (CATV) system operated by respondent Suffolk Cable Corp. This particular structure is not an unconditionally or conditionally permitted use in a "J" Business 1 District (Section 85- 97), and, in addition, structures in such districts are limited in height to 35 feet (Section 85-98). Section 85-234 of the ordinance provides that public utility buildings I or structures (with certain exceptions) shall he permitted in any district when authorized by special permit from the Board of Appeals. It was I under this section that respondents sought the special permit upon the ground that the CATV system operated by Suffolk Cable Corp. is a "public utility" and that the master antenna mast was a "public utility structure" within the meaning of the zoning ordinance. Although it did not specifically so find, the Board of Appeals apparently concluded that the master antenna mast was a "public utility structure" for which it icould grant a special permit under Section 85-234. Petitioner, who appeared before the Board of Appeals at hearings conducted on November 7, 1968 and November 14, 1968, asserts in this proceeding (as she did before the Board of Appeals) that Suffolk Cable Corp. is not a "public utility' nor is the antenna mast a "public utility structure" within the meaning of the ordinance, and that the Board of Appeals was therefore without authority to grant the special permit un- der Section 85-234. / The ordinance itself contains no definition of either "public utility" I + or "public utility structure". Practically all local zoning ordinances in this state contain provisions permitting public utility uses to be maintained in various use districts, customarily conditioned upon the granting of special exceptions or spe- VL STAMINSKI T.ROMEO 171 cite as 310 N.Y.14.2d 260 r cial permits by a Board of Appeals. Public utility structures serving the Board of entire community have historically been recognized as reasonable and r proper uses in all types of use districts because of technical and engi- of coun- neering requirements peculiar to such structures and the areas served. It does not appear however, from the research conducted by this court, — that the meaning and scope of the_term "public utility" as such term is —`used-in lociit zoning Srdinances has been the subject of judicial determi- reversing nation in this state. More particularly, there apparently have been no ,f Appeals reported cases concerning the status of CATV companies in regard to At for the local or state laws or regulations affecting the legal rights or obligations -able Corp. of public utility companies. the second Accordingly the court's determination in this proceeding must rest on nna height an analysis of the legal structure of CATV companies, their rights, powers and franchises, any existing public regulation, and their fune- "J" Busi- tions and operations as such affect the public interest. town Zon ;es consists A public utility is defined in Blacks Law Dictionary as "A business or service which is engaged in regularly supplying the public with some enna fora +: commodity or service which is of public consequence or need, such as respondent electricity, gas, water, transportation or telephone or telegraph service". mditionally section 85— Since their inception within the last twenty years, CATV companies n height to in New York State have been required to incorporate as telegraph and telephone corporations under the provisions of the Transportation Cor- y buildings porations Law. 1952 Op.Atty.Gen. 166, Harper v. City of Kingston, :ny district 17 Misc.2d 627, 188 N.Y.S.2d 577. This requirement is predicated on Is. It was the transmission of television signals by wire being a form of telephony t upon the or telegraphy. Corp. is a t'r Section 27 of the Transportation Corporations Law gives telegraph +blic utility i and telephone corporations broad powers to construct their lines and ough it did ..' fixtures over or under public highways, and to utilize private lands for eluded that their purposes, with the right to condemn such lands if necessary. The it which it ,i T section requires however that telegraph and telephone corporations must s obtain the permission of city, village or town authorities to use local at hearings streets for the construction of its lines. ffolk Cable in this " This latter requirement has resulted in CATV companies having to ifol obtain local "franchises" when they sought to construct their own co- ❑blic utility :.G. axial cable system either above or below the public highways. (See e Board of permit un- ,?%�;? Section 362, New fork City Charter, Section 64(7) Town Law, and Section 89(39) Village Law. See also Harper v. City of Kingston, su- pra). bait utility" Where a CATV company, however, did not attempt to lay and utilize its own lines under city streets, but rather leased New York Telephone provisions Company lines for the transmission of its signal, it has been held that se districts, 7 t' no city franchise is required. City of New. York v. Comttl, Inc., 57 ons or spe- k ' y F' if p M,,.� YI�IWlk11AC@IkMIFrAikO'SMO+•o 172 4110 NEW YORK SUPPLEMENT, 2d SER0 Misc.2d 585, 293 N.Y.S.2d 599, aff'd 30 A.D.2d 1049, 294 N.Y.S.2d 981,of f'd 25 N.Y.2d 922,304 N.Y.S.2d 853,252 N.E.2d 285. :f .,' One test as to the status of CATV companies as public utilities is —chair rogdation by local, state or federal authorities. The law in this area is still in a state of development (See comments of Special Term in City of New York v. Comtel, Inc., supra, 57 Misc.2d page 616, 393 N. Y.S.2d 599. Also Burton, "Cable Television—Tomorrow's Television— Ready or Not", New York State Bar Journal, Vol. 41, No. 7, Page 580). l.y In this state the Public Service Commission has been the traditional agency exercising regulatory powers over public utilities. Section 90 of the Public Service Law provides that the regulatory provisions of article Imo. 5 of that law shall apply to evcry telegraph corporation and telephone corporation. The latter terms, as defined in Section 2 of the Public f7 Service Law, include companies owning, operating or managing tele- phone or telegraph lines used in the conduct of the business of afford- ing telephonic or telegraphic communication for hire. The Public Service Commission has determined that the transmission of television signals by the New York Telephone Company through its own lines for a CATV company is a form of telephony or telegraphy, i.e., a providing of telephonic or telegraphic communications for hire, and thus subject to regulation, but has chosen not to assume any regula- tory supervision over CATV companies providing the same service over their own lines. Matter of New York Telephone Company, 34 P.U.R. 3d 115. t; In a case where a CATV company leased pole space from the New {. York Telephone Company for the erection of its own lines it has been held that the Public Service Commission has no jurisdiction to regulate the relationship between the CATV company and the New York Tele- phone Company in a dispute over rental rates and extent of service. Ceracche TV Corp. v. Public Service Commission, 49 Dlisc.2d 554, 267 i N.Y.S.2d 969. i In a number of opinions, the State Comptroller has advised various municipalities that CATV companies are not subject to the local taxes r on utility services imposed by Section 186-a of the Tax Law or Section 6-640 of the Village Law (13 Op.St.Comp. 351, 21 Op.St.Comp. 406 and 23 Op.St.Contp. 708). These opinions are based on the fact that Public Service Commission has not exercised regulatory jurisdiction over such companies. [1] It clearly appears to this court that CATV companies incorpo- rated wider the Transportation Corporations law as telegraph and tele- phone corporations and operating their own transmission lines are at present o en t ssible regulation b the Public Service Co under article 5 0. the Public Service Law, even t oug t e Public Serv- . 4 r. t. - STAMMSHI V. ROMEf. 1•13 Cite ee 310 N.T.8.2d I40 294 N.a'.S.2d ice Commission has chosen �not to �jerf ( ATV rmm , t 85. 3 ulation. — - b blic utilities is The,federal government however has recently begun to exercise cer- 'he law in this tain regulatory authority over CATV companies. The Second Report pecial Term in .—._ and Ck d"r ,ndlhe rules of the Federal Communications Commission, as e 616, Tetertsto 61 393 N. r published in the Federal Register, Alarch 17, 1966, sets forth rules and 's n- regulations for the receipt and distribution of television signals insofar No. 7, Page r as such distribution affects competition with the television industry and i has economic impact upon it. The rules provide for notice to all televi- sion stations received in the area and to the Federal Communications Section 90 of W Commission before any CATV company may commence or continue to .ions of article distribute signals. The rules set forth which signals must be distrib- and telephone uted, which signals may not be distributed, and, as set forth in subse- of the Public R, quent rules, what signals may or must be originated by CATV comps- lanaging tele- nies. Regulation of CATV systems by the Federal Communications =ss of afford- Commission was sustained in United States Y. Southwestern Cable Co., 392 U.S. 157, 88 S.Ct. 1994, 20 L.Ed.2d 1001, which upheld the appli- transmission cation of the Second Report and Order. y through its T% An issue similar to that raised in this proceeding has been considered IT telegraphy, by the highest court of a sister state. In State of Washington ex Tel. ons for hire,e any regula- Pruzan v. Redman, 60 \Wash.2d 521, 374 P.2d 1002, the local zoning board has granted a conditional use permit for the erection of a radio = service over s transmission station (one-story building and three 240 foot steel tow- p, 34 P.U.R. - ers) on land zoned for agricultural use, based upon the provision of the om the New ordinance authorizing such permits for "public utility buildings or struc- tures". The question considered by the court was whether the radio it has been � 1�". station is so impressed with a public interest that it came within the i to regulate field of public regulation, and, as such, was a public utility within the Pork Tele- broad meaning of that term. The court, referring to regulation of ra- of service. dio stations by the Federal Communications Commission, found that al- .2d 554, 267 though a radio station does not constitute a public utility in the ordinary sense, it is, nevertheless, a public utility in a limited sense impressed / ised various 1vith a public interest. The court found no restricting language on the / local taxes term "public utility" as used in the zoning ordinance, and found such v or Section term broad enough to give the zoning board jurisdiction to issue the use .Comp. 406 permit. .le fact that _ t jurisdiction (21 A similar finding is justified in the case at bar. CATV compa- nies in New Pork, as well as radio and television stations, are presently regulated in the public interest by the Federal Communications Commis- es incor pe sion. As above stated, in this court's opinion, CATV rnmpan;.c 1J w )h and tele- Fork could be regulated as public utili m u;e� nu,te a ines are at Yubhc C rv1 a —fin ti g r --ems r _Law. It is clear that CATV companies are impressed 'ommission with a public interest and can be classified as public utilities in the broad ublic Serv- t sense of that term. 41 M; hh yj3 5 r t }� w -�4A all" Mfltb'°°"",..... iQQ S&W YORK SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES. Nothing contained in the Brookhaven Town Zoning Ordinance sug- gests that the term "public utility buildings or structures" is to be nar- rowly construed. Under this ordinance a radio or television broadcast- ing station seeking to erect a transmission tower in a district other ' than industrial would have to apply for a special permit under Section 85-234. [3,41 Based on all the foregoing, this court finds that the master j antenna mast erected by the respondent Suffolk Cable Corp. is a public ! utility structure within the meaning of the Brookhaven Town Zoning Ordinance and that the respondent Board of Appeals acted within its authority in granting the special permit. In granting such a special per- mit the Board of Appeals must follow the provisions set forth in Sec- tion 85-187 of the ordinance. Subdivision B, subsection (2) sets forth the matters which the Board of Appeals must consider in making its de- n termination. Subdivision B, subsection (1) specifically lists four crite- ria which must be determined by the Board of Appeals before granting ! a special permit. There is no requirement however as to the manner in which such determinations are to be reported. It must be reasonably as- sumed that the granting of the special permit constitutes the determina- tion of the Board of Appeals required by the ordinance. A reading and { consideration of the record in this case shows ample credible evidence to i support the Board of Appeals' determination. [51 The court further finds that upon this record there was no I abuse of the Boards' discretion in granting the height variance. Accordingly, the petition is denied and the proceeding dismissed. v e ;m.wn r + 34 A.D.2d 154 Joseph ROGOFF, as President of Local 371, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-OIO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Arvid ANDERSON, as Director of the Office of Collective Bargaining of the City of New York and The City of New York, and Louis J. Let- kowitt, as Attorney General of the State of New York, Defendants-Ap- pellants. Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department. May 5, 1970. Action for declaration of unconstitutionality of Civil Service Law 4rP, provision and city rule promulgated thereunder, The Supreme Court, t: Special Term, New York County, Irving L. Levey, J., April 22, 1969, entered an order prohibiting application of statute and rule, and defend- r r a • f r s ,a f•° , , err i , _. �f ES + MAMMINA v. ZONING BD. OF APPEALS, ETC. 689 Cae as,UP.442 N.Y.S.2d ON issue, this rote with the Connecticut court since The Connecticut court has continued to ex- nnecticut jkcember 7, 1980, the date the petition ercise jurisdiction and until it declines to do fiction met filed,there was not"a proceeding eon- so,this court will defer to the jurisdiction of -ontained in Ing the custody of the child .. . Pend- Connecticut, the home state, which in fact has alle*" tt� in a court of another state exercising remains the residence of one of the contest- i that the.. iction substantially in conformity" ants. See 28 U.S.C. § 1738A(d). This re- I mnecticut� the UCCJA, DRL § 75-g, subd. 1. sult is compatible with the disapproval of . 1'ty ;The court further fails to comprehend forum shopping which is reflected in New I ssue, it a the respondent can seek the aid of this York caselaw. See, e. g., Vanneck v. Van- I I the inafi II the sta te oY in modifying the Connecticut wurt's neck, 49 N.Y.2d 602, 427 N.Y.S.2d 785, 404 of visitation by means of a family N.E.2d 1278 (1980); cf. Nicola v. Nicols, 76 sed 1° ease petition, while on the other hand, A.D.2d 910, 429 N.Y.S.2d 234 (2d Dept., I' CCJA. Njw. m that this court lacks jurisdiction to 19g0). =e' of Will' ify that Connecticut order here with! The petitioner is not without remedy in a, includioS 13) Based on the above analysis, it this state. Pursuant to DRL § 75-p, subd. ; commenced Id appear that Connecticut would not 1, a certified copy of a custody decree of c,au bd. jurisdiction to modify its decree, and another state which is filed in the office of nger hoe is t this court has jurisdiction. However, the clerk of the Supreme or Family Courts t state,'' ` ication of the Parental Kidnapping Pre- of this state has "the same effect and shall here, feu '+ tion Act of 1980 (PKPA) alters this re- be enforced in like manner as a custody child's` decree rendered by a court of this state." exists-in Theappropriate authorities of ever For UCCJApurposes,y a custody decree in- (b). See .Stale shall enforce according to its terms, eludes orders pertaining to visitation rights. 892, 436 and shall not modify . . . any child Gusto- Nicols v. Nkols, supra at 911, 429 N.Y.S.2d { i -rch 26,1981 :.dy determination made consistently with 234-, See DRL § 75-c, subda. 2 and 4. �r I _l, May 6,`, .w+.the provisions of this section by a court of ; �: The motion to dismiss is granted. Of�' another State. (emphasis added) I , Lionel regal U.S.C. course, the petitioner is not precluded from§ 1738A(a), amending Judiciary I' +± 1(c) and 4 Chap. 115, 28 U.S.C. § 1738 (December returning to this court should the Connecti- Michael 1a 1980). cut court, in the future,decline jurisdiction ,ecticut. over this matter or rule that 4ew,-Tork__ r, - The only exception to the above oblige- would be a more appropriate fo ti ' 'I�� and it Is that a court may modify a custody I I ,ri. iction elermi ation of another stale i[— this matter. , � n y in aceorda (1) it has jurisdiction to make such a f of DRL§ o' " Child custody determination; and o �.n su•eEasrsua APR Z 9 sI' (2) the court of the other state no long- -. mmgly. r. ,t court a�+ jurisdiction, or it has declined to fa custod• ,modify rich determination. (emphasis 110 Misc.2d 534 ,ire sa • ,'added) In the Matter of Joseph MAMMINA and " con U&C. § 1738A(f). Veronica Mammina, Petitioners, Y. ave all Where the UCCJA provides bases for jur- ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF the ihictw" ion which are alternative to the"home TOWN OF CORTLANDT and Highland ad ;9die ` kale , the PKPA confers exchaive and Broadcasting Corp, Respondents, for / RL § 75 'tl; `•fbn4nuing jurisdiction on the home state. Judgment under CPLR Article 78. T' slap 28 U.S.C. §§ 1788A(eX2XE)'and hild cue i�;il�A(d) Supreme Court, Westchester County. ` ICCJA: May 8, 1981. by?mtn}6 ti ;�Thus,the spirit of the PKPA is clear,and -to i. aemrd with what will be mandated in Action was brought for judgment an- is rM "<0tare cases,it is applied to the case at bar. nulling town zoning board of appeals'grant a • • 690 442 NEW YORK SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES } of public utility special use permit to com- this CPLR Article 78 proceeding for judg ?' mercial radio station to erect transmitting ment annulling the determination of the i towers in area zoned for residential use. respondent Zoning Board. t ' The Supreme Court, Westchester County, Vincent Gurahian, J., held that evidence Respondent Highland Broadcasting Cor- -2, was insufficient to support board's finding poration (Highland), is the licensee of a i that radio elation was a "public utility." commercial radio broadcasting station using a designated AM frequency during daylight A; . Petition granted. hours by authorization of the Federal Com 1. Zoning and Planning 45238 munications Commission. Highland's radio ! Zoning board must make reasonable station WLNA currently operates a trans determination of whether entity is "public mitting tower which is located near High- utility;' in terms of eligibility for special land's corporate offices in the Town of, use permits, based on substantial evidence Cortlandt. ' j that applicant for special permit is engaged On January 9, 1980, Highland made an in regularly supplying public with some •sr , '• commodity or service which is of public application to the Cortlandt Zoning Board .« y p of Appeals for a special use permit allowing '"t'�' ' consequence or need such as electricity,gas, the construction of five radio broadcasting water, transportation or telephone services. towers, ranging in height from 158 to 219 C.4 2. Zoning and Planning 4-645 feet, on 19 acres of wetlands located in an t In Article 78 proceeding for judgment area zoned residential. Highland had pur- annulling determination of town zoning chased the property a couple of years be- board of appeals which granted commercial fore. The five towers would replace the radio station a public utility special use existing transmitting facility and will allow permit to erect transmitting towers in area Highland to expand its operation by in- zoned for residential use, evidence was in- creasing the hours of broadcasting on sufficient to support board's finding that WLNA from daylight hours to all hours of radio station was a "public utility." CPLR the day. 7801 et seq. See publication Words and Phrases The site of the proposed new towers is for other Judicial constructions and low-lying and flat. There is an unobstruct- ;¢r; definitions. ed view of the site from petitioner's resi- dence. ' Henry J. Neale, Neale do Wilson, Scars- A series of public hearings were held at dale, for petitioners. which Highland presented evidence in sup- Andrew P. O'Rourke,O'Rourke & LoCas- port of its application including documents cio, White Plains, for Highland Broadcast- and expert witnesses. No substantial evi- dence was presented in opposition to the .,. rng application. Richard A. DeLorenzo, Deputy Town The Zoning Board at first refused to Atty., Croton-on-Hudson, for Zoning Beard grant the application; however, upon the of Appeals. Board's reconsideration, the special permit f'+ DECISION was granted unanimously- '-- The application was made pursuant to VINCENT GURAHIAN, Justice. Cortlandt Zoning Ordinance § 88-7 in con- ' f :r The Zoning Board of Appeals of the junction with § 88-88. Section 884 allows y` Town of Cortlandt has granted a eommer- for special we permits for,inter alia,"pub-`- cial radio station a public utility special use lic utility uses". Section " sets forth i permit to erect transmitting towers in an standards which must be met in the grant �;�• area zoned for residential use. Petitioner, ing of any @pedal permit pursuant to a y. 1 an owner of neighboring property, brings 4 88-7. . f i MAMMINA v. ZONING BD. OF APPEALS, ETC. 691 Cites,Sup.,442 N.y.a.zd ass oceeding for judg- ' The Zoning Board of Appeals decided as "public utilities" are within the purview -ermination of the ..yc .' that WLNA is a public utility. In its find- of the Public Service Commission (Public ✓ y, ings the Board noted the testimony of nu- Service Law § 2(23), at al.). Broadcasting Cor- �:IE merous individuals and associations from The elements of monopoly, rate fixing, the licensee of a Cortlandt to the effect that WLNA is per- local control and indiscriminate public ser- :ating station using forming a commendable public service vice are threaded throughout the several icy during daylight ,. which would be of even greater benefit to definitions of public utility. While perhaps the Federal Com- " the community if they were allowed to go no one of these would be absolutely neees- Highland's radio to 24-hour broadcasting. Also given weight sary to considering a given entity as a pub- operates a trans- - / was the fact that Highland is subject to lie utility,the common asoect which appears ocated near High- ;r public regulation by the Federal Communi- determinative 's the nature of the services in the Town of cations Commission and that its broadcast rovt um "r license states "it shall render such broad- m scant feature of vital serthat ce1- caating service as will serve public interest, Lain businesses are often accorded monopoly lighland made an convenience and necessity. . ." status and subject to penetrative regula- ndt Zoning Board '` The Board thereafter found that the "ad- lions. se permit allowing 6 ditional requirements" for special permits There is next presented the more specific radio broadcasting Isq ,' specified by § 8" had been met. subject of the meaning of public utility i t from 158 to 219 Ands located in an The petitioner alleges three bases for re- within the framework of zoning law. ". :ighland had pur` w lief: first, the determination by the Zoning Local ordinances similar to the one at bar t`')` Board was illegal and an abuse of discre• are commonplace. tublie utilities enjoy a mple of years :•ould replace the e h Lion,because Highland Broadcasting Corpo- favored position in relation to zoning regu- ��; lily and will all :. '.,,ta,_ ration is not eligible to obtain a special use lations and public utilil structures serving ow , operation by ow = permit in these circumstances since it is not a entire commurn y eve historically been in- ' a "public utility"; second, the determine- reco tied as re ab ro ruses m broadcasting on ''7.3" !rs to all hours of tion granting the application by Highland a types of use djetricts (Staminslri v Broadcasting Corporation for a re-hearing meo, Gl Miac.2d 1051, 810 N.Y.S.2d 169). was not supported by substantial evidence he ordinance in question here contains ed new towers is :'¢ t ' in the record; and third, the determination no qualification of the term "public utility" j is an unobstruct- r•" by the Zoning Board granting the applies- and a definition thereof is given to broad ; petitioner's rear .4 Lion of Highland Broadcasting Corporation interpretation by the respondent Zoning for a special use permit was not supported Board. Notwithstanding, that Board's de- ings were held at by substantial evidence in the record. termination should be limited to the param- 1 evidence in sup. 44"'' The threshold question presented is eters dictated by the rationale behind the it. :• whether the Board's finding that the a It a position lading documents 8 pP•- pedal ition accorded public utilities his- o substantial evi i cant herein is a "public utility" was valid tonically and in zoning matters specifically; opposition to the t both as a matter of law and of fact. that is, because they are essential to public A common parlance definition of "public health,safety and welfare(see Video Micro- first refused tor` ` . utility' may be gleaned from standard wave v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 77 waver, upon the sources to mean a private business, often a Misc.2d 798 354 N.Y.S.2d 617). ,w special permit monopoly, which provides services so essen- (1] The focus of the Zoning Board's in- lie tial to the public interest as to enjoy certain quiry in such matters abould be the nature / privileges such as eminent domain and be of the service coupled with the necessity for ✓ ade pursuant to subject to such governmental regulation as use of the site in question in providing said, =e § 88-7 in con- fixing of rates,and standard of service(see services to the communit . The Board coon 88 7 allows?; Vfebaler's Third New International Diction- m`usstms e a reasonable determination inter alia,"pub. :';; ary,Black's Law Dictionary, Anderson New based upon substantial evidence that an 88�8 sets forth"I' York Zoning Law and Practice § 9.19). applicant for a special permit is engaged in ,,at in the grant-` ° .It may also be said that public control is regularly supplying the public with some ,it pursuant to ' usually exercised on a local level and in this commodity or service which Is of public State those businesses ordinarily accepted consequence or need such as electricity,gas, � ilk i -- ♦ x, f ippi�,ya !��� ff '. Y �I:1 '41il 692 442 NEW YORK SUPPLEMENT, 2d SERIES �r a: water, transportation or telephone services. ing quasi-public service such as water,':A (Staminski v. Romeo, supra.) works, gasworks, railroads, telephones, [2) There remains the narrow issue telegraphs, etc. whether the respondent Zoning Board has_. The uses and enjoyment of such facdi matfesteg"al and reasonable determination ties the public has the legal right to de- - that an FCC licensed radio broadcasting mend; but its right to the use and enjoy $ station is a "public utility" within the ment of the facilities of a privatelyt " 2 meaning of the zoning ordinance. owned radio station is of a much more limited character . .. the (regulatory) i x' It appears that the applicant herein is not power of Congress (over radio stations)*}I a monopoly and,albeit subject to regulation has not yet been extended to the point of :• by the Federal Communications Commis- fixing and regulating the rates to be.f';" sion,the basis and nature of such regulation charged by the licensee or the establish=!: `. does not parallel that of businesses ordinari- ' �., P ment of rules requiring it to serve alike I", k1 1. ly accepted as public utilities. the entire public in the use of its facil(-5 = Generally stated,the purpose of FCC reg- ties. Nor has Congress assumed the right t ulation of radio stations is to prevent chaos to limit the profits on the basis of Invest., y i e• in communications. The scope of such reg- ment or otherwise. The licensee of a >' :k ulation includes such powers as classifim- radio station chooses its own advertisers 'fY —g tion of stations, prescription of the general and its own program, and generally, r nature of services in each class, assignment speaking the only requirement for renew t ' of frequency bands, power, time of opera- al of its license is that it has not failed to ,! tion and location. It does not include such function and will not fail to function in basic powers as the fixing of rates. It is the public interest." also noted that radio stations are not sub- (also see Sanders Bros. Radio Station v �i a ject to the control of the New York State Federal Communicatioro Commission 70 ' Public Service Commission. App•D.C. W, 106 F.2d 821 (1939)). 5' There may nevertheless be circumstances Respondents herein place considerable re- r� s in which a radio station would be fairly and fiance on the decisions in Staminski v. Ro properly treated as a public utility under meo, supra, and State ex rel. Prusen V.. e, j.; zoning ordinances. One example might be Redman, 60 Wash.2d 521, 874 P.2d 1002., where it is the only facility providing such Each can involved the granting of a special...., r p; j services in a remote or isolated area. How- permit under zoning ordinances similar to" -!I;. x ever, the essential nature of services under- the one at bar. s lying the rationale by which "public utili- The Staminski case held a master anten ties" are almost invariably true monopolies na for a cable TV company to be a publics" subject to rate and other regulation has yet utility structure. The Court found no re-, to be attributed to standard broadcasting stricting language on the term"public utili- ty" '�- facilities. ty" as used in the zoning ordinance and In the case of Pulitzer Publishing Co. v. found such term broad enough to give the =; `;• Federal Communications Commission, 68 Zoning Board jurisdiction to issue a use App.D.C. 124,94 F.2d 249(1937),the Circuit Permit. It m noted that said case may be Court of Appeals for the District of Colum- distinguished from the one at bar in that } bia, in reviewing an FCC grant of an appli- the cable TV company was subject to t7re ,, moon for a construction permit by a radio control of the New York State Public Se station, elated: vice Commission. , ^ .. but we have never said that a radio In the Redman matter,an appellate court y 5. broadcasting station is a public utility in held a radio broadcasting system to be the sense that a railroad is a public utili- "public utility". ? 5` ty, Generally speaking, that term coca- ConLraty bpinions are to be found la the z' prehends any facility employed in render- Matter oLWANV,int Y Xontl,219 V�:69,, 5 wr rp } qJxiit r !� 'd 1 i CUNNINGHAM v. FRUCHER 693 j o. Call at,Sup.442 N.V.S.2d tat such as water. y14 S.E.2d e entire record presented the 760 and Public Utility Commis- Upon th Court her As, telephones, ':j ` aion V. WVCN Communications Inc., 23 Pe. a public finds c util tyas athat the matter of laapplicant is not Cmwlth. 292, 851 A.?d 828. In the former case the Supreme Court o[ The applicant herein should ss h the •t of such faciL same sition u an other business which is Y gal right to de• Virginia held that the term "utilities" s- required to seek a commercial variance i use and enjoy i`` employed in a local zoning ordinance in rather than a special permit as a public of a privately ¢ eludes those utilities that provide services utility. f a much more r which are necessary and essential to any he (regulatory) residential area and that a radio tower is The petition is granted. I I ( lst tors) radio stations) _ not contemplated within the meaning of to the point of that term. In the later case the Common- o RRNVaa[REnIEa I' he rates to be l' wealth of Pennsylvania held that the mere .r the establish-' facts that a radio station serves a public t to serve alike interest and is regulated to some extent by the FCC do not make it a "public utility I, �se o[ its facdi it#y`, corporation". 110 Mlsa2d e58 :sumed the right basis of invest- ? ,; With respect to the holding in State of William 1. CUNNINGHAM, and all c licensee of a Ica: Washington v. Redman, supra, it is noted dmilarly situated employees of the own advertisers " "f; that there was a dissenting opinion which State of New York, Plaintiff, and generally stated: v. ment for renew • ,Other factors tend to confirm my belief ,as not failed to vli� that the radio transmitter facility in Meyer S. FRUCHER as Had of the New 1 to function in "g r: volved he is not a public utility w State Office of Employee Rels- ithin York& and Edward V. Regan, as Comp- the meaning of the zoning ordinance. tion �' adio Station v � . '- The station does not necessarily have to troller and Head of the New York State Commission, 70 .. be located within an area zoned for sin- Department of Audit and Control, De gle-family dwellings in order to serve fendanta. K that community. In that respect, it is Supreme Court, Albany County. considerable re- tnlx unlike an electric power substation, a May Is. 1981. ;taminski v. Ro rel. Pruzan v >,` branch telephone exchange, or a sewage - treatment plant Furthermore, the pur- 374 P.2d 1002. pose in establishing this radio station is State managerial confidential employee ting of a special only partly W serve the local communi- moved for summary judgment,in its declar- ` 4-nees similar to r+ ,;. t The primary motivation is com- atory judgment action, directing that had y. .. mercie1. Again, this is unlike the public of State Office of Empkyee Relations e ! a master anten i; utilities which are neceaarily located in a Comptroller and head of State Department ! `i v to be a public qs�,,�r ' single-family district for the purpose of of Audit and Control to Process payroll de rt found no re- ', serving that particular area." duction form for certain insurance pro I1 j: j ! rm "public utili- k;X.+;;, ordinance and '"'`�'?'�' On the question of whet is a public utility grams being offered to members o man- ugh to give the in the contemplation of zoning ordinances agement confidential employees union end end whether standard broadcasting facili- for order allowing action to proceed on class to issue a use ordinarily fall within,this Court is com- action basis,and defendants soughtdismiss- tiesAlba- lid Court,Al id case may be a pelled to agree with the holdings in Penn- al of complaint. The Supremba- at bar in that ,1,1 -1 Sylvania and Virginia, as well as the dis- ny County, Robert F. Doran, J., held that: subject to the A% renting opinion in Washington. (1)elm action certification was not proper, ' Late Public Ser . This Court finds that there is nothing in and(2)statutory Sutlariy granted to State this record by which the respondent Zoning Comptroller W make payroll deductions for appellate court = Board of ,Appals might reasonably have Bhp bealUE(rleuranee preiftlatns is limited system to be a' found that the necessary criteria is met by to lustanbal jtlYolwng atatedptinasred haaw ; the applicant.' It has not been established ante plada i ro+r be found in the by substantial evidence that the applicant is � s ouff. 219 Vs.67, a public utility as • matter of fact Ordeli rdingly 'd {d�'r n§ < " dial k''> 1Eilb '"?htllMA�lil!!Cf. .. . MOORE & MOORE } Attorneys at Law {PR 26 1,991 Clause Commons Suite 3 Main Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax: (516) 298-5664 William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary April 25, 1991 Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Metro One Special Exception Application Dear Chairman Goehringer and Members of the Board: In confirmation of my telephone conversation with Linda Kowalski, I am enclosing six (6) copies of a Memorandum in Support of Petitioner's Application for the special exception use and height exception or variance as necessary. I believe the Memorandum will address the questions regarding Metro One's status as a public utility. As I mentioned to Linda, Allen M. Smith, an attorney from Riverhead, will be handling the application for Metro One at the public hearing as I will be out of town on that evening. He is also an attorney for Metro One handling their sites in the Towns of Riverhead and Southampton. If you should need any additional information in advance of the hearing, he can be reached at 727-3947. Also enclosed is an affidavit signed by William J. Baxter, Jr. as owner of the southerly property which abuts the subject parcel consenting to the application. Very truly yours, V . - �'�� , William D. Moore WDM/mr Encls. cc: Metro One Allen M. Smith, Esq. PS. This letter was dictated by William D. Moore, but not reviewed by him because he had to be out of town. % v TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS In the Matter of -" THE CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE Description of Action: Special Exception approval for utility structure and variance if necessary -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER'S APPLICATION INTRODUCTION The Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One (hereinafter Metro One) is a public utility engaged in the business of radio cellular telephone service. Metro One seeks approval for the construction of a 104 foot monopole radio tower with radio antenna for transmitting and receiving cellular telephone radio signals. The proposed structure, if approved, is to be located at Elijah's Lane, Mattituck, New York on property owned by William J. Baxter and others with the Suffolk County Tax Map Number District 1000 Section 108 Block 4 Lot 11.3. In addition to the proposed radio tower, an existing concrete block building will be renovated and used to house computer equipment used to provide cellular radio telephone service. The proposed facility will be unmanned. APPROVALS NEEDED TO PROVIDE RADIO TELEPHONE SERVICE The following approvals from the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals are necessary for Metro One to provide cellular radio telephone service in the Town of Southold at the proposed site 1. Special Exception approval for this public utility structure in the limited business (LB) zoning district 2. An interpretation from the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the V applicability of section 230(d)of the Southold Town Zoning Ordinance - .A which establishes an exception from the height restrictions in the ^" zoning ordinance for radio towers. l r 3. A variance from the thirty-five (35') foot height limitation if the exception from section 230(d) does not apply to the proposed } vf£t monopole radio tower. tt SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE In the Limited Business (LB) zoning district uses which are permitted by special exception of the Board of Appeals are set forth in section 100-81(B)(1) which states: "any special exception use as set forth in and regulated by section 100-31(B) of the Agricultural- Conservation district. . . :' Section 100-31(B) of the Southold Town Zoning Ordinance includes subparagraph (6) which permits : Public utility rights-of-way as well as structures and other installations necessary to serve areas within the town, subject to such conditions as the Board of Appeals may impose in order to protect and promote the health, safety, appearance and general welfare of the community and the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed. Thus public utility structures are permitted in the Limited Business (LB) zoning district as special exception uses. A. METRO ONE IS A PUBLIC UTILITY PROPOSING TO BUILD A PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURE NECESSARY TO SERVE AREAS WITHIN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD The Southold Town Zoning Code does not define a "public utility" or "public utility structure". It is not uncommon for local zoning ordinances to have no definition for such terms. As a result, several court cases have determined whether or not a proposed structure and use of property constitutes a "public utility". In Staminski v. Romed, 62 Misc.2d 1051, 310 N.Y.S.2d 169 (Sup. Ct. Suffolk 1970) and in Mammina v. Zoning Board f A eal , 110 Misc.2d 534, 442 N.Y.S.2d 689, the courts determined that "in this State those businesses ordinarily accepted as "public utilities" are within the purview of the Public Service Commission" Mammini at 691. In addition, Black's Law Dictionary defines "public utility" as " a business or service which is engaged in regularly supplying the public with some commodity or service which is of public consequence and need, such as electricity, gas, water, transportation, or telephone or telegraph service." Metro One satisfies these definitions of "public utility". In order for Metro One to provide radio cellular telephone service, it was necessary for the company to submit an application pursuant to New York State Public Service Law to the New York State Public Service Commission. This application was necessary because telephone companies are regulated by the Public Service Commission in the State of New York. Metro One constitutes a "telephone corporation" and a "public utility company" as those terms are In this case the court held that a community antenna television system(CATV)was a public utility because the CATV system could be regulated by the Public Service Commission even though the Commission had chosen not to subject CATV to such regulation. P The court ruled that a commercial radio station was not a public utility within the context of the zoning ordinance. The court relied primarily upon the fact that"radio stations are not subject to the control of the New York State Public Service Commission." Mammin at 692. defined in Public Service Law sections 2 (17) and (23)3. Attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is a copy of the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity issued by the New York State Public Service Commission on April 18, 1985 with attachment I describing the geographic area in which Metro One is authorized to operate which includes the Town of Southold. In addition, Metro One is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to provide Domestic Public Cellular Radio Telecommunications Service in the New York Modified MSA. Attached hereto as Exhibit 'B" is a copy of a letter from the law firm =7 ��`d of Fisher, Wayland, Cooper and Leader the law firm representing Metro One before the FCC describing the FCC approval for Metro One to serve the geographic area including the Town of Southold. B. THE PROPOSED RADIO TOWER IS NECESSARY TO SERVE AREAS WITHIN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD When the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals considers a special exception application, its determination must be governed by the zoning ordinance specifically sections 100-13 [defines a special exception use], 100-263 [general standards] and 100-264 [matters to be considered]. While the special exception approval of the zoning board of appeals is necessary for the proposed public utility use, it is established law that "[p]ublic utilities enjoy a favored position in relation to zoning regulations and public utility structures serving the entire community have historically been recognized as reasonable and proper uses in all types of use districts." Mammina v. Zoning Board of Appealc, supra at 691 (citing Staminski v. 3 New York Public Service Law section 2 (23) defines a utility company or public utility company as"one or more persons or corporations operating an agency or agencies for public service,land who or which is or are subject to the jurisdiction, supervision and regulations prescribed by or pursuant to this chapter." j Romeo, 62 Misc.2d 1051, 310 N.Y.S.2d 169) This favored position is acceptable because public utilities are considered "necessary for the public health safety or welfare, and, of necessity, their facilities must often be located in areas which would otherwise not be the most suitable from the standpoint of customary zoning criteiia." Rathkopf, The Law of Zoning and Planning, section 55.01 page 55-1 (4th ed. 1988) This favored position is recognized in the Southold Zoning ordinance; public utility structures are permitted in all zoning districts except; Hamlet Density, Affordable Housing District; Marine I, Marine II. When selecting sites, Metro One attempts to use existing buildings, water tanks, radio towers and unoccupied properties for cell site locations to the extent practicable (i.e. usable from an engineering and service standpoint). Metro One engineers identified the subject site in Mattituck which is zoned limited business (LB) as a necessary and feasible site to link cellular radio coverage between Riverhead and the Peconic site to be developed at the Southold Town Police Department. The Mattituck site was selected in this location specifically to minimize, to the extent practicable, the impact of the proposed structure on the surrounding properties. The site was selected from others in the area because it is zoned for limited business use; residential or agriculturally zoned property was not chosen. The proposed location is set back from the streets and is situated in a wooded area -- all decisions made in an attempt to minimize the potential impact of the proposed structure while providing the reliable service which, by law, Metro One is obligated to provide. C. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED FACILITY AND SETTING AND REASONABLY EXPECTED IMPACTS OF USE Metro One proposes to locate the computer telecommunications equipment within a small concrete block building which already exists on the property and which is presently in a state of disrepair and is not used. This building is setback approximately 211 feet from Elijah's Lane behin an existing one story barn which blocks this structure from view from the road. The building is setback approximately 230 feet from New York State Route 25 and is separated from Route 25 by a separate piece of property also owned by William Baxter and others [the landlord of the subject parcel]. The building is also approximately 87 feet from the northerly property line which abuts vacant property zoned R-40. The building is situated approximately 266 from the rear lot line. The proposed monopole and antenna radio tower is 104 feet in height and is set back approximately 235 feet from Elijah's Lane behind both the small concrete block building which is proposed for computer equipment and the existing one story barn. The proposed radio tower is approximately 95 feet from the northerly property line, approximately 70 feet from the southerly property line and 241 feet from the rear lot line. The "fall down" radius of the proposed tower is such that the 104 foot tower, in the unlikely event that it should fall, would land only 9 feet into the northerly lot which abuts the subject parcel and 34 feet into the property to the south! The property to the south is already improved with an existing one story block building which building is located outside the falldown radius [ie. approximately 118 feet from tower to structure] and said ° The zoning setbacks in the R-40 zoning district in which the northerly parcel is located are 50 feet for principal structure and 15 feet for an accessory structure. Therefore the proposed tower would not interfere with the ability to utilize this property to the fullest extent permitted by the zoning ordinance. / J property is owned by the landlord/owner of the subject parcel and as owners of this southerly property, they have consented to the proposed application. The balance of the fall down area is situated within the subject parcel and is clear of overhead transmission lines. The subject property is well wooded with trees already growing to a height of approximately 40 feet. [See attached Exhibit C, letter from Carmen - Dunne] The proposed monopole radio tower will be situated within the existing trees and all trees will remain on the property. These trees provide an existing buffer and natural screening which does not exist on many of the other properties in the surrounding area, and provide screening which will mitigate, to the extent possible, the visual impacts of the proposed structure. The potential impacts of the proposed use on other uses permitted within the Limited Business district (ie. parcel to the south) and on ajoining use districts and properties is less than those impacts which could reasonably be expected from other uses permitted in the Limited Business District. Section 100-81(A)(2) sets forth those uses which, with the exception of site plan approval, are permitted and which do not require special exception approval of the zoning board. These uses are: Retail businesses for antique, art, craft shops/galleries ; Qistom workshops/ machine shops Wholesale and retail sale of nursery/garden plants and material; Libraries/ museums; Professional and business offices; Funeral homes; Restaurants (except drive ins) Personal service shop, (barbershops,beauty parlors, professional studios, travel agencies); Repair shops for household,business or personal appliances, cabinet shops, carpentershops, electrical shops,plumbing shops, furniture repair,bicycle and motorcycle shops,landscaping and other service business; Wholesale and warehousing; Retail use supplemental to service business establishment. Emphasis is added to highlight those particular uses which J would have a greater impact on the uses within the Limited Business district and on adjoining use districts than the proposed use. These are uses which do not require special exception approval, and yet could reasonably be expected to generate more traffic, and noise, and a greater use of resources such as water/sewage than the proposed use. The only impact created by the proposed use is visual. The use has no impact on the ability of other uses in the zoning district or on the ability of properties in the adjoining use districts to be utilized to the fullest extent permitted within the respective zoning district restrictions. The proposed use is an unmanned facility which will be visited, after initial construction, by a service technician once a week unless a problem developed. The use will have no need for water supply or facilities for removal of sewage nor will the use give off any gases, odors, smoke or soot. Similarly, operation of the radio tower and communications building will not cause disturbing emissions of electrical discharges, dust, light, vibration, or noise. There are no public parking or recreation facilities in the area, either existing or proposed, and even if there were, the proposed use will not cause undue interference with such a use. The proposed use includes two off street parking spaces which are easily located behind the existing one story barn out of view from the street. The radio tower and unmanned telecommunications building do not create a hazard to life, limb, or property as they carry no threat of fire, flood, erosion or panic. The structure includes a self-contained fire suppression system and is connected directly to the local emergency services. The proposed use will have no effect on overcrowding land or creating any concentration of population as this is an unmanned facility. The lot on which this use is proposed is appropriate as it is zoned Limited Business and has been selected by Metro One to minimize potential impacts on residential areas. The property owner to the south has given their consent to this application, and the impact / V of the proposed use on the abutting property to the north is minimal. The proposed use on this property is not located near a church, school, theater, recreational area or other place of public assembly. Within the search area in which Metro One selected the proposed site, this site was selected as being particularly suited for the engineering needs of Metro One to provide a link between sites located in the Town of Riverhead and the site to be constructed at the Southold Town Police Station in Peconic. In addition, this site, unlike others in the search area, is zoned for business use. Other sites examined in this area are zoned either residential or agricultural uses. This site was also selected because it is a wooded lot with existing trees already 40 feet in height. The site is thus suited to screen, the the extent possible, the proposed structure from adjoining properties. In addition, the substantial setbacks of the proposed structure from the adjoinging properties and from the roads further minimizes the potential impacts of the use and structures. To the extent necessary and as required by the applicable Southold Town Code requirements, the stormwater runoff will be collected on site. Finally, the selected site and the proposed use will create no interference with any natural features and will have no impact on any ground or surface waters. HEIGHT OF RADIO TOWER / EXCEPTION / VARIANCE The proposed monopole radio tower is to be 104 feet in height. Section 100-230(D) of the Southold Town Zoning Ordinance states: Height exceptions. The height limitations of this chapter shall not apply to (1) Spires, belfries, cupolas and domes not for human occupancy; and monuments, transmission towers, chimneys, derricks, conveyors, flagpoles, radio towers and television aerials, provided that any television or radio aerial shall not be located narer than a distance equal to its height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than two hundred twenty (220) volts. (emphasis added) The proposed structure clearly falls within the exception created by this section of the zoning ordinance. The tower is used for receiving and transmitting radio signals and as such can easily be considered a "transmission tower" or a "radio tower." The highest court in the state of New York has held that zoning regulations are in derogation of the common law and must be strictly construed in favor of the property owner and must be strictly construed against the municipality. Sg Anderson, New York Zoning Law and Practice, 3rd edition, vol 1. section 17.01 and the numerous cases cited therein. A fair and reasonable interpretation of the above section of the zoning ordinance can only conclude that the proposed structure falls clearly within this exception to the general height restrictions of the zoning ordinance. If the zoning board does not accept the interpretation offered by the applicant and the board does not agree that the proposed structure falls within the exception set forth in the ordinance a height variance is necessary. A height variance constitutes an "area variance" and as such, the standard of review to be applied is whether a strict application of the zoning ordinance consitutes a practical difficulty for the proposed structure. The standards to be considered have been set forth in the case of Wachsberger v. Michalis, 19 Misc.2d 909, 191 N.Y.S.2d 621 (1959) as follows: (1) How substantial is variance in relation to the requirement; (2) What effect if any if variance granted will be imposed on available governmental facilities (ie fire, water, garbage); (3) Will variance create a substantial change in character of neighborhood or a substantial detriment to adjoining properties; (4) Can the difficulty be obviated by some means other than a variance; (5) In view of manner in which difficulty arose and considering all of these factors, will the interests of justice be served by allowing the variance. The proposed structure requires a substantial variance in relation to the regulation. The height restriction is 35 feet and Metro seeks approval of a 104 structure. However, the proposed use is impossible without a tower of such a height. Granting the variance will have no impact at all on available governmental facilities because proposed facility is unmanned, will not generate garbage or the need for water, as it is a self contained unit which includes sophisticated fire suppression system. The variance will not create a substantial change in the character of the neighborhood or create a substantial detriment to adjoining owners. The tower is 95 feet and 70 feet from property lines at the closest point. The property consists of a wooded lot where trees are already 40 feet in height and the tower is setback 235 and 241 feet from the respective front and rear lot lines. The proposed structures are located behind the existing 1 story barn. The property cannot be put to the proposed use in this or any other zoning district if a height variance is not permitted; the tower cannot function at the 35 foot height requirement. This problem is unique to such public utility strutures and is a problem not shared by other property uses in the district. In light of all of the above and the fact that / V the facility is inoperable unless the requested variance is granted; substantial justice is served by granting the variance. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth herein, the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals must conclude that Metro One constitutes a "public utility" and is entitled to special exception approval and a height variance, if necessary for the proposed facility at the Mattituck site. Moore & Moore Attorneys for Metro One Clause Commons Suite 3 Main Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 (516) 298-5674 Allen M. Smith, Esq. Attorney for Metro One 737 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, New York 11971 (516) 727-3947 V � , � F '� ��' � ` ��; 't � . b . � �x � � �°�� ji � r� - a• , ., _ ik � i i Ii� �il� i ' Ii � Ii I Ilii � �� k�� ��� ��-r�R, �,� � ii� p 4'�Y.��"-' v: Sb UPk4F.'f m eJt ""'L^ .x' a` }} '" §1 5� 1•' a It, ' �a ;6 q z',�C'?..p,'� ��. „ = � k�"� !rq',�' s%- zr: '"Nb �a, * r ,� •a>"��.!''�`� ,�' �72s`"� ro S � s �wr*it e v y� rs I� r „�`k y* ,xr X ° '+Ys k, )d x °" •�d ,a „,'4 x• 9 17 'a S e �:5-..,. zu4a!,:'•-.� ^.,'�STs`,wR:+,✓c�.rc9dbr»�i�`�F��W."r, , -,.c.,.. . fa,.M. -. .. ez .�iA• : mz.m �M an:..�� =NSX Y,oi .. ,.� r. - __ u+% STATE OF NEW YORE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION APR 2 9 1g85 At a Session of the Public Service Commission held in the City of Albany on January 11 , 1984 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Paul • L. Gioia, Chairman n Harold.. A. Jerry, Jr. S Anne F. Mead Rosemary S. Pooler gAR23 � 9 ♦ 10 CASE 28693 — Cellular Telephone Company — Petition for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to construct and operate a cellular radio telecommunication service in the New York Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. ORDER ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY (Issued April 18 , 1985) a By petition filed November 21 , 1983, Cellular Telephone Company (CTC) sought authority pursuant to Section 99 of ' the Public Service Law to operate a cellular radio system in the New York City area. The petitioner had applied to the Federal Communications Commission for a construction permit. . , At our session of January 11, 1984 , we determined that public convenience and necessity require the construction of facilities by Cellular Telephone Company. We approved the request but withheld the certificate pending receipt of FCC approval . On October 19, 1984, the 2 FCC granted CTC permission to operate its proposed system in the New York SMSA. A copy of the FCC construction permit was forwarded to us on April 8 , 1985. Because of the extent of the plant to be constructed, CTC has requested a 12 month interval from the date of this order for filing of its tariffs. Accordingly it is: C E R T I F I E D that subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth in this order, and not otherwise, public convenience and necessity require that Cellular Telephone Company be authorized to construct and operate cellular telephone facilities which shall emit reliable radio signals within the contours defined by the directions and distances set forth in Attachment I. Additionally, Cellular Telephone Company shall be authorized to and it is further 0 R D E R E D: 1. That this order constitutes a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity authorizing Cellular Telephone Company to provide cellular radio telephone srevice in the New York Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area; 2. That appropriate tariff schedules should be filed with the Commission within 12 months of this order provided that such schedules are filed 60 days prior to the commencement of service; 3. That the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity set forth in this Order will be revoked without further notice if Cellular Telephone Company fails to file its schedule of tariffs with the Commission within the prescribed period. 3 4 . That this --der is effective immediately, and 5. That this proceeding is continued. By the Commission, (Signed ) JOHN J. KELLIHER Secretary v s Cellular Te18p11011e Company `"" Relisbie Ssx ice Area Lvcatioc►: #19 Hahopac i,ocations 11A HsbWac . " W. Lon . 73*44*43" 73*44,43" N. Lat. 41 22 4 N. Lat. - 410 2Z 4.0 W9' 8yI,an . es n �^ tsar ndau N o. R ll.o N o. E 9.8 miles 45. 13.],� 45' 6.9 90. 9.33 9o' 10.2 135' 4.5 135' 7.3 180' 4.2 180' 4'3 225' 4.2 6.5 210 3.6 2250 270' 10.6 315' 6.3 315' 10 .7 43A Katanah Jcat n. A2 Mohegan Lake Location: � �� 73.37133" N. Lat. 41'11' 38" W. 8 3 U 73'51' 28" 41 16 46 W. naV-n N 0' E 7.6 Miles N 0. E 6. 2 Milrs 450 4.4 45' 6. 2 900 3.8 $00 7 .8 135' 3 .9 1359 9. 1 180' 7.6 9.0 225 5.4 225• 1o.2 270' 4.7 270' 9.0 315' 5.9 315• 7 .6 518 485 9313 PROE . 007 Y/ MAR 22 '91 16: 26 EOO * 39Hd 3NO-0813W WON3 96 : 11 16 , L3 6U14 1. '. • • ti ;P ationf 05 stoney Point /LOoati3Ons #4 Ossining Let 41*091570 W. n 73.51'42" N. Lat. 41'14110" W�73'59'7.0" N. ear n 31--3388t[iT ita"_�=fin • 8.4 miles N 00 E 9.4 miles N 0 *E 8.4 450 0.4 so• 8.4 9o, 9.4 1350 a.4 13s e.g 1909 8.6 1800 6.4 228' 8.4 225' 8.4 • Y.4 2706 9.4 315• 9.3 3156 8.4 Locatioon, A6 Spring Valley Locatiolll 17 Elmsford N Ldt. 41605'35" W.LL04 .. 74'02' 39" at• 41'03 ' 26" We • 73049' 2.0 sax n 'x wearing, N 0' E 8.0 miles 14 011 E 5.9 miles 45' 13.4 451 S.S 90" 13.9 90• 5.3 135• 13.9 135 7 . 1 1804 13.9 1800 GA 2250 12.0 225• $.9 • 8.3 2.70 6.9 31S• 8.0 313• 6.6 MAR 22 ' 91 18: 26 518 465 9313 p�i4E. 008 600 . 39Hd 3W0-Odi3W W08J 96 : 11 16 . 43 4HW Loc� ti n: N9 Yonkers 4.oc n' to yaxriw� W. Lon 73'51 ' 31" V. 40.59954" H• oa • 73*42' 1.0" N. Lat. 40.96' 15" ss"s' ran+ dzu 82 9 .9 miles g arin �tMilee N 0• � 9.4 N A•5•� 2.5 9a•• 12.0 90• 1.7 135' 12.4 13S' 3. 3 1800 11.9 3.9 . 11.1 225' 3. 270• 11 .4 270' . 5 315• 30.9 315• S. S LvC�nt N10 Harrington Pa>•k• NJ Loam on= �kll Rat�tsAy► NJ • " N• �a • 41.03' 26" W. LOfi • 74'0' 47" 73 5B 44t 39 N, at.• 40.58' 58" ] BU Sear Sea rl N 00 E 8.4 miles N 0' E 8 .4 miles 458 8.4 450 9. 5 900 11.2 90• e•4 1350 12.8 135' 8.4 1909 12.3 1809 9.4 225' 0.4 225' 9 .3 210' 8.4 270* 4 315' B•4 315• 9.4 519 465 9313 p�iart• m09 MAR 22 ' 91 16:27 �. .. r.11 i n1.i i.inv a J P: : t 1 16 . LZ ?JHW Leaatife 1 012 pomptcn Lakes, NJ N. Lat, 40.59144" W. Long. 74*16451" ear. n ......,... N 0' E 11.0 miles 45' 11.2 9o' 11 .6 135' 13.0 180' 13,5 225' 11 ,5 27ot 8.0 315" 7. 7 Location: 114 Fort Loot NJ Location! 415 Secaucus, NJ r N, Lat, 401151117" W. n • 73*55- 44" N• La . 40'46`45" No Loa • 74•04130" s: n dH aU Hems: -31 dBU N 0' L" 11.8 miles N Oo 45'0 8.4 miloa 450 10.8 90' 12,1 90' 1.4 135' 12 .6 135" 8.4 Liao' 12 .4 loot' 8 ,4 225' 12.9 2230 8,4 2700 11.8 270' 0.4 315' 12,0 315' 8.4 MAR 22 ' 91 18s27 518 465 9319 PAGE .810 S00 ' 39dd 3W0-ON13W W08J LE : 11 16I LZ duw MAR 27 191 11 : 38 FROM METRO-ONE PAGE . 006 f { {0 '39dd C{E6 59b 915 88191 is , ZZ NUW Btt B' L Isle t•B .OLL 0'S IOLL !•p ISLE 6'b .Stl !.S .081 too!•g .08T *SET !Ii .Obi 696 .06 y•g Is* t'6 .i4 sells i'8 a .0 x aaYS>u t'6 a .0 N A f v svM119 6E -rulave .4Z ,6S.fL Nlot ,eC.04 •.4p'I 'N �,S£ , 6.vL !N YOPI ' uLfzZ£.OV rp'I x pumlal AouoO LC# +uoszvo pu*toz uo�*as 4z# svol�Oac Wei .ST£ L'Zt .OLZ T •TT .9zz 9'tt .08T Got% .SET L'ET .06 g.ZT Isf oattw ti•tt a .0 x ne -- u xaa ,9f �4T.iL u?'S •M •tt �0660t . R11 N 'i rocatio s #19 Jersey city, NJ Locations 929 Brooklyn n Lo 74.0224" N. I.at. 40041649" Lcn 73'99' 36" Q. Lat. 40'43 ' 19" W. U ' Be gd15U roR.xn 8.9 mitre N 0' E B 4 miles N b!•E 9.0 4V 9.3 • 8.9 90 8.4 135' 9. 1 135' 9.3 180• 9.8 180' 9.9 844 225' 9.9 225' 9.6 270' 6.8 313' 9.2 315' Lppatip = 030 Manhattan Locations #31 North Berson• NJ N. Tat 40'44' 23" • 73'S9� Z5" N. >t. 40•48' 16" n • 73 59'45" �. U >3eag C HAaz1 10.9 Milos • 9.2 miles N 0' E N 4 N 5• 10.6 456 10.5 90' 10 .1 90* 11.8 1350 10. 3 135 10.9 100' 10.1 1so' 11 .6 229' 10.9 11.3 270• 10.4 2.70' 11 .3 315• 10 .2 3150 11 . 1 MAR 22 191 16126 518 465 9313 PAU- 012 as • �nr.� �r.in-n� i �1.1 1.1nv a pp ` T T 7 a . 'P MH111 ,, I,oc_ aeon; #32 Long island dity Loc� ationt $33 Brooklyn N. Lat. 40045129" W• Lon 73658145" N. Lat. 40.42044" W�.. 3r. 13.56128" tarsn 3- earin 9 Cwu • 8.4 miles N 0" E 8.5 miles N 4 E 5• 9.6 43' 8.7 90' 8.4 90' 9.4 1350 135' 8.9 180' 9.4 140' 9.9 225" 9.0 225' B.9 270" 8.4 270' 9.0 316' 8.4 315' 9.7 Location: #34 Richmond Hill Locations #35 1#roux N, t 40641129" W. Long. 73'30' 43" N. Lat. 40'48' 57" W. 73" 3113" B'a 17 BMW Ham' 39 dzU N 0' E 8.4 miles N 0. 9 8.4 mils* 45' 13.4 45' 10.0 90. a.4 90' loll L35' 8 .9 1350 9.4 180' 9.9 1000 9.2 225• 8.8 2"' 10 .3 270" 8.4 270' 9.6 315" 8.4 31'S" 9.4 MAR 22 ' 91 16126 518 465 2313 PASE . 013 800 ' 390d 3NO-Oa13W WONA 6E : I1 f6 . J7. NHW icatio t #36 Dort Washington Location: #37 Glen Oaks N. Lat, 40050128" W. ton a. 73042' 10" N. Lat. 40'45'24" W- Long- 73.42' 37" Bear n419 dau- ' Haar na 39 s..ri.8U — N 0' E 814 Milan N 0' E 12 ,0 miles 45' 8.4 45' 11. 1 90, 8.4 90' 11, 3 1350 0-4 135' 11.8 100' 8,4 1900 12.0 225' 8.4 2254 11.8 270" 8.4 2700 11.9 3159 8.4 3151, 12.1 ocatione #30 WOOdmers LOc�akioon: Merrick N. Lat. 400371574 W, ZooA . 73*42 ' 520 N. Latt. 404010" V. LOW- 73933' 16" 8aarinamear nq 3 1 0• B 0.4 miles N 0' B 8.4 miles 450 8.4 45' 8.4 900 8.4 90' 8.4 L350 8.4 135' 8.4 LAO' 8.4 1900 8,4 229' 8,4 225' 8.4 170' 8.4 2.70' 8.4 11i' 8.4 3154 8.4 MAR 22 791 16:29 518 465 9313 PAOE . 014 r <- . . r"dation1 140 Jericho LocktiOa! 441 Huntington N. Lat. 40'46'49" WLonQ. 73433 ' 26" No Lat. 40*52120 No Lon . 73*24, 37" ear n ear nQ 9 d8 N 0' 9 8.4 miles N 0' 9 6.1 miles 45' 0.4 45' 0.0 406 8.4 90' 9.2 133' 9.8 133* 10.2 180' 10.2 190' 11.3 225' 9.7 225• 9 .7 270' 8.4 270' 8.3 315' 8.4 313• 6.4 L ca ations #42 Farmingdale Location: #43 St. James N. Lat. 40°43 ' 39" W. Lon 73027'4" N. Lat. 40092' 55" WO Load. 73 99' 29 Be r n 39 e�ar3- 3! dou - N 06 E 7.9 mils. N 0' 9 6.1 miler 49• 0.3 43' 4.7 90' 10.8 9o' 9.2 135' 11. 2 1356 10.6 loon 11 .2 180' 11.4 225' 11 . 2 225' 10.2 270' 10.2 270' 6.8 315' 8.7 315• 3.4 v MAR 22 ' 91 16 28 518 483 9313 AGE - 015 �an_nv 1 a1.1 I.MN 4 0b e 1 1 16 . L2 80W 4C, atiork. M44 eayelile Loaationt 45 Shirley N. Lat. 40'44' 46" W. LOW. 7305123" N. Lat. 40•47139" W. io 7R•gg' 38" eat inn 3AQ— aaS`z3 39 dau' - N 06 4S•8 8.4 miles N 00 E 8.6 miles 45• 9.2 90' 10.1 90' 9.9 135' 10.2 135' 7.3 180' 10.2 1904 7. 225• 10.2 2150 6.9 170• 9.1 270* 9.0 3l5' 3130 9.9 8#8 LOcatiOnt 946 Riverhead LOCdtiOnt #47 Shelter Island N. Lat 40055' 28" W. Long. 72'4I ' 36" Lan. 4101' 30" W. Lo g s 72021 'll" aP A 39 dBU Lear n9 3 N 00 E 4. 2 miles N 0' E 5. 6 miles 45' S.3 45• 8.2 90• 7.8 90• 9.9 13S' 8.5 1350 9.9 180' 9.7 1800 896 2259 7 .9 2259 862 2700 6.9 270' 9.6 315' 4,8 315• 5. 1 MAR 22 191 16:30 518 465 9313 PAOE . 016 • �•• v. n_nv i Mill LIAN J Mb : T T T R , J 7 NHW 139Hd Itl101 r• ocationa f49 8aet 8ampton 4pra ;ottt 048 BoathW=Pton 72'10' 18" • " N. LO 73*24113" tJ. La 40.59' 34" T i.�on�_ y, .40 5S 32 . �. 8ear An u BC11 A >ft p• 1r 9.4 miles 8 0. 1; 11 .0 miles 4 9.0 459 9.5 90. 8.9 90' 10.5 1350 8'0 1350 10.7 180• 8.7 190• 10.5 225' 8.5 225• 10.1 270• 8.4 270• LO.10.9 315• 8.2 315, • � V r 469 9313 pApE . 017 _.: �. ' , ;� • �Xh % bi7'� i sx f� a � A. hY P�? {v _ tr ; s�� r gn eY r xr I L S N i M M S �- t 1t f7N � jai F 3y > x ry w hmxt :t a jp+ s hy F 1u }}**S vtti FTS `"f3fa�p-F { .� x k- LAW OFFICES FISHER, WAYLAND, COOPER AND LEADER BEN C, FISHER 1255 TWENTY-THIRD STREET, N.W. BEN S. FISHER ,ROVER C. COOPER SMITE 800 MARTIN R. LEADER (1090-19541 RICHARD R. ZARAGOZA WASHINGTON, D. C. 20037-1125 CHARLES V. WAYLANO CLIFFORD M. HARRINGTON (191 0-19 8 01 JOEL R. KASWELL TELEPHONE (202) 659-3494 KATHRYN R. SCHMELTZER DOUGLAS WOLOSHIN TELECOPIER (202) 296-6518 BRIAN R. MOIR OF COUNSEL DAVID D. O%ENFORD BARRY H. GOTTFRIED WRITER'S DIRECT NUMBER JOHN O. HEARNE ANN K. FORD LARRY A. BLOSSEJACOBR - (202) 775-3531 B RUCE D. REENWA MCI MAIL- FWCLDC ELIOT J. ,REEN WAND C4RRO LL JOHN YUNG JOHN JOSEPH MCVEIGH KENNETH M. KAUFMAN BARRIE D. BERMAN JOHN K. HANE III* April 11, 1991 BRUCE F. HOFFMEISTER MICHELLE N. PLOTKIN SCOTT R. FLICK FRANCISCO R. MONTERO GREGORY L. MASTERS' MATTHEW P ZINN ROBERT C. FISHER KAREN M. CORR' JOAN A. SULLIVAN* LAUREN ANN LYNCH' No....ITT..1. C. VIA TELECOPIER William D. Moore, Esq. Moore & Moore Attorneys at Law Clause Commons Suite 3 Main Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Mr. Moore: This firm represents Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One (^Metro One") before the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") . This letter is in response to your request for confirmation of the scope of the Metro One FCC license. Metro One is licensed by the FCC to provide Domestic Public Cellular Radio Telecommunications Service on the "Block A" cellular frequencies in the New York Modified MSA. The New York Modified MSA, as defined in Section 22.904 (e) of the FCC's rules, is a consolidation of the New York, NY/Nassau-Suffolk, NY/Newark, Jersey City and Paterson-Clifton-Passaic, NJ MSAs. Metro one's initial FCC construction authorization, granted on October 31, 1984, proposed to provide service within a Cellular Geographic Service Area ("CGSA") which encompassed virtually all of the dry land area within the New York Modified i MSA (FCC File No. 26126-CL-CP-82) . By May 15, 1986, Metro One had completed construction of the initial phase of its system and was granted a cellular system license (FCC Call Sign KNKA310) for a term ending October 1, 1995. Thereafter, and within the five- William D. Moore, April 11, 1991 Page 2 year period permitted under the FCC's rules, Metro One expanded its CGSA so that it now includes all of the land and water areas within the New York Modified MSA, plus certain minor extensions into neighboring areas of Connecticut, New York and New Jersey (FCC File Nos. 00002-CL-MP-88 ; 02801-CL-MP-89; and 02813-CL-MP- 89) . Metro One's CGSA now encompasses all of the land area of Nassau and Suffolk Counties and adjacent waters, including those portions of Long Island Sound which lie within the State of New York. Metro One's current instrument of authorization, FCC File No. 08548-CL-L-91, issued March 20, 1991, includes approximately 125 separate transmitter sites or cell sites. Under the FCC's rules, Metro One is required to obtain prior FCC approval for the construction and operation of an additional cell site only if some portion of the service contour will fall outside the CGSA. The distance from the Town of Southold to the nearest CGSA boundary is approximately 10 miles. Metro One has constructed several cells on Long Island, including those at Patchogue and Stony Brook with radii of less than ten miles. If Metro One were to construct a similar cell at Southold, it would merely need to notify the FCC of construction at the time operation commences. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Very truly `/y�/ours, La 112 xYbosser LAB:lh APR 151991 J � Carman -Dunne, P.C. Consulting Engineers FRED MEYER,JR.,PAE9mENT CCIVIL ENGINEEJWSURVEYORS TWO LAKEVIEW AVENUE•LYNBROOK,L.L,N. Y. 11563 RICHARD H.SCHROEDER,JR, MUNICIPAL CONSULTANTS JOHN J.TOSCANO SDE PLANNING TELEPHONE 516599-5563 MICHAEL R.CAVOLI HIGHWAY DRAINAGE FACILUIES FAX NO.:516 5 9115 7 7 RAYM RAYMOND E.DAWBER STREET LIGHTING TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS ENERGY CONSERVATION REALTY SUBDIVISIONS March 28, 1991 Mr. William D. Moore, Esq. Moore & Moore Attorneys at Law Clause Commons, Suite 3 Main Road, P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 Re: Metro-One, Site No. 228. 1 .3 Town of Southold JGA Project No. 9037-174 Dear Mr. Moore: As requested by Metro-One, we have measured the heights of the existing trees that surround the proposed site of the monopole installation. We find that the heights vary to a maximum of 40± feet. Please contact me if you should require any additional information. Very truly yours, CARMAN-DUNNE, P.C. 3ohBipToscano, P. L.S. Vice President JJT:m cc: E Weingart - Metro-One C. Conover - Metro-One L. Lorimer - Metro-One A. Carbone - JGA s � �oS�FFaLK�oG� APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS rT' Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr. �1 �f. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. T P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 i i� Lvl+� �ln LZnL -a f'p" ^".'.4n'L�,J FILL MAIN ROAD - S. R. 23 SOUTHOLD, N.Y-11971 (14to /o '0d R. m . fu — �C t /J J - r-- APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS \ SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman-. Charles Grigonis,Jr. a�` ;� �'.. Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 April 16, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons Suite 3, P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone Co. Special Exception Dear Mr. Moore: Please find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice confirming the hearing on the proposed uses within the existing building as an unmanned telecommunications building and for the proposed construction of the monopole radio tower with antenna, as applied in the Special Exception application. Also enclosed is a copy of the Board SEQRA (Unlisted Action) Declaration determined after review by the board members of the Long Environmental Assessment Form voluntarily furnished by you. The Board Members will, of course, be individually conducting field inspections and reviews as may be required during this process. At the Board' s request, the public hearing on the height variance/interpretation request was not, however, placed on this April 30, 1991 calendar. This being a two-fold application, the Board chose first to address the issues on the applicability or interpretation under the zoning code for the proposed uses before proceeding with the height application. The request for the height interpretation/variance will be placed on a separate hearings calendar, immediately following the date of the Board's decision on the Special Exception. Further notice will be sent to you at that time. Yours very GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosures Southold Town Board of Appeals -27 - April 10 , 1991 Special Meeting GENERAL DISCUSSIONS: The Board Members generally discussed the town' s Home Occupations Law1under Local Law #10-1991 recently adopted by the Town Board -- which was before the Legislative Code Committee several times at length. HEARINGS FOR APRIL 30, 1991: On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, to schedule and authorize advertisement of the following matters for public hearings to be held by the Board of Appeals on TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 1991: 7 : 30 p.m. Appl. No. 4015 - MELVIN AND MOLLIE KURS. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-239. 4A, Section 100-244B, for permission to construct addition with an insufficient frontyard setback from the westerly property line, over existing patio. Location of Property: 360 Miami Avenue, Peconic, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 67, Block 06, Lot 016. 7:33 p.m. Appl. No. 4014 - JESSICA W. BARNARD. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III , Section 100-33 for permission to locate accessory building in an area other than the required rear yard. Location of Property: 4240 Paradise Point Road, Southold, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 81, Block 3, Lot 7. 7: 38 p.m. Appl. No. 3988 - ANTONIO VANGI. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244 and Article XXIII, Section 100-239. 4A for permission to construct addition with a setback of less than 100 feet from the top of the bluff along the Long Island Sound and with reduced side yard at 5.8 feet at its closest point. The lot area and width are nonconforming in this R-40 Zone District. Location of Property: 645 Glen Court, Cutchogue; County Tax Map No. 1000-83-1-17. 7 : 45 p.m. Appl. No. 4020 - KEITH HARRIS. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to construct addition with an insufficient (westerly) side yard set back. Location of Property: 265 Freeman Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map No. 1000-139-3-37. Southold Town Board of Appeals -28- April 10 , 1991 Special Meeting C (HEARINGS FOR APRIL 30, 1991 continued: ) 7:48 p.m. Appl. No. 4019 - CHARLES KREPP. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII', Section 100-239. 4B for permission to construct open deck addition with an insufficient setback from the retaining wall along high water mark. Location of Property: 1235 Island View Lane, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map No. 1000-57-2-18 . 7 :52 p.m. Appl. No. 4016 - JULIUS AND KATHERINE RAGUSIN. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Sections 100-242A and 100-244B for permission to construct addition to existing nonconforming dwelling structure, increasing the lot coverage and reducing the rear yard setback. Location of Property: 215 Hummel Avenue, Southold; County Tax Map No. 1000-63-2-14. 7: 58 p.m. Appl. No. 3998 - HENRY AND MARY RAYNOR. (Current Owners: Mr. and Mrs. Albert Mastropaolo) . Variances: ( 1) for approval of access as required by New York Town Law, Section 280A over private right-of-way extending off the north side of Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, to premises identified as County Tax Map Designation 1000-126-04-1, 2, 5; and (2) to the Zoning Ordinance, Article IIIA, Section 100-30A.3, requesting relief under the bulk area requirements of the proposed northerly parcel of 30, 162 sq. ft. and the proposed southeasterly parcel of 27, 062 sq. ft. The subject land is located in the R-40 Zone District, and is also shown on the "Map of A.L. Downs" as Lots No. 24, 25, 26 , 27, 28, 29, 30. Containing a total combined area of 1. 43+- acres. (Record is reopened to receive additional survey information. ) 8:00 P.M. Appl. No. 4012 - WILLIAM AND VIOLA DELUCA. Variances to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III , Section 100-32 for approval of insufficient lot area, depth and width of two parcels in this proposed division of land located along the west side of Luthers (Breakwater) Road, Mattituck; County Tax Map No. 1000-99-2-18. 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4017 - CHARLES BLEIFELD. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244(A) , AS AMENDED for permission to locate dwelling, swimming pool and garage structure with a reduced front yard setback. Location of Property: 1115 Private Road No. 16 at Bayview, Southold; Lots 41 and 42 - Cedar Beach Park Filed Map #90; 1000-90-4-19 & 20. 8: 15 p.m. Appl. No. 4022 - CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. Request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B( 1) , and Article III , Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a 104-ft. high Southold Town Board t Appeals -29- April 10 , 1991 Special Meeting monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, NY; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15, 1990, Map No. 8937 . County Tax Map No. 1000-108-4-11. 3 (part of 11) . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis and Villa. (Member Dinizio abstained as to Cellular appl* ) * * This resolution was adopted . NEW APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEWS/INSPECTIONS: The Board was advised of the following matters which are ready for public hearings and are expected to be held during the May Regular Meeting and Hearings Calendar ( tentative at this time for May 24, 1991 and to be confirmed prior to publication in the newspapers) : 1. Appl. of Michael Cholowsky provided SEQRA is finalized; 2. Both Applications of Linda Fischetti 3 . JULIUS RAGUSIN - Addition with excessive lot coverage and reduced rear yard. Substandard lot. 215 Hummel Avenue, Southold. 4. CHARLES BLIEFELD - One-family dwelling located proposed with reduced front, side, total sides, and accessory building in side yard area. Orchard Lane (private) , Southold. 5. CHARLES KREPP - Deck within 75 feet of water. 1235 Island View Avenue, Greenport. 6. KEITH HARRIS - Garage addition at 265 Freeman Road, Mattituck. * * * NEW REVIEW - INCOMPLETE: Appl. No. 4018 - WILHELM FRANKEN BY ELIZABETH THOMPSON, R.A. The following letter was authorized concerning this proposal to convert an existing one-family dwelling to a five-family dwelling in this B Zone District: " . . .Dear Ms. Thompson: Your recent application has been reviewed and is not complete for the reasons indicated below. You may submit the additional documentation when convenient, and the additional $200.00 filing fee check will be applied to the additional variances when furnished by you. ySouthold Town Board of Appeals -31- April 10, 1991 Special Meeting c) Article XXIV, Section 100-241A & C - Nonconforming Uses. The existing single-family dwelling use was/is a nonconforming use in this B Zone. Subsections A and C do not authorize structural alterations, extensions or any other changes involving nonconforming buildings with nonconforming uses, (except as may otherwise be permitted for a proposed conforming use and elimination of nonconforming use) . d) Please note the requirements under Section 100-191J concerning the parking regulations for multiple dwelling uses, subsections ( 1) through ( 5) , when preparing the PARKING PLAN. e) The Adjacent Property Owner Notification Forms should also include the above, should be RE-SENT by Certified Mail, furnishing the new postmarked receipts with the form and Affidavit of Mailing completed on the reverse side. Appl. No. 4022 and 4023 - CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE: Special Exception and Variance Applications. Member Dinizio indicated that he is abstaining in these two applications due to a possible conflict since he works with a competing corporation. The Board Members instructed that the application for a Special Exception be scheduled for April 30 , 1991, without the variance for height/interpretation, which will be held at a later calendar immediately following the date of the Board' s decision on the Special Exception. The Chairman was authorized to send a letter to the attorney for the applicant advising of the above. There being no other business properly coming before the board at this time, the meeting was adjourned at 11: 15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Linda F. Kowalski Approved - May 23 , 1991 f SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE OF - HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, Pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold,the following additional matters will be held for public hes, ings before the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the ---+ Southold TmssjujW.Main Road, STATE OF NEW YORK) Southold,NY 11971,on FRIDAY. JUNE 7, 1991, commencing at the )SS: times specified below: y y COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) 8:05 pm.Appl.No.4022-CEL- LULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY � � /(, �a METRO ONE.Continued hear said County, being duly swo of Mattituck, in request ing is the rest for special Excep rn /{,says that he/she Is Principal sion approval under Article VIM Sec- I Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper, lion 10 -SIB0-3IBlrand Article HI.m&�- Published at Mattituck, In the Town of Southold, County of lion 300-31B(6)f_or�I'anmanned telecommunications building in an Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which existing concrete o block 04-ft.badi and the annexed Is a printed copy,has been regularly construction of ■ 104-ft. high monopole radio tower with aaemu said Newspaper once each week for Published s for transmitting and receiving radio weeks signals to provide cellular telephone s C@ssively, common ng On the �?� Elijah',.Location ti Property:also — 19 '1 1 day Of Elijah', Lane,M■[tituck,NY; rho shown on Planning Board Map of May 15,1990,Map No.8937;Parcel ID#1000-108-4-I1.1 W of 10- 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 4031 ESTATE OF CHARLBS MORGAN. Request for Variance approving the location of an existing accessory Principal Clerk sm9c seucmm in the[soot yard coca, with a utbado at leas than that condi- tioned by prior ZBA decision ren- dered June 20. 1963 under Appeal Swore to before me this - � s576.Location of Property:930 Jack- son sneer,New suHoO[,NY:P■rcel day of V The Board of Appeals will at 19 said ! /� .,,�/ pyc" >L time and place hear any and all per U - f]OtilS: 1ti:- w.+li!MY sun,or representatives desiring to be (4% laptary Public,Stata of N,w York heard in the above matters.Written N0.52�4f05206-Suffolk County comments may also be submitted C77T"V M Expires April 30,19y`-� prior to the eondusian of the subject hearing. Each hearing will no[sun before the times designated above. For more information,please call 765-1809. Dated:May 16,1991. By ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Lind,Kowalski 163-1TM23 I . , NUTICC%0"�1L,5Y GIVEN, formerly of William J. Baxter and NOTICE IS hers; County Tax Map Parcel ID pursuant to Section 267 of the Town No. 1000-108-4-part of 11. tson of the subject premises, from s Law and the Codc of the Town of 8;00 p.m. Appl. No. 4116 — residential to non-residential. Loca- Southold,the following matters will LINDA TAGGART. 9'K,ls is an Ap- lion of Property:North Side of Main be held for public hearings before Cre peat of the March 13. 1992 Notice Road(State Route 25),at Arshamo- SO held for D TOWN I;OARp OP moque near Grcenport, (abutting of Disapproval issued by the Build- ing Inspector under Article XIV, properties of liquors, Restaurant. APPGAL$ at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road,Southold, Section 100-142 and Article XXIII, Mill Creek Liquors, The Pottery New Yolk 11971•°^WEDNESDAY. Section 100-239.4II (or approval or Place,etc.);County Tax Map Parcel DULY 29. 1992 commencing at the recognition of lot will,a substandard Nos. 1000-56-4-24 and 19. g es: size o! 15,285 s ft., for width 9:00 p.m. Appl. No. 4072 I, OW lire I No 4118 — q' Appl.No. 4072—VARUJAN AND 7:32 S J. ApP (frontage) along the Main Road GLADYS J.NllI-NE,Variance to the p LINDA AIber 26. AN. Appeal of 76.46 feet, and lot depth 125.0 feel. "J_onfng Ordinance, Article XXIV, At the time of transfer of title, the the November 26, I991 Notice of Section 100-2448.and Aft XXllI, ro rt was located in the 13-Li ht Disapproval of the Building Inspec- Scction 100-239.48 for permission to f y g for for a Variance to the"Zoning Or- Business Zone. Today, the property dinance,Article XXIII,Section 100- cons,nja deck addition w thu((cient is located in the Light Industrial(LI) cicnt side yard setback, 'Zone District. Location of Property: 239.4A and Article XXIV, Section bulkhead.and 100-244B, or Article III, Section setback from existing 68320 Main Road, Grecnpon; Map 'J with lot coverage at more than 209a of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 100-32, for permission to construct of the code limitation• �cation as°[ Of viar- and 186;County"Tax Map Parcel ID swimming pool and deck addition 340KnollCirele• No. 1000-53-2-2. with insufficient Setback and Property District 1000, with insufficient setback from sound ion;County Tax Map Lot 15; Gar- 8:15 P.M.'AppL No. 41175E— bluff/bank along the Long Island Section 31, Block 5, LINDA TAGGART. Request for a diners Bay Estates Lot No.31' Special Exception under Article Sound. Location of Property: 54455 7:37 p.m. Appl, No• 4115 T. XIII, Section 100-131B, as refer- (North Side) of County Road 48, eel STBPHGN AND ELLA SCIIMIDT. enccd from Article XIV, Section No.Gre 100 - County Tax Map Parcel Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, No. ]000-52-1-8. 244E for 100-141R for permission to esleb- Article XXIV•Section 100- lish retail gift shop in this Light The Board of Appeals will at the Article Xn to construct deck addtton above time and place hear any and ar and setback Industrial (LI) Zone District. Loca- with an insufbcicn'rc Y tion of Property:68320 Main Road, all persons or heard coconcerning representatives thedesse Southold, y' in to be heard concernin these at 340 Bay haven Lane, Greenporq Map of Peconic Bay g g "Map of Bay Haven" Lot No.s r Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186;Coun- applications.Written comments may Coum 9'ax Map Dal^ct 1(%)0, ty Tax map Parcel ID No. 1000-53- also be submitted prior to the con- Y Lor strict elusion of the subject hearing. Each 'ion 088,Block 04, EEL- 2-2. 7:40 p.m.Appl.No.4023— 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 4120 — hearing will not start before the time LULAR TELGPIIONG CO. Calla WILLIAM GOODALE AND MAT- madesion,tedplc above. For more infor- METRO ONE.91'is is an Appeal of mated:,my 14 c191 265-1809. TITUCK AUTO CENTER, INC. pe March 14, 91 Notice oflpssap- Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Dated:July A D P. INGER royal issued b Ere Budding sP le Article XXI, Section 100-212B for GGRARD P.GOGH CHAIRMAN Cr relic(from the front yard landscap- CHAIRMAN for for an Intcrpr..ta❑ono comccming a By Linda Kowalski p ,Section. Ci li 1c ing provisions o[ the zoning code. oseC 104[t.hei h'or,mion. a Location of Properly: 7655 NYS 7442-1TJv 1,6 structure Cor mdtoa trans a Rome 25 (Main Road). Laurel, near in the alternative, PP in restriction. Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map variance Crom die hei N I re Wcstion.erly Parcel No. 1000-122-06-30.1 (previ- Location of Property:( oust 30 side of EEjah's Lane and the Northere g 30 p.m. Appl. No. 4119SE— ly Side oC the MainRoad o shown on RICHARD GOODALE AND MAT- 25),Cu'choguc,NY; also shown°V d TITUCK AUTO CENTER, INC. Planning Board subdivision-appr now map of May , (Tenant). Special Exception to the l5 19 , property ZoningOrdinance Article X,Section or formerly of W .9ax MapBaaree1 ID 100-101B(12)for a permit authoriz- Others; County ing: (a) a new car sales estab- No.1000-10&4-Pan Of 11, _ lishment; (b)an establishment of an 7:50 P.M. APpI- No. 4022SE accessory use incidental to the pro- 'I'ELEPIIONIi CO. CELLULAR t for .,..1 ,�,.w „"• .ah•. Wdi.]•o „. h/b/a MIiTILO ONE. Reques ro, the sale and/or less. of used Y , 1 It�r.nl`t'^n -H....4M ..... B(I) vehicles;(e)outside display ofvchi- Article VIII, See,"" IW-SIB(I) cles, (d) accessory office use mci- and Anicic Ill.Section 100-318(6) dental to the new principal use as a for an unmanned telecommumca- con- new car sales establishment. Loca- tions building in an existing lion of Property: 7655 Main Road Crete block building an conslm t (NYS Rome 25).Laurel,near Matti- lion of a mOno(wle radio tower wish tuck, NY: County "fez Map Parcel antenna Cor transmitting and mceiv- No. 1000-122-06-30.I (prev.30). ing radio signals to Provide ccllular 8:45 p.m.(Reconvened from June telephone services' st�°iYt �c °f 30. 1992) Appl. No. 4001 — EU- Property: (N415) GENE M. LACOLLA. Variance to Eli ah's L ,and the Nonhedy Side an I this Zoning Ordinance, Anicic III, of the Main Road (NYS Route 25), .I Section 100-31A and 13, requesting Cutchoguc. NY;also shown onrP.v.d permission to change use of a por- ning Board subdivisiof aPny now 'lmap of May l5.1990;P 1x . w d i STATE OF NEW YORK) ) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) CCu'ct cc'-1 un of Mattituck, in said County, being duly sworn, says that he/she is Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper, published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been regular- ly published in said Newspaper once each week for I weeks successively, commencing on the [(4 day ofPrin 19 � eipal Clerk Sworn to before me this ZO' 1 day of19�7/ CAhIERINE A.O'BRIEN Notary Public,State of New Yak No.4966586 Oualified in Suffolk County Commission Expkes May 14.192 G p.m. Appl. No. 4022SE —CELLULAR TELEPHONE 8;30 p.m. Appl. No. 4119SE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE. Re- mitted prior to the conclusion of quest for Special Exception ap- RICHARD GOODALEAND MATTITUCK AUTO the subject hearing. Each hear- NOTICE proval under Article VIII, See- CENTER, INC. (Tenant). tng will not star[ before the OF HEARING tion 100-81B(1)and Article III, times designated above. For I Section 100-31B(6) for an on- Special Exception a the Zoning more information, please call NOTICE IS HEREBY Ordinance, Article a Section manned telecommunications �,� 765-1809. building m ]00-1O1B(12) for a permit. GIVEN, pursuant to Sec[iorr g' an existing concrete Dated: RDJulyP. , 1992. EH block building authorizing: (a)a new car sales 267 of the Town Law and the: gandconstruction GERARD P. GOEHRINGER' of a mono establishment;(b)so establish- CHAIRMAN ' Code of the Town of Southold, pole radio tower witty men[ of an accessory use in- I the following matters will be j antenna for transmitting and By Linda Kowalski held for public hearings before receiving radio signals to provide cidental to the proposed new car 1X-7/16/92(6) the SOUTHOLD TOWN cellular telephone services. sales establishment for the sale BOARD OF APPEALS at the I Location of Property: (#415) and/or lease of used vehicles; d) -vl Southold Town Hall, 53095 Westerly side of Elijah's Lane outside display use incidles,ental to Main Road, Southold, New, and the Northerly Side of the accessoryofficeuseincidental York 11971, on WEDNESDAY, Main Road (NYS Route 25), the new principal use as a new JULY 29, 1992 commencing a4 Cutchogue, NY; also shown on car sales establishment. Loca- �J the following times: Planning Board subdivision- tion a of Property: 5), Main/� 7:32 p.m. Appl. No. 4118 — appproved map of May 15, Road (NYS Route 25, Laurel, GLADYS J. MILNE. Variance- near Ma[[i Parcuck,el NY: County to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti- 1990;Property now or formerly Tax Map Parcel N. I000- of William J.Baxter and Others; I I22-06-30.1 (prey. nve cle XXIV, Section 100-244B; 8:45 p.m. (Reconvened from and Article XXIII, Section County Tax Map Parcel ID No. June 30, 1992) Appl. No. 4091 100-239AB for permission to I000-108-4-part of 11. — EUGENE M. LACOLLA. construct deck addition with in• 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 4116 — Variance to the Zoning Or- sufficient side yard setback,in- LINDA TAGGARE This is an dinance, Article 111, Section sufficient setback from existingAppeal of the March 13, 1992 100 and B, requesting per- bulkhead,and with lot coverage j Notice of Disapproval issued by '' mission to change use of a por- '. at more than 20% of the code j the Building Inspector under es tion of the subject premises, limitation. Location of Proper- Article XIV, Section 1W-1421. from residential to non- ty: 240 Knoll Circle, East and Article XXIII, Section residential. Location of Proper- Marion; County Tax Map 100-239.4B for approval or ty: North side of Main Road'. District 1000,Section 37,Block recognition of lot with a (State Route 25), at Aug 5,Lot 15;Gardiners Bay Estates substandard size of 15,285 sq. shamomoque near Greenport, Lot No. 31. ft., lot width (frontage) along j (abutting properties of 7:37 p.m. Appl. No. 4115 - the Main Road 76.46 feet, and Hollister's Restaurant, Mill STEPHEN AND ELLA lot depth 125.0 feet.At the time Creek Liquors, The Pottery SCHMIDT. Variance to the of transfer of title,the property Place, etc.); County Tax Map Zoning Ordinance, Article was located in the B-Light Parcel Nos. County T and Map XXIV, Section 1W-2448 for Business Zone. Today, the pro- 19. 9:00 p.m. Appl. No. 4072 — 1 permission to construct deck ad- I perty is located in the Light In- VARUJAN AND LINDA dition with an insufficient rear s dustrial (LI) Zone District. ARSLANYAN. Appeal of the yard setback at 340 Bay Haven-4 Location of Property: 68320 November 26, 1991 Notice of Lane, Southold, "Map of Bay Main Road,Greenport;Map of Disapproval of the Building In- Haven"Lot No.27;County Tax Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. Spector for a Variance [o the Map District 1W0,Section 088, 185 and 186; County Tax Map Zoning Ordinance, Article Block 04, Lot 24. Parcel ID No. IOW-53-2-2. XXIII,Section 100-239.4A and 1 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 4023 — 8:15 p.m.Appl.No.41175E— CELLULAR TELEPHONE LINDA TAGGART.Request for Article XXIV,Section 100-244B, CO.d/b/a METRO ONE.This a Special Exception under Are Iti or Article Ill, Section 1 W-32, title XIII, Section IW-131B, as for permission to construct ' is an Appeal of the March 1 swimming pool and deck addi- 1991 Notice of Disapproval referenced from Article XIV, I Lion with insufficient sideyard(s) issued by the Building Inspector Section 100-141B for permission j and with insufficient setback for an Interpretation under Ar- j to establish retail gift shop in from sound bluff/bank along 1 title XXIII, Section 1W-230 this Light Industrial(LI) Zone the Long Island Sound. Loca- concerning a proposed 104 ft. District. Location of Property: height of a monopole structure 68320 Main Road, Greenport; for radio transmission, and in Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot tion of Property: 54455 (North d the alternative, appellant re- I Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Side) of County Road 48✓ quests a variance from the Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2. Greenport; County Tax Map height restriction. Location of 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 4120 Parcel No. I000-52-1-8. Property:(#415)Westerly side of W ILLIAM GOODALE AND The Board of Appeals will at MATTITUCK AUTO CEN- the above time and place hear Elijah's Lane and the Norther# any and all persons or re r ly Side of the Main Road(NYS TER,INC.Variance to the Zon- p esen- Route 25),Cutchogue,NY;also ing Ordinance, Article XXI, tatives desiring to be heard con- shown on Planning Board Section I00-212B for relief from cerning these applications. Writ- Subdivision-approved map of the front yard landscaping pro- ten comments may also be sub- May 15, 1990; property now or visions of the zoning code. formerly of Wiliam J. Baxter Location of Property:7655 NYS,14 and Others; County Tax Map' Route 25 (Main Road), Laurel., Parcel ID No. 1000-108-4 near Mattituck, NY; County part of 11. Tax Map Parcel No. 1000- 122-06-30.1 (previously 30). y ~ • COUNTY Of- SUFFOLS S'ISTATE01= NEW YORK ss: Patricia Wood,- being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, haS been .published in said Long Island 'Traveler-Watchman once each week for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . weeks successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . clay of . . . . . �. . . . ., 19 yL. c Sworn to before me this . •. . . . . . . . . . . 2 . day of . • • • VVV c 19 L Notary Public BARBARA A. SCHNEIDER NOTARY PUBLIC, SL.te of New York No. 4BOG846 Qualifier) in Suffolk Coyynty Commission Expires 9/312 Af F914, APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ©� SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman o E �1 Supervisor Charles Gri onis,Jr. W I x g Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 James inizio Villa ,��' vb�! Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time, date and place of the public hearing concerning your recent application is a copy of the Legal Notice, as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman, Inc. and Suffolk Times, Inc. Please have someone appear in your behalf at the time specified in the event there are questions brought up during the same and in order to prevent a delay in the processing of your application. Your public hearing will not start before the time allotted in the attached Legal Notice. Additional time will, of course, be available. A drafted or final written copy of your presentation, if lengthy, is always appreciated. Please feel free to call our office prior to the hearing date if you have any questions or wish to update your file. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski Enclosure APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS �L �' SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman _ ' s Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. c' i a Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. L4 P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. `"'t® Robert A.Villa < Southold,New York 11971 a 1 Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone (516)765-1809 r Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NOTICE OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following matters will be held for public hearings before the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York 11971, on WEDNESDAY, JULY 29, 1992 commencing at the following times: 7: 32 p.m. Appl. No. 4118 - GLADYS J. MILNE. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, and Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4B for permission to construct deck addition with insufficient side yard setback, insufficient setback from existing bulkhead, and with lot coverage at more than 20% of the code limitation. Location of Property: 240 Knoll Circle, East Marion; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 37, Block 5, Lot 15; Gardiners Bay Estates Lot No. 31. 7: 37 P.M. Appl. No. 4115 - STEPHEN AND ELLA SCHMIDT. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244B for permission to construct deck addition with an insufficient rear yard setback at 340 Bay Haven Lane, Southold, "Map of Bay Haven" Lot No. 27; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 088, Block 04, Lot 24. ` Page 2 - Legal Noti� • Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals 7: 40 p.m. Appl. No. 4023 - CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE. This is an Appeal of the March 14, 1991 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector for an Interpretation under Article XXIII, Section 100-230 concerning a proposed 104 ft. height of a monopole structure for radio transmission, and in the alternative, appellant requests a variance from the height restriction. Location of Property: ( #415) Westerly side of Elijah' s Lane and the Northerly Side of ,,11 tuck the Main Road (NYS Route 25) , , NY; also shown on Planning Board subdivision-approved map of May 15, 1990; property now or formerly of William J. Baxter and Others; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-108-4-part of 11. 7: 50 p.m. Appl. No. 4022SE - d/b/a METRO ONE. Request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B(1) and Article III, Section 100-31B(6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete f s I block building and construction of a monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: ( #415) Westerly side of Elijah' s Lane and the Northerly Side of the Main Road (NYS Route 25) , nab )uck , NY; also shown on Planning ((( Board subdivision-approved map of May 15, 1990 ; property now or formerly of William J. Baxter and Others; County Tax Map a> Parcel ID No. 1000-108-4-part of 11 . 8: 00 p.m. Appl. No. 4116 - LINDA TAGGART. This is an Appeal of the March 13 , 1992 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Page 3 - Legal Noti• • Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals Building Inspector under Article XIV, Section 100-142 and Article XXIII, Section 100-239. 4B for approval or recognition of lot with a substandard size of 15,285 sq. ft. , lot width (frontage) along the Main Road 76 . 46 feet, and lot depth 125. 0 feet. At the time of transfer of title, the property was located in the B-Light Business Zone. Today, the property is located in the Light Industrial (LI ) Zone District. Location of Property: 68320 Main Road, Greenport; Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2. 8: 15 p.m. Appl. No. 41175E - LINDA TAGGART. Request for a Special Exception under Article XIII , Section 100-131B, as referenced from Article XIV, Section 100-141B for permission to establish retail gift shop in this Light Industrial (LI ) Zone District. Location of Property: 68320 Main Road, Greenport; Map of Peconic Bay Estates Lot Nos. 185 and 186; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-53-2-2. 8: 25 p.m. Appl. No. 4120 - WILLIAM GOODALE AND MATTITUCK AUTO CENTER, INC. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXI, Section 100-212B for relief from the front yard landscaping provisions of the zoning code. Location of Property: 7655 NYS Route 25 (Main Road) , Laurel, near Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-122-06-30. 1 (previously 30) . 8: 30 p.m. Appl. No. 41195E - RICHARD GOODALE AND MATTITUCK AUTO CENTER, INC. (Tenant) . Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article X, Section 100-101B( 12) for a permit Page 4 - Legal Noti• • Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals authorizing: (a) a new car sales establishment; (b) an establishment of an accessory use incidental to the proposed new car sales establishment for the sale and/or lease of used vehicles; (c) outside display of vehicles, (d) accessory office use incidental to the new principal use as a new car sales establishment. Location of Property: 7655 Main Road (NYS Route 25) , Laurel, near Mattituck, NY: County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-122-06-30. 1 (prey. 30) . 8:45 p.m. (Reconvened from June 30, 1992) Appl. No. 4091- EUGENE M. LACOLLA. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31A and B, requesting permission to change use of a portion of the subject premises, from residential to non-residential. Location of Property: Location of Property: North Side of Main Road (State Route 25) , at Arshamomoque near Greenport, (abutting properties of Hollister's Restaurant, Mill Creek Liquors, The Pottery Place, etc. ) ; County Tax Map Parcel Nos. 1000-56-4-24 and 19. 9: 00 P.M. Appl. No. 4072 - Appl. No. 4072 - VARUJAN AND LINDA ARSLANYAN. Appeal of the November 26, 1991 Notice of Disapproval of the Building Inspector for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, Section 100-239. 4A and Article XXIV, Section 100-244B, or Article III, Section 100-32, for permission to construct swimming pool and deck addition with insufficient sideyard(s) and with insufficient setback from sound bluff/bank along the Long Island Sound. Location of Property: 54455 (North Side) of County Road 48, Greenport; Page 5 - Legal Noti• • Hearings for July 29, 1992 Southold Town Board of Appeals County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-52-1-8. The Board of Appeals will at the above time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring to be heard concerning these applications. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before the times designated above. For more information, please call 765-1809. Dated: July 14, 1992. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski --------------------------------------------------------------x Mailing List of Legal ice for July 29 , 1992 He.*ngs : Copies mailed 7/14/92: Mr. and Mrs. R. Milne Mr. and Mrs. Stephen Schmidt P.O. Box 394 450 Bay Haven Lane East Marion, NY 11939-0394 Southold, NY 11971 Allen M. Smith, Esq. (Re: Cellular Telephone Co. ) 737 Roanoke Avenue Moore & Moore , Esqs . (Re : Cellular Tel . ) P.O. Box 1240 P .O . Box 23 Riverhead, NY 11901-1240 Mattituck , NY 11952 Mr. Merlon Wiggin, P.E. Mrs. Linda Taggart Peconic Associates, Inc. Box 249 P.O. Box 672 Southold, NY 11971 Greenport, NY 11944 J. Kevin McLaughlin, Esq. (Re: Goodale) P.O. Box 1210 1050 Youngs Avenue Southold, NY 11971 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. (Re: LaColla) P.O. Box 1547 180 Old Country Road Riverhead, NY 11901-1547 Mr. and Mrs. F.M. Flynn (Re: LaColla) P.O. Box 144 Southold, NY 11971 Mr. and Mrs. Varnjan Arslanyan Apt. PH-11 - South Building 1055 River Road Edgewater, NJ 07020 Mr. G. Townsend Smyser (Re: Arslanyan) 302 Prospect Street Ridgewood, NJ 07450 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Sherman (Re: Arslanyan) P.O. Box 1002 Southold, NY 11971 Mr. and Mrs. Wilbur C. Allcot 527 Paramus Road Paramus, NJ 07652 Mr. Robert H. Whelan, P.E. (Re: Arslanyan) P.O. Box 590 Mattituck, NY 11952-0590 �dv APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L. HARRIS 7 Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman > Charles Grigonis,Jr. ✓l'': 3�! Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. 4� _ P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. '_ Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE OF HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following additional matters will be held for public hearings before the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971, on FRIDAY, JUNE 7, 1991, commencing at the times specified below: 8: 05 p.m. Appl. No. 4022 - CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. Continued hearing in the request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B( 1) , and Article III, Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a 104-ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, NY; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15, 1990, Map No. 8937; Parcel ID #1000-108-4-11. 1 (part of 11) . Patge 2 - Legal Notico Hearing for June 7, 1991 Southold Town Board of Appeals 8 :25 p.m. Appl. No. 4031 - ESTATE OF CHARLES MORGAN. Request for Variance approving the locatibnrof an' existing accessory garage structure in the front yard area, with a setback at less than that conditioned by prior ZBA decision rendered June 20, 1963 under Appeal #576. Location of Property: 930 Jackson Street, New Suffolk, NY; Parcel ID #1000-117-10-6 . The Board of Appeals will at said time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring to be heard in the above matters. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before the times designated above. For more information, please call 765-1809. Dated: May 16, 1991. BY ORDER OF THE -SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski ---------------------------------------------------------------x TO: Times-Review Delivered 5/14/91 L.I . Traveler-Watchman For Publication Town Clerk Bulletin Board ( lobby) ZBA Board Members and Files ALSO ON 5/16/91 TO: William D. Moore, Esq. (For Cellular Telephone) Mr. Roy Radigan ( for Charles Morgan Estate) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK SUPPLEMENTAL I ss: S'I'A I'E OP NEW YORK NOTICE OF HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIV- EN,pursuant to Section 267of Patricia Wood,' being duly sworn, says that she is the The 7bwn Law and the Code of Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, the Town of Southold, the a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; following additional matters will be held for public hearings and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, before the SOUTHOLD TOWN has been ,published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman BOARD OF APPEALS at the I once each week for . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ! • • • • weeks Southold Town Hall, Main ;Road, Southold, NY 11971, on 0�3 FRIDAY, JUNE 7, 1991, com- I Successively, commencing On the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . mencing at the times specified i below: j ,,ma�yy,, 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 4022- clay of . . . . . . . . ./!L!"N. . . . .. CELLULAR TELEPHONE // COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE.Continued hearing in the ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' • • ' . . ' . . . . request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B(1),and Article J III, Section 100-31B(6) for an Sworn to before me This . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . clay of I telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction p . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. .?� . . . . , 19 .��. . of a 104-ft.high monopole radio' tower with antenna for transmit- ting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone set- vices.Location of Property:415 Elijah's Lane, Mattituck, NY; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .�' . !. . . . . . . . . . . . . • �. . . . . . . also shown on Planning Board Notary Public Map of Map 15, 1990,Map No. BARBARA A. SCHNEIDER 8937; parcel ID No. NOTARY PUBLIC, St^te of New York 108-4-11.1 (part of 11). No. 4806846 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 4031- Qualified in Suffolk Cognty ESTATE OF CHARLES MOR- j Commission Expires f f31 GAN. Request for variance ap- proving the location of an ex- isting accessory garage structure in the front yard,with a setback at less than that conditioned by prior ZBA decision rendered June 20, 1963 under Appeal No. 576. Location of Property: 930 Jackson Street, New Suffolk, NY;Parcel ID No. 1000-117-10-6. The Board of Appeals will at said time and place hear any and all persons or representatives, desiring to be heard in each of the above matters.Written com- ments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before the times designated above. For more in- ' formation,please call 765-1809. Dated: May 16, 1991 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN i By: Linda Kowalski IX-5/23/91(72) _ cc�7sF�.rns.,, NOTICE IS Hf.KeBY GIVEN, Pursuant to Section 267 of New York Town Law and the Code of the Town 8:05 p.m. „ppl. No. 4017 — he Southold, the following public CHARLES BLEIFELD. Variances to STATE OF NEW YORK) hearings will be held by the the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF Section 100-33 and Article X , )SS' XIV APPEALS at a Regular Meeting,at Section 100-244(A)for (a)permis- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) the Southold Town Hill,53095 Main lion to locate swimming pool and Road, SQJA4herT,_NY 11971, on garage structures as accessory uses ) /,TUESDAY,APRIL 30,1991: incidental to the SNAQQ/1/ �QC/� of Mattituek, In 7:30 p.m. Appl. No. 4015 — Proposed residence MELVIN AND MOLLIE KURS. a , a daher than requred rear r (b) permission to locate said County, being duly sworn,says that he/she Is Principal Variance to the Zoning Ordinagce, d new dwelling structure with reduced Clerk Of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper, Article XXIV,Section I00.239.4A, side yard setbacks and reduced floor I Section 100-244B,for permission to yard setback. Location of Property: published at Mattituek, in the Town of Southold, County of construct addition with an insufficient 1115 Private Road No.16 at Bayview; fmntyard setback from the westerly Southold;Las 41 and 42 as shown on Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which pro erty line, over existing patio: the Cedar Beach Park Filed Map No: the annexed is a printed copy,has been regularly published in La anon ec Property: 360 Miami 9P, County Tax Map No. 1000-90-4- Av rue, Peconic,NY; County Tax 19 and 20. said Newspaper once each week for / weeks District b 1000,Section 67,Block :15 p.m.Appl.No.4022—CEL-' su cessively, commenging on the day of 06,LotLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY 7:33 p.m.Appl.No.4014—JES- d/b/a METRO ONE.Request for Spe•SICA W.BARNARD.Variance to the cial Ezceptiou approval under Article Zoning Ordinance,Article III,Section V1II,Section 100-81 B(I),and Article. !]00-33 for permissionmlowte aazs- III, Section ]00-31B(6) for an nary building N an area other khan the unmanned telecommunications build- required rear yard. Location,of Pmp- ing in an existing concrete block. erty: 4240 Paradise Point Road; building and construction of a 104-fL \ Southold,NY:Cotmty Tax Map Dis• high monopole radio tower with Pripeipa C rk trio]000,Ssxtiou 81,Block 3,Lot 7, ant'sma for transmitting and receiving. 7:38 p.m. Appi. No. 3988 _ radio signals to provide cellular tele- ANTONIO VANGI..Variance to the phone services.Location of Properly:: Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV; 415 Elijah'a Lane, Mattituek,NY:' ���(qg�� ee�(/�/�j Sutiou I00-244 and Article XXII7; also shown on Planning Board Map` $Wert t0 b forf���thit Section 100-239.4A for permission to of May 15, 1990, Map No. 8937; construct addition with a setback of. County Tax Map No. 1000-108-4/ day 0 19 ! less than 100 feet from the top of the. 111.3(part of 11). bluff along the Long Island Sound' The Board of Appeals will at said and with side yards at less than the time and place hear any and - required 15 and 20 fceL The dwelling sans or o be as exists is norsconfonning as to total heard in ea h of the aboveentatives desiring at ers. sideyards,and the lot area and width Written comments may also be sub- -- are nouoonforming in this R-40 Zone mined prior to the conclusion of the District. Location of Property: 645' subject hearing.Each hearing will not Glen Court,Cutchogue,NY;County start before the time allotted. Addi- Tax Map No.1000-83-1-17. ticnal time for your presentation will 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 4020 — be available, if needed. For more KEITH HARRIS. Variance to thei information,please call 765-1809. Zoning Ordia m,Article III,Section Dated:April 10,1991. 100-32 for permission to construct BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD addition with an insufficient(wester; TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS ly)side yard set back. Location of GERARD P,GOEHRINGEt Property:265 Freeman Road,Matti- CHAIRMAN luck,NY;County Tax Map No.IBM By Linda Kowalski139-3-37. 1022-1TA18 7:48 p.m. Appl. No. 4019 — CHARLES KREPP- Variance to the, Zoning Ordinance,Article XXHI; Section 100-239.4B forpemsission to- centnrua open deck addition with an insufficient setback from the retaining wall along high water mark."Orion of Properly; 1235 Island View Lane, Greenpori,NY.County Tax Map No. 1000-57-2-18. 7:52 p.m. Appl. No. 4016 — JULIUS AND KATHERINE RA- GUSIN. Variance to the Zoning Or- dinance,Article XXIV,Sections 100• 242A and 100-244B for permission,to cortstrtka addition to existing nomm- forming dwelling structure.increasing the la coverage and reducing the mat yard setback. Location of Property: 215 Hummel Avenue, Southold; County Tax Map No.1000-63-2-14: 7:58 p.m. Appl. No. 3998 — HENRY AND MARY RAYNOR. (Current Owners:Mr.and Mrs.Albert Mastropaolo). Variances: (1) for approval of access as required by, New York Town Law,Section 280A- over private right-of-way extending off the north side of Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel.to premises iden- tified as County Tax Map Designation 1000-126-04-1,2,5;and (2)to the Zoning Ordinance,Article ILIA,Sec- tion 100-30A.3,requesting relief under the bulk area requirements of the proposed northerly parcel of 30.162 sq.It.and the proposed south- easterly parcel of 27,062 sq.it. The object land is located in the R-40 one District,and is also shown orf he "Map of A. L. Downs"as Lots 'o.24,25,26.27,28,29.30. Cory/ wining a total combined area of 1.43t. acres.(Record is reopened to receive, .additional survey information) 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 4012 — WILLIAM AND VIOLA DELUCA. Variances to the Zoning Ordinance, Article 111, Section 100-32 for ap. proval of insufficient lot area,depth and width of two parcels in this pm- Posed division of land located along khe west side of Luther(Breakwater) Road, Mattituck�_.uniy lax Map No.100099-2-18. LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE IS HFNY wall along high water mark. , GIVEN, pursuant to on Location of Property: 1235.`% ��cle ill, Section 100-33 and 267 of New York Town Law and Island View Lan 244( le XXIV, Section too. e, No, 10 rt, locate for. (a) permission to the Code of the Town of NY;County Tax Map No. 1000- locate swimming Southold, the following public 57-2-18. B Pool and gar- ' hearings will be held by the 7:52 p.m. Appl. No. 4016— age structures as accessory uses SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD JULIUS AND KATHERINE incidental to the proposed the OF APPEALS at a Regular RAGUSIN. Variance to the deuce in re area other than the Meeting,at the Southold Town ZoningOrdinance, Article required rear yard,and we per- mission to locate new dwelling Hall, 53095 Main Road, XXIV, Sections 100-242A and structure with reduced side yard Southold,NY 11971,on TUES- 100-244B for permission to con- setbacks and reduced front yard DAY, APRIL 30, 1991• struct addition to existing non- setback. Location of Property: 7:30 p.m. Appl. No. 4015— conforming dwelling structure, 1115 Private Road No. 16 at Bay- MELVIN AND MOLLIE increasing the lot coverage and view, Southold; Lots 41 and 42 KURS. Variance to the Zoning reducing the rear yard setback. as shown on the Cedar Beach L_ S Ordinance, Article XXIV, Sec- Location of Property:215 Hum- Park Filed Map No. 90; Coun- , 0� tion 100-239.4A, Section mel Avenue, Southold; County ty 'Pax Map No. 1000-90-4-191 100.244B,for permission to con- Tax Map No. 1000-63-2-14. struct addition with an insuffi- 7:58 P.M. Appl. No. 3998— and 0. cient frontyard setback from the HENRY AND MARY RAY_ S:IS in. Appl. No. 4022— I �I y'j41 westerly property line,over exist- NOR. (Current Owners: Mr. CELLULAR TELEPHONE ins patio. Location of Proper- and Mrs. Albert Mastropaolo.) COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE.360 Miami Avenue,Peconic, Variances:(1)fora ONE. Request for Special Ex- NY; County Tax Map District approval ac Vill, s approval under Article cow as required by New York VIII, section 100-81B(1), and 1000,Section 67,Block 06,Lo[L' Town Law, Section 280A over 016. private right-of-way "tending Article III, Section 1o0-muni- B for an unmanned[elecommuni- 7:33 p.m. Appl. No. 4014— off the north side of Peconic?k1 JESSICA W. BARNARD. Var. Bay Boulevard, Laurel, to pre- cations building in an existing lance to the Zoning Ordinance, mises identified as County1'ax concrete block building and construction Article III, Section 100-33 for Map Designation 1000-126-04-1, o a ter wi high monopole radio permission to locate accessory 2, 5; and(2) to the ZoningOr_ tower wth re- building in an area other than dinance, Article ILIA, Section terra for transmitting and - t eiling radio signs to provide the required rear yard.Location 100-30A.3, requesting relief c Of Property:4240 Paradise Point under the bulk area re uire- cellular telephone services. Road, Southold, NY; County ments of the proposed norther- Location of Property: 415 Eli- Road, Tax Map District 1000,Section IY Parcel of 30,162 sq.ft.and the- jah's Lane,Mattituck,NY,also 81, Block 3, Lot 7.. proposed southeaster) shown on Planning Board Map 738 Parcel of C May Ta 1990,Map 1No,00 -108. P.M.p.m. Appl. No. a988— is located sq. ft. The subject land .County Tak Map No. 1000-]08- ANTONIO VANGI.Variance[o is located in the R-40 Zone Dis- 4-11.3 the Zoning Ordinance, Article trict, and is also shown on the (Part of 11). XXIV,Section 100-244 and At- "Ma of A.L. Downs"as Lots The Board of Appeals will at P said time and place hear any and [icle XXIII,Section 100-239.4A No. 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30. all persons or representatives de.4 for permission to construct Containing a total combined siring to be heard in each of the addition with a setback of less area of 1.43 t acres. (Record is above matters. Written com- than 100 feet from the top of the reopened to receive additional ments may also be'submitted bluff along the Long Island 'survey information.) Sound and with side yards at 8.00 p.m. Appl. No. 4012— prior to the conclusion of the less than the required 15 and 20 WILLIAM AND VIOLA DE- subject hearing. Each hearing feet. The dwelling as exists is LUCA.Variances to the Zoning will not start before the time al. nonconforming as to total side-'� Ordinance, Article III, Section lotted.Additional time for your Yards,and the lot area and width IM32 for approval of insuffi- Presentation o be available,if are nonconforming in this R-40 cient lot area, depth and width'✓5 heeded. For more information, I Zone District.Location of Pro- of two parcels in this proposed Please call it 10, 19. P P P Dated: April 10, 1991. petty: 645 Glen Court, Cut- division of land located along BY ORDER OF chogue, NY; County 'Pax Map the west side of Luthers(Break- No. 1000-83-1-17. water)Road,Mattituck;Coun- THE SOUTHOLD TOWN 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 4020— ty Tax Ma No. 1000-99-2-18. BOARD OF APPEALS P GERARD P. GOEHRINGER KEITH HARRIS. Variance to 8:05 P.M. Appl. No. 4017— the Zoning Ordinance, Article CHARLES BLEIFELD. Vari- CHAIRMAN III, Section 100-32 for permis-, ances to the Zoning Ordinance, By Linda Kowalski _ sion to construct addition with IX, 4/18/91 (4) an insufficient (westerly) side Yard setback. Location of Pro- perty:265 Freeman Road,Mat- tituck, NY, County Tax Map No. 1000-139-3-37. 7*48 P.M. Appl. No. 4019— CHARLES KREPP. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance,Arti- cle XXIII, Section 100-239.4B for permission to construct open deck addition with an insuffi- cient setback from the retaining COUNIY OFSUFFOLK* STATE OF NEW YORK •1 Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been ,published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman once each week for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . weeks Successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . day of . . . . . . . . a4 , . .n . . . . ., 19 9�. . . Sworn to before me this . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . day of . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..v�. . . . . . , 199.! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notary Public BARBARA A. SCHNEIDER NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York No. 4806846 Qualilied in Suitolk Coynty Commission Expires., Pj. Y ) �9 Z t � APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS s P c Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. _' P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time, date and place of the public hearing concerning your recent application is a copy of the Legal Notice, as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman, Inc. and Suffolk Times, Inc. Please have someone appear in your behalf at the time specified in the event there are questions brought up during the same and in order to prevent a delay in the processing of your application. Your public hearing will not start before the time allotted in the attached Legal Notice. If you or your representative should require more than 20 minutes to present your case, it is suggested that the extended presentation be submitted in writing at the hearing (if possible) . Please feel free to call our office prior to the hearing date if you have any questions or wish to update your file. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure J 1 I PEALS BOARD MEMBERS K _ SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of New York Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following public hearings will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at a Regular Meeting, at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, NY 11971, on TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 1991 : 7: 30 p.m. Appl. No. 4015 - MELVIN AND MOLLIE KURS. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-239. 4A, Section 100-244B, for permission to construct addition with an insufficient frontyard setback from the westerly property line, over existing patio. Location of Property: 360 Miami Avenue, Peconic, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 67, Block 06, Lot 016. 7: 33 p.m. Appl. No. 4014 - JESSICA W. BARNARD. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-33 for permission to locate accessory building in an area other than the required rear yard. Location of Property: 4240 Paradise Point Road, Southold, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 81, Block 3 , Lot 7. Page 2 - Board of Appeals Notice of Hearings Regular Meeting - April 30 , 1991 7: 38 P.M. Appl. No. 3988 - ANTONIO VANGI . Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244 and Article XXIII , Section 100-239. 4A for permission to construct addition with a setback of less than 100 feet from the top of the bluff along the Long Island Sound and with side yards at less than the required 15 and 20 feet. The dwelling as exists is nonconform- ing as to total sideyards, and the lot area and width are nonconforming in this R-40 Zone District. Location of Property: 645 Glen Court, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map No. 1000-83-1-17. 7 : 45 P.M. Appl. No. 4020 - KEITH HARRIS. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to construct addition with an insufficient (westerly) side yard set back. Location of Property: 265 Freeman Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map No. 1000-139-3-37. 7 : 48 P.M. Appl. No. 4019 - CHARLES KREPP. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII , Section 100-239. 4B for permission to construct open deck addition with an insufficient setback from the retaining wall along high water mark. Location of Property: 1235 Island View Lane, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map No. 1000-57-2-18. Page 3 - Board of Asals Notice of Hearings Regular Meeting - April 30, 1991 7 : 52 p.m. Appl. No. 4016 - JULIUS AND KATHERINE RAGUSIN. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Sections 100-242A and 100-244B for permission to construct addition to existing nonconforming dwelling structure, increasing the lot coverage and reducing the rear yard setback. Location of Property: 215 Hummel Avenue, Southold; County Tax Map No. 1000-63-2-14. 7 : 58 P.M. Appl. No. 3998 - HENRY AND MARY RAYNOR. (Current Owners: Mr. and Mrs. Albert Mastropaolo) . Variances: ( 1) for approval of access as required by New York Town Law, Section 280A over private right-of-way extending off the north side of Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, to premises identified as County Tax Map Designation 1000-126-04-1, 2, 5 ; and (2) to the Zoning Ordinance, Article IIIA, Section 100-30A. 3, requesting relief under the bulk area requirements of the proposed northerly parcel of 30,162 sq. ft. and the proposed southeasterly parcel of 27,062 sq. ft. The subject land is located in the R-40 Zone District, and is also shown on the "Map of A.L. Downs" as Lots No. 24, 25, 26, 27 , 28 , 29, 30. Containing a total combined area of 1. 43+- acres. (Record is reopened to receive additional survey information. ) 8: 00 p.m. Appl. No. 4012 - WILLIAM AND VIOLA DELUCA. Variances to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-32 for approval of insufficient lot area, depth and width of two Page 4 - Board of Oeals • Notice of Hearings Regular Meeting - April 30, 1991 parcels in this proposed division of land located along the west side of Luthers (Breakwater) Road, Mattituck; County Tax Map No. 1000-99-2-18. 8:05 P.M. Appl. No. 4017 - CHARLES BLEIFELD. Variances to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-33 and Article XXIV, Section 100-244(A) for: (a) permission to locate swimming pool and garage structures as accessory uses incidental to the proposed residence in an area other than the required rear yard, and (b) permission to locate new dwelling structure with reduced side yard setbacks and reduced front yard setback. Location of Property: 1115 Private Road No. 16 at Bayview, Southold; Lots 41 and 42 as shown on the Cedar Beach Park Filed Map No. 90; County Tax Map No. 1000-90-4-19 and 20. 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. 4022 - CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. Request for Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B( 1) , and Article III , Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a 104-ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio sign to provide cellular telephone services. Location. of Property: 415 ELijah' s Lane, Mattituck, NY; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15, 1990, Map No. 8937 . County Tax Map No. 1000-108-4-11. 3 (part of 11) . Page 5 - Board of deals • Notice of Hearings Regular Meeting - April 30, 1991 The Board of Appeals will at said time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring to be heard in each of the above matters. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before the time allotted. Additional time for your presentation will be available, if needed. For more information, please call 765-1809 . Dated: April 10, 1991. BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski ----------------------------------------------------------------x ec W Copies of the Legal Notices for Hearings to be held 4/30/91 were sent to the following on 4/15/91 Mr . & Mrs . Melvin Kurs 1404 Lowell Avenue New Hyde Park , NY 11040 Ms . Jessica W. Barnard 225 Elderfields Road Manhasset , NY 11030 Mr. John Scaramucci (Vangi ) 2045 Westphalia Road Mattituck , NY 11952 Marie Ongioni , Esq . (Vangi ) 218 Front St . - Box 562 Greenport , NY 11944 Mr . Keith Harris P . O . Box 513 Mattituck , NY 11952 Torkelsen Builders , Inc . ( Krepp ) P . O. Box 1475 Southold , NY 11971 Deborah Doty , Esq . (Ragusin ) P. O . Box 1181 Cutchogue , NY 11935 Mr. & Mrs . Henry Raynor (DeLuca and Mastropaolo ) 320 Love Lane Mattituck , NY 11952 Peter S. Danowski , Esq . (Beifeld) 616 Roakoke Avenue - P. O. Box 779 Riverhead , NY 11901 Wm. D. Moore , Esq . (Cellular Telephone d/b/a Metro One ) Clause Commons - Suite 3 Main Road - P . O. Box 23 Mattituck , NY 11952 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ° ?; SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. 4�! s' G' Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 ate,- James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 April 16, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons Suite 3, P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone Co. Special Exception Dear Mr. Moore: Please find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice confirming the hearing on the proposed uses within the existing building as an unmanned telecommunications building and for the proposed construction of the monopole radio tower with antenna, as applied in the Special Exception application. Also enclosed is a copy of the Board SEQRA (Unlisted Action) Declaration determined after review by the board members of the Long Environmental Assessment Form voluntarily furnished by you. The Board Members will, of course, be individually conducting field inspections and reviews as may be required during this process. At the Board' s request, the public hearing on the height variance/interpretation request was not, however, placed on this �6 April 30, 1991 calendar. This being a two-fold application, vim / the Board chose first to address the issues on the applicability or interpretation under the zoning code for the proposed uses before proceeding with the height application. The request for the height interpretation/variance will be placed on a separate hearings calendar, immediately following the date of the Board's decision on the Special Exception. Further notice will be sent to you at that time. Yours very /u , GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosures ` � �R 5 i`39� � PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS _ `3eOV L. HARRIS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairmanf; ^` George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward ? Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Mark S. McDonald P.O. Box 1179 Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE Southold. New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 April 4, 1991 William D. Moore, Attorney at Law Clause Commons Suite 3 Main Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Metro One site plan SCTM# 1000-108-4-11. 3 Dear Mr. Moore: The Planning Board has been notified of your application to the Board of Appeals for a Special Exception for a radio transmission tower with antenna and unmanned computer run equipment in an existing concrete block building. Until the Board of Appeals acts on your Special Exception request, the Planning Board must consider your application incomplete for the purpose of a SEQRA review. The Board will review other items in your site plan application simultaneously with the Board of Appeals review to insure the timely processing of your application. If you have any questions, or require further assistance please contact this office. Very truly yours, 3� �Bennett Orlowski Jr. ,//6 Chairman cc: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals t/ Page 3 • Special Meeting - April 5, 1991 Southold Town Board of Appeals BOARD REVIEW: MATTER OF THE APPLICATION of CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE ( Special Exception application was submitted on February 22, 1991 for review and processing) . The Board Members indicated that since a Long Environmental Assessment Form was voluntarily furnished by the applicant, the Board will review the same in time for the April 10, 1991 Special Meeting. At the April 10 , 1991 Meeting, the calendar of hearings for April 30, 1991 will be confirmed by the Board and subsequently advertised. The Special Exception (Use Permit) application has tentatively been placed on the April 30, 1991 hearings calendar. NEXT MEETINGS: The following meeting dates were confirmed with the Board: Wednesday, April 10, 1991 - Special Meeting Tuesday, April 30, 1991 ( instead of April 26) Ci RULES OF CONDUCT AND PROCEDURE: The Board discussed the proposed Rules of Conduct and Procedure drafted by Confidential Secretary Linda Kowalski and presently under review by the Town Attorney' s Office. Mrs. Kowalski indicated that she expected that the Town Attorney' s Office will be commenting on the proposal within the next week or so, and suggested that the Board further consider adoption of rules at one of the next two Z.B.A. meetings. (These Rules of Conduct and Procedure would be a supplement to those adopted previously by the Z.B.A. in or about 1958 . ) REMINDERS FOR BOARD INSPECTION AND REVIEWS PRIOR TO ADVERTISING, LINDA FISCHETTI - Special Exception and Variance applications for conversion of single-family dwelling to professional office use in this RO Zone. E/s Oaklawn Avenue, Southold. WILLIAM DELUCA - Area variances in proposed set-off division. . 4845 Breakwater (Luthers) Road, Mattituck. JESSICA BARNARD - Garage in front yard at a height over 18 feet. 4240 Paradise Point Road, Southold. ARTHUR CARLSON - Amended Application for Interpretation under Special Exception (Production of Wine Products) . APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS 7 r z a lr Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman > Charles Grigonis,Jr. `� a� 1 a •�o .,,' Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. `� ;v'. P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio. Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 SEQRA UNLISTED ACTION DECLARATION April 10 , 1991 Appeal No. 4022 SE Project Name: Cellular Telephone Co . , d/b/a Metro One County Tax Map No. 1000- 108-4-11 . 1 Location of Project: W/S Elijah ' s Lane , Matti tuck , NY Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project: Special Exception - Public utility use as principal use in this LB Zone This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted with the subject application indicating that no significant adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be project be implemented as planned, and: ( ) this Board wishes to assume Lead Agency status and urges coordinated written comments by your agency to be submitted with the next 20 days. (>C) this Board has taken jurisdiction as Lead Agency, has deemed this Board of Appeals application to be an Unlisted SEQRA Action, and has declared a Negative Declaration for the following reasons: a. An Environmental Assessment/liastlieenOstSbm0tted and evaluated, and/or b. An inspection of the property has been made, or C. Sufficient information has been furnished in the record to evaluate any possible adverse affect of this project as filed, and/or d. This application does not directly relate to new construction or on-site improvements. ( ) this Board refers lead agency status to your agency since the. Board of Appeals does not feel its scope of jurisdiction is as broad as the Planning Board concerning site changes and elements under the site plan reviews.- The area of jurisdiction by the Board of Appeals is not directly related to site improvements or new buildings. (However, if you do not wish to assume lead agency status within 15 days of this letter, we will assume you have waived same, and we will be required to proceed as Lead Agency.) For further information, please contact the Office of the Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at (515) 765-1809. tr / ,O r b OEOfEONICAL INVESTIGATION FOR METRO ONE FACILITY MAfTITUCK" LONG.-ISLAND, NEW YORK PREPARED FOR: JUENGERT GRUTZMACHER ASSOC. PREPARED BY: TECTONIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS P.C. W FEBRUARY 1991 Phi s a W:b. /7DrLCO1�YJ Y , C f T f VVVu 6f rt v .�M Y�y _S 1 1'�.0 tltin �. •vac•. ;r e'r ,. a TrCTONIC ENGMEERNG C0N LTANTS P.C. GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR METRO ONE FACILITY MATTITUCK; LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION ITEM PAGE 1.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION 1 4.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION 2 4. 1 Borings 2 4.2 Laboratory Testing 3 5.0 SUBSURFACE DESCRIPTION 3 6.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS 4 6.1 Monopole Foundation 4 7.0 GENERAL EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA 6 7. 1 Monopole Foundation 6 8.0 LIMITATIONS 8 FIGURE 1 SITE LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2 BORING LOCATION PLAN APPENDIX I BORING LOGS APPENDIX II LABORATORY TESTING APPENDIX III TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR CAISSON CONSTRUCTION TECTONIC EN NEEMNG CGNSULTMTG P.C. 1 .0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE A geotechnical investigation was performed in order to determine the subsurface conditions, delineate engineering characteristics of the subsurface materials and establish foundation design criteria for the proposed Metro One facilities to be located in East Mattituck; Long Island, Suffolk County, New York at Site No. 228.1.3 (Mattituck) . The investigation consisted of one (1) boring drilled by Soiltesting, Inc. in the vicinity of the proposed monpole. The results of the investigation and associated engineering analysis are discussed herein. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project involves the construction of a monopole which will be approximately 100 feet tall . A portion of an existing 20 foot by 42 foot one story block building will be used to house associated telecommunications equipment. The proposed monopole will be located approximately 60 feet west of the existing one story framed barn and approximately 15 feet west of the existing one story block building. Final monopole size, configuration and location are tentative at this time. 3.0 SITE DESCRIPTION The proposed site for the Metro One facility is in East Mattituck, New York. The site is located in the area northwest of the Elijah's Lane and Main Road intersection. The property for the proposed site is the second one north on Elijah's Lane from the intersection (see Figure 1). - 1 - TECTONIC ENOINEERINO CONEOLTGNTE PC. The site is presently occupied by two, one (1) story buildings. The large building is a framed barn structure presently used to house trucks and storage. The smaller structure is a 20 foot by 42 foot block structure, proposed to be restored and house telecommunications equipment (see Figure 2) . The rear half (west end) of the property is vegetated by low brush and grass with stands of, approximately 3 inch diameter, beech trees. Topographically the sites lowest elevation is in the vicinity of the proposed monopole location. There was no surface water or wet areas observed in this area. However, seasonal fluctuations and/or during periods of heavy precipitation surface water may accumulate in this area. 4.0 SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION The subsurface investigation was comprised of 1 boring performed by Soiltesting, Inc. on January 28, 1991 at the location indicated on Figure 2. The boring data obtained was supplemented by laboratory testing in order to verify field classification of soil samples. The borings and laboratory testing of soil samples are described herein. 4.1 Borings Tectonic Engineering Consultants' geotechnical representative was present during the drilling operations to monitor the work and modify the boring program as necessary to accommodate actual conditions. Boring MK-1 was drilled at the proposed monopole - 2 - TECTONIC EN NEENINO CONS LTL V.C. location. The boring was advanced by power auger drilling methods with a 2 inch hollow stem auger and advanced to a total depth of 42 ft. Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) and split spoon sampling was performed at maximum 5 ft. intervals in accordance with ASTM D 1586. Boring logs are contained in Appendix I. 4.2 Laboratory Testing Laboratory testing was performed on representative soil samples to verify field classification of samples and establish index properties of the soils. Testing included the following: a. Moisture content, ASTM D2216 b. Particle Soil Analysis, ASTM D422 In all , two (2) samples were tested. Laboratory test results are contained in Appendix II. 5.0 SUBSURFACE DESCRIPTION Results of the boring indicates that the subsurface soils generally consist of very loose to dense coastal plain sediment deposits that are predominantly granular in nature underlying a 6 to 8 inch layer of topsoil . The sediment deposits are comprised of a mixture of coarse to fine grained sands that are poorly graded with trace amounts of silt and gravel throughout. The soils generally increase in density with increased depths as indicated by the range of Standard Penetration Test (SPT) or IINII values encountered during the drilling operation. From _ 3 _ • TECTONIC ' EMGiNEEPoNG CONSULTRNTS P.L. depths of 0 to 15 feet the soils are very loose with SPT values ranging from 5 to 9 blows per foot. An increase in SPT values ranging from 13 to 14 blows per foot from 15 to 30 feet was noted, indicating a loose to medium dense sand stratum for the remaining 5 feet of the boring from 35 to 40 feet, the SPT values ranged from 29 to 70 blows per foot indicating that a medium dense to dense sand stratum was encountered. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 23 feet. Increased static groundwater levels due to seasonal fluctuation and/or during periods of heavy precipitation should be expected. 6.0 FOUNDATION RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the design considerations, economic feasibility and results of the subsurface investigation, recommended foundation systems for the proposed structures are as follows: 6.1 Monopole Foundation To accommodate static compressive loads due to the weight of the structure itself and the overturning moments created by wind and ice loading on the monopole, it is recommended that the monopole be supported on a large diameter caisson foundation. The caisson should penetrate to a minimum depth of 30 ft. below grade to accommodate the overturning and compressive loads on the monopole. An allowable bearing capacity of 3.0 tons per square foot should be assumed for compressive loading of the caisson. - 4 - TECTONIC EN WEMNO CONSULTANTS F.C. In determining the available shear strength of insitu soils, the values of internal friction assumed, were 28 degrees from ground level to a depth of 15 ft. , 30 degrees from a depth of 15 ft. to 35 ft. and 34 degrees from depths of 35 ft. to 40 ft. For resistance of lateral loads and overturning moments, allowable lateral earth pressure values per foot diameter of caisson will vary with depth as follows: DEPTH (FT) LATERAL RESISTANCE (PSF) 0-5 0 5 1250 10 2525 15 3800 20 5500 25 6650 30 7475 35 8275 40 9106 * Based on a factor safety of 2.5 Concrete for caissons shall have a minimum compressive strength of 4000 psi . Reinforcing of caissons shall conform with minimum requirements specified by the ACI code. Reinforcing cages shall be provided for the full depth of caisson to accommodate the overturning loads. - 5 - TECTONIC ENpIN IW CON LTM TS P.C. 7.0 GENERAL EARTHWORK CONSTRUCTION CRITERIA 7.1 Monopole Foundation The caisson shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions contained herein and with the Technical Specifications as indicated in Appendix III. Sidewall stability should be maintained during construction of the caisson.-; The loose conditions of the granular soils the presence ofgroundwater provides minimal stability in open excavations and liquefaction of the insitu sand may occur. This can lead to disturbance of the confining soils adjacent to the drilled shaft and the bearing strata as well as inhibiting construction progress. Therefore a lightweight drilling slurry should be used to prevent caving and maintain sidewall integrity. The drilling slurry level should be kept at a minimum of 10 feet above the groundwater table elevation to ensure an outward pressure on the sidewalls and to eliminate the occurrence of running sands at the base of the drilled shaft excavation. Additional measures which could be implemented to prevent caving and limit sidewall instability include the use of temporary casing along with the drilling slurry. The caisson shall be constructed at the locations noted on the contract drawings. Deviation from plan location should not exceed 1/24 of the shaft diameter or 3 inches, whichever is - 6 - TECTONIC ENG*N EMW CO LJMM P.C. less. Out of plumb tolerance for shafts should be 2% or less of the shaft length. Drilled shafts shall be excavated to a minimum depth of 30 feet. The bearing stratum should be explored with a probe hole below the bottom of the drilled caisson at the discretion of the geotechnical engineer in order to verify the bearing capacity of the stratum. If test results indicate that the stratum is not capable of providing the required minimum service load bearing pressure, adjustments to the caisson depths shall be made as directed by the geotechnical engineer. Prior to placement of concrete, the bottom of the shaft should be cleared of loose material . Concrete should be placed immediately after completion of excavation and verification of bearing stratum. Shaft excavations should not be left open overnight. Concrete should be placed utilizing tremie methods and should be placed in one continuous operation. If a construction joint is unavoidable, level , roughen and clean the surface prior to recommencement of concrete placement. As indicated previously, sidewall stability should be maintained during excavation and construction efforts. Due to the proximity of the existing building foundation to the proposed monopole and the loose soils, temporary casing should be used along with drilling slurry. The minimum outside diameter of the casing - 7 - TECTONIC MGWRRMq MG LTMTG P.C. should be equal to the normal outside diameter of the drilled foundations. Lugs ng may ue removed at the option of the contractor. However, contract bid documents shall specify that no additional payment be made for casing left in place. Casing shall be withdrawn only as the shaft is filled with concrete. Adequate head of concrete shall be maintained to balance outside soil- and water pressure above the bottom of the casing at all times during withdrawal . Casing shall be withdrawn while concrete is still fluid and plastic and before initial set. Upward movement shall not exceed 6 inches per 20 feet of shaft length. If the casing is left in place, the void between the casing and shaft excavation shall be filled with concrete or fluid grout by means of grout pipe and pump pressure as required. All spoil associated with caisson construction should be disposed of offsite or at a suitable onsite location as designated by the Owner. 8.0 LIMITATIONS Our professional services have been performed using that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar circumstances by reputable geotechnical engineers and geologists practicing in this or similar situations. The interpretation of the field data is based on good judgement and experience. However, no matter how qualified the geotechnical engineer or detailed the investigation, subsurface - 8 - TECTONIC ENWNEE WCC LTMTS P.G conditions cannot always be predicted between the points of actual sampling and testing. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice included in this report. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Juengert Grutzmacher Associates for the specific application to the proposed Metro One Facility located at Mattituck, Long Island, New York. In the event that any changes in nature, design or location of proposed building and/or site facilities are planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions modified or verified in writing by Tectonic Engineering Consultants P.C. It is recommended that Tectonic Engineering be retained to provide construction monitoring and inspection services to ensure proper implementation of recommendations contained herein, which would otherwise limit our professional liability. - 9 - JL o <a cxaaa< STA. u EAST MATTISUCK 9J2 \ CN ,1 \` It L a O A is 6 of ( �� � tlMl 9 � • / NORTH NRN l i T �h/ CO NMr f V MA77ITUCN CIUO ' r __ _ _ OR k � A/RPORT �,] ♦ i ,� Xs Narratookapt 1 J J^ y i , �^ �(,�-I t' wc_; aY �'�''y•:r i* Est i f�.py-+' -.�: ® I TECTONIC ENOINEERINO CON3ULTMfT's P.C. P.O. Box 447, e00 Rout SR Nlihlan• Mille, N.Y. (014) YIIO—eO l SITE LOCATION MAP Metro One Mattltuck Long Island, New-York N,Psr,1 a Oxx/Mfto tl•MM Rs. M A.x1,13 ( 5$.22&1.3 Flgure 1 0 N.T.S. ELIJPN�S / U.P. / U.P. ACCESS I a ROAD I o I 1 STORY BLOCK ® BUILDING I 1 STORY g FRAME BARN o 1 1 STORY I BUILDING MONOPOLE MK-1 ®j m� CONC IT ® ( T6CTOIVIC ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS P.C. P.O. Oat "7. [00 0aula 32 Mahan! Mi.. N.Y. (014) 090-0 l BORING LOCATION PLAN Metro One Mottituck Long Island, New York daPwa!Ia CM11Aa1 ar M 000 OaM,11� M 55.228.1.3 Figure 2 0 N.T.S AdIlk TmOTONIG L\X1VV F4W CONSULTAMS P.C. P�a+� Ji °yl�7f BORING No. MK-1 (Monopole) PROJECT Metro One — Mottituck, Long Island, New York g DATE TIME DEPTH CASING SHEET NO.: 1 OF 2 OWNER Metro One b< — — 23' — PROJECT NO.:755.228.1. CONTRACTOR Soil Testin , Inc. L3 — — — — ELEVATION: 310' METHOD OF ADVANC, BORING DEPTH CSG. SAMP. CORE TUBE DATUM: NSGD POWER AUGER 0 TO 42' 7YPE HSA S.S. — — DATE START: 1/28/91 HAND CHOP. W/MUD: W/WATER TO DIA. 2 1/4'ID 2" OD — — DATE FINISH: 1/28/91 ROT. DRILL, W/MUD: W/WATER TO WT. — 140e — — DRILLER: 5. O'Brien DIAMOND CORE TO FALL 1 30' — — INSPECTOR: D. Hasbrouc SAMPLES r` z_ 3 yJ, OWr RECOV. .a e W Ede (L F Q DESCRIPTION 4 REMARKS f a z Z irK cm) UO Z 4 6' Topsoil 1 9 4 S-1 16 SP M Light brown m—f SAND 5 2 3 4 5 4 5 6 6 3 S-2 14 SP D Tan c—m—f SAND, trace f. Gravel, 3 trace Silt 7 8 9 10 3 10 5 2 S-3 13 SP D Tan c—m—f SAND, trace f. Gravel, 11 3 trace Silt 12 13 14 15 5 15 16 13 6 S-4 14 SP D Tan c—m—f SAND, trace(+) f. Gravel, 7 trace(—) Silt 17 18 19 20 3 20 21 12 5 S-5 15 SP D Tan c—m—f SAND, trace f. Gravel, 7 trace Silt 22 23 Ground Water Table 24 25 25 • ELAPSED TIME FOR STATIC READING •s CHANGES IN STRATA ARE INFERRED ® I TECTONIC E"NEMW CONSULTANTS P.C. BORING No. MK-1 (Monopole) PROJECT Metro One — Mattituck Long Island New York SNEET NO.: 2 OF 2 OWNER Metro One PROJECT NO.:755.228.1. SAMPLES e z z RECOV. W � „ a o^ DESCRIPTION Z REMARKS o Z a z �z &t 25 4 2 S-6 12 SP W Ton c—m—f SAND, trace f. Gravel, 25 2 trace Silt 26 27 28 29 30 Dif6cu 6 30 ttY getting the rod all the way down. 31 14 8 S-7 17 SP W Tan c—m-1 SAND, trace f. Gravel. Possible ex running sands. trace Silt 32 observed at the top of the casing. 33 34 35 35 12 36 29 15 S-6 26 SP W Ton c—m—f SAND, trace f. Gravel, 14 trace Silt 37 38 39 40 2 40 2 41 70 32 S-9 17 SP W Tan c—m—f SAND, trace f. Gravel, 38 trace Silt 42 43 End of Boring O 42' 44 45 45 46 47 48 49 50 50 51 52 • ELAPSED TIME FOR STATIC READING •• CHANGES IN STRATA ARE INFERRED " ■■■r11111■■rYfii::1!!■r�11111■■■�IIYII■■■■IIIII■■■■ ., ■■■�11111■■■■IIIII%���IIIII■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■� , ■■■�11111■■■�Ilill■■��11111■■■�111111■■�11111■■■� ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■�\IIIII■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ , ' ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■�11111■■■■IIIIII■■IIIIII■■■■ ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIIII■■IIIIII■■■■ , ' ■■■�11111■■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ , • ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ■■■■IIIII■■■■Illu■■■■IIIIII■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ' ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■111'11■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ' ■■■■dill■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIIII■■IIIIII■■■■ , - ' ■■■■IIIII■■■■11111■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ' , ■■■■IIIII■■■■Illlle■■■IIIII■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIIIe■■■ . ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■�Illllr!■■■IIIIII■■�11111■■■■ ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■\■■IIIIII MINIMUM ■■■ ' e■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■\■IIIIII■■■IIIIIe■■■ :' ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■►71111II■■■IIIII■■I■■ . ' ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■�IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ' . ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■li,!111■■■IIIII■■■■ .. • RON " ■■er11I11■■r�� 111i1■■r�11111■■■e■IIIYIII■■■■IIIII■■■e■ ' ., ■■BeeIIIII■■■�lii:1��■■■■IIIII■■eee11111�■eee11111■■e■ ■■■■IIIII■■■eIIIII■C��IIIII■■■e111111■■■IIIII■■■e ■■■eeIIIi1■■BeeIIIII■■��11111■■eee1111II■eee1111I■■■ee , ' ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■�\IIIII■■ee111111■■■■IIIII■■■■ ■■ee■IIIII■■■ IIIII■■ee�►11II■■eeeI111I�■■■■IIIII■eeee ' ■■■eIIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ' ■■BeeIIIII■■BeeIIIII■■■Belli\I■■eee1111II■■■■IIIII■■Bee ' ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■ee1111II■■■IIIII■■el■ ' ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■e111111■■eeI111II■■■■IIIII■■■e ' ■■BeeIIIII■■■■IIIII■■e■11111�■eee1111II■■■IIIII■■Bee ■■■eIIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■illlliw■■e111111■■■IIIII■■ems ., ■■eeIIIII■■■■IIIII■■■eI1111�i■ee1111II■■■IIIII■■■■ ■■■eIIIII■■■■IIIII■■e�11111■\■■IIIIII■■■IIIII■■■e . ■■■■IIIII■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■ ■■eee1111I■■■■IIIII■■ee■IIIII■■■■■IIIII■■■■■IIIII■■e■■ :, ■■■■IIIII■■■elllll■■■■IIIII■■■eI1111I■■■IIIII■■■� ■■eee1111I■■BeeIIIII■■eeeI111I■■eeeI111II■eee1111I■■Bee ., ' ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■■IIIII■■■7��IIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■■IIIII■■■Y..IIII■■■IIIII■■■■ ., IFS •- • r�Ie�e�e� - • - . ®M�= ■eee■e■1 • �� eeee �� eeee TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR CAISSON CONSTRUCTION 1. The caisson drilling contractor shall be responsible for performing the construction according to the plans and specifications contained herein. Any deviations from the plans and specifications must be approved by the geotechnical engineer. The caisson drilling contractor shall also be responsible for maintaining job safety during construction of drilled shafts and related operations. 2. Contractor shall conform with all OSHA requirements regarding excavation safety for personnel working in confined spaces. 3. Contractor shall provide all services as described herein to install straight shaft caissons to depths necessary to achieve the specified bearing capacity. Anticipated penetration depths indicated on the plans are approximate only and shall be adjusted as dictated by actual subsurface conditions encountered and as approved by the Geotechnical Engineer. 4. The Contractor shall: A. Furnish all labor supervision, tools equipment and material to excavate and install caissons to required dimensions. B. Furnish install and remove all temporary casing as required to complete construction of the caisson and furnish all lightweight drilling slurry as required to stabilize caisson excavations to required bearing depth. C. Furnish all labor and equipment to control and dispose of surface water as required. U. Furnish all labor tools and equipment required to dewater cassion excavations. E. Furnish reinforcing steel and provide all material, labor, tools, and equipment required to fabricate and install rebar cages to depths indicated on the plans. F. Furnish concrete and provide all labor tools and equipment required to place concrete by tremie methods. G. Furnish equipment and labor necessary for bottom cleanout of aisson excavations. H. Furnish a water supply as required for drilling operations. I.. Furnish all labor and equipment necessary to dispose of drilling slurry and caisson spoil material that is unacceptable for onsite use to an offsite disposal area. - 2 - 5. Caissons shall be excavated with the use of drilling slurry to stabilize the excavation. Temporary casing may be required if sidewall stability cannot be maintained with drilling slurry. . 6. Temporary casing, when employed, should be of an ample strength to withstand handling stresses and external pressures of the caving soil and/or fluid and shall be water tight. When necessary, the contractor should prepare the bottom of the casing with cutting teeth to facilitate sealing. The casing shall be smooth and its interior clean. The outside diameter of the casing shall not be less than the specified diameter of the drilled shaft, the length of casing shall be sufficient to provide adequate protection and safety against any caving soil and water. Temporary casing shall not be left in place without the permission of the engineer. No additional payment shall be made for casing left in place. 7. The slurry shall be maintained a minimum of 10 feet above the groundwater level in the caisson excavation. Drilling slurry may be reused provided it is processed to remove granular material left in suspension. 8. Caissons shall be advanced to minimum depths as indicated on the drawings. The bearing stratum shall be explored at the discretion of the geotechnical engineer with a probe as necessary to confirm that suitable bearing has been achieved. If test results indicate that the stratum is not capable of providing the specified bearing the depth of the caisson shall be extended as directed by the geotechnical engineer. 9. If obstructions such as boulders, stump, concrete, ledgerock, etc. are encountered which will not permit excavation of caissons to the specified depth, the obstructions shall be removed by the caisson drilling contractor and a new caisson shall be excavated in the same location. Payment for removal of obstructions shall be made by cubic foot of material removed. 10. The caisson drilling contractor should provide suitable lighting and safe access to the surface area of shaft excavations for proper inspection of the completed excavation as required by the engineer. The access should allow the location, dimensions, and alignment of the excavation to be checked. Both construction and inspection should be performed without the need for personnel to enter the excavation. 11. The excavation for a drilled shaft should be made so that the axis of the shaft at the top of the shaft is no more than 1/24th of the shaft diameter or 3 in. from its plan location, whichever is less. The drilled shaft shall be within 2 percent of plumb for the total length of the shaft, with plumbness measured from the as-constructed position of the top of the excavation, provided the excavation meets the tolerance specified in the first sentence. The top elevation of the shaft should be no more than 1 inch above or below the top elevation indicated on the - 3 - drawings. The diameter of the stem of the drilled shaft should be no less than the plan dimension. The bottom of the caisson shall not slope more than one half inch foot. The engineer shall provide redesign as required due to drilled shafts which do not meet the above requirements. All corrective measures, including the cost of the engineer's redesign shall be at the caisson drilling contractor's expense. 12. The bottom of excavation shall be maintained clean of all loose and disturbed material prior to concrete placement. Each caisson will be visually inspected from the ground surface immediately before placing concrete. 13. Reinforcing steel shall be deformed bars conforming to ASTM A615-GR 60, "Deformed and Plain Billet Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement" latest edition. Longitudinal and transverse reinforcing steel for cages shall be of the sizes indicated on the plans. 14. Centering devices shall be provided for all rebar cages to maintain the location of the cages within the tolerances indicated on the plan and ensure adequate cover of the cages with concrete. Reinforcing steel pieces may be used as centering devices provided they are epoxy coated. Alternatively, a precast concrete roller tied into the reinforcing cage and aligned to roll parallel to the long axis of the rebar cage can be used. 15. Caic shall be taken during lifting and handling of rebar cages to prevent damage and/or distortion to the cage during installation. Cages shall be strengthed if required to prevent damage from occurring Cage that are to long to handle in one section can be assembled in multiple sections and spliced together in accordance with ACI requirements. 16. Rebar cages shall be fastened within the caisson hole to prevent lateral and vertical movement during placement of concrete. A minimum of 3 inches of cover shall be maintained between the rebar cage and the sidewall of the caisson. 17. For caissons where temporary casing is used, casing shall be withdrawn in a slow uniform manner to prevent movement of the rebar cage. 18. Welding may be employed over the lower portion of the rebar cage for attaching stirrup reinforcement, bands, or lateral reinforcement. The applicable provisions of the American Welding Society must be followed. Welding may not be employed in the top portion of the rebar cage unless a weldable steel is employed. 19. Concrete for caissons shall conform to the requirements of the ACI 336.1. Concrete shall have a minimum compressive strength of 4000 psi at 28 days. - 4 - 20. Concrete shall be placed by the tremie method and the tremie pipe shall be placed at the bottom of the excavation. Concrete shall be pumped in one continuous operation starting from the bottom of the excavation and proceeding upward to the top, to ensure displacement of water, slur), and other free material within the excavation. Concrete placed by this method shall have a slump of between 4 and 7 inches. The use of super plasticizers will not be allowed. 21. A71 concrete placement shall begin as soon as posy" after the caisson excavation has been completed. Uncased caisson excavations shall not be left open overnight. Concrete shall be placed in one continuous operation for each caisson. Tops of caissons shall be bush hammered or green cut to provide a roughened surface. File 119 STATE. OF NV 0 SIOti pUdLIC SERVICE At a Session of the Public Service mission held in the City of Com Apg 2 Albany on January 11, 1984 r W Ire �• COMMISSIONERS pChairman L7C Paul L. Oioia, rT(_ Harold . A. Jerry l 3r' /^ -414, 9 Anne P . !lead 3 Rosemary S. pooler _ petition for a Certificate CASE ZS693 - Cellular Telephone Company to construct and of Public Convenience and Necessity operate agk hula ard Metropolitan litano atistical Areammunication rce in the New York OgDt ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF ORDUUBLIC CONVENINNCE AND NECESSITY ` (Issued April 181 1985) By petition filed November 11, 1983+ Cellular Telephone CompdnY (CTC) sought authority pursuan 99 of the Public t to Section ellular radio system Service Law to oPstate a c in the New York City area. The Petitioner had applied to the Federal Communications struction permit. Commission for a con At our session of 3anuary il, 1994 , we determined that publ convenience and necessity require the construction of facilities by Company' We approved the request but withheld tl Cellular Telephone • ipt of FCC approval. On October 19+ certificate pending rece 1984, �nL S,Hd 2 FCC granted CTC permis on to operate its proposeosystem in the New York SNSA. A copy of the FCC construction permit was forwarded to us on April B, 1985. Because of the extent of the plant to be constructed, CTC has requested a 12 month interval from the date of this order for filing of its tariffs. Accordingly it is: C E R T I F I E D that subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth in this order, and not otherwise► public convenience and necessity require that Cellular Telephone Company be authorized to construct and operate cellular telephone facilitie@ which shall emit reliable radio signals within the contours defined by the directions, and distancot set forth in Attachment I. Additionally, Cellular Telephone Company shall be authorized to and it is further o R D E R E D: 1, That this order constitutes a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity authorizing Cellular Telephone Companyete provide cellular radio telephone crevice in the New York standard Metropolitan Statistical Areal 2. That appropriate tariff schedules should be filed with the. Commission within 12 months of this order provided that such schedules are filed 60 days prior to the commencement of service; 3. That the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity set forth in this order will be revoked without further notice if Cellular Telephone Company fails to file its schedule of tariffs with the Commission within the prescribed period. 3 {. That thi Order is effective immediatelye and 5. That this proceeding is continued. Sy the Commission, (Signed ) JOHN J. KELLIHER Secretary 4 V �D� ' 356d 3NU—Gj13H 3 144 IN SCALE `S• R' 2S 0 60 126 180 240 S7E PLAN LRTITUDE: 1 SCRLE: 1 60' 4 O° 5 —_ SECTOR--.74XaG ItORTi1 _AZEOFkM AND_ANT-.MTG.. DES(6NER'$a SUPPLIED=. I EGLOR T.?t C _ VOPOLE MANUFBCTURER� �j� - G� E SCTOR - " RXIC • I I _NOTE , SQiI_ BEARING CAPAGITY MUST 0 BE DETERMINED AND ENGINEERED �q WITH MONOPOLE FOUNDATION PFt10R_"TO THE COMMENCENT TO NY WORK. 1 I 3 s (" P.ROPoSED IoO1=r. HIGH Qic�o.nlOr=o�-G , i IIaNT GABLES ROUTED INSIDE I MONOFOLE � r I ANT CABLES IN 2- G"COND, I I I7N0(?ERGRGUND,T0EQU1PT Fkrn. _ro RAD6 wOL6 FoUNDA-noN INEERED�_-►I - ATON Srai F: 1JniJF n � MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law Clause Commons Suite 3 2 M '�91 Main Road P.O. Box 23 AW Mattituck, New York 11952 1` Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax: (516) 298-5664 William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary April 2, 1991 BY HAND Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application for Special Exception Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One Dear Chairman Goehringer and Members of the Board: Enclosed please find the following in reference to the above application: 1. Long Environmental Assessment Form prepared by Carman-Dunne PC Consulting Engineers which includes a visual EAF addendum 2. Copy of lease between Metro One and Baxter 3. The exhibit described as "Attachment I" in the New York State Public Service Commission Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for Metro One (the certificate previously provided dated April 18, 1985 is the current certificate) 4. United States Federal Aviation Administration determination regarding the proposed structure 5. Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Tectonic Engineering Consultants P.C. 6. Letter dated July 10,1990 from AT&T to Diane Amedeo of Metro One regarding electromagnetic energy associated with cellular radio installation. If there is any additional information which you desire, please do not hesitate to call our office and we will attempt to provide same in advance of the April 30th public hearing. V Very o s, oWDM/mr il or e 14-16.2 (2187)-7c 617.21 SEOR ! Appendix A State Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM i Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent- ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental t . analysis. In addition,many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination i process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature,yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. 3 Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: ' Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially- large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE—Type 1 and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: ? Bart 1 tt ZZ a Appendix B — Visua�rEAF Addoen run Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF(Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the l ' lead agency that: A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not t have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.* — C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Communications Antenna Installation, Site 228. 1 .3, Northwest corner of Route 25 and Elijahs Lane, East Mattituck, New York. t Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Pre arer(If different from res on�iib424ffjped Richard H. Schroeder Jr. , P. //8L Carman—Dunne, P.C. Date 1 PART 1—PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. NAME OF ACTION Communications Antenna Installation Site 228. 1 .3 LOCATION OF ACTION(Include Street Address.Municipality and County) I NAME OF APPLICANTISPONSOR BUSINESS TELEPHONE Cellular Telephone Company dba Metro-One 1201 ) 587-7857 ADDRESS 1 265 West Passaic Street Il ^ CITY/Po STATE ZIP CODE Rochelle Park07662 NAME OF OWNER(If different) BUSINESS TELEPHONE L L I V4 m - I ( 2D3) 63 7- rS ADDRESS 1T13U E. P ?NAM ✓r i CITY/PO STATE ZIP CODE C� ��/wlcl{ G CU.✓n/ 068.�0 DESCRIPTION OF ACTION Installation of 100 foot high monopole communications antenna Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: ❑Urban. ❑Industrial MCommercial ❑Residential(suburban) ❑Rural (non-farm) - ❑Forest ❑Agriculture ❑Other 2 Total acreage of project area: 1 .85 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION Meadow or Brushland (Nor.-agricultural) acres acres 4 Forested acres acres Agricultural (includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres acres .Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) acres acres {I Water Surface Area acres acres Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres acres Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces 0.28 acres 0. "17 acres Other (Indicate type) Overground yard area 1 .57 acres 1 -52 acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? Sand & Gravel / �v a. Soil drainage: tWell drained 100 % of site ❑Moderately well drained % of site ❑Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is involvVd, now many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS Land Classification System? N/A acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370). 4. Are there bedrock outcroppings on project site? ❑Yes ®No a. What is depth 'to bedrock? 421+ (in feet) 2 5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: ❑0-10% 100 % 010-15% % 015% or greater % t I� 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? ❑Yes Flo 7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? ❑Yes 2PNo 8. What is the depth of the water table? 23 (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? RYes ❑No i ' 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? ❑Yes L13No 11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? :-� ❑Yes MNo According to Identify each species 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) 0-Yes (RNO Describe l 13 Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? i []Yes (RNo If yes, explain 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? ❑Yes TNo 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: none a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary i 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: - a. Name none b. Size (In acres) 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? ®Yes ❑No .a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? 21Yes ONo b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? lOYes ' ®No 18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? []Yes IMNO 19. Is the site located in or substantially contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL. and 6 NYCRR 617? ❑Yes ZNo + ' 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? Dyes %No 4 B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor 1 .85 acres. b. Project acreage to be developed: _nS _— acres initially; _nS acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped 1 .52 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: N/A (If appropriate) I ' e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed N/A %; I f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing 0 proposed 2 g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour N/A (upon completion of project)? (Unmanned site) / h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: N/A One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initially Ultimately i. Dimensions (in feet) or largest proposed structure 100'height; width; length. 3'+ diameter at j. Linear feet cf frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? * ft. base 3 *The affected property has 197.5 ft. frontage on Elijah's lane. The monopole will be set back approximately 200 feet from Elijah's Lane. ' • • 18 2. How much natural material (i.e., rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site? Wcubic yards 3. Will distt:rbed areas be reclaimed? ❑Yes ONO IRN/A a. If yes, for what intend .. purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? Dyes ONo N/A c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? OYes ONO N/A 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? none acres 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? I.- ❑Yes C$No ' 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction z months, (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: N/A a. Total number of phases anticipated (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition). c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? Dyes ONO 8. Will blasting occur during construction? ❑Yes ONO 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction N/A after project is complete N/A 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project none 11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? ❑Yes ®No If yes, explain � • 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? OYes ®No a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ❑Yes ®No Type i 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? ❑Yes MNo Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? ❑Yes ®No i 16. Will the project generate solid waste? ❑Yes ®No a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? []Yes ONO c. If yes, give name ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? ❑Yes ONO e. If Yes, explain 1 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? ❑Yes ISNo a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month. b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? ❑Yes ONO 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? ❑Yes ONO `r 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? ❑Yes ONO 21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? CRYes ONO If yes , indicate type(s) Electric 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity N/A gallons/minute. 23. Total anticipated water usage per day N/A gallons/day. J 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? ❑Yes ®No If Yes, explain 4 25. Approvals Required: Submittal Type Date 1 City, Town, Viliage Board ❑Yes ®No City, Town, Village Planning Board ZYes ❑No Site Plan Approval 2/22/91 City, Town Zoning Board Yes ❑No Social ExceStion Use 2/22/91 City, County Health Department ❑Yes 2No 3 ( Other Local Agencies ❑Yes ®No Other Regional Agencies ❑Yes NNo State Agencies ❑Yes ®No Federal Agencies []Yes ®No r C. Zoning and Planning Information 1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ®Yes ❑No ( If Yes, indicate decision required: ❑zoning amendment ❑zoning variance ❑special use permit ❑subdivision Zsite plan i f ❑new/revision of master plan ❑resource management plan Mother Special exception 2. What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? Limited Business is 3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? N/A 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? Same 5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? Same 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? ❑Yes ❑No N/A 7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a I/ mile radius of proposed action? Limited Business, Residential & Agricultural Conservation. } l 8. Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a '/4 mile? (fYes ❑No 9 If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? N/A a. What is the minimum lot size proposed? J 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? ❑Yes hallo 11 Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection)? -Yes BNo - a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? []Yes CRNo 12 Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? ❑Yes CZNo • a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? ❑Yes ❑No D. Informational Details 4 Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse i impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sp or Name Cellular Telephone Co. dba Metro-One 3 Z� Date t Signature 0 T'tie Vice President, Carman-Dunne, P.C. lc` is arSchroeder r. , 8Z ` If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. 5 • • rPart 2—PROJECT IMPACTS AND THEIR MAGNITUDE Responsibility of Lead Agency General Information (Read Carefully) • In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the question: Have my responses and determinations been reasonable? The reviewer is not expected to be an expert environmental analyst. • Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column 2) does not mean that it is also necessarily significant. Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Identifying an impact in column 2 simply asks that it be looked at further. • The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing types of impacts and wherever possible the threshold of magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples are generally applicable throughout the State and for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples and/or lower thresholds may be appropriate for a Potential Large impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part 3. • The impacts of each project, on each site, in each locality, will vary. Therefore, the examples are illustrative and I have been offered as guidance.They do not constitute an exhaustive list of impacts and thresholds to answer each question. • The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance of each question. • In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effects. { Instructions (Read carefully) I` a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact. b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers. c. If answering Yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 or 2) to indicate the potential size of the i impact. If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check column 2. If impact will occur but threshold is lower than example, check column 1. d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PART 3. e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s) in the project to a small to moderate impact, also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not possible. This must be explained in Part 3. 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be C IMPACT ON LAND Moderate Large Mitigated By t Impact Impact Project Change 1. Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the project site? ❑NO MYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100 ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed 10%. • Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than ❑ ❑ []Yes []No 3 feet. • Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 3 feet of existing ground surface. • Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No i than one phase or stage. 1 • Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000 ❑ _ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year. • Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Construction in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts 100 foot high monopole antenna ® ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 2. Will there be an effect It ..ay ur:,que or unusual land forms found on the site?(i.e., cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)®NO OYES .1 • Specific land forms: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 6 Y r' 1 2 3 IMPACT ON WATER Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By -` 3. Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? Impact Impact Project Change _ (Under Articles 15,24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL) i MNO ❑YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Developable area of site contains a protected water body. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes CNo • Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No I protected stream. • Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. ❑ ❑ Eyes ❑No j Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Eyes ❑No ' 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new body of water? MNO ❑YES Examples that would apply to column 2 • A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No i or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease. j • Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. ❑ Cl ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No i 5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater quality or quantity? MNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No C • Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not ❑ C ❑Yes CNo / have approval to serve proposed (project) action. • Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No gallons per minute pumping capacity. S ) • Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water E. C Cl Yes ❑No supply system. • Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. ❑ C Eyes ❑No • Liquid effluent will be conve.e� off the site to facilities wh..h presently ❑ C C1 es C>;o do not exist or have inadequate capacity. • Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per ❑ C Eyes No day. • Proposed Action will Iikelt siltation or other discharge into an ❑ C GYes CNo �• existing body of watt! u•� c:�t that there will be an ob:icus visual contrast to natu:ai conditions. • Proposed Action will require the sterage of petroleum or chemical C Eyes No t products greater than 1.100 gallons. • Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water ❑ ❑I nYes ❑,4o and/or sewer services. I • Proposed Action locats commercial and/or industrial uses which may Cl ❑ ,Yes CP:o require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage I facilities. • Other impacts: ❑ u _Yes L No ' 6. Will proposed action alter drainage tl,:w or patterns, or surface v.ater runoff? LNO OYES Ex_.nples that would apply to column 2 • Propt..rd Action would change flood water flows. ❑ Eyes 'No t 7 1 - 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change • Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. ❑ Cl Dyes ❑No I • Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No IMPACT ON AIR 7. Will proposed action affect air quality? MNO DYES ! Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No hour. Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No refuse per hour. • Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. t • Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No to industrial use. • Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No development within existing industrial areas. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No r IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 1 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered species? MNO DYES l Examples that would apply to column 2 • Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. • Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat. ❑ Cl ❑Yes ❑No • Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a year, other ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No than for agricultural purposes._ • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 9- Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or non-endangered species? (ENO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 ` • Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No It migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. • Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres ❑ - ❑ ❑Yes ❑No of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. ./ IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES f 10 Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? CRNO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, orchard, etc.) 8 1 2 3 ! Small to Potential Can impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change 1 • Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of ❑ ❑ [Dyes ONO agricultural land. • The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO i I of agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District, more than 2.5 acres of agricultural land. _ • The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural ❑ ❑ [-]Yes ❑No i land management systems(e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches, strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm field to drain poorly due to increased runoff) • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO i> IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11 Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? ONO ®YES (if necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21, Appendix B.) i Examples that would apply to column 2 rq • Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from ❑ ❑Yes IZNo or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether man-made or natural. • Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of ® ❑ Dyes MNo aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource. • Project components that will result in the elimination or significant i's7 13 OYes ONO i� screening of scenic views known to be important to the area. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre- historic or paleontological importance? ZNO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially ❑ ❑ El Yes El No contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register �. of historic places. • Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the ❑ ❑ - ee ED ' project site. • Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for Cl ❑ ❑Yes ❑No archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No I_ i IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13 Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunities? Examples that would apply to column 2 129NO OYES • The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes []No • A major reduction of an open space important to the community. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No • Other impacts. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 9 IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be 14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systems? Moderate Large Mitigated By ®NO DYES Impact Impact Project Change Examples that would apply to column 2 _ • Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON ENERGY 15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or I energy supply? ONO ®YES t Examples that would apply to column 2 • Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of ® ❑ ❑Yes IMNo t any form of energy in the municipality. ` -• Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy ® ❑ ❑Yes ❑No .y transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS j 16. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Action? C2NO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive Cl ❑ ❑Yes []No facility. (. • Odors will occur routinely (more than one hour per day). ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO • Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. F • Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a ❑ Cl ❑Yes ❑No l noise screen. j • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17, Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? r E-NO DYES Examples that would apply to column 2 Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No substances(i.e.oil, pesticides, chemicals. radiation, etc.)in the event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic low level discharge or emission. • Proposed Action may result in the burial of"hazardous wastes" in any ❑ ❑ []Yes []No form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating, infectious, etc.) V/ • Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No gas or other flammable liquids. Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO within 2,000 feet of a site used for the disposal of solid or hazardous waste. • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No ' 10 1 2 3 IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER Small to Potential Can Impact Be OF COMMUNITY OR NEIGHBORHOOD Moderate Large Mitigated By 18 Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? Impact Impact Project Change r ®NO OYES Examples that would apply to column 2 • The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the ❑ ❑ Eyes ❑No project is located is likely to grow by more than 5%. • The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No will increase by more than 5% per year as a result of this project. • Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. ❑ ❑ Eyes ❑No • Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures ❑ ❑ Eyes ❑No or areas of historic importance to the community. • Development will create a demand for additional community services ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No • Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. ❑ ❑ []Yes ❑No • Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No 19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacts? RNO OYES If Any Action in Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 , Part 3—EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impacts) may be mitigated. . Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2: 1 Briefly describe the impact. 2. Describe(if applicable)how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project change(s). 3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important. - To answer the question of importance, consider: • The probability of the impact occurring • The duration of the impact • Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources of value • Whether the impact can or will be controlled • The regional consequence of the impact • Its potential divergence from local needs and goals • Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact. (Continue on attachments) 11 14. 617.21 iaur.s�re� Appendix B APR 2 I S±4te Environmental Quality Review P91 Visual EAF Addendum- This form may be used to provide additional information relating to Question 11 of Part 2 of the Full EAF. (To be completed by Lead Agency) Distance Between Visibility Project and Resource (in Miles) r 1. Would the project be visible from: 0•'/. /.•/z h-3 3.5 5+ • A parcel of land which is dedicated to and available ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑N/Al to the public for the use, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? i • An overlook or parcel of land dedicated to public ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N/A observation, enjoyment and appreciation of natural or man-made scenic qualities? • A site or structure listed on the National or State ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N/A Registers of Historic Places? • State Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ C3 N/A • The State Forest Preserve? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N/A • National Wildlife Refuges and state game refuges? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑N/A • National Natural Landmarks and other outstanding ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N/A natural features? ( i • National Park Service lands? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N/A • Rivers designated as National or State Wild, Scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ El,N/A or Recreational? i ! • Any transportation corridor of high exposure, such ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N/A as part of the Interstate System, or Amtrak? I , • A governmentally established or designated interstate ❑ ❑ ❑ Q N/A or inter-county foot trail, or one formally proposed for establishment or designation? • A site, area, lake, reservoir or highway designated as ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N/A I scenic? • Municipal park, or designated open space? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ N/ • County road? ❑ i2 ❑ ❑ ❑ • State? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ i • Local road? ® Cl ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Is the visibility of the project seasonal?(i.e., screened by summer foliage, but visible during other seasons) ❑Yes CRNo 3. Are any of the resources checked in question 1 used by the public during the time of year during which the project will be visible? / 12Yes ❑No DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING VISUAL ENVIRONMENT 4. From each item checked in question 1, check those which generally describe the surrounding ` environment. Within •1/4 mile •1 mile Essentially undeveloped N/A ❑ ❑ Forested N/A ❑ Cl Agricultural ® ❑ Suburban residential ® ❑ Industrial N/A ❑ ❑ Commercial ® ❑ / Urban N/A ❑ ❑ River, Lake, Pond ❑ 12 Cliffs, Overlooks N/A ❑ ❑ S Designated Open Space N/A ❑ ❑ Flat ® ❑ Hilly N/A ❑ ❑ Mountainous N/A ❑ ❑ Other N A ❑ ❑ NOTE: ad attachments as needed (_ 5. Are there visually similar projects within: I •1h mile ❑Yes ®No 2z miles ®Yes 'El No •2 miles El Yes ®No •3 miles ❑Yes ®No • Distance from project site are provided for assistance. Substitute other distances as appropriate. EXPOSURE 6. The annual number of viewers likely to observe the proposed project is 1 ,500,000 NOTE: When user data is unavailable or unknown, use best estimate. j CONTEXT 7. The situation or activity in which the viewers are engaged while viewing the proposed action is FREQUENCY k3 Holidays/ ` Activity Daily Weekly Weekends Seasonally Travel to and from work ® ❑ ❑ ❑ S Involved in recreational activities ❑ ❑ ® ❑ L Routine travel by residents ® ❑ ❑ ❑ At a residence ® ❑ ❑ ❑ �� At worksite ❑ ❑ Cl ❑ Other ❑ ❑ ❑ Cl i I 1 2 1 • 4L �iJ�'/ 1 APR 2 - 1991 LAND LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made this M1 day of 1991 by and between GOBIL, a partnership having its office at 32495 Main Road, Cutchogue, New York 11935 (hereinafter referred to as "Landlord") and CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY, a New York General Partnership, having an office at 87 West Passaic Street, Rochelle Park, New Jersey, 07662 (hereinafter referred to as "Tenant" and "CTC") . WHEREAS, Landlord is the owner of certain property described in exhibit 1 annexed hereto, hereinafter called the demised premises, which demised premises are a part of Lot No. 2 on a certain map entitled, "Map of Alteration of Boundary Lines Proposed for William J. Baxter, Jr. , Patricia Baxter, Robert A. Goeller, Jr. and Jane P.Goeller, at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, N.Y. " filed on May 15, 1990 in the office of the Clerk of Suffolk County as Map No. 8937, which said lot is also shown as District 1000, Section 108, Block 4, Lot 11.3 on the Suffolk County Tax Map, which said lot is hereinafter called "Landlord's premises" , and WHEREAS, CTC desires to use the premises for the construction, installation, maintenance and operation of radio transmitting and receiving equipment and other associated equipment in connection with, its cellular mobile telephone business; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of all the foregoing, and in further consideration of the premises, obligations, terms and conditions hereinafter set forth and recited, both parties do hereby agree as 'follows: 1. LEASE OF PREMISES: Landlord hereby leases to CTC that certain parcel of property containing approximately 10, 000 square feet; being a part of District 1000, Section 108, Block 4, Lot 11. 3 on the Suffolk County tax map, as b described in Exhibit 11111 , (hereinafter referred to as "Leased Premises") , together with the nonexclusive right for ingress and egress, seven (7) days a week, twenty-four (24) hours a day, on foot or motor vehicle, including trucks and for the installation and maintenance of utility wires, poles, cables, conduits, and pipes over, under or along a 20 . .�.. . � __....... ..._ _� ..� ...0 -...e alcares., r�...�a�, i..ya•v_ of-way, Elijah' s Lane, to the demised premises, said Property and right-of-way for access being substantially as described herein in Exhibit 11211 and as shown enclosed within red lines on Exhibit 11211 attached hereto and made a part hereof. Tenant shall not obstruct the right of way in such a manner as to prevent access to the rear of landlord's property. In the event any public utility is unable to use the aforementioned right-of-way, the Landlord hereby agrees to grant an additional right-of-way either to CTC or to the public utility at no cost to CTC. 2 . RIGHT TO SURVEY: Landlord also hereby grants to CTC the right to survey said Property, and said survey shall then become Exhibit 11311 which shall be attached hereto and made a part hereof, and shall control in the event of discrepancies between it and Exhibit 112". Cost for work shall be borne by CTC. 3 . USE OF PREMISES: (a) The Leased Premises are to be used for the construction, installation, operation and maintenance of radio transmitting and receiving equipment along with associated other electronic equipment which may be passive and/or active. CTC shall have .the right to construct a 100 foot monopole along with associated antennas, and to utilize existing 20 x 36 foot structure, fencing and any other accessories necessary to the successful and secure operation of the above-mentioned radio equipment. All improvements shall be at the Tenant's expense. All equipment or other property attached to or otherwise brought onto the Leased Premises shall at all times be personal property and, at CTC' s option, may be removed by CTC at any time during the term or within a reasonable time after expiration of this lease. The tower will be constructed for the exclusive use of CTC. (b) CTC shall have the right to use whatever meant ;.t (jPP,nc ,a_ Landlord recognizes that in order for CTC to install and operate its equipment, it will need the ability to run transmission lines from the equipment room to the antenna location, run power from the main feed to the equipment room, and run telephone lines from the main telephone entry point to the equipment room. Landlord agrees to allow CTC to make all reasonable and necessary alterations to the real property in order to accomplish the above. CTC shall have the right at any time during the term hereof, at its own expense to erect, construct or make any improvements, alterations or additions upon or to the Leased Premises required for CTC's use. (c) It is understood and agreed that CTC's ability to use the Property is contingent upon obtaining, after the execution date of this Agreement of all the certificates, permits and other approvals that may be required by any Federal, State or Local authorities, as well as satisfactory soil boring tests which will permit CTC use of the property asset forth above. Landlord shall cooperate with CTC in its effort to obtain such approvals and shall take no action which would adversely affect the status of the Property with respect to the proposed use thereof by CTC as described herein upon delivery of landlords written consent, not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 4 . MANAGEMENT OF SITE ENGINEERING: (a) Landlord agrees to eliminate, without cost to CTC, any radio interference to CTC's operation caused by Landlord or anyone holding under Landlord in a ' • • 4 timely manner after oral notice thereof. If such radio interference cannot be eliminated within a reasonable length of time, after oral notice thereof, Landlord shall cease or shall require the party causing the radio interference except for short tests necessary for the elimination of the radio interference. (b) nmr, transmission or reception equipment properly located on the premises owned by Landlord of which the Leased Premises forms a part. If CTC should cause such measurable interference, CTC shall eliminate it in a timely manner, after written notice. C •• ens-i-n-eenn -t i-p w i:•n *s s^ 9 • Qemisaa� ^ g e�riaes iT rc_, 4L lea/ /- Gfc) Iandlord' agr es note to erect any structure within or on the premises owned by Landlord of which the Lease Premises forms a part that would interfere with CTC's operation of its equipment. 5. TERM: The initial term of this lease shall be for ten (10) years commencing on January 1, 1991 ("Commencement Date") and ending on December 31, 2000. As used herein, "term" refers to the initial term and any renewal term as herein provided. 6. RENT: (See Attached RIDER) 7. OPTION TO RENEW: (See Attached RIDER) 8. LIABILITY: CTC shall carry during the term of this lease the following insurance protecting the Landlord's interest with the customary coverages and exclusions: Bodily Injury - $3, 000, 000. for all injuries sustained by more than one person in any one occurrence. Property Damage - $1, 000, 000. for damages as a result of any one accident. CTC shall furnish Landlord with a copy of the V b policies' and proof of payment. Such policies shalloprovide that they shall not be cancelled without thirty (30) days notice to Landlord. 9 . CONDITION OF PREMISES : Upon termination or expiration of this lease, CTC shall surrender the Leased Premises to Landlord in good condition except (a) for causes beyond CTC' s control or without its fault or negligence, or (c) for both. 10. WARRANTY OF TITLE AND RIGHT TO LEASE: a. Landlord warrants that: (i) Landlord owns the Leased Premises in fee simple and has right of access thereto; Landlord has full right to make this Lease; and (ii) CTC shall have quiet and peaceful possession of the Leased Premises during the term. Landlord is prepared to document its interests in the premises. b. Landlord warrants that the making of this lease and the performance thereof will not violate any restrictive covenants, or the provisions of any mortgage, lease, or other agreements under which the landlord is bound and which restricts the landlord in any way with respect to the use and disposition of the premises. 11. ACCESS: Landlord agrees that, from the date of execution of this lease, it shall obtain CTC' s consent before granting any other party any rights, or further right of access to the Leased Premises. CTC agrees not to unreasonably withhold or delay such consent. Leased premises means the premises leased to tenant under this lease. 12 . CTC's RIGHT TO MAINTAIN SECURITY: CTC, at its cost and expense, may place, construct and maintain a fence around any equipment structure housing CTC equipment, or undertake any other appropriate means to restrict access thereto. 13 . MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS UTILITIES : CTC shall perform all repairs necessary to keep its improvements �' on the premises and easements or other access to the premises in good and tenantable condition. CTC, at its sole expense, shall arrange for a separately metered electrical supply and shall pay for all charges for electricity and other utilities consumed by CTC. 14 . TENANT'S DEFAULT AND RIGHT TO CURE: Each of CTC aiad u of this lease: (a) Non-payment of rent, including any adjustments in rental amount as required hereunder, due hereunder for a period of thirty (30) days after receipt of notice of such failure from Landlord. (b) Failure to perform any other covenant for a period of forty-five (45) days after receipt of such notice from Landlord specifying the failure. No such failure, however, shall be deemed to exist if CTC shall have commenced good faith effort to rectify the same within such forty-five (45) day period and provided such efforts shall be prosecuted to completion with reasonable diligence. Delay in rectifying the same shall be excused if due to causes beyond the reasonable control of CTC. (c) Any vacating or abandonment of the premises by CTC for more than three (3) consecutive months unless ordered to do so by duly authorized legal authority or other cause beyond CTC' s reasonable control. 15. ASSIGNMENT: Landlord may assign this lease and said assignee will be responsible to CTC for the performance of all the terms and conditions of this lease. Landlord agrees that CTC may assign all rights, benefits, duties and obligations under this Agreement to any corporation, firm or person licensed by governmental agencies to operate a cellular mobile telephone system or to any corporation or other business entity which shall acquire substantially all of the assets of CTC, by giving Landlord written notice. If such assignment is made, CTC shall be V relieved of all future liabilities hereunder and Landlord shall look solely to such assignee for the performance of this agreement after assignment. 16. NOTICES : Unless otherwise provided herein, any notice of demand required or permitted to be given hereunder shall be given in writing by certified or registered mail , return receipt requested, in a sealed • ``^'L 1"J : rIepai"" .._ -11 ...ate 3=l UdiLL lay following mailing, addressed as follows: If to Landlord: Gobil P.O. Box 802 Cutchogue, New York 11935 If to Tenant: CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY 87 West Passaic Street Rochelle Park, NJ 07662 Attn: Vice-President, Engineering & Operations With copy to: Kearns & Coyle 3640 Valley Road Liberty Corner, NJ 07938 Either party hereto may change the place for the giving notice to it by like written notice to the other. 17. SEVERABILITY: If any provision of this lease shall be held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be binding upon the parties and shall be enforceable as though said invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision were not contained herein, provided, however, that if the invalid, illegal or unenforceable provision goes to the heart of this lease, the lease may be terminated, by either party on ten (10) days prior written notice to the other party hereto. 18. AMENDMENT: WAIVER: No revision of this lease shall be valid unless made in writing and signed by the General Manager or higher authority of CTC and an authorized agent of the Landlord. No provision may be waived except in writing signed by both parties. • � 8 19 . BIND AND BENEFIT: All the conditions and covenants contained in this lease shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and permitted assigns of the parties hereto. 20. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This lease and the exhibits and rider attached hereto constitute the entire prior offers, negotiations and agreements. 21. See attached rider for additional provisions. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this lease the date and year first above written. V 9 t RIDER TO LEASE Dated: i4� 'N 199/b Between GOBIL, or landlord and CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY, as tenant 1. TERMS OF RIDER TO PREVAIL In the event of conflict between the terms of this rider and those of the main portion of this lease, the terms of this rider shall prevail. 2 . REMOVAL OF STRUCTURES AT END OF LEASE The tenant shall remove all structures erected by it from the demised premises at the termination of the lease, at tenant's cost and expense. This paragraph shall apply regardless of reason for the termination of the lease. 3 . ROUTING OF UTILITY LINES All power, telephone and other utility lines for the structures to be erected by tenant on the demised premises are to be run directly from the street or road to tenant' s structures, and under no circumstances shall such power, telephone or utility lines be routed through or connected with any of the landlord's structures. 4 . PERMITS AND CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANY Tenant shall obtain all permits and Certificates of Occupancy for tenant's structures at tenant's sole expense. Landlord will not be responsible for obtaining any subdivision approval from any Federal, State, or municipal authorities. The responsibility for obtaining such approvals shall be the tenants. 5. TEST AND SOIL BORING All test or soil borings are to be made at tenant' s cost and expense. 6. INTERFERENCE The term "radio interference to CTC's operation" as used in paragraph 4a of the main portion of the lease : . • 10 shall not be deemed to include use of electrically powered tools or machinery or electric welding equipment in landlord' s premises. 7 . RENT Tenant shall pay rent to landlord. Rent shall be as follows: olhi 1_A .T_�rlgl Will pay Landlord as rent hereunder monthly in advance, the SUM of $2 , 000. 00 commencing on the "Commencement Date" referred to herein and on the first day of each month thereafter. If the term commences on any day other than the first day of a calendar month, a pro rata fraction of a full month' s rental shall be paid for the partial month at the end of said term. The rental for the second year and each succeeding year during the term of the lease, including any renewal term thereof, shall be increased to the annual rental determined thereof by a formula as follows: New Annual Rent = (Basic Rent) + (IR-IL/IL x Basic Rent) Definitions: IR is the Consumer Price Index for the month immediately preceding the month in which rent is due to be increased. IL is the Consumer Price Index immediately preceding the month in which this Lease was signed, Basic rent is the annual rental for the year immediately preceding the month in which rent is due to be increased. "Consumer Price Index" shall mean the Consumer Price Index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of Labor for Urban Wage earners and Clerical Workers for All Items for the New York/Metropolitan area, or shall mean the successor thereto. In the event the Consumer Price Index is converted to a different standard reference base or otherwise revised, the determination of the New Annual Rate shall be made with the use of such conversion factor, formula or table for converting the Consumer Price Index as may be published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or if the Bureau should fail to publish the same, then with the use of such conversion factor, formula or table for converting the Consumer Price Index as may be published by Prentice Hall, Inc. , or any ntlier - ti�nally recognized information. If the Consumer Price Index ceases to be published and there is no successor thereto, such other index as Landlord and CTC may agree upon shall be substituted for the Consumer Price Index, and if they are unable to agree, then such matter shall be submitted to arbitration. in no event shall the monthly rent be less than $2, 000. 00. Notwithstanding the provisions of this paragraph 7, CTC may, at its option, pay rent quarterly in advance. 8 • REAL ESTATE TAX INCREASES Tenant shall pay to landlord in each year throughout the term of this lease, including renewals thereof, a proportionate share of any increase in real estate taxes or general or special assessments levied against landlord's premises over those levied against landlord's premises for the tax year 1990-91. The real estate taxes levied against landlord's premises for the tax year 1990-91 amount to $4, 029 . 33 . The assessed valuation of landlord's premises for the tax year 1990-91 is the sum of $7,900. 00. The proportionate share of such increases in real estate taxes, general or special assessments to be paid by tenant hhall be in the same ratio that the portion of the assessed valuation of landlord's premises in each year which is attributed to the demised premises (which forms a part of landlord's premises) bears to the total assessed valuation of landlord's premises for the year in question. The ratio between that portion of the total assessed valuation of landlord's premises attributed to the demised premises and j v the total assessed valuation of landlord's premises, shall • 12 be determined by reference to the assessment card and records of the Board of Assessors of the Town of Southold. Tenant's proportionate share of real estate tax or general or special assessment increases shall be payable to landlord whether such increase is the result of increase in assessed valuation or increase in tax rate, or both. Each year shall notif', L��. ,. Wyr1..,'r. V4iYVLYVrv1• VL tenant's proportionate share of increase in real estate tax and/or general or special assessments and together with such notice shall furnish tenant with a copy of the tax bill, and the tax bill for the lease year 1990-1991, and a copy of the assessment cards for landlord's premises as described above. Tenant shall pay landlord for tenant's proportionate share of increase in real estate taxes or general or special assessments semiannually not late than ten (10) days before the taxing authorities delinquency date or ten (10) days after receipt of the tax bill, whichever shall be later. 9 • OPTION TO RENEW Provided CTC is not in default, CTC shall have the option of renewing this lease for two (2) successive periods of five (5) years each, upon the same terms and conditions which were in effect during the initial tern, except as to the rental rate which shall be as stated below for the option term: Option Term(s) Monthly Rent lst/2nd Annual C.P.I. increases and real estate tax increases as described above continue throughout the first and second option terms. CTC shall exercise its option by giving. Landlord written notice. of its intention to exercise its option to renew at least sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the initial term hereof, and if said renewal is for the successive period, CTC shall give to Landlord a like written notice at least sixty (60) days prior to the expiration of the then • 13 current period, of its intention to renew this lease for and during the next succeeding period. 10. HOLD HARMLESS Tenant shall indemnify and hold landlord harmless from any and all claims or suits for personal injury, wrongful death, or property damage arising out of tenant's •...A 2 11. TENANT'S WARRANTY Tenant warrants to landlord that tenant's structures to be erected on the demised premises and tenant's use of the demised premises will not violate any Federal, State, or municipal laws, regulations or ordinances. 12. LEASE NOT TO BE RECORDED This lease shall not be recorded, nor shall any memorandum of this lease be recorded. 13. SIGNS Tenant shall not place or cause to be placed any sign of any kind, on, in, or about the demised premises without landlord's written consent. 14. SUBORDINATION Upon written request by landlord, tenant shall execute and deliver an agreement subordinating the lease to any mortgage to be made on the demised premises. At Landlord's option, this Agreement shall be subordinate to any mortgage by Landlord which from time to time may encumber all or part of the Property or provided, however, every such mortgage shall recognize the validity of this Agreement in the event of a foreclosure of Landlord's interest and also CTC's right to remain in occupancy of and have access to the Property as long as CTC is not in default of this Agreement. CTC shall execute whatever instruments may reasonably be required to evidence this subordination clause. In the event the Property is encumbered by a mortgage, the Landlord immediately after this option is . • • 14 exercised, will obtain and furnish to CTC, a non-disturbance instrument for each such mortgage in recordable form. 15. CONDEMNATION If the whole or any part of the demised premises shall be acquired or condemned by Eminent Domain for any public or quasi-public use or purposes, then in that event, F l.w 4•nw. �F a43 .. 1 � 'a f . ._ . .. ... ... �� r.�au r.: u.a4 �.ta l6ruu..... r.�W WIC date tenant shall be deprived of physical possession of the demised premises, and tenant shall have no claim against landlord for the value of any unexpired term of this lease or of any option to renew it, and tenant shall not be entitled to any part of any award. Except that the Tenant reserves the right to proceed against the condemning authority for its loss of use. 16. ATTORNEYS FEES CTC shall pay Landlord's reasonable attorneys fees in connection with any action or proceeding arising out of CTC's breach of any provision hereof, including but not limited to summary proceedings for possession or preliminary actions for amounts due hereunder. In any such action or proceeding the parties mutually waive trial by jury. .l._ _A.'a. .. i .. ... __y.. . .• .+ .. A - .. _...vui r.. dS,.4�t:e:.� tY o..n ...v.... a.44_� IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this lease the date and year first above written. CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY (LANDLORD) (TENANT) By: By: E. Lee aywork Title: 9eeea�#etts Title: President and Gener Manager Wit s• ���� Witness: I • .v :. .iei ... :.: 1F. .• iw:-u' •. Ai.11u11v.•9f .: - ..•. ' W c tpcmosto� .„o eS I \cho°n ° LNI t cmec y 4t5,0 - \ 1m`1111 � •4A I \ G OUp \ \I pRN - O�me\\y FRANC 9 r I � I 0496 s.f. 8 \ •l iao / \ p5 WELL •` `\ I �/1 O� � I l000-ws��-� 11•\p a+� ps pHA�t \ /' i D� O" i —2\� � :000-loE'•"O '' i Q R P R K\N G \ \ ., GESfPpo1"'x I \O it I l4PL«pT0N1 I a � •00 W. \ ' i gtORV OpNG. ` N F 100�g8 s i r a \ ell �. \ to 69.74 60.00' 31.49' N.85°30401-W. 91.49 ' N.85-36'3p"W —_ — fDOF Oi P•VEYEMI M A 1 I\I Cellular Telephone Company • Reliable Service Area #18 Mahopac ,6 a,&t iDAe #lA Mahopae �- 41'21'4•b'p• Long. 13°44'43" N. Lat. 41°22' 4" W. Lon . 73044*43" N 39' H I if U 8•ar--�S 11 .0 4.8 miles N o a i/ N 050E 6.9 45. 1S A 90° 10.2 135° 4.5 135° 7.3 180' 4.2 1800 4.3 6.5 225° 4.•1 Z25° 10.6 270 3.6 315' 10 .7 315' 6.3 scat ns #2 Mohegan take Locations M3A Kstonah N. Lat. 41°17' S8" W. zon 73°51'28" N. Lat. 41'16' 46" w� 73'37'33" ea�ng dHU aela'�' N 0° $ 6. 2 Miles N of 2 7.5 miles 45* 4.4 450 6'2 900 3.8 1909 36• 7 .8 1390 3 .9 180° 7.6 180• 9 .0 225' 5.4 225° 10.2 270° 4.7 315° 7 .6 315' S.9 AM 2 - : i MAR 22 '91 16:26 518., 465 9313 PRGE . 00T 200 ' 39dd 3NO-Oa13W. WOJd 9E : 11 16 , LZ Nk)W Locations #4 Ossining Loci i6n, #5 stoney Point p, zat. 41.09157" a . 13•51 '42" Lat. 41.14'10" �73'59' 7.0" l,sar as uT earsn N 0' S 8.4 miles N 01, E 8.4 miles 45' 6.4 43• 8.4 90• 8.4 9o• 8.4 135• 8.4 135' 8.2 1800 8.8 180' 8.4 225' 9.4 225• 8.4 270• 4.4 270• 8.4 315• 9.3 31S' 8.4 Loci aatiens 06 spring valley Locatio> 1 07 Eims£ord N. Lat. 41•05' 35" W. Lan . 74.02' 38" N. Latg41%dV26" wo Long- 73°49' 2.0 earsn � et1 N 0' E 8.0 miles N 0. 8 5 .5 miles 450 13.4 45' S.S 90• 13.9 90o 5. 5 135• 13.9 1331, 7 . 1 • 13.9 180' 6.4 q25• 12.0 225 S69 270' 8.3 2.70• 6.8 31S• 8.0 315• 6.8 MAR 22 ' 91 16 26 S,18 465 9313 F'A6E . 006 600 ' 39dd 3NO-06i3W WOad 96 : 11 16 , LZ 8dw s i LocC #g Harrison LOCAL t YQek9rr N. Lat. 40.59' 54" W• >a 73.42' 1 .0" N. Lat. 40656' 15" W, Lon az x ' 8U - SsaR � 7•g�Qsi.Vti N 00 B 3 .0 miles N 0. 8 9.9 miles 450 2.5 450 9.4 909 1.7 90 1200 • 3. 3 133• 12.4 180• .6.1 1800 11.9 • 225411.1 zzs 270' 5.5 270 11.4 315• 5 . 5 315' loot jogti.on: #10 Harrington park, NJ T4001tiCnI _ #il R&MOY► NJ N. Let.tt. 40.58' 58" W n . 73.38#44" N, Lgt4 41.0312611 W. Long-*-7400'47a RMIARAR ILdau sea N 06 E 8 ,4 miles N 00 z 8.4 mile• 430 8. 5 451 8.4 900 8.4 90 11.2 • 8.4 1350 12.8 135. 8.4 1900 12.3 225' 9 .3 225• 8.4 2706 8.4 270' 8.4 3159 0.4 315• B.4 MAR 82 ' 91 16s27 519 .455 8313 plies . 009 000 ' 39Hd 3NO-Odi3W 1.WOad " t 11 16 , 42 duw Leeatii0 #12 Pompton Lakee. NJ N. Late 40.59146" w• Lgaz 74'16 ' 51" ar n N 0' v 11.0 miles 45' 11.2 goo 11 .6 135' 13.0 180' 13. 5 225' lies 270• 8.0 also 7.7 Loeat�ion! !14 Fort LOe# NJ �,�n= $15 Secaucus, NJ No Lat. 40051' 17" W• aan 7a'S8' 44" N�r�yt• 40o44'45" K� 74.04' 50" Ic-cring sear N 0' >~ 5 11.8 mil*s N 4 ' 8 06 8 .4 mllea 45' 10.9 900 8.4 goo 12e1 • 12.6 135 6.4 180' 12 .4 200� 8e4 225' 12.8 225* 8.4 804 270• 11.8 315' 12e0 !lS' 8.4 MAR 22 ' 91 18127 31.8 465 9313 PAGE-010 S00 ' 39tid 3N0-021jW'� ' W08J 40 : 11 16 , LE 8UW �r11 x '�" � ? � Y� 10a>:icn: 516 Otangr, tQJ N. ;# .L 40•50'42" Lon • 14•14' 36" IV U N 06 E 11.4 miles 45" 12.6 90• 13.7 135• 13.6 180' 11.6 225' ll. 1 270' 12.7 315' 12.0 )ca_t&ons #26 Staten Island b9cAtions 027 Coney Island N. Lat 40•32'47" W. Lo 74.913S" at 40'36' 34'' . W• LOn4,, 73'S9' 24" Bea _� 3 eer 3L asv N 0' Z 9.3 miles N 0. 8 8.4 miles 450 963 45' 8.4 9o• 9.5 90' s•$ - 135' 8.2 135' so$ 180' S.4 1804 is$ 225• 4.9 225' 6.6 270' S.0 270• 8.4 315' 7.8 315' 8.4 MAR 22 191 19IZ5 516 46S 9353 PAGE. 0i1 900139Hd '3N0-02d13W W08J 8E , I1 I8 , LZ 81dw #28 Jersey City# NJ L ationt #29 gseoklyn LoCatio t • " W. L00 , 73059136" L�ari 74•022`" N. Lati• 40 41 49 #. L . a0'43 ' 18" 97. R pig' C•ig 8.9 miles 0• 8.4 miles 4'3• 9 .3 450 9 .0 90• 8.4 9o► set 13S• 9.3 135" Q'1 180• 9.9 9.8 22SO8#4 225' 9. 5 270• 9.6 270" @.8 313" 9.2 UP LOastie = 030 Manhattan LocatipAl #31 North Bergse# NJ 73•S9' 2s° N. � 40.to, 16" n . 73 59'45" N�l,.at.�. 4o•4a' 23" wewam ROM NeOa•1L 9.Z ed1Es N 00 E 10#9 miles • 10.5 43• 10.6 90• 11#8 90• 10 .1 135• 10.9 1351 10. 3 1600 11 .6 180• 1001 225: 1103 225• 10.9 2.70 11 .3 270► 10.4 313• 11 . 1 3i5• 10 .2 '1Q 465 9313 PAGE.01E MAR 22 ' 91 16: ae L00 ' 390d 3N0-Odi3W W08d 9E : 1I Is , 42 dbw ro_ ate; #32 Long island City Locations �33 Brooklyn N._ Lest. 40045125" W.Lon 73.54' 45" N. Lat. 40.4244411 W�.�3-. 79•56' 28" Boarsn N 0' E 8.4 miles N 0' E 8.5 miles 45' 8.6 4S' 8.7 90' 8.4 90• 8.4 • 8.4 135. 8.9 190' 8.4 180' 8.$ 225' 9.0 225' 8.9 270" 8.4 270' 9.0 315' 8.4 315' 8.7 LocaL�: M34 Richmond Hill LOc�atfori: S35 Brorix 40.41129" W. Long. 73.50' 43" N, Lat. 40.48' 57" W.Dori . 73•r13113" Ba-.R-fin 39 SU Bear ' dzU N 09 E 8.4 miles N 0' 9 8.4 miles 45' 8.4 45' 10.0 g0' 8,4 900 10.1 135' 8.9 135 0.4 1B0' 8.9 1900 9.2 2250 8.8 225• 10 . 3 270• 8.4 270' 9.6 315' 8.4 315• 9.4 MAR 22 ' 91 16126 518 469 9313 PAGE . 013 800 ' 39bd 3NO-0613W WOdJ 66 ! 11 16 , LZ duw LOC8tja! #36 port Washington Locations 137 Olen Oaks N. Lat. 40.50- 28" W. LonLon 73642110" N. Lat. 40G43'24" W. Limon 73'42 ' 37" Haab 3Td8U Hear ng 3M9 N 0' E 8.4 miles N 0' E 12.0 miles 45' 8.4 45' 11. 1 90' 8.4 90' 11. 3 13V 8.4 13S' 11.8 180' 8.4 180' 12.0 225' 8.4 225' 11.8 270' 8.4 270' 11.8 315' 8.4 315' 12.1 Location: $38 Woodmere Location: Merrick W N. Lat. 40•37 ' 514 W on . 73'42 ' 32" N�. Lst�40'40'0" �f�, 73'33 ' 18" Hearin e'd�r rig 3 N 0' E 8.4 miles N 0' E 8.4 miles 45' 8.4 45' 8.4 90' 8.4 90' 8.4 139' 8.4 135' 8.4 lA0' 8.4 190' 8.4 225' 8.4 225' 8 .4 210' 8.4 2.70' 8.4 316' 8.4 315" 8.4 MAR 22 191 16: 29 518 465 9313 PAGE , 014 600 ' 390d 3NO-02113W WOb3 66 : TT T6 , LZ add Locations 140 Jericho Looltion! 341 Huntington N. Lat. 40.46'49" W. Ion9. 73'33 ' 26" N. Lat. 40°52 ' 2" W. Long. 73•24'37" Seams eat 39 d8 ' N 00 E e.4 miles N as 3 6.1 miles 450 8.4 45• 8.0 9o• 8.4 90• 9.2 135• 9.8 1350 10.2 le0° 10.2 1800 11.3 2250 9.7 221• 9 .7 270° 8.4 2706 8.3 315• 8.4 3150 6.4 Locations #42 1'armingdals Location: #43 5t. Jstnes N. Lat. 40.43139" W. Long. 7342714" N. Lat. 40'52' 55" W Long. 73'9'29" 8e�1rTAg 39 Be_ ar 4 N 0• E 7.9 miles N 00 E Sol miler 490 8.3 45° 6. 7 900 10.e go. 9,2 135• 11 . 2 135• 10.6 1800 11.2 180' 11.4 11. 2 225• 270• 10.2 270• 16.6 3150 8.7 3150 3.4 MAR FZ ' 91 16: 29 518 488 9313 P6E. 615 010 ' 390d 3N0-08i3W W06J 0h : 71 16 , Lz NNW LOCatioft,o #44 Sayville LOCaticAl #45 8htr1'y N. LAt. 40'44' 46" W. Loo 73.5' 23" N. Lat. 40.47139" W Lo 72.32* 35" N 4S1E 8.7 mime N 0•�E 4.6 miles 45 0.2 90' 10.1 900 9.9 135' 10.2 135' 7.3 180• 10.2 19047.4 225• 10.2 2230 6.9 2700 9.1 270' 9.0 3136 8.8 313` file LOCatiq : 446 Riverhead Location: #47 shelter Island N. Lat. 40.55' 28" W. Long. 72`411261, N. Let- 41`4' 30" W. LO . 72`21 '12" DeArintl 39 d8u 8ea�r�ng 3 N 0• E 4. 2 miles N 0' E 5,6 miles 45 45� 5.3 • 8. 2 90' 7.8 • 135• 0.5 1350 9.0 ISO, 8.7 1800 BOG 2254 77 .9 223" sea 270• 3.6 6.9 270 315` 4.2 3150 5. 1 MAR 22 '91 16:30 518 465 9313 PAGE . 016 110 ' 39dd 3NO-Oai3W WOaJ 0b : 11 16 . L2 allW * 8I0 ' 3DUd Id101 r ocatioa: 1R49 8aat Hampton GoCa i e #►48 Sout Ptoh . L2119. 72•10, 18" N. Lat. 40'59' 32" W. La . 7A'24' 17" fit. r- 40 59 34 a Seas n 39� SCE 8.4 miles M 0• >3 11.0 miles 4S�1r 9.0 49' 6.6 45 8.8 90' lows 135• $'g 133" lows 180' 8.7 180• 10.5 22S' GA 223• 10.7 270" *2 270• 10•9 9 315' 315' 10 .6 518 46S S313 PAGE . 017 7. . r ra•ap VTM.:MnuJ -i_- 9 kin-n J... LIn,iI lb • tr rc .__ 1.I- lLLL. U.S.Department Eastern Region Fitzgerald Federa Building of Transportation John F.Kennedy' Federal Aviation International Airp t Administration Jamaica.New Yo k.11430 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERAT100 ON ---- CITY STATE LATITUDE/------------------------ ----------- LONGITUDE MSL AL AMSL MATTITUCK----------NY 40-59-56. 00 072-30-39 . 00------30---� 130 --- ----------------------------- =---------- METRO ONE CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. AERONAUTICAL S UDY ATTN: GLENN WITTE No: 91-AEA-010 -OE 365 WEST PASSAIC STREET NEW ROCHELLE, NY 07662 Type Structure: ANTENNA TOWER The Federal Aviation Administration hereby acknowledges receip ' of notice dated 01/11/91 concerning the proposed constructioi or alteration contained herein. A study has been conducted under the provisions of Part 77 of he Federal Aviation Regulations to determine whether the propo ed construction would be an obstruction to air navigation, whethe7 it should be marked and lighted to enhance safety in air navigat on, and whether supplemental notice of start and completion of construction is required to permit timely charting and notific tion to airmen. The findings of that study are as follows: The proposed construction would not exceed FAA obstruction standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. However, the following applies to the construction propose The structure should be obstruction marked and lightel per FAA Advisory Circular AC 70/7460-1, 'Obstruction Markin aTZd Lighting' . CHAPTERS : �3 J74 � -5 ( )-6 ( ]-7 ( ] 8 V4.-9 . This determination expires on 08/27/91 unless application is //!` I��\ made, (if subject to the licensing authority of the Federal j Communications Commission) , to the FCC before that date, or iti is otherwise extended, revised or terminated. If the structure is subject to the licensing authority of the FCC, a copy of this acknowledgement will be sent to that Agenc 1 . NOTICE IS REQUIRED ANYTIME THE PROJECT IS ABANDONED OR THE PROPOSAL IS MODIFIED SIGNED ( )V-Lt" �) �lki "[� -(�.. Specialist, Systems Management Branch Robert P. Alexander (718) 917-1230/1228 ISSUED IN: Jamaica, New York ON 02/25/91 i I MT AT&T Bell Laboratories 600 Mountain Avenue -. Murray Hill, NJ 07974-2070 201 582-3000 July 10, 1990 Diane Amedeo Metro-One 15 E. Midland Ave. , 2nd Floor Paramus, NJ 07652 Dear Ms. Amedeo: In response to your request for an estimate of the levels of exposure to electromagnetic energy associated with a proposed cellular-radio installation at Cedar Lane, Englewood, NJ and an opinion regarding the concern for public health associated with long term exposure at these levels, please be advised of the following: The proposed system will ultimately consist of three directional transmitting antennas (Sweden Corp, ANTEL-ALP9211) located at an elevation of approximately 97 ft. above grade on a self-supported antenna tower. Six receiving antennas will also be mounted at approximately the same height. A maximum of fourteen transmitters will be connected to each transmitting antenna; each transmitter operates at a maximum output power of less than 8 watts. Hence, the maximum radiated power will be approximately 112 watts per antenna or 336 watts total for the three antennas (assuming all transmitters operate simultaneously which is rarely, if ever, the case) . This is an extremely low power system when compared with other familiar radio systems, such as AM and FM and television broadcast, which typically operate at power levels of 50,000 watts or more. For the case at hand, the maximum exposure levels associated with the cellular radio system can be readily calculated at any point in a plane at any height above grade. Based on the information provided above and an antenna gain of approximately 13 . 15 dBi, the maximum power density in a horizontal plane 6 ft. above a plane that passes through grade directly under the antennas will be less than 1. 1 millionths of a watt per centimeter squared (1. 1 µW/cm' ) and will be less than 2 . 0 µW/cm' at any point in a corresponding plane 25 ft. Diane Amedeo - 2 above grade. The latter is representative of the maximum power density immediately outside of the upper floor of nearby dwellings (assuming level- terrain) . Further, the antenna pattern is such that the energy is propagated in a relatively narrow beam (in the vertical plane) which is directed tdwArd the horizon. The reason for this is to provide uniform coverage. Hence, exposure levels directly under the antennas are not remarkably different from the levels at points more distant. The above values are the theoretical maxima that could occur and are not typical values. The calculations include the effect of field reinforcement from in-phase reflections and, the assumption was made that all transmitters operate simultaneously and continuously (which is not the usual case) . Although the above values are obtained analytically, experience has shown that the technique used is extremely conservative. That is, the calculated power density levels have always been found to be greater than the corresponding measured levels. The maximum power density at points considered normally accessible, i.e. , 1-2 µW/cm' can be compared with the current federal occupational exposure guide of 10, 000 µW/cm' (OSHA - 29 CFR 1910.97) for continuous exposure or the 1982 ANSI' radiofrequency protection guide (RFPG) of 2,700 µW/cm' , the New Jersey environmental limits of 2,700 µW/cm' (NJAC: Title 7, Chapter 28, Subchapter 42) or the Massachusetts environmental limits of 530 µW/cm' at cellular-radio frequencies. (There are no applicable federal limits for exposure of the public to radiofrequency electromagnetic energy. ) The total power density at any point a few feet above grade, including contributions from all antennas on the tower, will be, in fact, considerably lower than any health standard used anywhere in the western world. The levels inside of nearby buildings or homes at cellular radio frequencies will be significantly lower than those immediately outside because of the high attenuation of common building materials at these frequencies and also will be lower than any health standard used anywhere in the world. The concern about exposure to electromagnetic energy is understandable. Many people feel uneasy about new technology and often want absolute proof that something is safe. Such 'American National Standard "Safety levels with respect to human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields 300 kHz to 100 GHz, " ANSI'.C95. 1-1982 , American National Standards Institute, New York, NY. • Diane Amedeo - 3 guarantees are not possible since one is asking for proof that something does not exist. However, sound judgements can be made as to the safety of a physical agent based on knowledge of the scientific literature. This is exactly how health standards are see. Because all unequivocal scientific evidence indicates that biological effects associated with exposure to radiofrequency - energy are threshold effects, i.e. , unless the exposure level is sufficiently high the effect will not occur regardless of exposure duration, it is relatively straightforward to derive safe limits. (Unlike ionizing radiation, e.g. , X-rays and nuclear radiation, repeated exposures to low level radiofrequency/microwave radiation, or nonionizing radiation, are not cumulative. ) By adding safety factors to the level at which the most sensitive effect occurs, conservative exposure guides have been developed to ensure safety. At present, well over 6, 000 reports are in the scientific literature which address the subject of microwave and radiofrequency bioeffects. These reports, most of which describe the results of epidemiological studies and animal studies, have been critically reviewed by leading researchers in the field and all new studies are continuously being reviewed by various groups and organizations whose interest is developing health standards. These include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, the American National Standards Institute, the World Health Organization, the international Radiation Protection Association, etc. All of these groups have recently either reaffirmed existing health standards, developed and adopted new health standards or have proposed health standards for exposure to radiofrequency and microwave energy. For example, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements has recently (April 1986) published recommended limits for occupational and public exposures. These recommendations were based on the results of an extensive critical review of the scientific literature by a committee of the leading researchers in the field of bioelectromagnetics. The literature selected included many controversial studies reporting effects at low levels. The 2NCRP - "Biological effects and exposure criteria for radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, " NCRP Report No. 86, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Bethesda, MD. Diane Amedeo - 4 results of all studies selected were weighed and analyzed and an exposure guide of approximately 2 , 700 µW/cm' (at cellular-radio frequencies) recommended for continuous occupational exposure and -approximately 530 µW/cm' for continuous exposure of the public. Similarly, the Environmental Protection Agency recently (July 30, 1986) 3 published a notice in the Federal Register, calling for public comment on recommended guidance for exposure of the public. Three different limits, ranging •from approximately 270 to 2,700 µW/cm' , were proposed. Further, the latest draft of the ANSI C95. 1 standard (April, 1990) , which resulted from an extensive critical review of the scientific literature, reaffirmed the 1982 RFPG for occupational exposure and recommends 530 µW/cm' for exposure of the general public at cellular radio frequencies. Also, the USSR, which traditionally had the lowest exposure guides, has recently revised upward its limits for public exposure. Enough is now known to allow unequivocal judgements to be made as to what power density levels are safe and what levels may be potentially harmful. With respect to the proposed cellular-radio system, be assured that the exposure levels in the vicinity of the Englewood installation will be below any health standard used anywhere in the western world and literally thousands of times below any level reported to be associated with any functional change in humans or laboratory animals. This holds true even when all transmitters operate simultaneously and continuously (which is not the normal operating mode) . Power density levels of this magnitude are not even a subject of speculation with regard to an association with adverse health effects. Anyone interested can obtain additional information about the environmental impact of cellular-radio from: Dr. Robert Cleveland, Jr. Federal Communications Office of Engineering and Technology Room 7002 1919 M Street NW Washington, DC 20554 (202) 653-8169 and 3Federal Register, Vol. 51, No. 146, Wednesday, July 30, 1986. Diane Amedeo - 5 Norbert Hankin USEPA, Office of Radiation Programs (ANR-461) 401 M Street NW Washington; DC 20460 (202) 475-9626 A substantial amount of knowledge exists relating to the health implications associated with exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic energy. However, perhaps because of the anticipated lack of general interest, little of this information is imparted to the public by the media. But you can be assured that based on what is known, the proposed Englewood, NJ cellular-radio installation will not present any health problem to members of the public. incerely, R. C. Petersen Nonionizing Radiation Protection Manager e�;. ,)P. �� M. M. Weiss, Ph.D. Consultant n DECLINATION 1 S T 0 R m 130 ± WEST Z B /Q ANT.CABLES IN 2-6"COND. UNDERGROUND. C�J CD EXISTING PORTION OF BUILDING TO BE DEMOLISHED. PROPOSED 100' HIGH MONOPOLE m 69'-0" (SEE DETAIL 3/SI) `p.p• 2C •o C PROVIDE GRAVEL MULCH Z 95 1 0 0 ROOM ENTRANCE DOOR ALL OVER FENCED AREA t � PROVIDE (2) 8.5'a2C PROPOSED UNMANNED 12'-0' 3.0, PARKING SPACES(SEE �4+ ELECT EQUIPMENT ` _ PROPOSED CHAIN LINK F �I n,f /RLK. BLDG.O OOM IN EXIST. I-STY. 6'-0" HIGH(SEE DETAIL `B _ T 3� •, " �� PROPOSED 101 GRAVEL DRIVE 256� L (� J18.5 8.5 p �. BR I , PROPOSED 6FT. HIGH CHAIN LINK FENCE ENCLOSURE(SEE DETAIL 6/SI) ` - n- 9 I _ p r0 _-- • 6 0 co Q ./ PROVIDE 2-5'-C"W 0 m • SWING GATE 0 r w I— 9`�� 316---------- -- rr III 86 II NEW I •UNE TUNDERGROUND CONC ' 234'-0" NOTE: V. 1 . F. NO TREE CUTTING ALLOWED IN THIS SITE. TO 1/5- I, IDS 2 . I�5'3 FOB FUQ'WL=. slrP_ 1- 4-: . INFORM,,&r10N E SCALE 0 20 40 60 80 • I_Cl1L.EI;iLs'LlvXtr. u.15LL'S+!' Burr ct vsr uL'rrin nE rNlwdr. ANO FORMED MR t/ON Of PIER CIE. UNE Of O OLL-CMU 'r n%. IF N rc W o WK,3ETctNltn rF Ztwh)r- ,�F N O T m_ v r OOMIN. 0, •c ncyy_ "I NE r PORN , SOIL SEARING CAP^CITY MUST el w< �I Ft 3E DETEF\MINED AND ENGINEERED o%n ru rr rolNr% WITH MONOPOLE TOWER FO UNDfjTION, PRIOKTO GOMMENCEMENTOpANY .WORK. 1•-0 MINIMUM 1• II �_ oYcrtt�n;wttn ��.� I I I1 II II I of I �• - . 4. _a `o AA ® ® A T _o o ® T -9� L.PA - I A � I HVRC EQUIPMENT EL_ECTRICRL_ AH-1 Trane model no. TWE 090 R3 air handler (MER #49-86-E) 1. Provide a comple cobling capacity: 88,000 BTU/hr Drawings, as spec sensible capacity: 62,000 BTU/hr complete and prc indoor air flow: 3,000 CFM motor: 1 1/2 HP 2. RII work shall con, system KW: 10.23 KW Code, all local cc electrical: 208/230 V., 3PH 3. Contractor shall Include: 1. Discharge plenum & grills and permits requir 2. Return air grills 3. Sub base 4. Contractor shall 4. Vibration isolators and chasing rcquiT 5. FRRR 30/30 2'' filters 6. Single point electrical entry 5. RII conduits passin 7. 11.25 KW electric heat module partitions, roof, r R Hnnr wall nn TR74 listed Sealant. �oS�fFOIK��G� JUDITH T. TERRY l� j Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK = P.O. Box 1179 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS �f'! T Southold, New York 11971 MARRIAGE OFFICER y Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1801 1 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Office of the Town Clerk DATE: April 2, 1991 RE: Special Exception No. 4022 - CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE Transmitted herewith is Special Exception No. 4022 - CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. d/b/a METRO ONE, together with a letter from the Board of Appeals to William D. Moore dated March 20, 1991, a letter from William D. Moore dated March 13, 1991, a letter from the Board of Appeals dated March 4, 1991 to William D. Moore, a 3 page site plan map, a letter from John J. Kelliber of the New York State Public Service Commission, Notices to Adjacent Property Owners, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department dated March 14, 1991, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department dated March 13, 1991, Short Environmental Assessment Form, Zoning Board of Appeals Questionnaire, a copy of the Certificate of Occupancy dated June 14, 1965, a copy of the Certificate of Occupancy dated August 18, 1961 , a copy of the deed, a copy of a letter from William J. Baxter dated March 12, 1991, a copy of a disclosure statement for Cellular Telephone Co. . and a copy of a letter from Lynne Lorimer of Metro One. Judith T. Terry Town Clerk t APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ° SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Gri orris,Jr. g Town Hall,53095 Main Road 3 Serge Doyen,Jr. � � y� P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 March 20, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons Suite 3 , Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Application for Special Exception/Interpretation/Variance Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One Dear Mr. Moore: This letter will acknowledge receipt by our office of your recent three-fold application for: ( 1) a determination as to whether or not the structure and use as proposed meets the requirements for a Special Exception under the residential provisions of the Zoning Code, to wit: Section 100-31B of the Agricultural-Conservation Zone District, as referenced in Section 100-81B; (2) an Appeal for an Interpretation regarding appli- cability of the height restrictions for the proposed tower at a height of approximately 104 feet from ground level, and the question of an exemption under Section 100-230D; (3) and if a variance is deemed necessary, an appeal for relief concerning height of the tower as an alternative. Our office has also agreed to recommend a return of $200.00 which was applied toward the variance from the $500.00 filing fee, after a public hearing under the appeal for the interpretation, if the Board should determine that such a variance was not necessary . Also, this filing should not be construed as a waiver of this board' s jurisdiction to determine whether or not this project is a use authorized in the Limited Business or Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts. As you recall, our previous letter dated March 4, 1991 indicated that a telecommunications use is not listed as a permitted use, by Special Exception or otherwise, in the Limited Business or Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts, and further reference was made to the principal uses, by Special Exception, listed // under the Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park LIO Zone District regulations of the zoning code. It is additionally noted under this preliminary review that you have furnished a copy of an Order issued April 18, 1985 by the N.Y.S. Public Service Commission to "operate a cellular radio system in the New York City Area" as proof that the applicant is a public utility. Please elaborate furnishing additional evidence that the applicant is a public utility in the Town of Southold area, and furnish "Attachment I" which is referred to on Page 2 of the order, and if this order is not current, please furnish documents from the Public Service Commission which are in effect and which may apply in this project. This matter is expected to be heard on April 30, 1991. It is requested, however, that you file the above requested information by April 5, 1991 for distribution to the Board, review, and on-site inspections. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN lk G' • MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law �r, Clause Commons Suite 3 0�n L �n . — -- I Main Road P.O. Box 23 }, ; Mattituck, New York 11952 h 0 � Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax: (516) 298-5664 Li William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary March 13, 1991 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application for Special Exception Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One Dear Chairman Goehringer and Members of the Board: This letter is written in response to yours of March 4, 1991 to clarify what I may not have adequately explained in the above referenced application initially submitted February 22, 1991. The proposed use for which this special exception is sought is a radio transmission tower with antenna with unmanned, computer-run equipment in an existing concrete block building. The Cellular Telephone Company is a public utility and as such, the proposed structure and use constitutes a public utility structure and installation necessary to serve areas within the town. Such a use is permitted by special exception pursuant to Southold Town Zoning Code section 100-81(B)(1) [see 110-31(B)(6)] and falls within the original jurisdiction of the zoning board as granted by the Southold Town Board. Enclosed please find a certificate from the New York State Public Service Commission (the regulatory agency charged with supervision and control of public utilities) authorizing the Cellular Telephone Company (Metro One) to provide cellular radio telephone service in the New York area. We are resubmitting the application for the special exception use. Enclosed herewith please find a new application together with the following supporting documents: 1. Special Exception application (new) 2. Notice to Adjoining Property Owners w/ receipts (new) 3. Environmental Assessment Form (new) 4. ZBA Questionnaire (new) 5. Certificates of Occupancy (may be for both subject and adjoining property recently subdivided) 6. Deeds 7. Filing fee (our firm's check #1707 in the sum of $300.00) 8. Authorization letters (from Metro One to Moore & Moore and from William J. Baxter to Metro One and Moore & Moore) 9. Disclosure Statement from Cellular Telephone Company (d/b/a Metro One) We were advised to submit the plans of the proposed facility to the building department for their review and determination of compliance with the zoning ordinance. Enclosed are copies of the two different notices of disapproval signed respectively by Thomas J. Fisher and Victor Lessard. The basis of the disapproval cited by Mr. Fisher is addressed in this letter with the clarification that the applicant is a public utility. The Notice of Disapproval prepared by Mr. Lessard determined that special exception approval from the zoning board and site plan approval from the planning board were necessary before a building permit could be issued. In addition, Mr. Lessard determined that an interpretation of section 100-230 regarding height exemptions for certain structures may be necessary as the proposed structure is more than 35 feet in height. Enclosed please find an application for an interpretation of the applicability of section 100-230 to the proposed facility and a determination that the structure proposed is exempt from the height limitation. To facilitate and expedite the review of this project in its entirety, the application for the interpretation requests alternative relief in the form of a height variance if the board determines that the exception from the height limitation does not apply to the proposed structure. Copies of each of the above referenced documents are enclosed with this application together with our firm's check for $200.00 (check # 1741). It is our understanding that these applications will be scheduled together for hearing on April 30, 1991. Please advise if you need additional copies of the surveys/site plans that were submitted previously. If there is any additional information you require, please do not hesitate to contact us. Wi cc: Metro One Southold Building Dept. Southold Planning Board APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman ;, Charles Grigonis,Jr. ?� o' , Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. �'� P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 March 4, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons Suite 3, Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Application for Special Exception Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One Dear Mr. Moore: This letter will acknowledge review of your recent Special Exception application left with our office on February 22, 1991. It is our understanding that you do not wish to file the Special Exception application if there is a need for a variance concerning the height of the principal antenna building, which is at approximately 104 feet above average ground level, and that you are in the process of requesting a determination or Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, which has not been furnished with the Special Exception documents. Pursuant to Article XXVI, Section 100-262 of the zoning code, we are returning your Special Exception application forms requesting telecommunications building (antenna) and change of principal use to permit telecommunications for the following reasons: a) Telecommunications is not a use permitted in the Limited Business or Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts ( see Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park LIO Zone District regulations) ; b) a written determination by way of a Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector concerning conformance or nonconformance with the zoning code has not been furnished as �)�Page 2 - March 4, To: William D. Moore, Esq. Re: Cellular Telephone Co. required in the filing of applications to the Board of Appeals, for either a Special Exception or Variance (please see instructions sheet with ZBA form packet and Article XXVI , Section 100-262A) ; c) a Notice of Disclosure for the applicant-corporation, Cellular Telephone Co. , must be provided; d) a Consent from the property owner authorizing the applicant-corporation(s) to file the subject application must be provided. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN lk Enclosures cc: Building Department Planning Board APR 26 1991 STATE OF CONNECTICUT ) COUNTY OF D ) William J. Baxter, Jr. being duly sworn, deposes and states as follows: 1. I am one of the owners of property which abuts land on which Metro One proposes the construction of a 104 foot monopole with antenna. Our property is located to the south of the subject site. 2. This affidavit is given to advise the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals that as the owners of this parcel to the south, we are familiar with, and have no objection to the Metro One application presently before the Zoning Board of Appeals. � 1 will , J. Baxter, Or. Sworn to before me the 98 day of 1991 Notary Public TILDA S. FICD Notary Pull NC, Faime!J �uun!y My Commission Expires Apr; 5G, lu9G v . FORM No. . TOWN OF SOUTIIOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OEEICE SOU T HOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OP DISAPPROVAL /� / � �. . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated for permit tocxul .2_ . . . . . . . . . . . . at Location of Property . . .�. �.5. . . aa. . . . 1tu House No. - �- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 section . . .� .�.8. . . . . . Block . . .Q.�. . . . . . . Lot . 11. . . . . . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pilcd Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lot No. is returned hereewith and disapproved on the following grounds . . . .. . . 1.. . . . .R a-H, . .qf. (J - . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`. . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ding Inspector RV 1/80 1-v{ZM ti0. 3 TO"'IN OF SUUTHOLD BU LDiNG DEPART`„ENT TOIdN CLERK'S OFFICE SGiiTIIOi.D, N.`!. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date . . .MARCH 13 • . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 9.1. . . To WILLIAM D. MOORE (ATTORNEY) WILLIAM BASCT$k• W., V bTnRS. P;0.• ,30X 23• • . . YATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated . . .FEB, •22 • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 91 for permit to CONSTRUCT ANTENNA FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at Location of Property 4 15 ELIJAHS LANE P'.ATTITUCK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . House No. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . . . . . . . . . . Block .04. . . . . . . . . . . Lot ' . 1.3 Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LoL No. is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds . .UNDER ARTICLF. VIII SECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • 100-8 PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS ]aUSTNESS WITH ANTENNA IS NOT A PERMITTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . USE IN THIS DISTRICT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • •ACTION REQUIRED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . wild g inspector THOMAS J. FI R RV I/80 PROJECT 1.0.NUMBER 617.21 L SEOR 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 rSPONSOR Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro NAME On 2 SiteROJECT228 . 1. 3 a, PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality Town of Southold a. PRECISE LOCATION(Street address and road intersections,Prominent landmarks,etc.,or Provide map)O 1 k Northwest corner of intersection of Elijah Lane and State Route 25 Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-108-4-11 . 3 5, IS PROPOSED ACTION: JPNew ❑Exoansion ❑Modification/alteration IB 6, DESCRE PROJECT BRIEFLY: Reconstruction of existing one story concrete block building for use as unmanned telecommunications equipment room and construction of 104 foot high monopole radio tower with antenna. 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially 2 acres Ultimately 2 5. WILL PROPOacres SED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? ®Yes No If No,describe briefly 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? ®Residential �1! [Industrial Commercial ESA ricultute Describe: 9 ❑ParWForast/Open space ❑Olney South of proposed site predominantly agricultural use. Abandoned auto re abuts premises. North and east of pro pzir shop property, land use is residential and agricultural. 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)and permieapr Southold Town Planning Board pSite Plan Suffolk County Planning, F.C.C. Frm ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? ®No I!yea•list agency name and Permittapproval OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMITIAPPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? ®No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE r m , lul Tele hone Co. d b a etro One Dale: A_1 s_g�_ AttDrney for Applicant If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER 1 (Continued on reverse side) The N.Y.s. Environmental Quality Review Act requires submission of this form, and an environmental review will before any action is taken. be rt.ade Ly this board SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSbtENT FORM INSTRUCTIONS: ( order to answer the questions in this short EAF it is assumed that the preparer will use currently available information coneezninq the project and the likely impacts of the action. It is not expected that additional studies, research or other investigations will be undertaken. (b) If any question has been answered Yes the project may be sig- nificant and completed Environmental Assessment Form is necessary. (c) If all questions have been answered No it is likely that the project is not significant, (d) Environmental Assessment • 1. Will project result in a large Physical change to the project site or Physically alter more than 10 acres of land? _Yes X NO 2. Will there be a major change to any unique or unusual land form on the site? �• _Yes X No 3. Will project alter or have a large effect on an existing body Of water? , _Yes X No 4. Will Project have a potentially large impact on groundwater quality? _Yes __X.No 5. Will project significantly effect drainage flow on adjacent sites? , 6. Will project affect any threatened or endangered Yes X No plant or animal species? Yes X No 7. Will project result in a major adverse effect on air quality? Yes _X_No 8. Will project have a major effect on visual char- acter of the community or scenic views or vistas 'known to be important to the community? Yes _X-No 9. Will project adversely impact any site or struct- ure of historic, pre-historic, or paleontological importance or any site designated as a critical environmental area by a local agency? _ Yes X No , 10. Will project have a major effect on existing or future recreational opportunities? Yes y No 11. Will Project result in major traffic problems or '+� cause s major effect to existing transportation ' systems? _Yes -ENO 12. Will Project regularly cause objectionable odors, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical disturb- ance as a result of the projects operation? 13. Will — Yes _�Na or safety? have any impact on public health Y. 14. Will ,Yes �-No Project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in Permanent Popula- tion of more than 5 percent Over a one-year period or have a major negative effect on the _- YOs X.No character of the community or neighborhood? 15. Is there public project? ersy concerning the pre a _Yes - No P ret's Signature• . Representing: Cellular Tele one Co. d b a Metro One ZSA v/75 Date: 3-15-91 QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR Z.B.A. APPLICATION A. Please disclose the names of the owner(s) and any other individuals (and entities) having a financial interest in the subject premises and a description of their interests: (Separate sheet may be attached. ) William J. Baxter, Jr. Robert A. Goellar ?r Patricia Bax Cellular Telephone Co d/b/a Jane CoellpMetro Ona (tenant) B. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale or being shown to prospective buyers? { ) Yes ( X) No. (If Yes, please attach copy of "conditions" of sale. ) C. Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? ( ) Yes {X) No D. 1. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? no 2. Are the wetland areas shown on the map submitted with this application? n/a 3. Is the property bulkheaded between the wetlands area and the upland building area? n/a 4. If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? n/a E. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? no (If not applicable, state "N.A. " ) F. Are there any patios, concrete barriers, bulkheads or fences which exist and are not shown on the survey map that you are submitting? no If none exist, please state "none. " G. Do you have any construction taking place at this time concerning your premises? no If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and map as approved by the Building Department. If none, please state. H. Do you or any co-owner also own other land close to this parcel? If yes, please explain where or submit copies of deeds. ( pt„rwl Bo�wy ./ _Zoe f bpi Spa I. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel existing barn used for storage and proposed .use telecommunications ui ing wi antenna . //& Attorney for Applicant A zed Sig ature and Date 3/87, 10/901k &axter 1030 E.PUTNAM AVENUE,GREENWICH,CONN.06830 (203)6374559 I C lI�R1 A WORLD ECONOMIC SERVICE SERVING INVESTORS SINCE 1924 March 12, 1991 Southold Town zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Southold Town Planing Board Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Ladies/Gentlemen : The undersigned, as owner and on behalf of the owners, authorizes Metro One as a tenant of our property and the law firm of Moore & Moore as attorneys for Metro One to submit any applications and supporting documents which may be necessary for approval of proposed public utility telecommunications facilities and structures (antenna) on our property on Elijah Lane, Mattituck in the Town of Southold. Very truly yours, I zhf��"') I)'J+- William J., Baxter WJB: rs 7ISCLOSgRP STATEME= Cellular Telephone Company a_New York General Partnership 1. Cellular System, Inc. (50%) address 29 west 57th Street New York, NY 10019 2 . LIN Cellular Communications, Inc. (50%) address 1370 Avenue Of The Americas New York, New York 10019 Cellular System. Inc 1. LIN Cellular Corporation (86. 15%) Lzx _CQllular Comm Corp address 1370 Avenue of Americas wholly owned subsidiary New York, New York 10019 of LIN Broadcasting Corp. 1370 Avenue Of Americas New York, New York (10019) 2 . Remaining entity ( ies) (10% interest or greater) address (es) None 77N BRQADCASTING CORM !.McCaw Cellular Comm(52%) 5400 Carillon Point Kirkland, Wash. 98033 2.Remaining entity (ies) (10% or greater interest) address (es) None McCaw Cellular _ CAmmun cation, Inc. List _ holders ( and addresses) of 10% or more interest. 1. Holder:Craig o. McCaw address: 5400 Carillon Pt. Kirkland, WA 99033 (71%) 2 . Holder: BT USA address: 1100 N. Market St. Suite 730 Wilmington, DE 19890 (20%) 1-0 : 9I 16 . 2I 3Nld Rvmr emr . January 23 , 19A,1. Southhold Town Zoning SOerd of Appeals Southold gown ball Main Road Southold , N .Y . 11971 Southold Town Planninq heard Southold Town flail Main Road Southold , N7 V' 11971 RE: Metro Qnr Dear Ladjan/Gentlemen : The under_si_gnpa , on behalf of Metro one , hereby authorizes the law firm of Moore & Moore r.o submit any applications and supporting documenj_s which may be necessary for approval Of proposes, t .^leoommunic:atuun{; facilities any, structures in the 'Down of Southold . Sinaerely, Lynne Lorimer. Real Estate Consultant Metro One 385 West Passaic Sheet, Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662-3015 • (201) 5870886 PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS NAME ADDRESS. Sonja C . Hunter 30 Perna Lane , Riverside, CT 06878 Mr . & Mrs . Joseph Neville P.O. Box 592 , Mattituck , NY 11952 North Fork Housing Alliance 110 South Street, Greenport, NY 11944 Richard & Janet Oddon 1165 Pounder Path, Southold , NY 11971 William Baxter, Jr. 1030 E . Putnam, Greenwich, CT 06830 Mr . & Mrs . Cornelius L. Naston Elijahs Lane , Mattituck , NY 11952 STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OFSUFFOLK ) Margaret Rutkowski residing at mr,o cia �ele t 81" being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the — day of March , 19 91 deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth on the re- verse side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold;that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Of- fice at Mattituck, NY ;that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by (certified) (mgi6se*61 mail. Margaret Rutkowski Sworn to before me ;his day of _g i 0 aX Public WILLIAM D.MOORE Notary Public,State of New York No.4832728 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires January 31, 1996 ( This side does not have to be completed on form transmitted to adjoining property owners . ) BOARD OF APPEALS. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter or the Petition of Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One NOTICE TO to the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold ADJACENT TO. PROPERTY OWNER YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold torequesta ariance ecta xcepti ( CIIK�Gstt ia) (Other) (circle choice] and interpretation of zoning ordinance ]. 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-108-4-11. 3 '• liiah s Lane northwest of intersection of Elijah ' s Lane and 3. That the property which is the subject of such Petition is located in the following zoning district: � = mited Business (LB) 4 That by such Petition, the undersigned will request the following relief: approval of a public ,tlti 1 i tV stzair_t-ure cnnqJqtjnq of an unmanned tele=mmini in existing small concrete block building together with a 104 foot high monopole radio tcwer antenna to provide cellular telephone radio communication. 5. That the provisions of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to the relief sought by the under- signed are Article VIII Section 100-8 (B) (1) - 100-230 (D) • 100-82 [ ] Section 280-A, New York Town Law for approval of access over right(s)-of-way. 6. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road Southold, New York and you may then and there :,mine the same during regular office hours. (516) 7�5-1809. 7. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Board of Appeals; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler•Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Dated: March 15, 1991 Petitioner Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One Owners ' Names : c/o Moore & Moore Post Office Address Clause Con-nons, Suite 3, P.O. Box 23 Mattituc-k. NY 11952 Tel - No . (516 ) 298-5674 [Copy of sketch or plan showing proposal to be attached for convenience purposes . ] ti. P 493 527 242 P 4"3 527 241 • P 493 527 242 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED h9AE'_ l FOR CERTrHF0 hi NOIESURANCE COVERAGE PEDvmFO RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL - 'P/ L avl Pin NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIOEO NOr FOR INTERNATIONAL MAr. l I'In%,_*AAR NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) l r Rrrersel 1'n — I (See Reverse) In le William Baxter, J -- —___ r. SRichara & Janet Oddon � sent tn�rnrk unncin �34wnE. Putnam so-en Nr, --_ q Al i m Slrect and Na " t -- ---- 65-Founder Pam-- P ( 110 South Street 0 e71P Code o - -- ° I ; ¢ � ' PO.. State,and ZIP Code ^zeenwich� CT _06830 _ _� vISoL ho I d, NY i1Q]1_� y Greenport, NY 11944 - 29 I n C . 29 1 Postage 29 1 . 00 _� I C° 1- O O Certihad Fee I 1 . 00� ^a' )•, rry F ce Sol ITrI, Spinal Delivery Fee I '+ IF D ary Fee I Rat 2 r, Restocted — -- Rat 1 I Dr� I Delivery Fee - 1 R p ;howmg Return Receipt showing tId D Delve ed �to a O P 9 ' — g N - to whom and Date Delivered m t Rccrll_.how towrm I m -- [),It, Illd AJ Iress of Delivery m Return ReC wIl t�� ,am. Ca 11 Ad r nt 1 J,Ay/�. Daie- nn tld� o `y AL rrs j G �o rl F 1- 29 ogy ' 1 . 29 3 TorAL ost ge 'T 1 . 29 o Postm t So LL 0 -- C) N P 43 527 243 P 493 527 246 P 493 527 245 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED A°P.t!_ R%:-EiPT r0l" CERTIFIED blIAIL RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL t'SLRANCE UVECIAL,L iV N P NC I! A ( Jbif RAGE PRSVIDFp NJ INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED Ia;;Na vur ff c. ^=IL AI MAIL NO! FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL w - Lterc,) cnr r. vers-e) (See Reverse] In Sen -_ Sent to v —� c v, & Mrs -J.—Neville_, r or3a- C . Iunter Mr. & Mrs . C . L. Ni O 3 Pernaan - m Street and No P 0 Box 592 = 0 1 ane Eli3ahs Lane - --- - > �Itt° FIMatt ltuck, NY I�I P.O Stan �td 71P Code 1952 Is a-i NLR-iverslde , CT 6H78 �Y�52--- rl 29 Post, t Postage 29 29 I � Ce I Ise I CerUl d Fee _ -- — -1 . 00 100 1 . 0G 1 a t -r t ( I F er i { � I spec al De e y Fee - — - I F- -- -� I y Fee { 1 1 v } Re— f n Res,rted D,'. e,Fee 1 o P Rr ept hnwrpg, + tRCI c - ----_ Return Receipt shuwing ` -- I I. Ind I d!Kati Del oreQ I I to whom and Date Delivered I I tl R Rv�N t oy[p>v fq wh 1. Reh ae. gyp -, hA Return nd Addr show in to whom - -- > r rG Add ess l very Date and Address of elive yyy w y 6 n / Dat ]AOd -y,� ^7 m Y AI Pn ge antl Fes C T r _ TOTAL Postage and Fees I 5 �� 1 29 0 1 P an :3p R 29 ' g 1 . 29 c r .F-Yl,. C il -,ImNK. [eta �h <o - I c Po.," 1"+of it I, _ t g PosimerN r 11e, ` E 1 /r E nr Yn Ut a � a TOWN OF SOUTHOLD -- j i BUILDING 'DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. T. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY No. ...?e.....21.7.2........ Dote .............................June....11►......... THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at ..MaItL.Rd.&.F1i'3h!.3..1+8................ Street Map No. ...?4-X............ Block No. ........ ...... Lot No. ..Xx.........Ma.tti-tuak.,.....N.-Y.............. conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated ...................Feb......9........ 19.65.. pursuant to which Building Permit No. .2632...z. dated ..............................Feb.....U.......... 19-65., was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the low. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is ........ ...........Bu sSriA'.s s..bni 1d in g.............................................................................................................. The certificate is issued to .....Wm.Baxter...Jr.. ..Athers...................0.PMeX3........................... (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. r I (' . ..................... :................ Building Inspector TOWN OF SOUTHOLD EMLDING DEPARTI&ENT --- TOWN CLERK'S OMCE SOOT HOLD. X. Y. CERTIFiCAT;E OF OCCUPANCY -- No. .Z.. 1104......... Date .......... ................... ugust..�8........ 19..61 mattituck THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at Elijahl..B...La, ..& At..... .a...... Street MapNo. ....�f*............ Block No. ...........am........:cot No. .......... .................................... ............... conforms Eubstantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated ............KaY.-Z. ...........•..•.•.•.. . 19.. g pursuant to which Building Permit No. .........Z..1417 ......... dated iaY... ............... ........ 196 ... was issued. and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issuedis ....... ................13USINSSS BUILDING.. ............................. .... ... .... ............................ ..... ................................................... Willirua J. Baxter, Jr. , & Jane P. Goller, owners Thiscertificate is issued to ............................ ..................................... .... ............................ .... ... ..... (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. ��- Building Inspe for Fria aotWA.96—UUWW er1 a.k r=..a.wit®r'-Oak am®as.w/A.a/—taii•teW Wa asws! GCOMMY YOU LAWYU Mi*6 THIS 1kM* i Y—TM 110ITI mom " VM By L4gt W am% 61 . t Q17,� TNtS It®1ftiAtT31R11, made the day of li<&,vy ninetecia hundred and siity�,ma 4 . �r s p cnr. i Piou �lorat on c/o 57 Park Avenue, Bay Shores v ' e New York i party of the first part, and NILLIAM ' . BAX-ER, residing at 2266 fa2aswr,Arg, fits Aoohe1.1 t and JANE P. GOELL;3R, Birch Lane, Greenwich, Conn. Recorded on May 2, 1961 in Lihcr Li980 at page 1)'07 party of the second part, WITHUSYTIt, that the party of the first part, in consideration of Ten Dollars and other valuable con- sideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvynents thereon erected situate, lying and being in the Hamlet of Mattituck, in the Tewn of Southold, County o? Suffolk and State ,f New York, tmineed end '.escribed as followst BEGINNIh, at a monurievt set: in the ground at the intersecti^n of the northerly line of Main State itrMd, with the westerly lire of Fli,jnhts Lane; running 1HE�'CE along the said northerly line of Stain State Road north 8L degrees 45 dnutea 40 seconds west 395.38 feet to a m„nunAnt set in the ground at an angle in said i line of Main State Road; _-- i ; THFNCE still along said northeCl,, line of Train State Rout north 85 degrees 36 ` v m'_nuten 311 se nds west 31.0 feet to the easterly line nt' land of John J. McManus; �THh7fGE along land of :aid : .fir S1cVanus, ❑lrth 7 ? de,gr"�s 07 mrnu:.es 00 seconds west I i. /9 feet to the tiutherly ; ine of of Martin ' iila, THP' I: s1onC said souU erly 1 ine c,t Tani of varti_n Fille „.)rth 77 degrees 06 minutes U0 seconds east "'7.)16 feet a Tr-nucert net in the 7rr.,m-I or, the westerly line of lijah 'I L'ine; ann Along the westerly lire of iiah 's Tune south 25 ,lo.�rees 09 min,aes 10 seconds eos+, 3�O,K0 feet to taP point or place of beginntn,7. te=.i r..n 's �+ TOGETHER with all right, title and interest, if any, of the party of the first part in and to any streets and roads abutting the above described p emises to the center lines thereof; TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part the heirs e ® or successors ar<d assigns of the partv of the second part forever. AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or auffered any- t hing whereby the said premises have been encumbered in any way whatever, accept as aforesaid AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law,covenants that the party I of the first part will receive the consider tion for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consideration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for any other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read "parties" whenever the sense of tkis in ref uire& f� IN WITNESS WHIR1:07, Cue party of the Rrxt part has duly executed this deed the above written• � �{ � ♦�Imo= Y iN 7aaa9:PY(Y Oe: . :`,iXAIY, INC. .�t2 �14 Herr Cantor, vice—p .• i VV11 —7\IrtURV"iv1�6:!V:ffallYf6A! •r--iV iVrva�Vrr�a anVVat•Seen. n..,ra.ar.a..• � .aavr.rrau.aaaa a ,ruriaur Va tv arrVV. a _ CONSULT YOUR LAWYER ®EFO GHIN fHIS INSTRUMENT—THM INSTRUM HOLWI ji USED BY LAWYERS ONLY. THIS INDENTURE, made the grid day of a?ri1 nineteen hundred and 9*17aTtt7—on® BETWEEN 6.''nYTgY J4_�� a�® residing at 31 r1ohogan Road,LarahzCIat• I� New York 10538 I party of the first part, and VIIZW1 J6 d'R p TR.Iri hie wife, residing at 31 12o egan i d, Je—,chraant, Ifew XorY, JB• ,mod JAIIS R. GC�, his wife, resifting at Birch Zane r.o nun , wr®c cE, ern®etiout. party of the second part, WITNFSSECI;3, that the party of the first part, in consideration of dollars, lawful money of the United States, and other good and Valuable consideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and rcicacc unto the part of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, �f J.L that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and impror('mcnts thereon erected, situate, jlying and being at PPxttituek, in the �t�wYl of Srnxthold. County of Suffolk and State of New Yore, bounded and described no foilowst i i IiEGZI=G at e concrete rorur..ent, sot in the ground an the i Northerly line of the YAin or State Road, said nonu=ent being located �. 426.87 feet; Iresterly from tbs Westerly line of Elijah's Lane, as I. the same intersects the said 17ortherly aide or line of Nain or State Roae ; zunning trance along the Norttwrly line of said Main or State Road, earth 85° 36" 30" iloet 60.0 feet; to a corcrets mmu:.ent set in the ground and being the F,)storly lino of land formerly owned by I �I Clarence Tuthill ane Ralph T'Ahill; :sannir-G tLencm Northerly and along said "and formerly of Clarence iithill and r,S1ph Tuthill Korth 20° 44/ 00" Wast 164.41 feat to a concrete monumnt set in the ground; rtnning thence Eaoterly and still along land formerly Of Clarence Tuthill and Ralph Tuthill North 770 06' 00" Beat 60 feet to a oonerete monument set in the ground and land now or formerl7 of William L. Strickland; r%zmJzg thence Southerly and along the Vesterly line of land now or formerly of said William L. Strickland South 196 CT 00" East 181.79 fact to a corcrete motet met is the s g 9 U d Point being tba Northerly line of said Min or State Roadv the point or place of EMi+"r 'LTM. BEI3i(} AND ZYGT=ED To BE the swae premises an conveyed to the party of the first part by deed dated November 4, 19'7G and recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk' s office in Libor 6W cp 597. li (I II i i 1 P i� �I (I r I� �I �I i I d 6 g Y TOGETHER with all r gh e a .nterest, if any, of the party of the par t and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof, TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises, TO HAVE AND TO HOID the prcn ses herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second par: forever. N I �r II 11 I` (I If iII AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part 1Pu not done or suffered anything whereby the said premises have been incumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consid- eration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for Iany other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read "parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. 1, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first above written. IN PRESENCE OF: � 1 a tl p l OF NUM Yom LOUR" O! Sims � RY: I STAT9 OF i7€M TOM COO(W � YI i a the 2nd dry of April 1 71, before me I On the day of 19 , before me ,)ersonally came HILLW J. $gyp JR. personally came to me known to be the individual described in and who i to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that0 executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that executed the same. executed the same. s i O�axy o i i I I STATE OF NEW Milt. COUNTT OF Ke: I STATE OF NEW YOWK. COUNTY OR slu On the clay of 19 before me ( On the day of 19 `afore me personally came personally came to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and to we known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he resides at No. say that he resides at No, , that he is the i that lie is the of I of the corporation described the corporation described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the board of directors of said corpora- affixed by order of the hoard of directors of said corpora- tion., and that he signed h name thereto by like order. tion, and that he signed h name thereto by like order. 38argaitt anb $safe X)eeb secnON WITH COVENANT AGAINST GRANIORs ACIs BLOCK TITLE NO. LOT COUNTY OR TOWN it>YJ f ll? Wnllm T. urmq in. TO RqA.6.l ,* AyN17G C A. WJYLLAAYiS. iM and Recorded At Rrq—u oI The Tide Guvrntre Compmy tlAM y GIC� RETURN BY MAIL TO: -t STAMDAKD FOKIA Of MM YORK 1OARD Of TIM UNDI MMURS 1i 4 Dirrnbw.d by 9 I II William Wic%hamt Esq. THE TITLE GUARANTEE COhfP iNl i i t Ro od Rea York U952 _ Zip No. V 0 Q V 2 O 0 O O w a4 S - W V M w_ W a Y( { ^%� ( ' CONSULT YOUR LAWYER( DRd GNIXJ '}9i5 fN STF.UiA 3Ai'T — MS INS,,,�Y,fj � SH(`�) ®! USED O7 LAWYERS ONLY. t _ uaER 6639 w536 TINS MDEN-FURE, made the 10th day of 0 c t ob be r, nineteen hundred and sixty-nine, BETWEEN MARTIN FILLA, residing at Mattituck, Town of Southold, IT_T1 T Suffolk County, New York, i `�Z7ttE'1, CCAR SFiR'3'A CD y ; Q � � pB=:Y�,�''.3P'a�e 4CL�yic�,i:=.•l�j�-T-•'*' j 'T 1� IRN party of the first part. and WILLIAM J. BAXTER, JR. and PATRICIA BAXTER, his wife, as tenants by the entirety, holding a one-half undivided interest, both residin at Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, New York, f and ROBERT A. GOE'LLER� nd JANE P. GOELLER, his wife, as tenants by the entirety, holding a one-half undivided interest, both re- siding at Haywaters Road, Nassau Point, Suffolk County, New York, l V v yI U party of the second part, W111'iVESSETI3, that the part}' of the first part. in cor.sidcratmn of Ten and 00/100 . . . �) . . . . . . . . . ($10. 00) . . . . . . . . . . . . dollars, other lawful money of the United States, and/good and valuable consideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby lgrant and release t:nto the party of the second part. the heirs or successors and assi,^,ns of the party of the second part forever, II` ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the bttiidings and intpmn-rnrents thereon erected, situate. I� lying andbein'-wAx at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of III Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows : BEGINNING at a monument on the westerly line of Elijah' s 'Lane distant 320, 50 feet northerly from a monument at the intersection of the westerly line of Elijah' s Lane and the northerly line of Main Road; THENCE from said point of beginning the following seven (7) courses and distances : 1. South 77' 06 ' 00' West 417 .46 feet along lands of William J. Baxter, Jr. , et ano. , and McManus to a monument; 2. South 20° 44 ' 00" East 164.41 feet along said lands of McManus to a monument situate on the northerly line of Main Road; 3 . North 850 30' 40" West 69. 74 feet along the northerly line of Main Road to lands now or formerly of Joseph Neville; 4. North 230 08 ' 10" West along said last mentioned lands I 161. 95 feet to a point and lands now or formerly of Anjef Associates, Inc. ; II 5. North 23° 52 ' 10" West along said last mentioned land 101.47 feet to the northwest corner of the premises herein described; 6. North 70' 30' 50" East 475. 60 feet along lands of Anjef Associates, Inc. , and Maston to a pipe situate on the west- erly line of Elijah' s Lane at the northeast corner of the premises herein described; 7. Thence South 25' 09 ' 10" East along said westerlyline of Elijah' s Lane 175. 50 feet to the monument at the point or place of BEGINNING. BEING AND INTENDED TO BE the same premises and more conveyed to Martin Filla by deed from Ralph W. Tuthill and Laura F. Tuthill his wife, dated September 7, 1954, and recorded September 8, 1954, in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffdk, in Liber 3754 cp 249. �I �Y t� • CAR6litJk7 na537 TOGETHER with all rights, title and interest, if any, of the party of the first part in and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center unesthereof, TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises, TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever. I I li A l 1 i i I� AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything whereby the said premises have been encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. �IAND the party of the f.rst part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consid- eration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for an%- other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read "parties" %%l7enever the sense of this indenture so requires. IN WITNESS WIIERFOF, the party of the first kart has duly executed this deed the day and year first above it written. i IN-PRESENCE OP' Martin Fella I �39 n GE538 STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SbF"rOLK ss.: STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss On the 10th day of 0 C t o b e : 19 69 , before me i On the day of 19 before me personally came MARTIN FILIA personaky came i to me known to be the individml described in and who to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the fore ging-TrisrTA&Mene, and ac cc ged c}at executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he exec d t s me �/ \ 1 i executed the same. RTCA. 4R`J J.cRON � Notary phut-Su!iotl'e eCo Y. Nn.52-I, ar.3t1, � ?[7 comise!on Ez;res M l` 1 STATE OF-NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss.: STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss.: On the day of I9 before me On the day of 19 before me personally came personally came to me known, who,being by me duly sworn, did depose and the subscribing wimess to the foregoing instrument, with say that he resides at No. svhonu I am personally acquainted, who, being by me duly that he is the sworn, did depose and say that he resides at No. of rhat he knows the corporation described i in and which executed the foeegoing instrument; thar he I to be the individual knows the seal of said corporation; that the seai of xed described in and who executed the foregoing instrument; to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so ,hat he, said subscribing witness, was present and saw affixed by order of the board of directors of said corpora- execute the same; and chat he, said wimess, rion, and that he signed h name thereto by like order. I ac the same time subscribed h name as witness thereto. i r i 3 a ff� .,4 I2�u:II c»lI lli » aFru S .CTION With Covenant A-ainst Grantor's Act, nf.nC6 Title No. urn MARTIN FiLLA COUNTY OR TOWN O WILLIAM, J. BAXTER, JR. and ux, and R<rordrd At Regaert of ROBERT A. GOELLt and ux INTER-COUNTY Titre Guaranty and Mortga9a Company SiANpAID rOaM Of N!W YORK 30AR0 Or TintVNDEAt4'RRIRS RETURN BY NAIL TO DIOA.T.d by INTER-COUNTY TITLE GUARANTY ,t William Wickham, Esq. and 3IORTGAGE COMPANY Main Road CHARTERED 7927 �L_" IN NEW YORK � Mattituck, N. Y. 11952 Zip No. 9 � W v � o / `OCT 14 Igo g V ^+ 'd 3 Pr,. W LESTER M ALBERTSON Clerk of Suffolk Comfy r_ 22 a ` 1 , 3 1 47S. 60 1 ' e _ 1 20 d N 3 � 83.4 GAR 0, FF EL 'o 31. 20 O1 "E 33.00 �VERHEAO-- -HIRES �` V ' 1 1 STORY FRAME 3 1 ' "I BARN m ' GAR FF EL 32.50 N ' PROPOSED 100' HIGH 3og MONOPOLE AREA - 804955 S.F. GAR FF EL RE00' u 1.648 ACRES e,4 32.77 % SE18pCK W PROPOSED UNMANNED Zg V t G D �.�J5V PROVIDE (2) 8.5'L 20� GAR 1i ro TELECOM. EQUIPMENT ,Q ^"— PARKING SPACES ROOM IN EXIST. BLOCK m FF EL - OLDS. H 7Y� 1p2 33.0 }7` PRO33fl (1 ZONE LB yrbl w 0 &S' B (z 9.i:o wlDBcw� }75A GRAVELEDRIVEWAY� PROPOSED 5.0� NIGH Il ,(SEE SECTION2/5.1)( •-� CHAIN LINK FENCE 0 \\ S __ _ ( __ Z"sALo --=`--`� --- -- - — ,, (INSTALL FENCE TO CLEAR a F o g ®°° 8 °In 3� o -------- - �o ,Zn9 neg2 i BLUE570NE 3 �F,?�� 4aa. 05 S87e rJ5112"W COfJC - i DRIVEWAY �}IP }115 /}2'•J 1 1 DALE 12/04/9G S O U T H O L O O W N E Re•, G U I D E PAGE 703 TAN r`PP NO. LAST KN0OOOR REPUTED OWNER - -- -. PD 10`.SS ZIP 103.-3-1?.S CROSS JA'1ES E _. ..-.-. —.. RO% 7 ' MAIN RD 473R0 __________________________ C'JTCH^lljE YY 11935 _____________________________________________________________________ --------------------------- 1 US.-3-12_4 TUTHILL RALPH W III 6 WE uIC KNe:+, pyE "ATTITUC< NY 11952 ______________________________________________________________________________ __-___----- ______________________________ 4731-9 OUT'_ 1 MAIN RD -13.6 PARI SI SAV c"RIO F 47e - ------------ MATTITUCK NY 11952 _____________________________________________________ _____--______-_--P 0 --; 52--------------------------- 1G P.-3-13.4 SCNUA>Z R03ERT J S WF - 473�5i9 - C'JTCH^CUc_ NY 11935 ----------------------------------------____________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 JP.-3-13.9 SHEEHAN KERSY S EILEEN R.Ri 9i, Y 106R 473�,) 490 MANOR HILL LANE 1ATTITUCK NY 11952 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________ --______________-__-__ ____ 1C'n,-i-13.10 SHEEHt@ 011A'4 S 4F 473351 490 MAF.00 HILL LANE ROX-------------- - _ RR 1 --- --- M -ATTITUCK N Y ----- 1^.i.-i-13,11 A4 M3 RJ S7 RAl>N L S WF 3O% 52?-MANOR HILL LANE -- -----------------CUTC40C�JE NY ---_11935 131.-4-1 GRA305KI A'II-S 473S31 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -ATTITUCK NY 11952 -'4--' 64A0045KI VICTOR 413";� _____________________________________4�T TITUCK NY 1195? 1 3 6ARDNER CHAPLES JR & MILDRED 13435 GAIN RD 473.ia -" ... . i1ATT1TUCK NY 11952____________________________' N JAL" __. _______________________________________________________________je j'__n^'_________- ------ 473,-4-5.2 R°R'c - DO4AlD 4733'9 - _ --- - — -- - d ATTITUC< NY 11952 ------------ -_____-______________- c _ ____________ _________ _MAIN RCA9________-____-_____________- 1C3.-4-5.3 P_RG ES DALE i ANDH4TTITHCK NY 11952 -_-- - 4]3?+9 - 1f?•-4-6 KUGL"R NAVCY E RR1 AAIIJ RD 301( 107A 473', A _________________________________________________________ MATTITU:K NY 11952 11 R.-4-7.1 ALIP'RTI EUDVODANTCNA 4 - 1?35 ' NTAUK HIGHWAY 473',P9 PO-KI% 11WIN IASTIC NY 11950 -_.. __________________________ _ ____ ______________________ _________----_---__________--_________--_____-_--_--_-_-____----___- 473Sr9-7.3 UN TER SONJA C 30 PERIIA LA G]3539 RIVERSIDE IT 06973 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _- 1G3,-4-7.4 GOOD" SALLY 34i cL IJ AH'S LANE _47};.9 MATTITUC< NY 11952 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -1L3,-4-7.5 SHIPMA.N JOS"PH P 4 WF 995 EL IJ 4NS LA 473;i9 MATTITIJCK NY 11952 >RANN.N 93POTRY A ANO f73?i9 -ATTITUCK NY 1195? _______________________---__________-_--____- 103,-4-7.7 VICTORIA PETER J Rn% 1110 g399 - - ATTITUCK NY 1195_?- _______________---____--__--____-____----_____-__-____-----___-_---__--------___--_-----______- ____--___-___-_--_-_-_-____-_-__ �1r1�.tYA rr'iirWb41�R"' ��~•"'�e'�• __ "DATE 12/14790� S 0 U T H 0 L D O W N E R S G U I D E PAGE 705 TAX MAP NO. LUST K-10OR REPUTED_ OWNER AD,`SS ZIP L�VILLE JOSEPH A WE OOX 31, 473319 NATTITIICK NY 11752 --------------------------------------------------------_-------------------________________________________________________________ it 1f4.-4-11.2 3AX TER VILL IPM J JR B AND 133 u van 06910 ------ ----- - -- -- - ----- 10i.-4-11.3 BAXT-R Jz WILL IPM J & ORS 1030 E PUTNAM -4738T9 GREE WICH CONN 06930 _____________________E_________________________ ________________________________________________r_____-________-____-_______--_-_ IC3.-4-1Z &-<ASTDN CORNELIUS L 6 4F ELIJAHS LANE 473°30 MGTTITJCK NY 11952 ____ _________________________________________________________ _________________________J_ 109.-1-1 SCNP OE D-"+ GECRGE S GW"N SKUNK LAN. 475tii9 CUTCH(GUE NY 117'S ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 109.-1-2 SOLECKI JJLIAN A WE .. 4735119 CUTCAC'PJE NY 11935 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1G9.-1-3 PACE LILLIAN 1AIN —,eD 473'i9 PO BOX 87 CUTCM^SUE NY 11935 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1 C7.-1-5 LORE 'WILLIAM D 4 WE HAI)CLE` DR 477'i9 °ATTITUCK 9 Y 11952 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1C4.-1-5 ALBC RUOI 2704 ,A.L°IN 47311? ROYAL ;AK MI 41073 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1G9,-1-7 ALEC Gc'2 GE 473 i9 CUTCMO oIJE NY 11935 _____________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________ 109,-1-3J PFEIFLF RICHARD P 4 ORS 330 PPIVPTE RD 473i59 CAST PAT C NOGUE NY 11772 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 109.-1-3.3 CROSS JAIES -All: "D 4731'.1 _ BOX 739 CUTC'40"UF. NY 11935 _______________________________________________________I____________________________________________________________________________ 10J.-1-5.9 KPF3PACH FREDEPICK NFIA '41 4731-9 BOX 134 CUTCH'4U=, NY 11935 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1C9.-1-10.1 CASINATIJN PROPERTIES INC 600 OLO COUNTRY RD 473-4 GAROES CITY AY 11511 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1C9.-1-11 WICKHAM WILLIAM _ 4733.,q COTCHC,"JE NY 11935 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 109.-1-12 WICKHAM iOMESTEAD INC _ 10315 MAIN PJ 473"i? HATTITUCK NY 11052 -------------------------------;__--------_y_-------___----__---------____-------______-------_______ - ____---_----___________----- 199.-1-13 CUTCH.^1- FARMS LTD C/O J GRISTINA 473119 PO BOX 1009 CUTC,i1r0- NY 11935 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ IG9.-I-14 dARCN ZYGMUHT S WE MAIN <D i473",1 Ci1TCN:'1,10E NY 11935 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------j-`-_______---__-----__-__--_____- 109.-1-15 P-TRASH ROSE 33 POUELL ST {73Pi9 LANSi CRD PA 18232 mn All r. All 1 II IL i IN i - 1 ' — N pp TE /2/C4/9p S O UT H O L D O W N* S G U I D E PAGE 704 MAP NO. LAST KNOWN OR_ REPUTED OWNEER . _ A)IPESS ZIP I f I� 108,_4-7.3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD , 473"4 SOUTIIJLD NY 11971 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I• 103.-4-7.9 MOORF PICHA7D A 4 AUOREY 1645 FLIJA4'S LANE 413aq? MATTITUCK NY 11952 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 109.-4-7.10 ROVE ELWOOD V 6 4f. _ ELIJAHS LA 47338? MATTITUCK VY 11952 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ I, 103.-c-7.11 MCD1411OTT JOHN it WF 75 MARTIN COURT 4733 ) JERICHO NY 11753 1. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________101.-4-7.12 D-LUNA VITO 3 EVELYN RFD 41 90% 160D 473'y4 148 WOODCLIFF DRIVE MATTITUCK NY 1195_ _______________________________________________________________________________.______________________________________-______-_______ r 101.-4-7.15 RELYFA JAMES RR 1. 10Y 175E 4739i) ELIJAHS LANE '1ATT RUCK MY 11952 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 103.-4-7.14 R7LY5A JAMES 4 WF FLSJAAS LANE 473,-,? 90% 105E-RR1 MATTITUCK AY 11952 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ / 101.-4-7.15 SCHMITI WILLIAM A K JEAN 2645 ELIJAHS L44E U33i9 MATTITUCK NY 11952 ('r ______________-------------------___________________________________________________________________i_______________________-_____103r 4-7.16 SIMM STANTON B WF RD 1, 2765 CLIJAHS LANE - 173L39 MATTITU'K NY 11952 -------------_----------------------_------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (1 103.-4-7.17 7LMJOS(I MARCELLA RFD ELIJAH LANE 4739A9 MATTITUCK NY 11952 -----------------------------------------___________________________________________________________________________________________ (r 10E.-4-7.18 SULLIVAN JOSEPH M 4 WF `-LIJA,IS LA 4 ___ RR 1 UO% 105A MATTITUCK NY 11992 ______________________________________________________ - - - _________________--___ _ __ ____________________----- n 1D3.-4-7.19 POWER CONSULTANTS INTL INC 222 5?AND AVE 473339 FYGL-.IOOD NI 07631 __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 103.-4-7.20 PAPX GRACF KE YEU'IG HO% 1051 3435 ELIJA'dS LA 4739.i? MATTITUCK N.Y. 11952 ____________________________-_-_________-________________-__________________________________-_______________________________________ 1C3.-4-7.21 PARK YOUNS-JA HO% 1061 3435 ELIJAHS LA 4733'? MAT*STUCK NY 11957 _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1C9.-4-7.?2 I SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNTY C-NTER 4733 9 - - RIVERHEAD MY 11901 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 10E.-4-7.23 ^GRTH FORK HOUSING ALLIANCE 110 SOUTH STREET 473319 GRFFN^CRT NY 11944 ! _______________ ________________________________________________________________________________ __ ____ __________ _____ H j 1C 3.-'.-7_24 MIRT FORK HOUSING ALLIANCE 4739'.? GREE___ _ _ _________________________________________________________________________________-_-____________________ ______________________1 106.-4-7.15 NO^TH FOPK HOUSING ALLIANCE 110 SOUTH SIR E E T 47333? GREE'1?OPT NY 11944 4 _10?,-4-7.26 NORT4 FORK HOUSING ALLIANCE 119 SOUTH STREET 473P9 GdEENP09T NY ___________________________________________________-______________________________________-__-____--_______________ ,11 _ n,eu� --tv"\ ci c� H - 7 C-I �fs� z ► o�- L4-T C-7 H 40 A—C R-20LB v' J FI f I Cr a o, c 183 / -80 / f A—C Oonns i I�• —YYY��� y' Creek —:r' A—C , ,. err CrNk SEE N[ "S [E..b SA. _ ,[[ xe z cx Z. _. .x[ x.,�x z x.Nx �. r.r [ [ ° ygoa �r , \ (a p .2 +O [,.rrr II is O m .. ;a J ,•. J �9 t• esPP\ ?a r r ' `P6n •� 1 .�Nn POT'``9 .rr ,a,aa � is �l. �O •o.kl�•i` • L,°wx v,w,xa r ♦ \ I ,.l,.,l Jl , ISE....[uax1° A\ PE o•.kl Sf..la a ja• .fir A10 tb:. n if.lel.. 1,• er, 1 " z raikl r lel •' " S.P.25 r o aE oE`c[,w ro.e.x[a o ra;m�xo [txa " pG •r t 'e t x° s ae[s[c x° i wc¢x°. •' uz J ro "° NPIN- z z r Le b. ` a x-GPEENVGPT p� •"' n MPTTITUC — LeNenj "`["'r © COUNTY OF SUFFOLK a SOUTHOLD N[,rP`r - �r-°�—�-�Real Property Tox Service Agency - I OS an .. r. M'...A ad.1.I.•N� Yer1 _1000 _-- rparrvr♦ u R-80 i A—C I r i r 40 — — „I LL R-80 ' T' y I A-C i I R—fi0 U. ,1_ Ba Vl✓ . � I I M A— � F Zaks A I I s 'R 80 I I a = 1 p J ^•+T i Dows I / Creek yy. —C v �o��SUFfO(,�co SCOTT L. HARRIS SUPERVISOR ! %t <3 Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 FAX (516) 765 - 1823 p ® :Y Southold. New York 11971 TELEPHONE(516) 765 - 1800 BOARD OF APPEALS : Gerard P. Goehringer OFFICE OF THE aOARD OF APPEALS Chairman TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 765-1809 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 4058 : NYNEX MOBILE CCr*TUNI CATIONS/ARTHUR V. JUNGE, INC. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XIV, Section 100-142 for permission to construct monocole radio tower and accessory equipment-storage building with insufficient side and rear yard setbacks. Zone District: Light Industrial (LI ) . Location of Property: 21855 County Road 48, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-96-1-19 . 1. WHEREAS, after due notice, a public hearing was held on October 24, 1991, and at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Scard Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1 . The premises in question is located in the Light Industrial (LI) Zone District in the Hamlet of Cutchogue, Town Of Southold, and is more particularly identified as County Tax Map District 1000, Section 96, Block 1, Lot 19. 1. 2. The subject premises consists of a total area of 1. 04 acres (or 43,398 s north side of County Routew48 a frontage of 168 feet along the This ..e �' 48 and a lot depth of 252+- feet. Parcel is improved with an existing building and uses which were the subject of a conditional approval by the Board of Appeals under Appl. No. 3835 rendered April 27 , 1989 and App1. No. 3705 rendered March 3, 1988 ( Arthur L. Junge, Inc. ) , as well as site plan approval by the Southold Town Planning Board. 3 . By this application, reduced setbacks are requested: (a) from the northerly rear yard and westerly e yard a� 4 feet and 24+- feet, respectively for the 13 ' jbyl27 ' foundation of the proposed accessoLy_ storagq building, and norther-1yrear yard at 39-- *<=r end �r (b) frcm the at .r_ +.- for the f� ndation of cm the westerly side yard the proposed monopole tower �i Page. 2 - Apol. No. 4058 Matter of NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 structure, all as more particularly shown on map of proposed site plan and details prepared by Richard E. Tangel, P.E. dated July 31, 1991. 4. The subject premises is located in the Light-Industrial (LI) Zone District, and the setbacks applicable are noted for a principal use structure at 70 from the rear property line and 20 for the side yard. 5 . The following documentation and site plan information are noted for reference and consideration: ( a) an existing tree ( screening) line is shown along or very near the northerly and southerly lines of the subject property; pine-tree screening must be located along the westerly property line, as shown on the site plan maps; (b) also proposed is a stockade fence along the northerly and easterly sections of the proposed equipment storage building; ( c) Certificates of Cccupanc_r have been found of record for the existing uses as follows : ( 1 ) 74Z17295 issued on September 13 , 1988 for the electric shop/building of Arthur V. Junge; ( 2) 44-13981 issued on April 231 1990 for a wholeale bakery and for Local Talent, Inc. in the existing light-industrial building; (d) the proposed equipment storage building and tower structure will be unmanned, not requiring active daily parking for additional on-site personal or any increase of on-site customers related to the establishment of this public utility use; e other mlan elements conditioned by thePlanningBoardunder its siimultaneouslys pending site plan application {see PB letter of 11/7/911 ; ( f) New York SMSA Limited Partnership and NYNEX have furnished information for the record concernings its licensing as a public utility to provide cellular radio transmission serving to its full extent the public interest, convenience and necessary as per written consent and order authorized by the N.Y.S. Public Service Commission, Federal Communications Commission, etc. , which includes limitation on the Effective Radiated Power for mobile transmitters up to 7 watts, and output Power for mobile transmitters up to 60 watts. It is also not Permitted to be assigned or transferred to any person, firm, company, or corporation without the written consent of the Commission; and it is understood that upon any future proposal of this applicant or owner( s) to transfer or assign this Page ,3 - Appl. No. 4058 `Matter of NYNEX Mobile Communications/Junge Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 authorization, subsequent application to this Board must be filed for consideration. 6 . Other relevant technical information considered in this project are also noted below for the record: cellular through a networkof co mmunication the nfirst efor ms mthis ust oapplicant in the Town of Southold at the subject premises in Cutchogue. (b) this cell site has two principal components, a 12 ' by 26 ft. ( 13 ' by 27' foundation) structure for computer equipment storage, and transmitting/receiving antenna-tower structure, both of which are incidental 'and necessary to operate a wire line telephone communications use. The top of the tower is 12 ft. equilateral triangle, 40 inches high, 36 inches at the base and 18 inches at the top. There would be two whip antennas that are 10 ft. above that, and one below. (c) the tower and building are monitored seven days a week, 24 hours per day per FCC mandates, although it is unmanned physically at the site. (d) the tower and antenna are solely for use by this i applicant/public utility and will not be rented or leased to any other corporation, person, firm or company. Also, it is expressly understood that no new cell, or expansion will be established, unless further application and approvals by this board and the regulating commissions, on this site in order that appropriate criteria may be evaluated, including engineering data relative to wind pressures, wind loads and other safety considerations for such future utility expansion; (e) the design of the tower and antenna submitted is not a steel lattice design; this monopole structure must,however, be designed to withstand continuous wind loads in excess of 150 mph and wind peaks of 190 mph or more (sufficiently mounted with wires and brackets capable to support these pressures) . 7. This date, a Special Exception was conditionally approved by this Board concerning the applicant' s request under Article XIII, Section 100-130 of the Light Industrial (LI) and Light Industrial-Office (LIO) Zoning Provisions for authorization to establish a telecommunications use by a public utility. Page '4 - Apol. No. 4058 Matter of NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 8. In considering this application, the Board also finds that the relief requested: (a) will not be adverse to the essential character of the neighborhood and is the minimum necessary to afford relief under the circumstances; (b) will not in turn be adverse to the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience or order of the town, or be adverse to neighboring properties; (c) will not increase dwelling unit density or cause a substantial effect on available governmental facilities; (d) cannot be obviated by another method feasible to appellant to Pursue, other than a variance (e) is uniquely related to the property and is not personal in nature; ( f) in considering all of the above factors, the interests of justice will be served b conditionally noted below. y granting the variance, as Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT relief for the reduced setbacks requested and noted above on the first page, paragraph #3 , in the Matter of the Application of rn x MOBILE C0.LT4UNICATIONS, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for the establishment of a public utility for the construction of a cellular telephone communications tower and accessory equipment-storage building as applied under App1. No. 4062 in the Matter of NYNEX/ARrjU V. JUNGE, INC. , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1 . No excessive (disturbing) noise levels; exception 2 . No of or additional construction (with the -ption or emergency, fire or police necessities which serve the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience and order to the town) , unless further application and approvals are obtained, and for which engineering certifications will be required concerning increased loads, winds pressures and other safety considerations for such expansion; _ 042 3 • No microwave dishes, as agreed by the applicants (none ` which are proposed during the consideration of this a Pp_ lication) ; Page 5 - App1. No. 4058 i 1<iatter of NYNEX Mobile Communicat ions/Junge Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 f . application) ; 4 . No disturbing emissions of electrical discharges, light, vibration or noise, or harmful distribution levels of radiation, as agreed. 5 . The setbacks shall be not less than that applied for and shown on the plan dated October 18 , 1991 (Drawing No. 92-8012) prepared by Richard E. Tangel, P.E. , from the northerly property line. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: MESSRS . GOEHRINGER, GRIGONIS, DOYEN AND VILLA. (MEMBER DINIZIO ABSTAINED FROM DISCUSSIONS AND FROM VOTE) . This resolution was duly adopted. * * z z w * lk GERARD P. GOEHP.INGER, CHAIRMAN G ::ILCEPTLD AND FILZD BY 'I"HE SOUTI CGLD TOWN CL%:iZ: DATE 3�` HOUR Town Clerk, Town of Southold f ' APPEALC 60ARD MEM6ERS a 11fF0( ( SCOTTL. HARRIS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ;few �Gy Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. Serge Doyen,Jr. y 2 r Town Hall,53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. p ^ P.O. Box 1179 Robert A. Villa ?� ��y Southold,New York 11971 �4j ya�,1r Telephone (516)765-1309 Fax (516) 765-1323Telephone (516) 765-1300 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD App1. No. 4062. NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS/ARTHUR v. JUNGE, INC. Request for Special Exception approval under Article XI11, Section 100-141B( l) for permission to establish public utility use and construct monopole radio tower and accessory equipment-storage building. Zone District: Light Industrial (LI ) . Location of Property: 21853 County Road 48, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Man Parcel No. 1000-96-1-19 . 1. WHEREAS, after due notice, a public hearing was held on October 24, 1991, and at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding areas; and '.WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact and determination: 1 . The premises in question is located in the Light Industrial (LI ) Zone District in the Hamlet of Cutchogue, Town of Southold, and is more particularly identified as County Tax Map District 1000, Section 96, Block 1, Lot 19 . 1 . 2 . The subject parcel contains a total area of 1. 04 acres (or 45 , 589 sq. ft. ) with a frontage of 168 feet along the north side of County Route 48 and a lot depth of 252+- feet. This parcel is improved with an existing building and uses which were the subject of a conditional approval by the Board of Appeals under App1. No. 3835 rendered April 27, 1989 and Appl. No. 3703 rendered March 3 , 1988 (Arthur L. Junge, Inc. ) , as well as site plan approval by the Southold Town Planning Board. 3 . By this application, a Special Exception is requested for .construction of an equipment building and monopole for cellular mobile communications. . . ", both of which are public Page 2 - November 21, 1991 Matter of NYNEV ARTHUR JUNGE, INC. Decision Rendered November 21 , 1991 utility structures providing a public telephone communications service. 4. Reference is made to the following documents and sit-- plan information submitted for the record: ( a) Certificate of Occupancy OZ17295 issued by the Building Inspector on September 13 , 1988 has been provided for the existing electric shop of Arthur V. Junge and building. (b) Certificate of Occupancy #Z18981 issued by the Building Inspector on April 23, 1990 has been provided for a wholesale bakery and in the existing light industrial building to Local Talent, Inc. (c) the proposed equipment storage building and tower structure will be unmanned, not requiring active daily parking for on-site personnel or customers related to this use. (d) an existing tree line is shown along or very near the northerly and southerly lines the property; pine-tree screening shall be along the westerly property line. ( e) also proposed a stockade fence along the northerly and easterly sections of the proposed radio equipment storage building; ( f) other site plan elements will be provided as may be determined by the Planning Board under its simultaneously pending site plan application (see PB letter of 11/7/911 . (g) New York SMSA Limited Partnership and NYNEX have furnished information for the record concerning its licensing as a public utility to provide cellular radio transmission serving to its full extent the public interest, convenience and necessity as per written consent and order authorized by the N.Y.S. Public Service Commission, Federal Communications Commission, which includes limitation on the Effective Radiated Power for mobile transmitters up to 7 watts, and output power for mobile transmitters up to 60 watts. It is also not permitted to be assigned or transferred to any person, firm, company,. or corporation without the written consent of the Commission, and it is understood that upon any future proposal of this applicant or owner( s) to transfer or assign this authorization, subsequent application to this Board must be filed for consideration. 5 . Also noted are the following data: Page 3 - November 21, 1991 Matter of NFNEX/ARTHUR JUNGE, INC. Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 (a) cellular communication systems must operate through a network of cell sites, the first for this applicant in the Town of Southold at the subject premises in Cutchogue. (b) this cell site has two principal components, a 12 ' by 26 ft. structure for computer equipment storage, and —transmitting/receiving antenna-tower structure; both of which are incidental and necessary to operate a wire line telephone communications use. The top of the tower is 12 ft. equilateral triangle, 40 inches high, 36 inches at the base and 18 inches at the too. There would be two whip antennas that are 10 ft. above that, and one below. (c) the tower and building are monitored seven days a week, 24 hours per day per FCC mandates, although it is unmanned physically at the site. applicant/publich utility and will e tower and nnot na abe rented orre solely r leased use vtohany other corporation, person, firm or company. Also, it is expressly understood that no new cell, or expansion will be established, unless further application and approvals by this board and the regulating commissions, on this site in order that appropriate criteria may be evaluated, including engineering data relative to wind pressures, wind loads and other safety considerations for such future utility expansion. ( e) the tower and antenna shall not be constructed of steel lattice design, but shall be a monopole structure designed to withstand continuous wind loads in excess of 130 mph and wind peaks of 190 mph or more ( sufficiently mounted with wires and brackets capable to support these pressures) . 6 . Article XIII, Section 100-130 of the Light Industrial ( LI ) and Light Industrial-Office (LIO) Zoning Provisions authorize this type of telecomm� .,;�ations use_ by-.Special Exception. The use of this proposed monopole tower and accessory a --- I quipment storage buirding -:aoulcd include,- to some extent,—t"elephone exchanges. Although a telephone exchange is listed as a permitted use in the Light Industrial ( LI ) Zone District, this application for public utility structures and uses does require a special exception as provided by Article XIV, Section 100-141B( 1) and Article XIII, Section 100-131B( 4) for " . . . Public Utility Structures and uses. . . . 11 The Special Exception provision is applicable to this proposed project, and has been filed and considered under this provision. 7. In passing upon this application, the Board Members have also considered Sections 100-264, subsections A through P, and have found and determined the following: C Page 4 - Appl. No. 4062 Matter of NYNEY Mobile Communications/Junge Decision Rendered November 21 , 1991 ( a) That the proposed use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacent properties or of properties in adjacent use districts; (b) That the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of permitted or legally established uses in the district wherein the proposed use is to be located or of permitted or legally established uses in adjacent use districts; (c) That the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience, or order of the town will not be adversely affected by the proposed use and its location; (d) That the use will be in harmony with and will promote the general purposes and intent of this chapter; ( e) That the use will be compatible with its surroundings, with the character of the neighborhood and of the community in general, particularly with regard to visibility, scale and overall appearance and the fact that the property is bounded on the north by the Town Landfill, south by a major dual-lane highway, and bounded by other properties also located in the Light-Industrial Zone District. NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr . Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigcnis, it was RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for the establishment of a public utility for the construction of a cellular telephone communications tower and accessory equipment-storage building as applied under Appl. No. 4062 in the Matter of NYNEX/ARTHUR V. JUNGE, INC. , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. No excessive (disturbing) noise levels; 2 . No expansion or additional construction (with the exception of emergency, fire or police necessities which serve the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience and order to the town) , unless further application and approvals are obtained, and for which engineering certifications will be required concerning increased loads, winds pressures and other safety considerations for such expansion; 3'. No microwave dishes, as agreed by the applicants (none of which are proposed during the consideration of this Page 5 - Apo1. No. 4062 . Matter of N:'NEX Mobile Communications/Junge Decision Rendered November 21, 1991 application) ; 4 . No disturbing emissions of electrical discharges, light, vibration or noise, or harmful distribution levels of radiation, as agreed. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: MESSRS. GOEHRINGER, GRIGONIS, DOYEN AND VILLA. (MEMBER DINIZIO ABSTAINED FROM DISCUSSIONS AND FROM VOTE) . This resolution was duly adopted. lk GE.RARD P. GOEHR.INGER, CHAIRMAN RECEIVED AND FILED BY THi SOliTN_CLD TOWN CLT_RK DATE/-�-A / 9/ HCUR /o :is P� Town Clerk, Town of Southold �. ronm rrn. a r TOIVN OF So(M1OLI) OI1rLDL�[t D<:PAIZTJIr.NT TOIVN CI-EIZK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD. N.Y. NOTICE OF D[S,ipprZO VAL Date . . . . . .AUGUST 15,. . . . . . . . . . .. 19 9.1. . . To MARIE ONCIONI, ESQ. (AGENT) NYNEX MOBILE COMMUNICATION (LESSEE) ART[IUR JUNGE, INC.218 FRONT STREET BOX 562 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GREENPORT, N.Y. 11944 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated .JULY 9I b REC.. .AUG. I3,. . . . . . . . . . . for permit to „ CONSTRUCT MONOPOLE RADIO T047ER b EQUIpt(ENT BUILDING In 91 . . . . . . . . . . . . QUTP. NT B Location of Property . . ,21855 COUNTY ROAD 48 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at Haute,vo. • ' . ' . ' ' • . • • • • CUTCTIOGUE, N.Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Count Tax ,\[❑ No, 1000 Sc^tion 96 S. . . . . . ... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � p .. Ham/er . . . . . . . . . . . . . . [)loc . . . . ! . . . . . . . . . Lot I9. I Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed \Iap No. . . . . . Lot No. . . . . is returned here^rith and disapproved on the follo%vin� UNDER ARTICLE X[V ' SECTION 100-142 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION H[LI. HAVE INSUFFICIENT SIDE YARD AND REAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . YARD SETBACKS. . . . . • - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ACTION REQUIRED BY TUE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL IS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REQUIRED BY. THE PLANNING BOARD. �)ItilyCltiq IclsFcctoi: � � � ' 7110MAS J. FTSIIF.R RV 1/80 I l , t, P ALL _f 1LlK J t TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTH OLD Suffolk County, New York 516 - 765.1801 1V 7�7 o 39212 Southold. N. Y. 1197 lgg E1 VED OF w T— c c � G OG Dollars EFor "r . Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk ICiCassh El Check � �l By— �a-j2� TOWN~ CLERK �~"""'���.� ! TOWN OF SOUTROLD SuffLIECE lk county, New York 516 - 765.18ol ° 39211 D D � Southold 11971N Y.G- 19 ` ollars /Cash ❑ Check 1 J 'th T, Terry, •��•�.�,� ��fj]/ By erry, Town Clerk Y 0 79 r, Y \ A 1K � A Y so Z 2 i r c 00 ddYNN S 6 1661 "NVP :31tl0 0 10 16 'ON d V W Vd 'S31tlI705Stl i13AW1710J0 1M30N3Y' Q,�,�.��� ...�g�l L-j I�IINOG� c C .7 ,y �`•� �. — 1 0 Z alE+® I 1`I 210A3A21nS b"Jr, ZSLZ603'd '8r 830308HOS 'H OHtl H01N A N 0.7 N �Odd(1S .gyp Ae a3x73H� _ x ° a mon.L .Lvw • 3 b-X 15 03AOMddtl ONtl 03113IA3M SNOISIA321 1b-f-a H1„I,IM NM �::331�IIJN3 OlOtin NIJOA M3N ` MOONGNAl N1 k.LU3dOMd d0 rW Ae 03AOMdds a•n 03n3In3M bit .' N,y��ogyN �w :�i0w NpI10na'1sNon N �OHHO3"'� y MOA3ANn5 'S Si133NION3 ONIllnSN00 o d� , NV�d 311S (13O(' 19 03MALA3M 1ON3 1-NO .IMMWI'13Md ❑ F/ Ta YILo N , l :�JW 31'd1s3 H3 !�13N30! 0 'd 3NNno - NVV46VO � c y�°w 13nooad e°r' -o \ pNo g — 3 �1 N0 03W 01 SONIMHNO nSSI (D a 7 e m 03 V OZl 06 09 H 0 TWOS a � — Z a , (t i � 'O • Z x � a o m \\\ n yy� 0 1� ' • m \+J d \\ \, m y � ° C N m �Y�. • OO III - m p � O �— - _ Nlbw � o rn aI i p Q - { un � — 1 �' m m �� M ro o o r m ' ro \ i CA � r ` D mI s � u ONI4iI na rrcr4 var�v \ `ri•C1tJ� 3Nl rl N11 r'I GJ 33J11 L1LI'd N, i ,I aj n \ ` 0N00 A AVM3AIi-i ,,` n j 90 ' 88b odo 4 3Nols3me ;•. z m , I . o � Q co Lo At3 3Ab2J f2H1 N01�3 L, ; - %\ 0 , 1 — d 039 Sly $33" 12"33 r 3N015 A881/00 ,S/9 d0 83Atll 031atldW0 I' V N 73'- tlY13 310O N013 d3'0XN3NdI"�I 03S'OIYd1O3NWI1d) � 3 ZM� Z - 4 9-1 !O 3NO1S Atl8tln0 „U/£ d0 83Atll,IZ C %V-5;, N01133S 33S) S F '61a' a� AVM3A18a '13AV80 uIM OI 03SOd02dm +,01 { 95 All '151%3 NI W1008 j S33tldS 6NIX8tld IZ0:1 a NO 0350ddO8dl 3 aV° 0Z Y 9'6 (Z) 301 AO8d 'IR C b C \\ I\ 1�'� ° •°L " y6`' 3 �� z s N y°vai3s c'I zc �'S 5'S6b08 = to d3by Q :NO AI A\ �' '°D3b `� r3 dj 9 3'1 ONO S y d \ I I HE) Z01 0d0 i N 0 O 0 ZC i � u; g o ' Nc,ll'v �Nl '�atr1�nd 21a� \\ ` I �3 p ! _ � a m `=' S/l I •s/I 1aaH �- c71 -a'���2' :aloN o, \\\ �1 `�, �v�J �_ Z Nave 3MJ.� A80iS l 3,1 LO ,OZ • 18 N s3al ------- °? ss Lo M OV3Hb3A0------ 3cr Z'9L S I11 \\ � ti. Ntii,✓ n. i 4 ti 09 ' S�b D 1S3M-/+ ,£l NOU VNI"030 H m � I V3 W O \ I i - µ 1 L DECLINATION EAST TTRUCK 130 + WEST - w 1 STORY FRAME J95 — Ls DECLINATION ' W 13- t WEST BARN r _... _�... -- 11935 tor TJ LOf 12UDT � I 43 LIDCU C-HO- Y ANT.CABLES IN 2-6"COND. M1+ c ATb•w S UNDERGROUND, LOT M N e 0 a O ¢ EXISTING PORTION OF BUILDING p '! TO BE DEMOLISHED. ns`• as O 4I'1 u M B+•2 0. 1% °' PRO D 100' HI H I STORY FRAME MONO 69'-O° ta4-�• I , 3arrok n I �"'""r+r �l BARN (SEE DETAIL ^�- PROVIDE GRAVEL MULCH n Z J5 I O '�� ROOM ENTRANCE DOOR �4 J.. ] - p F LOT 112 _ aJ a 111 = ALL OVER FENCED AREA qq SEBLOCK 4CTION IM {2 I PROVIDE PARKING (2) B,S'E20' PROPOSED UNMANNED � . 5.0' 915EE DETAIL- �' OISTgtLT iox, TELECOM EQUIPMENT PARKING SPACE K e ' fTY u ROOM IN EXIST. I-STY, - 6'-0"PROPOHIGHSED CHAIN DETAIL -NK NCE Af PoJiT IE 01 Iwo 10LGo TR ETAto wL. - 1 ¢ G}7. {SEE DETAIL-6/SI) 2 h'' A2 n ° Z i oN6 a®b�'hITE. P BLK. BLDG.( 'r, JI• q �6 o-...?' p . - - J PROPOSED IOFTY/IDE,9 �c GRAVEL DRIVEWAY( n I BLK i R. r-B•R R I - �sL O��� OV PLAN I6. •�r �L_/ ro * LkM LOT sn•bb'I2•W LINK FENCE 03 SCALE: NONE : LU g ENCLOSUREISEE DETAIL 6/SI) 1 uz ------- , --^'--- - ----- 14 LOT SEE DETL. 3 5/ a �OH EAI'lsT, 2 co8 ,000 0 6 .;� Q SWING GATE PRQVIDE 1-O'fE%IST.UTI ITY I STY. V O p, m ql 31�0 3L0 POLE. "RAA4,0III r') w — 9• r ---------------- +-9 ---- ----2---- BA6tN H, k`p` # E �EXI Z SEE b G �M ST MA NEW POWER BLUEST\O E I CONDUIT u pND. _ r . DRIVEWAY �31� 3j75 Oen9o- +aw.E ti N 0$44 sire 4 h D - 7 23 1_0" '(56E DW(s. A/) \ i ,U (y•R. ?�; NOTE: V. I. F. _ \I ' _it r--x—,—Y 1 .. SCALE 2S J NO fkEE'CCUTTING ALLOWED IN THIS SITE. 0 60 120 180 240 O r�-; IgEFKK� TO 1/5- I, I�5 -2E� I�6,5 FOP_cr ( ` �uru�ra E31TE P LaIY INPOP-MAnoN EXIST --- - _ -__ _ _- - Roan I SCALE 1 STORY BLOCK s°"T" ,� �` 20 40 60 HO BUILDING SOCK 4• LOT II 2 I MAP E ZONING II. ^�e�V.TE SCALE: I" = s0' t�On E: 56° NGI 3E: 3;9" si ���� ���N - u IC PLAN SCALE: NONE ENTRANCE ELEV. LRTIru5 LONGITUDE: MAIN O e DE AFL S7E/ANTENNA LAYOUT PLAN ANTENNA NOTES: S-I 30 FT AMSL Szl O _��p'T�'E� CTdFt _:.7�k'�2.0 _ � ' „I,.,,,.m,,P SCALE: I"= 20' , �NT..PLATFC M^ND_.ANS�ATCi_ . _.'' - -- f ES�A�TTRtiE7�Di3.TF � 6aTog F[X2 5 i RAIL FT F < < ZU.BE DESl FLED RILI PLIED=_ EG _F1'UST�:E �%ER1F..fED�Fi� SR3 — D '=mAmNOPoL: mAwur=-ACSLHwiL -_SQf'i-T ,�. TO THE...INSTALL_ATION_ -- -- '- • �' *1' i.' 'S . 5#,c^.• --- - - SECTOR=-TXA xu'evnvfR wxrlox of nen �I Enr onto.u ,v + tY,If P1.Ax lPIERffdi a ,T� �a.c er 8. hFkf. '�iF SlL;1'1' /Is - ,'b ., •.. 'I .. w C/.X71Y�.�F/�_ - _ _ -Fa(('r'ir°raoci!nern o nclry Ir f L' I f2d's 2p,t0,• Z 98GTo 6dESR0=0h(E • 0 3 z In^ 0.0 PDsr Io G e x a R=R%'1' _ ' I '' - - - NOTE { .``' N r'rn"N . k " p p D ;: FI y f3" 0.0. TERFI INAL.;ANO CORN@R' P05rs EI,,, CRB N �!A ,Z ' SOIL4EARI^JO GA'PACITY MU 57 a E• mrNrx I• FI - N I, (4" D,O. GATE PCSTSI , TH Irri 13E tlETERMINED AND eNGINEERED a RASE LA ; 5 7/S" FOR LESS THAN 225' S- „ MONOPOLE TOWER FO LINDATIONI •�k� ,\ _ 6 o ENc ME PAN - - a GAUGE CHAIN LINK, 1 5/8 225' T 25 wITH MDN " FOR 0 325' lb w oR TO COMM E ENT o y w " FOR GRERTER THRN 3 II, ;,,;i•{. l9 a 2" OL'AMONO it N w Q 5FILL SECTOR RNTENNRE TO BE N F^ I' — ESAr LE. GrLAPFL I �I S I ' oursiaIS ENDS INSTRLLED ON DOWNTILT BRRCKETS 'F (WCTDT-20 �:': I I', ro•olA. cmar + Y n�CAl 1AflE o GRADEui _ EYfxLY EPACEO o V j— I HOLE,' n ENIFn AT U•APAnI z Pw' t 1 I G GrE DIA RI ED a I' ANTENNA/CABLE' INFO , ; N ` D II I ? EO SECTOR DEGREE LENGTH COLOR °. V w T p _. .eRN _PALATFORM ( MONOPOLE - j e A rxe ".QI ' ° -- Y 9` B �I u I1�i, o eE PULLED ou + e' t- r jll: j CONCIIE ZINC OPENBrION I- • - 3.000 PSI Plx I. A o• 40 fit. GREEN' F E / nl ov neuMctas[sr .B I% 1 ' CONCRETE, O• yy , I POINT g [��d A- Ilnn run �I Q� {'1 �r q 'I&S fat' 'GREEN - 1 •� / ' TE I NOG ---- FIIN II E O b Oi'• fPFI . - E •,E '/i'FA Q • N M ' , 14:4 �r, : GREEN a �I � m W , W� IgoLL 6EARINo_CAPACITY MUST - , 0 - ,/D ' '' 1sC;M 1 ',B 12©• I Q Fi'; '�1BE�ETERMINI_D AND ENGINEERED " A (9 IN. LINE or' rowER BAse PLArf „: "'- ", ',A-"SILT'--I °' " MIN. 1�• BLUE o ^a y I��{ W I _ ' � VO CL VS PISS N .. .I '• 'yrb p Qt ° AND FOAMED MR VON OF PIER -1 I. iV '12O• L r Oa S I , (TH NION OPOLE'FOU NDATI ON _ _ p — — i'Oren Ar 3'^ 1 3 �`T' BLUE /U1 Z • pJI{ " —� fsT-R'BT IRE 0.0. -R'AI @.'�I+ 120" 14.0 P?,T 'BLUE PRIOR"TO i"H EGONIMENOENT To _ _ / j rvP/cAI cA/s9DN s TrON 3,• FS-'EI R,X. IC 'G`40• IpPq p.T. WHITE I—_ -NY WORK+' _ __ Fi • — T)C' C, 2 o WHITE, N FENGE DETAIL 4 13� PT ' E? 91 LO%TIIVE MR DIRT lax ro ro vea rvr/rox on Pren�rE �- I I NT'S' - FREKaG 240• IAFP K�', WHITE 1' 0 LROPOSE - -100. . G - A s Lr vA. eDLi crncLE . 1 fill p hi <• HI C_C a I O V - O 0 . .@toN. PO"L ,. - p _ _ � METRO ON IOB R GPON IBI ITIF l T V 110 JGR PRODUCT. MGR: A EX CARES&Nr AN T• C IBI ES ROUTED INSIDE Ti •I I $1 REAL ESTATE MGR: LYN LOPIM ]ylpNd POLE N @ •' ?CONSTRUCTION MGR: 5015 14 AN OP 64 u V not i fARE PLATE MA r _I __ RADIO ENGINEER:�L�t�lIwI l7TF -=PN WW� ce Y " STRUCTURAL ERG:ATE PA PAY Q '' JGR SURVEYOR:l=11G U 240� If p• u.Axwon runs eoI r- 2 AN.On If uG s sxoNn. Lux. TOLFRAxce I rrr I'M1I• GER'AK0 _ ZONING MGK,.: r.s SECTOR-TX C ��z� ; �9 •I'/ ` TABLE OF CA f550N DIMENSION'S , N �1 ^ _ MA sr onrexrAnan rnncxon sr Gsr roe AurxNExr To rnxxsvrsTlON - I - ANT CA$LES'.IN 2-GI COND: ?•40' 1 'D!_; ' I _ �q cero srsTEM To usunufG Er ANTS"DID FREQUENCY ENGINEER OH SUCRIPrmx OF ITS. It. IM N I N ! ISSUED DRAWINGS TO METRO ONE � M TJN DER.S ROUND�TO;�-�yLIIP - � jO SITE Gn iNnoucx oefnlrron AElnESENTA TILE ON SITE. BEFORE fEr n IE _ '+f T RIri, - -- x INE COMMENCENEnT Of THIS FOVNPAFION NOAK. O - SBCTOP,- RX 2G Toro LENGTH DI-Plow-=- 'A -Et - qp TT�� I� p, I�J-J^�J GRADS - S�CT'IpFN R>.SIi� ANCHOR STUD ARRANGEMENT E- D �:/ LS PRELIMINARY ONLY (NOT REVIEWED BY JGR7 sS p . oexrx Or eonvrG ran s ,���,/,( op L6-FoUNDgTONJ SECTION FI-FI ran Plot. B.xve ( y�J REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY JGR F 51o. IN .EREDI ANCHOR TIM aAE•vexr ; I' REVISIONS IEWED RHO APPROVED BY JGR �E"+ 4 Ajv 1�pp Imp // ^ 1� p I I I Axcxon srw wr»crrox e EL E V ATIO V ANTENNA 0 E oI� � a I� n f�\ � o p � A /•�{� 1 � - ."��r'•» _ _ � _ CHECKED BY '�' '<S-1 SCALE: NONE �YII �I�Ilml flu �1L� II�/OO�UII V� � ®TLC SCALE: N.#6. !'V I�,� NOPOLE FOUNDATION DE'S1rwN DATE 2 t/ its KNvpF co - SOALE : NONE JUENGERT GRUTZMRCHER RSSOCIATES, P.R. /O�b S•�PA YY7 , *; . 4 # a 5 .U. }9� w DECLINATION z 13" k/—WEST , a 475 60 N 3}A4 LO 83. 4 33 3791 _. GAR LP I FF EL OVERHE AD LO �' 11 „ 33. 00 -- ---WIRES � II 3 0 tJ 81 ' 20� p1 E _ _ 1 STORY FRAME 3� ------ - 0 BARN GAR w m °z w Z ` 0 FF EL X N EE REFER TO S THam I��5 I. 1/53 } g 2 o LA - a 32. 50 t �l I F7lR FUR.TWF_I1 . INFORMATIOIhI. Z N PROP RED 100 GH MONO LE C' - i 30 I m = 7 'V a( e Ln Lo AREA = 80495.5 S.F. FF EL aE°°' a h 32. 77 i SETBACK �, 1 Q W A 3a;r q 1.848 ACRES 2995 10• ° '15T PROVIDE I2) S.B'e 20' 1 PROPOSED UNMANNED - ` OO pF, TELECOM. EQUIPMENT ��`I 021 PARNING SPACES FFAEL I, 11 j eSi mm -'D ROOM IN EXIST. BLOCK Gi N Ip2 33. Q9 33j9 , BLDG. PROPOSED 10 WI D€ J "' II +i 12-a TY/• 1 J WJP!s GAT€ , , 10 t -, 5 • t�' ZONE LB 2551 © ( 5 B 3 GRAVEL DRIVEWAY LID w PROPOSED 6.0' HIGH '�'\ 11 _ 2�3 3 (SEE SECTION 2/5�11 --T 6 ` - 2"LAYER OF 3/4"QUARRY STONE CHAIN LINK FENCE 1 N (IN•TALL FENCE TO CLEAR , r r Q y ExuT.Trees Aa Z W Zk34 0 LID Y rm ©° _� 8 Qr'1 o lm�~' Z ___—`�S 1111 1 B"COMPACTED LAYER QUARRY STONE\ _a LyA EXCAVATE TOP SOIL LAYER AS flE0'O z CD \O BLUESTONE AV" 488 . 05 ; 2 SECTION THRU GRAVEL DRIVEWAY F' ��Nc� a g�4 x 'fl 79B DRIVEWAY �'� �I . S•� —��'� � _,�; "I �V� -�,�, �' �� 24- S87° 55 ' 12 "W ©� cDNc w \, 25 z� F=olZ F-L11Z'I'FfEI= SII ��, I ,�� -� , _ hI�AN IN�o12MA-TIN• •. - I � o � ,;�, , x ° �LnuR�.tcrNST�ucTIoN Isrlor - 1 STORY BLOCK � s IPERP7I p_rE �•I ITH IIJ THE GROSS - /I f ,41 ' �4 I a i pwrc14% sNo BUILDING !� I ju W { LID yi 10,',F•• f N M La A 3 A S W P IN lu n m N q 0 • �' w 0 2 < • � s.1r rdi S . R € . k 4?s " • I A p 6; r � SCALE °` �. 4 3. ' 0 30 60 90 � � l l SITE PLAhI — C PROf'EkT1 SURVEY ) 71992 n JUL 2 � W. SZ SCAL"Eo I L �aP —G MFTRO QNE 'JOB FFSPONSIBILTTIFS - - - � � 4 11 ISSUED DRRWINGS TO METRO ONE JGR PRODUCT.' MGR. nLE o x RERL ESTRTE, MGR. L '1.OAtT - FRELIMIN9Y MILT NOT REVIEWED BY JGW SITE ' PLAN CARMAN - DUNNE , P. C. �OPNE{yY A ROWED pw APPROVED BY JGH" CONSULTING ENGINEERS d SURVEYORS �• - ,• ,�. ,s 5 I, CONSTRUCTION "MGR R OF PROPERTY IN RROIOENGINEEPW' � RE'visipus LYNBROOK , NEW YORK .'pip�RPBRpVEo BY +JGR STRUCTUxk Pop - E . MATTITUCKcmEc .JGR SURVETi'k�* DE, BY -I&I 1 SUFFOLK CO., N. Y. RICHARD H. 9CHROEOER JR. P.E 042782 I13� RIIK� 3. '�ni f ,'. "' - ' FA MAP NO. 91010 DATES JAN., IYYI R,S.KNAPP CO � � F 5 , (P CVTL1 OGUE N �E is EAST TIITUCK I AI U DECLINATION I STORY FRAME _ f- 130 t WEST Is DEILINATION J952 _ _ _ o i w 131E WEST ' BARN v�r - - 11935 ? vs � 73 LOT 12 T C ULOT � �, 1 ANT.CABLES IN 2-6"COND. y UNDERGROUND. 7.43 475.60 w r TO BE NG DEMOLISHED, TION ISHEDOF BUILDING O IAr tA' TO BE DEMOLISHED, [s m wPROPOSED 00' HIGH % •• TNT ® rJ°t kan `J°`•�.•. I _ n. •MONOPOLE _ R W7.20 T•E 1 STORY FRAME (SEE DETAIL i/511 Zy- yy _ O �• " - �' BARN = 263� •� 95 I, � _ w w PROVIDE GRA LMULCH Z O O - ��7� ROOM ENTRANCE DOOR - Na ° °e _ �� ALL OVER FE:CED AREA 'PROVIDE (2) 8.5'x2O' 9 eY, '�O• PARKING SPACESISEE DETAIL-� m 112 PROPOSED U{MANNED 12'-0 r5.0' ' - PROPOSED CHAIN LINK FENCE 3216'-0" DETAIL- A 1•A5w1 n "�A �•1'11 I1 1F1 �L-`��Qc•+'��pp>"OS'O•1.��.�. \ OZI TELECOM EdJIPMENT SECTON ms ROOM IN XBTT-STY. "SEE DETAIL-6/SO DISTRCT BLK. BLDG. 256 ONE TEE" hITEK GROVELED IOFT WIDE . GRAVEL DRVEWAY(SEEV713,2/5-Z 10 W 8.5' I BRI3RS � OM PLAN ' Ed o PROPOSED GIFT HIGH O .\ I IN` �qjTL� 3 SCRLE: NONE f 0 QLu I— ' n 406.105 CHAIN LINK FENCE ?O • '^•fN+--G�-.zl__ p[F - ENCLOSUREOEE 1. � ' O —� Q Q w 6 u Ssi•55'12'W `' _ _- - - fffLLL p( 9 w _ m nz _ DETAIL 6/LIl', ____�—�° _'-_ _ i..'0� � - _ _ - - Q 3 -- — -- L - - PROPOSED 100rH/GH �� Z z /� ~ C�� - MONOPOLE mV LLu 0 U'r i 0 (�,�, Cp [;> E%IST,UT ITT SEE DETL. 3/5! E•�'!$�T ) Q II wW • { M PRQVfDE2-5'-0' W. 8000 ���,,,•fffFDL / STY- :PAIA445 xCD �,/ Al SWING GATE 3+fQ 3 . _�'------- BARN � LF w ED g. YYv---=-----p---------?-- ---- n F Q� UJ N 31 Y� — EXIST NEW POWER a TELECOM.LINES IN SEPARATE BLUE StNE ICONDUIT UNDERGROUND. DR IULWQY _ _y MAI1y CONC PROPOJED I Q METRO- OWE _ CELL 51re 234'-0" SEE DWG. A 1) \ z y^1 NOTE: �_ — •_H—Y—.L— _ z (S. R. 2S NO fkEEWTTING ALLOWED IN THIS SITE. ~ SCALE -NOTE: 2EFf= Z. TO 1/5- I, 1/5 2 1�53 FOB - 1 o- S 0 60 120 180 240 FUILTI-IE SITE F'L,Uil INF012'MATIOI`I EXIST sour" --- -- --- - --- u o 0 1 STORK BLOCK n ` - z ~I coac. Exlsr. a /'� SCALE .. i BCOES7-o, ;ry.„ , TV _g °AD BUILDING ZONING _ 0 '20 40 60 80 „ BLOCK '�I- LOT II 2 MRP x - t- ll ` � fF��OTf pLQN P r` p SCRLE: NO SITE PLAN .. ., Q SCRILE: I"= 2 a v_ o :`' o II�� pp L� n pp p pp PLAN NOTES; W ` v Li . - -rt ., . .. ..' -LRTITUO"E ... LONGITUDE: MRIN ENTRRNC ®LL���VLL= ��I��/�N`I�IENNQ L���OILLI�, �,IL-/�1N p � J E ELEV. O e o o' r O RNTENNR � - 911 SCRLE I" 60 L} O 59' SG 72` 30' 39° 30 FT AMSL „�,r„r S 1 _ I'• ANTENNA' Mt t-'E L 'x- _r $$ v ". 1' • ) TOP RAIL, PDICIII ' G Et T - E'.G'Tl:�I 4'•9+A' 1- 1;a' f ry b :d -_ -. ` • i . . _�- {{ .., 1`; ^^= .. ..J� ' LYk, r �'+ -- "N" I� -iiviaaviie{v IT,in °��nrunimE I. ri, .. 2TYPE OF CELL : SECT � -Ol ' NT._PLATFOf�M.ANRAh -_MTGni „ . .. ' - '. '' t jv ,T T Tk 'R _ i Y'e'u' '�tY' L„ -dr"°+" ,: MZ LP -. nue°rcn THIN Gr ra - NO, Or- _ e _ ANI rI n S eTO P;5 3 m w DES EG£BS-SLlP1'LIED= I 4 q F t 3 ! Z Z -- - 1R= �''Iw ? ''S:? -F7', i fJ A ) O `-hol `_P5r$.o':'°'u - C o' 120• 4 ) •s, >"w 'r�'H GTO F =:TX A. �' rr nTJn •i"ziarzlr' by -kQ s s 2 O• J ]]gyp a +`rc• ,, - ,�t7 ASWr`G•• 'N : b� •, ^l OTEl °• I`nx .. f° 2341.a' .D, POST 'ID'-D'" O.0 )"' b v-�IArx yH ca . .�• - //- O N '` R° `' ry TERMINAL AND CORNER POSTS CRB L O FI FL «t 4° 0 GATE 'POLTSI 4, LENGTHS: m m z IE'V IA SOIL 6EA ING CAPAOITY MUST � V SECTOR- -- -. BE DETE INED AND, ITNGINEERED a SASE PEAT -' r 7/8" FOR LESS THRN 225' rn = _� ; ' , `'• ., , . 'fP*+d � - IS , >, WITH MONO JLE TOWER FouNDgTION � O•� " 0 325' N 1 1/4 FOR 22 T J�' • 1 5/8" FOR GRERTER THRN 32S' ti -1 cT GETTER To MM ENcEMENT OF ANY - '-I B EAu HA[N LINK. I ' G o,. - _ - •ok C _ '�, i l9 li 2,. D[ ❑ m N W O :woRK, ,, y , _ s, RLL SECTOR RNTENNRE TO BE N 1- ;,r - I!' � S J' P•NIH NUN ` n .' I I' ' 'Ypcls{AE o❑Ts, INSTRLLED ON DOWNTILT BRRCKETS F' \ IVEnIAP. NEED I' 10 'DOErnEnArENUS + (WCTDT-2D) w a Ir P E ~ nnfs Ar P-r ry B r[nnceL ,ens 'FACE _ ANTENNA/CABLE INFO y AT IARr J r I - 1 [ L IF/ GIA�D ILLfO ---���--- „ .1A • AT 0 xDLI,HEG rGEN1En a S` j- 1 � s� . 90 SECTOR DEGREE LENGTH o w • Wj r, I I GTH COLORI if "' 'i _ur rxc A4 a.P,n S 2+ „ 5 I e o I .D00 P : RX I A o• 14-0 FT GREEN AYNT PLATPoRM - ONOPOLE ' I TD•E rmlEl ours . • °„ "qF ^YII�r .-ll 'o Z. DNOREI - , °r1 CONCRETING OPERA THIN n.; 3'MINIYUY r _ o r •• a " '! TX A O• 135 FT, ° CIYEN AT CLOSEST �o •Ei •a ) GREEN y; n TOlxr �= Nf'rrr sONI :k GREEN m W —J f i p Erma IN x2A o • 14o KT L-Li XEL°YL IC n "� TILE THE IHIn TI S °w O a i•h7oT.E • M1� . . ,� D 1. _"' 6K IN. R)( I $ 120• Iq-o FT. BLUE DO k' � LLJ Ii rGOIC$ .. . '1 �.I /^ 4"; rn. uxf dr TowEn AM PLATE TX $ 120• 135 F � - i. �/. EIA�IINE _OAP�1CITn .MUST ��, _ I\ ✓ .1 AHO FOnNfO Pofl TION OF FlFfl r' PC[[An Ar b f' 3r„ T' BLUE Z 'gE-RETE'RNtINED AND EI NEERED 5 - \, r I ".1 '" 1i, ' tTH N10N OPOLE POU.IJI TION - / 'I 'IT N_ N „ ' '� — I rrrrmm E P o -RX 2D 120• 14o FT• BLUE r� U m KIOR_- O E CcMMEI�L1 T TO - A - - ;t1MI F N F1-F F° —_ --1 Fl k." RX I C 2 40' 14o F T. WHITE FT ry 0 II - _ _ I r O -NY WORK. _ -- I„ T,.eni�'=`= 51 F �JGE DETAI L TX. 0 2¢O` 135 FT WHITE . AEPEAT NTS RX2G 240' 14o FT. I- z a l 'I ; L°NG SIDE 'IO OIYFX51°N SrUO RKNO I n f 1 —� WHITE I _ - • \ � ; AHO EOn M(I MATTER OF[IEn 1— -1-' 6 METRO ONE JOB RFSPON IBT ITIF -RAQPOS ED _TOO F=T HI14 .. ';p -I \ • Y oP...OL•E• ,� ; "A\ \ 1 rA .� I JGR PRODUCT. MGR: ALEX OAE:�NE/,% �i RERL ESTRTE MGR: LYNN LOR IMER./JP 0 ta�y/Y W v 0 ,�rrII m c W _I CONSTRUCTION MGR: BOB 14 AG oP I,rAN� I�-�./ m a Q EiCdTJ_GA�LESLES ROUT INSIDE - - RROIO ENGINEER:r LFN IA.IITTF �N,Q�491 z 5 Y W Z fllPNoPOLE IOSE PEA rE. s V ;•4. N !ES MA T �-5-` � F J I - - _ aMNrxcs TE PAPA`(STRUCTURRL ENG:PE W Q C= a J JG E I R SU o I RVEYOR:- y f_I,s nJ wt FR.. . , I , ' , u SEC"iTO R' RXI IJ' %_�Qg---1 .289•- - - c•o T-r• IA. AxaE°n sru°s -" - - • ANI°n1E V 3 3 OI•E ,4-' .I sxDHx. NAx. TOLERANCE r 1/r ZONIING MGM:.: ARb aHFlgi''s TABLE OF CAFSSON DIMENSIONS ISSUED DRRWI NGS TO h- - Nsr DfllLx,nncn rnnc lsru°sl ran 010 FAECUEnc rnAxNEEROx METRO ONE s FZ-TX C.r �j -- V� A r M GIN Sion A r+ /p�A'y�� P� • - , CqG sY3rfN TO EE SVIYPERAIpY EY ANI'J MOIO Fn FGUEHCY FHGINFEfl ON Ofs[n Prl°N OF ITFN IT[. rLET NGIf3 ~ .r�YNT)S/ABLES,IN�a*9•-�_.�`6 - 'T I-S TIIECONNEN[FMENOR r �OF Tdmi NIATI°xREPRESENF^NN"TIYE ON SITE. nfFOnE _ _ ❑ „D ~-1 �. _ :UNP_E.FLGROUNp�.TD6`�JIPT F�FYt,' RX2_Q. S,L�4'F; ,f ,. �(�� 1 „ ANCHORITUO ARRANCEMENT rrenT neovf enA HER -J� — �J PRELIMINRRY ONLY (NOT REVIEWED B7 JGW + 01 tTION F7-FI G• /yyJ REVIEWED RNO RPPROVEO BY JGR MT LoPt^ NFnInsr.D. I-N EFONEDB D J J vv REVISIONS EVIEWEO FIND I RPPRAxcon srvl rn0srcrNHnE OVEO BY JGRDAI CHECKED BY _ iFOUN ` 4 n . . G DRTE g/ P IZ 4 N R, � p � �I- I� /� p p f� p bl 581 �LL EVA p IOON SCRLE: NONE 5-1 QN u �NNQ IV� �O�ltt_FUNTI�J ®T1L SCRLENT.�. MONOPQLE 1=0UNDATIO�N DESIGN „I ,,A�, z Scq�E : NONE JUENGERT GRUTZMRCHER RSSOCIRTES, P.R. 'r0i ' IS `S R 5 KNAPP CO • 3. F c yyW N ` 0 N H � W DECLINATION 13' +/-WEST I a I � 475 . 60 33pa 3�1 LID z 83. 4 GAR LP. I '� of z FF EL u 33. 00 - OVERHEAD ---WIRES � ' 1'I 1Y � E ---- = 4Q N a1 . 2o101 1 STORY FRAME �t ' ' A ed I I EQ N BARN GAR w mLn � z To y H E 0 ET I�s• I (�i.�..3 FF EL I'3 `, NOTEc REFET� LA a 32. 50 .` `� PoR FU fLTLaE IZ. INFo�MA7lc�hi . 7F o� \ N o PROPOSED 100' HIGH O MONOPOLE GAR , 30, ` r� -+ �� + FF EL - w AREA = 80495.5 S.F. REpD w N R �� L S 32. 77 SETBPCK ' '� Qd w 1.848 ACRES ' d 2 63A '✓996 � i O. 0 .3`�1 PROVIDE (2) G.5'x 20' I K GAR PROPOSED UNMANNED — 5.0 y,� EL —PARKING SPACES FF I ` TELECOM. EQUIPMENT `I �3Ig � w ,` AZ ROOM IN EXIST. BLOCK N .�I42 33. 09 6 , �' '� MLL = BLDG. ♦I STY�Ln T� \ 3� PROPOSED 10' WID€ '� 1, - P .6m Lil I / r , B, ' e. ' (2) 5=a WIDE GATE 4 \ 10'+ - �y. O -p 6 5 32G GRAVEL DRIVEWAY, .LID w _ ZONE L B �gI n 119 (SEE SECTION 2/5�1 � ' LAY 4 QUARRY STONE PROPOSED 6.0' HIGH I �j v ' I //------ I CHAIN LINK FENCE ---- (INSTALL FENCE TO CLEAE EXIST.TREES AS NEO'O.) — o a q^ f� A Z� a r_' �n nn , z Zak E� � � 8 ®�0-.-� _071 ^ oom 2 '� 3'�` w ` 5"COMPACTED LAYER OF 5/8" QUARRY STONE -31t�= a j ,fig kl 3 __--------- EXCAVATE- TOP SOIL LAYER A9 RED'D.cp WI II, 2 I BLUESTONE SECTION THRU GRAVEL DRIVEWAY 4 hAP-k-'U� LP Zk'� v I u O DRIVEWAY p,IDP•'' S•2 0 I CONC z � S87° 55 ' 12 "W s� w I Fol2 r-URTHEIz SITE a ¢ I I?LAN INFDI2M.A-TI�JN• � I'' � I,,.w � Ia 1 STORY BLOCK A w B z a ILL; �. 1e I� UILDING r Y • 1 1 f `- �° z Z a OZ N 0 N W NLID F CIP m ~ FLo N F o a a M W W � Iu AIN V ^ N p m � o m \ 1 Z a a o a W S „ Rw 3 0 0 • N 25 W U z N �h d U. zp �+ U Rpqq w o c� w o . K X ry U u SCALE � e 2 ' 0 30 60 90 120 3 Q SITE PLAN — ( PIZof'ERT`( SURVEY ) - _- • a � -- - - - - - METRO ONF JOB RF5PON5I8TLTTTF5 TI7 J'2 sca �e 3°'_oi1 ISSUED DRRWINGS TO METRO .ONE o 'JGR PRODUCT. MGR: ALVX C.ARMoNa RERL ESTRTE 'MGR', L-YWNigJ-oFtIM'6p. d ❑ PRELIMINiRY ONLY (JOT REVIEWED BY JGR) . SITE PLAN CARMAN - DUNNE , P. C. CONSTRUCTION MGR' ��''-NAfjcPEA.y ^' I I REVIEWED RC FPMVE13 BY JOS CONSULTING ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS N eN PI - OF PROPERTY IN N' ROFo G RRCIO•ENGINEER. wITTE a LYNBROOK , NEW YORK '+�q,� ` U y- REVISIOf'6 REVIEWED F!'i1 ATROVEO BY JGR � � 3' I„ e W 0 ASTRUCTURRL, ENG: P'�'T�' ",',P�,FxY E . MATTITUCK 1 ".' � _ A I 0 2 JGR ,sukvEYOR ) enKa' CHECKED BY SUFFOL K CO., N . Y. p G 2 RICHAflO H. 9CHROEDER Jfl. ' RE 042782 Ci+. l r '+. pc, CI FN.S DATE 0 coV Z'aF}�11Gj,,' M62. M ilas�tat� " z T,.JIENGEKT GRUTZMRI7'ER RSSOCTRiES. PA• MAP N0. 91010 DATES JAN., 1991 `I-h'✓�,`'�� -,), 2 • .r R,S KNAPP CO SRI o p� Section 115, Block 7 Section 108, Block 4 yy= Lot(sn Name/Address Lot(s) Name/Address N 4 Alfred 6 Kathleen Delaney 1 Agnes Groboskl P.O. Box 465 Mattituck. NY 11952 N LOT 5.45 Mattltuck. NY 11952 W CO 2 Vlotor Grabowski 3 Peter J. Signorelli 8 Wife Mattituck, NY 11952 L P.O. Box 372 7 2 Eastward Court 3 Charles. Jr. & Mildred Gardner_ un MattitUCK. NY 11952 18485 Main Road Mattituck, NY 11952 1 Barry Murphy & Main Road 5.2 Dale A Donald Bergen P.O. Box 1230 Main Road lu Or 5M Mattituck, NY 11952 Mattituck. NY 11952 C 14 Jacqueline K. Mitchell 6 John Mitchell 5.3 Dale Bergen A Main Road Main Road 01 - - Mattituck, NY 11952 Mattituck, NY 11952 Z } 9 Howard 5 Margaret Brod 6 Nancy E. Kugler � 2875 Bay LOT 75 UR 5A5 Matti tuck.VNYue11952 BOX M ain Road 07A Q� Mattituck, NY 11952 10 Marcus H. Burden 8 Wife h d D p Eastward Court 7.1 Aliperti Buovodantona a Irwin Papkin Q Cutchogue, NY 11935 1235 Montauk Highway 1P d "2 W � 7.4 Mastic. NY 11950 `C{ ii Carolyn Myron Box 819 7.3 Sonia C. Hunter W Eastward Court 30 Perna Lane C 1" 59 - - Mattituck. NY 11952 Riverside. Connecticut 06878 3 N ILl LOT T1 5ELTION eloppo 12 Lawrence 4 Barrios Bogan 7.4 Salley Goode "TINT 25 Burns Street 845 EIIJahs Lane Forest HI I Is, NY 11375 Mattitck. NY 11952 �N a P 7 tm ' RpCHp 13.2 Fred Koehler 7.5 Joseph P. Shipman & Wife W 10 Azalez Court 985 Elllahs Lone S M 4` Farmingdale, NY 11735 Mattituck, NY 11952 Lar 55 7 James Joseph Cal Icghan A LUAnne B Joseph Neville 8 Wife w I 640 Eastward Court 92 BOX 5 - I Q Mattituck, NY 1,952 Mattltuck, NY 11952 N r p 5M H 1 N 7.43 North Fork Housing Alliance N lE 110 South Street Z 1,45' L" ?5 orSeohlon 715. Block 8 tar 7., Iqr i'N 475.w PD IUS Greenport, NY 11944 TM i SOO R Lot(Isl Name/Atldress 7.44 Richard A Janet Oddon z u 1 Alma Suter 1165 Founder Path ' W I FI p1� 5T Southold. NY 77971 ¢ o' c o ¢ o , 1 51OIIY FIIAIE LOT 943 �I New Suffolk AVen� 7.45 6 7.46 North Fork Housing Alliance z z (01' 3 1Dr Ill � ss el➢cK K ( -- - 710 South Street u I i !. Nr 5J (pr 6 S SEC XW b4 • u " dSTRKT ICW Greenport, NY 11944 a MEA•NOM65 S.F. sv W uno VRE5 p1% 11.2 William Baxter, Jr. 6 a oIu 1030 E. Putnam RA Iz Greenwich. Connecticut 06830 a Iz ii- to 50 O Lor e : "' u5.0! - - 11.3 William J. Boxter, Jr. 4 ORS SS7•65'1I'll 5fi I r1 r I� to IW 1030 E. Putnam a I 4IY IJ Ic w 112 u C u Greenwich. Connecticut 06803 I IDr ' ' I 12 Cornelius L. Holston & Wife EIIJahs Lane MAIN Mattituck. NY 11952 } Section 108 Block� n . 3, \ y Z r S' R, zs Lot(s) Names/Address O 0 N) 2 !or o 5.2 Martin H. Garrell 6 Wife - Y Main Road O 06 W :3(or T2 gal se Mattituck, NY 11952 CU J... cc m R04p s.3 Edward Sandberg r W W Q 100 Main Road ~ I-- N ' Mattituck. NY 11952 `� fn I3,1 Z zor5.6 William A. & Eileen Villano a w K W 3 w 260 EIIJahs Lane V o' H C-) a Mattituck, NY 11952 O cle 5.7 Lawrence H. Hofer d Wife 0 1 4 McttitUck49NY 11952 w N o n N 3 o wl F '(V 5.8 Terrance E. Matthews d Wife 19- V) Q RR1 - Box 105C Z Q EIIJahs Lane U ri ro Z r W Mattltuck. NY 11952 � G 0 •v h [2 0 2 y 1 5.9 John J. Glovannel ll 6 Wife 11F•�•`l1 J wN ,ayT 'N✓/is C.,J •Te2T,p5, ° 770 E I i J ohs Lane F� W w x �N l 'kb OR•CT Mattituck. NY 11952 V rl�y ri 5.10 Frank C. 6 Nancy Ann Todrick O 0 P.C. Box 406 of 0 Mattituck. NY 11952 _ W 0 F(.1 0 so W � . so 5.44 Hugh J. 6 Judith C. Leahy m � V 310 Ocean Avenue Massapequa. NY 11758 rj U_ 'V u 5.45 Joseph A. Cathleen L. CM Oman ou 0 985 EIIJahs Lane ~ u Q - Mattituck. NY 11952 • � W METRO ONE JQ0 RESPONSTRTI TTIFS - - - -- ---- W f l � ISSUED DRRWINGS TO METRO ONE = o N SITE= PL.,4N - (500 FT 2ADIU5 MAP) JGR PRODUCT. MG ° R: e cagecsoNe - SCALE _ m RERL„ ESTRTE MGR:V' WQS LORIM ' ' lryq� ❑ pRELIMINTRY ONLY ONDT REVIEWED BY JGR7 , CARMAN - DUNNE R C. OF NCB, ~ 5-3 ecALM = IN= 100 0 100 200. 300 400 $00 RADIUS MAP CONSULTING ENGINEERS a SURVEYORS CONSTRUCTION MGR: �CS� µA '4 REVIEWED AM RPPROVED BY JGR _ RROIO ENGINEER. �"I-'61VN WITTIi�r4, - OF PROPERTY IN LYNB 0 , NEW YORK 0 p�N !^ SOS .7"-_�, aA N CI REVI9ION9 REVIEWED PPID RP ROVED BY JGH * r n� sTRucTURRL• ENc, f'��� i*QA'r E. MATTITUCK o w v� o z !-.us NEI�WC SR CHECI�U BYCO. , JOHN J. CAN ,i�A rYN' Q 4 O ' SUFFOLK CO N. Y. PLs oa99n �, e o JGR SURVEYOR' 9 ORTEIS ¢"' iN 1 T GR ITZMRCIER R9600IRTE9. PA vy,�11� .1Vtf•11?ER MAP NO, 91010 DATE: JAN., 1991 � yF z `o R,5,KNAPP CO --- 7'3 LOT 12 LO7 359 w DECLINATION a Z 13° +/-WEST w q3 - LOT 7. 475 . 60 sap° LOT 7.44 IV I Q 55 i6.zI Cn w . ' 83. 4 GAR 20� 01 FF EL ----CRHEAD_ __WIRES 33. 00 1 STORY FRAME p LOT 11.2 BRtPRs BARN = C/� � GAR Z TRE FF ELES BLOCK 4 ' 0 w a 32- SC SECTION 108 0 � N DISTRICT 1000 3�9 6d GAR 30' FF EL \1 REpO. w y pQ iUTk9 AREA - 80495.5 S.F. 32. 77 Q�. ` 1.848 ACRES 34 10. 0 �\ SETBPOK 1 N F W Z6 ZAg5 0 10.0 3p5t f GAR FF EL 1 �' ' k2 33. 09 ,VrB 3�j9 Ni, 1 y�I /1 0 STY M �1 3 w 3 �j H LB 75b1 cp 0 BLK }IJB BRIARS 3 -I u� 6 ZONE 20. 0 3Yp3 3 J Q 0 m _ ------------- ---- B _ 1\ Z w .4 m lJT✓ y Q N U k o o © g ®o g o w Fm 3- ------ -- f--- — w r r 0 y� _--- --- ¢ w N A VA g1F __ 37�________ IFS 2 : r Zk;n 7982 i BLUESTONE DRIVEWAY 488 . 05 LOT 8 coNc I�IP y1�5 3Yy \ i \ I 111 1 � I u o a ¢ a LOT 11.2 1 STORY BLOCK I o - �UILDING I , z I¢ I o z u `1 z i iw I� ¢ I I> - 1 y 1 f IV CP Z LO (n Ln _ I � M INq _ W m N N C U m LLJInF ~ — N F- cf) F �N F Q 1 ( S , p o Z • L'oll u 0 ^ Ro n 3 0 qp u H ¢ SCALE o LL 0 30 60 90 120 �i u P W SITS PLAN -- (C)UTL. INE TOPOGIZAPNIC. 5U2.VEY OF F-F-OF r-TY) W m p S.G1. SGA LE : 1 il= 301_ 0I o • O ^ h y J ' �k � � 0 we < a .I � KEMFTRO ❑NF JOB RFSPON5TBTI ITTFSI"II 'ISSUED DRAWINGS TO PIETROONE-JGR PRODUCT. MGR; L - cARPSOr N L_.I PRELIMINARY pLY MY REVIEWED BY JG* ' t REAL ESTATE MGR, gym` Iona 9 CARMAN - DUNNE, P.C. of NEwy CONSTRUCTION MGR .Gon\ REVIEWED FM R.PRDVED By JCR �� , , OUTLINE 8j TOPOGRAPHIC CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS �.P a �• TOS OQ �2" UwQ N1:1Ir zN LE 9I " (Y—jf +. LYNBROOK, NEW YORK ��p� n`7,�, i� RRDID ENGINEER: �'' REVISIDNS WED AM Af PROVED BY JGR SURVEY OF PROPERTY 1 � * o * �•,:� STRUCTURRL ENG7-m=,r T wa'y — �EaED eY d' - MATTITUCK NEW YORK JGR SURVEYOR; GU1 6JIFI$1fW&.ER DiiTE T? hI JO J. 9CANO PL S O49872 (� 0 �3, zaylNrr r%Iq t,�. : rJ�reo .N, z V / II JUENGERT GRUTZMRgER P1550CIATES. ,¢_ ,w - - - _ - - MAP N0. 91010 DATE:JAN.9,1991 R 5 KNAPP CO i , t NORTH EXISTING MASONRY WALLS NOTE: GROUND THE TO e> RE MO./ifD I FOLLOWING • 2DO AMPS R.C. PANEL • BATTERY RACK EKI STING pOoP • HVRCNUNIT EQUIP. _--Y • CABLE R9CKS TO BE REMOVED AND • RADIO EQUIP PATCH OPEN'G W/ GONG • EXHAUST FAN • FRESH AIR INTAKE LOUVER BtOGK TO I'IATGi-1 E.XIST'y WALK '—T - - > NElr �ON� . (9 • H.M. DOOR S FRAME• LANDING. 1 ' p I i 1- {- - A NOTES: (WHERE RPPLICRBLE) PROVIDE GABLE m 'I * I O ENTRY SEE DETAfL, PRO`/IpE LINTEL I _ CONCEALED •6 GAO. �1=� '-I/A-I FofR- {I� I LE STEEL BUCKS -7/A_I n P?L, 1 1 LINTEL)EL)IAND6DOOR WITH PROVIDE 2 k3 a FU RR _ _ CLAMPED OR W/RIGID IN BUTAT DNS,USE - - '-o I I CONNECTION CRIMPED ~ 8 RG:Cyf P,D.W LUNG. I PANG NGONTROL W 16' --+„ yl WI GAD., GREEN I ED t_ i i ll I I I F O WIRE WITH CLAMPED DR NEW 3x71 H.METALDOOR I p CRIMPED CONN. TO BLDG. PATd-1 EXIST'G WI NPOW � /r// WITH METALFRAME. PROVIDE � 1 � i � � PERIMETER GAD, CABLE 01 P2pvIDIN4 OPEN'4 Fo NEW 4CONL ETE SLR% WITH SIMPLEX LOCK, L/ V I cO 06 GREEN I DJU r cXIHAUST FAN= yIo l WIRE BONGED JUMPERS Q 'y FfA N dI Q rI AT CONN. VISIBLY SCR d EXISTING CHIMNEY �� N EXISTING PRINT TO d� OPENING TO SE BuSSKED ENSURE GROUNDING 0 UP TD MATCH WALLS . I I 6LOc k_ UP ALL MXIS'T'6 'E INTEGRITY (TYP). Q Q ! f LJI NOOW ooOIL OPEIN'Cg5 4 PATaH � CONIGr_E•TE l j l O CONTRACTOR TO FURNISH 2!X ID" V�/D O TS ® 12'_' p.0 I5LOGIC o MATG(-1 ExlsT'U GRD. ROD AND INSTALL TO EARTH R p�N1 77h( kJALL (TY P) GROUND AT G BLDG. VERIFY XLOCATION TERIOR F Z ll A \ WITH BLDG. OWNER PRIOR !\)= _ Poe Or{ snvUCTURe as°vc III— -,HI TO INST. (ROD IE 1" DIR 1il) L TO ROD) GROND R R E ELO F a q WC q dv •2 RWG. STRANDED . EXISTING d I e COPPER WIRE L1 y{ !C I o �\I NIA60N KY WALL [t1 ATTACHED T BUS.) W mU �1 - -T-'II To REP'WI W. ATTACHED TO WALL m > Ofl I� 51 SPEC 1F. SEE DTL S S Y Q GRD. BAR PLATE m • ' ,� 1 . � 8'-O" R.F.F. SEE DTL S' - ' " w // - 2-SPEC-1 Q- LL _x ISTING PARTITIONS // - I �- r II ANG DOORS TO a REMOVED, ��� - I( d - �I .� Q SEE -1 1 d 3 N N N r SPEC-1 I of PRDVIDINLi. OP6'N'G''FOR, ��•- - f- - - - LOUVEF FRESH AI F_ INTAKE _ - -- - - - - - - I I O o IL_I 4 � M _I-- L 1_ _ TI .� _ _ - _ J EXISTING TGH" iP.NY CJCAGKS OR Ha LES ON EXTER11d IZ u a — — ----- EkTERI PIS SCALE -�Id B' OF (S"M1 MASONARY WALL-FaNp APPLY ONE � JOS LYN AG ARRESTER TELGO BOARD 2- 3/¢ )0 ,- 7 L I T dF"7H111Z.0- ETV"TYI"E PAINT OVER ENT E WALL Z,00 AMR SERVIOE PAN L 5'-R" PLYWOOD PAINT FLAT BLACK 0' NOTE . SEE DETAIL 4/A-I 'FOR NACRE ROOF -A FLOOR IN FORMHTICN AS RECZUIREp o 3 4 j U J N r� I� ��* Imp p I� p FLAN mp � f� � I��1 p p h1(� �fL�I� p LAYOUT � p p PLAN ��p � (� p r�I�I p p� pI I� p LAYOUT � M p p Imp fn� � W U of u , All 1��� �1�JTII�U=17CT��� V If"L�/r10 �l EF ARTIAL QRouND FLOOR) 704 So, FT SCALE: 1/4 = 1 ' - O" q 1 1��5tS��l�"I V E �)T L�/r�1YOUT PLC. G-=�� �.I - SCALE. '/4"' < I , _O" ' R31 lJlr- CU � QY G LL,- A II OUT PLAN V SCALE: '/4" 1' _ G" �� � � ws' GENERRL TOTES: _ CONSTRUCTION NOTES: H } NOTE ALl W 0D MUST BE,ALA,�S 1A. y ,! 'I R. GENERRL� CONTRRCTOR WILL VERIFY RLL DIMENSIONS .RND CONDITIONS 1. RLL WRILLS TO BE CLERNED, SRNDED RND PRTCHED TO RECEIVE TWO (2) m F*IIRE RATED ,;NION COMBUSTIBLE NY��I ERIA�, ,.. I IN THE F� ELD. CORTS OF WHITE EGG SHELL PRINT. di 4 ' I 2. EXISTING CONCRETE FLOOR TO BE CLERNED, PRTCH RLL < i COMTRRCTOR_ WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFICRTION RND O m COORDINRTION OF HIS WORK WITH THRT OF THE OTHER TRRDES RND IMPERFECTIONS RND INSTRLL NEW RRMSTRQNG "IMPERIRL TEXTURE" BUILT uP Rtd�PIN6 VCT TILE NO. 51839 - FORTRESS WHITE. °i NEw(27- 2' %8'WO°D5ILL wToov Q ocr o z'-o o.c.— �� RND CNT�NT TORS. 3. -NEW RRMSTRONG CEILING TILE, MYLRR TYPE NO. 882 TO BE w C. THE INT NT OF THESE PLANS IS FOR THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO S` INSTALLED RT 9' 0" R.F.F. �y Ay KFQIIIREV (2f 2 s, 6 WOAD BL-ocKINC PROVIDE LABOR RND MRTERIRLS TO PRODUCE THE INTENDED RESULTS ANOB: TO NEW PLOGK AQ I coNrwuous, - UNDER INDUSTRY RECOGNIZED STRNDRRDS, EVEN IF WORK IS NOT `� of 1^ F- RE4UIRED• R- 19 1NSULATI OIV I _ � O VJ DESCRIBED IN DETRIL BUT IS RERSONRBLY INFERRBLE FROM' PLRNS. ■ N N METAL FLASHING AROUND SSE ADDITIONAL GENERAL NOTES ON DRAWING SPEC-1 ROOFING ED6EASRPA'D• D. CONTRACTOR WILL PROVIDE ,RLL TEMPORARY BRACING RND SHORING , - UJ ALUM, GUTT ER I Ida PEz -o" s/4" 6KT PL'r W-42oP REQUIRED DURING CONSTRUCTION. F w a ATTACHED To A u INw P YI< Pi NEIL— E. WRRRRNTEE RND/OR GURRRNTEE FOR ONE YERR RLL WORK. LONGER W F W FASCIA AS SHOWN) -� , @ OPPOSITE POND. s WHERE PROVIDED BY PRODUCT MRNUFRCTURERS, R W ALUM, RAIN 1• "x Ip I��� G _ NEW z- Z"A a" WAD' SILL ANCHORED F. CONTRRCTOR WILL MRINTRIN LIRBILITY INSURRNCE TO PROTECT LEADt R• : �� r �I To BLOCK WALLAS REQUIRED• THE OWNER. F'�,TGH ANY eRP eKs ore ;DIES G. REMOVE RLL DEMOLISHED MRTERIRLS RND RUBBISH PROMPTLY �( PROVIDE AL umtwuM r SIpE of 5>q"-r AZO NARY Wa'•I�✓ 0 m m VPW711.ATED WAPITI-�� --- PROd'I Dr" I'll^_J-1 1�" ....III AhID r•PP LY OYM MG of FROM THE SITE, _ F'G'' .� rR-�SEPa-"TYPE P,a.IN ovER ENTIfC6 H. RLL PERMITS TO BE OBTRINED: BY CONTRRCTOR WHO WILL BE Tp FiTvINI RES9UIREp (2)-2"X a, y(oop BLOCK INC C REIMBURSED BY OWNER. ,- m E'�r'� F I. CONTRRCTOR TO COORDINRTE RLL DELIVERIES RND TEMPORARY 00000 1/2" THREADED o m z ,vz '/ I PROvtDm 12 X3' WD:Pu RR, BRRRICRDES WITH OWNER _ _ _ _ _ _ ROD TO DECK 0 c ' J. CONTRRCTOR TO OBTRIN OWNER RPPROVRL CONCERNING WORK HOURS _� RIc,Ip INSU pTIoN RND TIME SCHEDULE OF CONSTRUCTION. w _� Y -1 SEE cgN9TR uGTION NOTE$ / �' U, : The tollowin9 canstructlon procedure ls,to be stribtlY'adhated tan _ _ O T 1ea Q) U I Y 3 STEEL ! Q(IST • WALL 1. Set end bearing Plates tilling block solid with mortar Below Plate SHIMS a, (2 mursae mnJ. ,METRO ONE JOB RFSPON9TBT TTTF `�/ as ,° / __ _ __ - la- 4 g G, �• ''d ' o 1 2 Chase an< ride of wall to amept flanges of channel. •° [..( w • 12 o C9-% 11.5 (2'-0' LONGER THAN M.O.) „ = Y i W F '�rc 1 3. Install channel, drive steell'shims at 1/4 points and great Ught wan. JGR PRODUCT, MGR LEX CCRn N ay u r. ; aO 1 4 2-8 non-shrink grout. w 1���• /� A �+- r•V U:y W O a ✓ I /'2 EXPAN ( ✓ / 4 Dr l through wall and Install ipeq acgre and bolts ! R ANT 'VHBLG' �QV.ef� I gCRL- ESTATE MG'n, L UN Lo ME ° 3 .�E OIA. BOLTS wi1H v 5 Lu PI SPACERS 0 2'-G- O.C. P sP a NT5- T^ Y c x hId IJ JOINTS . . .. . .. t r. (se 5. Chaea <a.d aide of all to vae t flanges at a'cend ah.nne:- P - �� I-IAGo P(AN z u "' 6�Gw �• .:: _U . u, i p / p g PARTITION (VSF:1 RADIO STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: P aN FILg V w a J GONG P.LAS LY - / / O PL 1/4- X 11' CONL) I'6. Install second ehvnnN drlye steel shims at 1 4 hints and rout. ,_ HN W1�2��) l F, . GRADE t,gh< with non-shrink Iayt Tighten through bolts. _ 1 '0 W •d e•l a •' _ _ / < a 6 ,L CBULK AS REOUIRED N ET�PAPbY I��f< P d //�/NV o o cs�wiA\ •,• I- /���'w/7/uY�. • 3 a o o 7. R<me•,e wall below ah nel. ON BOTH ENDS OF S g u , Now. S. Install banam ports �e red weld as shown. , CONIILRT SHOWN �i JGR SURVEYOR: GU�N1521mram NEW ¢ GONG. g1L-�pB WITH IS G�lo-lo I' I � rc rr � PROVIDE WALL PUTE � � PVC 'SLEEVE- V4RIFY ZONI I-I Ca _ MCA �. G E�Af_.I� �wT1'�" � 'EXISTING ❑bOTING I WwP OVER oOC'VI5ci3uEBN VAPOR BARRIER. e m W F, - n' x t/2" x n' ® EACH .LENGTH 6 EKRC L'OQATION IN - tD W �.wrJ I- L-I w ,g P _ ENo OF LINTEL c NN7RACTQRECF1, 'd FLED ISSUED DRRWINGS TO METRO ONE _mMPA61eD CRUSHED S'(bNe¢THK BP SP - �' '" L-- J : a W -- ~-_- � OUTLINE OF CABLE ` 8a- ' INSIDE QUIP 1, EVIEWEOR RND RPPROVECREVIEWED B7 JGR1 TRAY IN DE E Ej PR ROOM " t R ' I � h \\� i REVISIONS RE IEWED FIND APPROVED B7 JCR . ANT CFIBF,ES3 IN&TFI_ l�2 IID CHECKED BY EQUIPM`°ANT BUILDING C �COa�a SECTION - Ilf - ' DETAIL THRU NEW LINTEL - \��{ / 3 ��e�E ENTRY DTL :' oaTE u . - ��.��, ^ 'kY,,--,' ,: SCA E .NONE JUENGERT GRUTZMRCHER RSBDCIRTEB, P.R. A"I S /ALE: 3 J _ I ,.-o• I ' r� , .4:,r',s' m • �`h"".•.me. J o\\\��IVVV ,'RS KNAPP CO ' 0 FEECU_ I I"ra FJD. Iz2A1"l __ w / Wa-fE"¢fRa=F SaFrY 6W a b51LNb lZo • tMANI E¢UiV. w OIIIB SUi i'li'U9UID R\-%, �>-`FRIaEFAN7- P-IPMc+-- \ N 2 14 aALON `'°AMY 1r W u P -�"IT - FFIL, �eC 01A Pa ie I H UTILi Co. REQu12O.2NT5 i3 of YYY��� Q'k25oMQ-1 IN COHo m 2 3 To OTT CONTgaL iJi uuCeR4XuuD SFRulce - 0TH E24 a - - ----- --�.' Z I'1- - -- - - - 2G0 t V.I .F. Q _ D1 O ® O MI LoCATuoN PLAN AILI A"AlF 4e 4-- MoONT SCALE: No Scale _ �A. 1 _ 21 AFF � 4'0"uG - c d- 3 Q ® O ® IiuTivi OcK MOT010iZEO 7YT� `0 DANI'LR 'WITA EF-1 s fGS S I I - -LOW LEAzA4E MO'DRaEA v - -- - -- --___- / VAMPEI2 - 24"x 24" -- - 6 �iII x24" FARR 30/'0 --�-- w '6(T6R1o'R WALL-} �FWM125 IN FILTER FRAME - _o , N 7 B 2 2$''x24"INTAIZE _ _ NOT J.i µ/ITN L¢OUVER "lall -- J -- IOFT '3012 PAY 5LAc'Ie ^.IOpEL E`L"¢ 0 Q ✓ �_9 N/5 UN'rrt7lor ro, G 9 I A `(� AS �i J l0 4{6 MAcKE --- �PPE¢2J a o a I LPA-I - o r _s 2''0" 5'_0 2''a a� - L -I - _ 224'•G a o f --TT'0 UTILITY Ml VA C RL=A N SCALE '/4" Ml, ¢� U u M �R � � O L � SCALE: 1�4. 1 42 �� A � P� � � SCALE: '/4"= 1' - 01' E ECTRR CAL R�SER D�AGRAM of u - SCALE: Y10 SCALE Id HVRC SPECIFICATIONS HVRC EQUIPMENT ELECTRICOL�� SPECIEICRTIONS ?11L SCHEDULE � > VOLT- ❑REAKERS �. 1. Install a HVRC system as shown on the Drawings, as RH-1 Trane model no. TWE 090 R3 air handler (MER #49-86-E) 1. Provide a complete electrical system as shown on 13. Wiring Devices: MOUNTLUGS RGE PH WIRE OTT TRIP POLE! NO SIZE en SERVED J specified herein, and as needed for a complete and cobling capacity: 88,000 BTU/hr Drawings, as specified herein, and as needed for a a. Wall switches' shell be specification glade, u❑i O ' proper installation. sensible capacity: 62.000 BTU/hr complete ,and proper installation. heav duty, L L listed 20 am 120/277 Vac. xn 3°R 2 20 I 2 12 LIG )711JG indoor air flow: 3,000 GEM Y y' p' �d 2. Contractor shell obtain and e for all licenses end 2. RI work - shall conform to the National Electrical I. Bryant #4901 single pole, #4903 3 way. V pay motor: 1 1/2 HP N permits required. Code, all local *codes and ordinances, 2. Hubbell: 41221 single pole, #1223 3 'way. AMP 3P MAIN BREAKER I 2 12 E9'I-( /EMER LIGHTINGp R system KW: 10.23 KW electrical: 208/231J V., 3PH b. Duplex receptacles, 20 amp. 125 volts,3. Contractor shall do all cutting, coredrilling, and 3. Contractor' shall obtain and pay for all licenses 3 pole grounding type, specification ' grade 20 1 2 12 IZEcp�(-ArL�jJatchin re uired. Include: 1. Discharge plenum d grills u1 Q patching q 2. Return air grills and permits required. heavy duty. o � 4. Contractor shall provide a (1) one year warranty on al 3. Sub base 4. Contractor shall do all cutting, coredrilling, 1. Bryant: #5242 20 I 2 12 IA AN CouTl2ol pAN , F 2. General Electric: 44050 or #4060. a 0 w labor and materials. 4. Vibration isolators and chasing required. F 1` 5. FARR 30/30 2" filters c. Plates shall be herd plastic with finish as 4 20 Z 3 2 oR P/5 UIJITZ m W Q 5. HVRC system shell be installed in accordance with BOCR 6. Single point electrical entry 5. RII conduits passing through floors, demising specified. by the Architect. Furnish gang F Basic National Code Requirements, and Landlord/Tenant 7. 11.25 KW electric heat module partitions, roof, etc, shall be sealed with UL plates to cover, all ganged devices.• 1 15 1 2 12 F-F-I " lease documents. 8. Honeywell no. T874 heating/cooling listed sealant. 14. Branch clrcuite panels: I Ga 3 3 C. AN- 1 6. Insulation thermostat 6 auto on-off subbase. 6. RII materials shall be UL listed. a. Branch circuit -panels shall be 3 phase, 4 N m Z a. General wire, using copper bussing with bolt-on CU 1 Trane mod no. TTR D90 R3 condens'g unit(MEFI 450 86 E) -type 6v 3 a C_ CU- I m a CZ 1. Provide materials coin in with NEER Bulletin 7. Provide all temporary lights and power required For b., Provide directory with• transparent cover and _ PY gg electrical: 208/230 V., 3PF � 90-R, as determined by UL method NFPR 225-RSTM Include: 1. Low ambient head pressure control each trade. and typewritten lists cf circ'Olts. ' 6 20 I - - 5PAIZEg z � \ n E84, and complying with ,the governing code, with 2. Time delayrely 8. Contractor' shall U Y provide e' one (ll year warranty on c. Mount anal max. 6' 6" from ,floor. to to flame spread rating under 25 and smoke 3. Anti short cycle timer all labor and materiels. p p 14 - - - - C,P, SpAc'Eg o 3 developed rating under 50. circuit breaker. _ 3 o a p 9 4, Compressor coil guards N I 2. Insulate refrigerant piping with 1/2 inch closed 9. Provide all required sleeves, forms and inserts d. Panel shall be similar to Square D type cell neoprene insulation. EF-1 Penn Ventilator Co, model no, WRO-10 wall, venitilator beford walls or partitions are built, NO08, bolt on. _ ? < N e 7:�_ e Provide isolated ground bus in paned. CZ 270 CFM, @ 0" SP C�+ 7. Piping 10. Grounding shall be in accordance with the National _ o o = a. Refrigerant piping shall be RCR Copper Mount 6' 0" above floor Electrical Code latest edition. 15. RII fuses shall be BUssman "Fusetron" type. 0 2 . Z C-� b. Fittings shall be wrought copper soldered with 95/5 Include back-draft damper 6 disconnect switch • g 9 PP 1/4 HP, 12D Volt, 1 PH 11. Raceways: 1G.' Lighting Fixtures: � V ; m solder. Y Provide fixtures of the type shown on. the LIGHTING FIXTURE SCHEDULE 0 m C. Condensate in shall be Schedule 40 PVC and shall a. Provide electrical metallic tubing or sherardized dwgs, and with the following accessories as W 0 piping steel conduit, with compression or to on type MARK MRNUFRCTURER CATALOG NO. LAMPS LENS MOUNTING REMARKS Z drain to exterior of building. p p YP appllcable. LJ s fittings.. � ; b. RII wiringto be run in conduit, 3/4" min. size. s'. Recessed fixtures:' J , ROBERTS MRNUF. CO. HG U(- 440 4J F40 RS RCRYLI S4RFAC` iY c. Use flexible conduit only for final 1 Provide all unitsss having an attached pull I M u C J box and with UL label. a d connection to recessed lighting fixture. J ROBERTS MRNUF. CO. RR-1 (2) 3.6W 5URFRCE EMER. LT. a 3 b. provide local label in addition if so �i -- - 12. Wire and Cable: required by governmental agencies having v�/ Rol MFNUF. CO. XSR-PP (2) T6 1/2 SURFACE BATTERY PACK 6 n r a. For line voltages, 60D volt insulated copper jurl,sdiction. wire and cable and color coded as required b. Flourescent Fixtures: w C� by governmental agencies having jurisdiction'. 1. Prov,ide ballasts thermally protected against METRO ONE JOB RFSPON TBT TTTFS JNJTTal ISSUED DRAWINGS TO METRO ONE r L J b For wire No. 8 and smaller, provide solid wire, over heetin b built in thermal w g y protectors o for wire larger than No. 8, provide stranded sensitive to ballast Winding temperature and JGA PRODUCT. MGR:Y-AL6X,e ARbI_QF_- � ❑ PRELIMINARY ONLY (JOT REVIEWED BY JGR) R �wire. ' current. ` a / c. Final Conn. to recessed lighting shall be made REAL ESTATE MGRa uu Z 2. Provide protector preventing winding ''sec 4 REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY JGR QQ wwOR with 90 degree C wire rated at 600 volts. temperatures from exceeding 120 degrees CONSTRUCTION MGR; - 11; ''a q v e d. Use only copper wires and Cables, C. mN AIL REVISIONS RE EWEO AND APPROVED BY JGR 0 S �y 4' ❑ e. Feeders: THW, min size #12, Branch ' ' RADIO ENGINEER:e 1k__-W,rrf z-4al /! UJ a °e circuits: Gen. lighting and receptacles, 3. Provide energy saving high' power factor. CHECKED aY ( � u a- m 4 9 9 p CBM, ETL approved type . 'P" ballast, STRUCTURAL ENG:=pNic �� ."� r >0 min 412. DarE 7 i� �� 30 W equal to. General Electric Watt Miser II. JGR SURVEYOR:6u6 K-Q0I Om R P. . H E f. Control wiring: THW, minimum size #14. JUENGERT GRUTZMRCHER RSSOCIRTES. J ' R 5 KNAPP CO o 4V,E�R. Q� MOUNT TO WALL 4" GENERAL MOTES 12. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PATCH, REPAIR AND FINISH ALL WALLS, CEILINGS, W/3/S"0 BOLTS 5wwfTF EL DISK ' P I ., THE SCOPE OF WORD' INCLUDES ALL LABOR, MATERIALS, TOOLS, ETC. , REQUIRED FLOORS AND BRSE AS REQUIRED USING MATCHING MATERIALS. r AsgEMBLY. -0% [POPPER TO COMPLETE THE INTENT OF THE DRAWINGS IMCLUD•ING MECHANICAL AND 13. THE CONTRACTOR IS TO REMOVE AND RELOCATE EXISTING LIGHTING AS PER PLAN, 2" B" 2" D ELECTRICAL WORK. LDING POWER A G B. ALL WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE BUILDING CODES AND HVRC NOTES: yoFO �\ WALL - - -- -- ALL RELEVANT SUBCODES, AS WELL AS APPLICABLE LOCAL ORDINANCES. AUTOMATIC TEMPERATURE CONTROLS J P HOLE _ 1/4 " COPPER � ' , 9 PLATE $ ' .�l 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL THOROUGHLY EXAMINE THE PREMISES AND SHALL BASE HIS A. GENERAL: PROVIDE ELECTRIC TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY CONTROLS AND A FlNISHED GRODNO ROD WELD COST PROPOSAL ON THE E%[STING CONDITIONS, NOTWITHSTANDING ANV RE-WIRED CONTROL CENTER,LD CAVITY INFCRMq?ION BI»OWNOR NOT SHOWNON THE CIBNSTRUCTION PLANS.MOLD (ONE HALF SHOWN) c ° COMP TYPE PARALLEL,TAP' rn 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHHLL CLARIFY WITH OWNER RNV CONFLSCTS BETIWEEN THE A, T.C, MANUFACTURER SHALL FURNISH ALL NECESSARY CONTROL THE WIRING > ND ZAWG BARE f SUPPLE IAENTARY 2xJS CONSTRUCTION PLAN AND EXISTING CONDITIONS OR BETWEEN THE CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS, SUPERVISION OF THE CONTROLS INSTALLATION AND R ONE lU YEARTINNED COPPER SERVICE GUARANTEE OF THE CONTROLS. All wIRE 12 HOLES FOR � 2" PLANS THEMSELVES, PR10P TO SUBMITTAL GF HI5 COST PROPOSAL.-. 3/8"P BOLTS ® NO. 2 STRANDED COPPER WIRE (PERIPHERAL BUS) 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AND PAY FOR COMPREHENSIVE LIABILITY 1 . THE HVAC CONTRACTOR SHALL MOUNT ALL CONTROLS IN OR ON DUCTWORK. ST ' L(NJG STAINLESS THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR, AS PART OF HIS CONTRACT, SHALL INSTALL STEEL GROUND 1 " S SPACES @ 2" 1 ' OB NO. 6 STRANDED COPPER WIRE (UNIT BOND) (vREEnI WI PIE) INSURANCE DANC COVERING- THE ENTIRE WORKRENT LAW COMPENSATION INSURANCE IN ALL WALL MOUNTED CONTROLS, THE CONTROL CENTER, THE CONTROL MOTORS 10" TAP (TSB CO "C TAP" CAT. 54730 ACCORDANCE WITH APPLICABLE CURRENT LAWS. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE AND HE SHALL FURNISH AND INSTALL THE NECESSARY WIRE AND CONDUIT FINISHED TEE GROUND WIRE TAP WELD 1 ,_0„ - © CRIMP TYPE PARALLEL r•Fc FULL CHARGE OF THE 'WORK LMTIL COMPLETION AND SHALL BEAR RESPONSIBILITY FOR FOR PROPER TV WHICH M4Y BE DAMAGED OR STOLEN WHILE THIS WORK IS IN FOR ALL OF THE CONTROLS. THE HVRC CONTRACTOR AND THE ELECTRICAL PROGRESS, INCLUDING STORED MATERIALS. FORM OF INSURANCE MENTIONED CONTRACTOR AS PART OF THEIR CONTRACTS, SHALL PROVIDE THE NECESSARY I DETAIL O TSB CO "TY-RAP" CAT 50 405A STANDOFF ABOVE SHALL BE ACCEPTABLE TO OWNER. MANPOWER TO ASSIST THE A.T.C. MANUFACTURER TO CHECK-OUT AND w T' TYPICAL GROUND ROD TO CABLE CONNECTION 0.190-32 x3/8" RHM SCREW START-UP THE CONTROL SYSTEMS. e GROUND B A R PLATE G E T A I L "C 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INITIATE, MAINTAIN AND SUPERVISE ALL SAFETY PRECAUTIONS T'0 PROTECT THE BUILDING AND ITS OCCUPANTS IN CONNECTION 2. ALL CONTROLS MUST BE PROVIDED BY A DIRECT FACTORY SALES OFFICE OR SALES REPRESENTATIVE. DISTRIBUTORS, DEALERS AND WHOLESALERS OF S PEc•r 4 REQUIRED - NOT TO SCALE F 46323 DR. U.S. EXPANSION BOLT CO "TAP-IT" CAT. NO. WITH THE WORK, KEEPING THE BUILDING WEOTHERTIGHT, PROVIDING DUST CONTROL PRODUCTS SHALL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE. 12 963250 PROTECTIDN. FOR THE EXISTING PORTION OF THE BUILDING, ERECTING AND SCREW INSULATED MECHANICAL PIPE © TSB "TY-RAP" CAT TC-15 CABLE TIE MAINTAINING ALL BARRICADES, SHORING ONO BRACING. ° RJO 4,. LINES TO CONDENSING UNIT ALL CONTRDL DAMPERS SHALL BE OF THE OPPOSED BLADE TYPE WITH BLADE z Q EDGE AND SIDE SEALS. ALL CONTROL MOTORS SHALL BE OF THE SPRING d (LI 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PROTECTION TO ALL EXISTING FINISHES IN CLOSING, OIL IMMERSED, GEAR DRIVE TYPE. ALL ROOM THERMOSTATS l �TYPILAL IJ7TACLATIOFJ INTE%IUR HIM SHALL BE WITHOUT THERMOMETERS. Y � O PUBLIC AREAS RNO 5HRLL BE RESP[1NSI BCE 70 REPAIR ANV DAMAGES CAUSED BV 61ECI G�iR1/J0 GABLE P>US #21N�UL. ���I-AN, COPPER QQ F N. P. S. S. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE WITH OWNER DURING CONSTRUCTION, THE B. PRE-WIRED CONTROL CENTER; PROVIDE A PRE-WIRED CONTROL CENTER TO BE F- Ina W LOCATED IN THE EQUIPMENT ROOM AND SHALL BE TOTALLY ENCLOSED, 'm 2'-O"LONG . 6"o PVC, FINISH STEEL CHANNEL LAYOUT OF ALL PARTITIONS, CEILING GRID, LIGHT FIXTURES AND DI RECEPTACLES PLO& q'EPIIN CONSTRUCTED OF CODE GAGE STEEL WITH HINGED LOCKING DOOR AND GREY PAINT N FINISHED IN DARK BRONZE "PVC PIPE /AIR W1R1N� OBTaIPII PIG APPROVAL =pR THE SAME BEFORE' PRO[EEDING. (2 COATS) SECURED TO B" RAOVS MIW1\ \•��. \ \ FINISH. THE CENTER SHALL HOUSE THE REQUIRED NUMBERED TERMINAL STRIPS, - WALL FACE W/ 1/4"0 (2 CU(LUES PER RELAYS, LOW VOLTAGE TRANSFORMER, LOW VOLTAGE OVERHEAD BREAKER, AND p y = CONFUIT MAXIMUM) \ 9. THE CONTRRCTO�9 SHALL SUBMIT SPECIFICATION SHEETS FOR ANY PROPOSED ANCHOR BOLTS @ 2 '-0" O .C . 2'MP% DOOR MOUMTED THERMOSTATS AND HUMIDISTATS. 1�rp 0 , \ \ MATERIAL OR EQUIPMENT SUBSTITUTIONS TO OWNER FOR APPROVAL IPRIOR TO Y1 ) V fj_ - PURCHASE. - E > 12 GA . STEEL PLATE \\ ;\, ��\ C. SPACE TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY CONTROLS, PROVIDE THERMOSTATS AND CADWELD FINISHED IN CARK BRONZE (2 COATS[ l0. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT P COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION SCHEDUI'LE WITH HIS HUMIDISTATS TO MAINTAIN[ CONDITION IN THE EQUIPMENT ROOM. #ZAWG BARE TINNED (2 SECTIONS IN RERT ICRL _ IV-° COST PROPOSAL TO OWNER. r F J SOLID COPPER WIRE GROUND ROD DIMENSION) SECURED TO \ _ THE ELECTRIC HEAT COIL SHALL REMAIN IN OFF, CONDENSING UNIT SHALL Z CHANNELS W/ 1/4" \\,. 11. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND SOB CONDIT ICONS PRIOR TO REMAIN OFF AND THE OUTDOOR AIR INTAKE DAMPER SHALL REMAIN CLOSED WHEN W W S ROUND HEAD TO BOLTS ,\ � THE AIR HANDLING FAN IS NOT RUNNING. @ 2 '-0" OC . CONSTRUCTION AND SHALL REPORT TO OWNER, ANY DISCREPANCIES OR OMISSIONS 41 ,DR� EXTERIOR WHICH WOULD INTERFERE WITH SATISFACTORY £DMPLET ION OF THE 4WORK. C J PVC PIPE PROVIDE MANUAL RESET TYPE SUPPLY AIR (200 DEG. F. ) AND RETURN AIR ( 125 TYPICAL DETA I L CONDENSCR L I NE TO EXTEND DEG, F. ) FIRESTATS TO STOP THE SUPPLY AIR FAN, - 18° fpELOW G(%ADE 12. ALL WORK IS TO CONFORM IJ[_TH THE OWNER'S DRAWINGS AND SPECIiF ICPTIONB. UPON DEMAND FOR SPACE HEATING, A TWO STAGE HEATING THERMOSTAT (60 DEG. GROUND RING INSPECTION SLEEVE PROTECTIVE COVERING 3. ALL WORK SHALL BE GUARANTEED FOR A'PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER DATE ❑F r p 'q' THE SUPPLY A F. r SHALL ENERGIZE AIR FAN AND CONTROL THE ELECTRIC HEAT SCALE : 1 1/2 1 '-0" e p E T A I L FINAL ACCEPTANCE BY OWNER. N N N SRaI " = A,I COIL IN TWO STAGES, UPON DEMAND FOR COOLING, THE COOLING THERMOSTAT a 14. ALL DEBRIS AND DIPT SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE BUILDING AND SITE (76 DEG. F. ) SHALL ENERGIZE THE CONDENSING UNIT. UPON DEMAND FOR x PERIODICALLY THROUGHOUT DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTIDN. NO ACCUMULATION DEHUMIDIFICATION, THE HUMIDIS7AT (50%) ONLY, THE COOLING THERMOSTAT (76 NOTE: OF DEBRIS WILL BE TOLERATED. THE SPACE SHALL BE LEFT BROOM SWEPT. DEG. F. ) SHALL BE ABLE TO ENIERGIZE THE ELECTRIC HEAT COIL IN TWO STAGES p S/I6 OR TO FAC(LITIATE CRIMPING OF WIRES TO (A), STP,AP (F) EACH 5'.EB-CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS OWN CLEAN UP. TO PROVIDE THE REQUIRED REHEAT. . IN (R), (D), SHALL BE INSTALLED IN POSITION CFI ) UNTIL ALL CRIMPS (E) FOR (J) ARE MADE, THEN ADJUSTED TO POSITION (F2). 15. THE CONTRACTDR SHALL OBTAIN AND PAY FOR, ALL. PERMITS AND ARRANGE FOR A TIMER SHALL ENERGIZE THE EQUIPMENT ROOM EXHAUST FAN, ENERGIZE THE 0, F F w (N) REDUIRED INSPECTIONS. - SUPPLY AIR FAN AND OPEN THE MOTORIZED OUTDOOR AIR INTAKE DAMPER FOR TEN o 0 0 0 LEGEND MINUTES OUT OF EVERY HOUR, OTHERWISE, THE DAMPER SHALL REMAIN CLOSED ® (A) H0.2 AWG ------ BARE STRANDED (OPPEq VIBE 16. DRAWINGS ARE NOT TO HE SCALED. AND TIE SUPPLY RIR FAN SHALL BE ENERGIZED UPON DEMAND FOR COOL DIG (76 z(GIB PER RHCflAL BUS) k -- ( DEG, . ) , DEHUMIDIFICATION f50%) OR HEATING (60 DEG. R. I . _ , _ (B) NO.6 AWG GREEN INSULATED STRANDED COPPER WIRE 17. PROVIDE BI'7 .RS PER DRAWINGS. ANY ALTERNATE PRODUCT EUUAL OR BETTER IN u (FI ) (UNIT BOND) QUAL14`! E,HALL BE PROVIDED AS SEPARATE BID. ALL SUBSTITUTIONS SHALL BE EL ECTRICAt• SERVICE NOTES: - APPROVED .BY OWNER, z EE SK A, (E) (C) CRIMP TYFE PARALLEL TAP (T)B CO "C TAP" CAT F OTC A (D) S1770 TTPI GL - 1 . THE EECTR ICRL CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN FROM THE LOCAL UTILITY POWER AND Ma o (D) DRYWALL (ILLUSTRATED).), CON`R[T[, BRICK OR M 18. ALL SHOP ,ORAWING5 SHALL BE APPROVED BY OWNER. LIGHT,FOMPANV, THEIR FAULT CURRENT SHORT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTION CAPACITY OTHER WALL MATE PER o 3 ? N (C) �I - _ _ FOfl BUILDING SECONDARY SERVICE REOU IREMENTI ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR > / (C) I % 2 V000 SLCCPCR 9' x'Fq FLOOR (TYPICAL 19, REFRIGERANT SUCTION PIPING SHALL BE INSULATED WITH 1/2" THIICKNES'S SHALL COORDINATE HIS WORK WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE UTILITY POWER a u z A -� / � / / FOR DRYWALL) f I CLOSED CELL NEOPRENE INSULATION WITH ALL BUTT JOINTS AND LIONGITUDINAL AND IIDHT COMPANY BY ADJUSTING, FURNISHING, AND INSTALLING CODE SIZE ¢ W u u (F) TAB IN TY-RAP' CAT TC-IS I�C(2) TIE OR EQUIVALENT JOINTS 'JOTMED WITH ADHESIVE. INSULATION SHALL BE MANUFACTURED BY CIRCCIT BREAKER AND/OR SWITCH AND FUSE (TO ASCERTAIN THE REQUIRED SHORT • (J) , (I ) IN Insi ALIT NG POSITION oN (2) IN FINAL POSITION DN RUBR7EX, CIRCUIT PROTECTION TO ALL EQUIPMENT) , OF THE ADEQUATE FRAME SIZES TO - IN) (G) TAB CO 'TY-PAP" CAT SO-105A'STANDOFF OR 6 EQUIVALENT HANDLE POWER COMPANY'S FAULT CURRENT INTERRUPTING CAPACITY (H) F.,68625 RHM SCREW t,1\\ 20. AIR CONDITIONING, EXHAUST FAN AND DAMPER WIRING SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE REQUIREMENTS. (ALL FUSES SHALL BE CURRENT LIMITING HIGH INTERRUPTING III I� O J 2 (F2) (G) (9) (J) U.S. EXPANSION BOLT CO "TIP-IT' CAT. NO Ifi7250 \ WITH MANUFACTURER'S SHOP DRAWINGS. _ TYPE). „3„ NYLON FASTENER OR EQUIVALENT - { C (A1 \ 21 . Cr_NTROI.S SHALL BE WIPED BY ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR IN ACCORDANCE TO 2• THE ELECTRICAL POWER AND LIGHTING SYSTEM HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO 2 ° Fig. 4-Wall Support Assembly for Peripheral Bus MANUFACTURER'S SHOP DRAWINGS. ACCOMMODATE A 120/208 VOLT 3-PHASE 4 WIRE-60 HERTZ SECONDARY ¢ cn Q ' DISTRIBUTION "THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT. O S K A 22. CONNECT EMERGENCY BATTERY PACK/LIGHT TO LIGHTING CIRCUIT AIHEAD OF ALL J P/+�Lyf1 R LCCAL SWITCHING, 3. IF THE LOCAL UTILITY POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY DESIGNATES ANOTHER VOLTAGE W �TYPI GA L WA L L 50 PP_D RT A155 EI L� SECONDARY HEDISTHIBUTION NSIB SYSTEM OTHER THAN THE SYSTEM AS DESIGNED - IT N w 1 23, HVRC FAN TO. SHUT DOWN WHEN SMOKE DETECTORS ACTIVATE. SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN ALL , I - REQUIREMENTS NECESSARY TO FURNISH AND PROVIDE THE BUILDING (PROJECT IN w Lo J °AEC [ -IN.(• T S. 24. COORDINATE ELECTRIC SERVICE REQUIREMENTS - 120/208V, 10, 31W, 200 AMP TOTAL') WITH POWER AND LIGHT DISTRIBUTION BY PRNELBOARD ADJUSTMENTS III N I.- AND METERING WITH BUILDING OWNER AND UTILITY COMPANY. INCLIUSIVELY, itz I- W DEMOLITION NOTE (WHEN APPLICABLE) ; 4, IF INCOMING SERVICE FEEDERS ARE RUN AND GROUNDED BY UTILITY POWER AND I'- Q LIGHT COMPANY, THEN ELECTRICAL CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH AND INSTALL ALL .� 1 . THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE HELD TOTALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DEMOLITION, NECESSARY CONDUITS BETWEEN METER AND UTILITY COMPANY TRANSFORMER. n THIS DRAWING .IS ONLY A GRAPHIC REPRESENTATION OF THE EXTENT OF DEMOLITION AND SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED AS THE TOTAL DEMOLITION REQUIRED GROUNDING NOTES: 12 Q s TO SATISFY THIS CONTRACT. DEMOLITION IS TO BE COORDINATED WITH OWNER FOR 1TEM9 _N(DT IMPLIED OR SPECIFIED ON DRAWINGS. 1 . ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXTERIOR GROUND RING TO BE WELDED STEEL TO STEEL OR ¢ r _ - CA)WELDED• Cl V J aI " 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE AND MAKE HIS OWN ESTIMATION OF THE 11 EXTENT OF THE DEMOLITION WORK REQUIRED TO COMPLETELY REMOVE THE WORK AS 2. ALL CONNECTIONS TO EXTERIOR RING T❑ BE MADE RT MID-SPAN BETWEEN GROUND D = INDICATED aN THE DRAWINGS, ROOS. 3, ALL MATERIALS FORMING A PERMANENT PORT OF THE WORK. TO BE DEMOLISHED 3. GROUND ALL METALLIC PIPES/ SERVICES ENTERING THE BUILDING AND ANY METAL ° UNDER THIS. CONTRACT SHALL 'OUNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED) BECOME THE FENCES, STAIR RR'LS, ETC. , WITHIN 6 FEET OF BUILDING. ° Z LJL_j PROPERTY OF THE CONTRACTOR AND SHALL BE COMPLETELY REMOVED FROM THE o SITE BYHIM,qT HIS OWN COST 4, UNSTWU AND EXPENSE. T CABLE RACK FROM ANTENNA TO BUILDING (FURNISHED BY OTHERS) TO � k4o BE GROUNDED TO EXTERIOR GROUND RING WITH #2 AWG BARE TINNED COPPER4. THE WORK OF DEMOLISHING THE WALLS SHALL BE CARRIED ON IN R MANNER THAT GROUND BY THIS CONTRACTOR. OWELL IMF R f a .U. E ADJACENT AREAS AGAINST ANY DAMAGES WHICH MIGHT OCCUR FROM I O ' FALLING DEBRIS OR OTHER CAUSE ANO 50 PS NOT TO INTERFERE WITH THE USE S. ALL EXTERIOR GROUND RING WIRE TO BE #2 AWG TINNED COPPER WIRE. C] I OF ADJACENT AREAS OR THE FREE AND-.SAFE PASSAGE TO AND FROM THE SAME. 6. P-L GROUNDING WORK TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 250 OF THE NEC-1934 (1_, ° : O 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR AT HIS 'OWN EXPENSE ANY DAMAGE DONE TO EDITION. C1 PROPERTI"OF THE OWNER OR THE LANDLORD, RND ANY OTHER PERSON OR PERSONS `oQ ON OR OFF THE PREMISES BY REASON OF THE CONTRACTOR'S WORK HEREUNDER. 7. -QUIPMENT RACKS AND BATTERY RACKS BY OTHERS. FINAL CONNECTIONS TO THIS EQUIFMENT BY OTHERS. 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL•PROVIDE A DUST CURTAIN AROUND STRUCTURES BEING : DEMOLISHED AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS TO SAFEGUARD THE PUBLIC FROMB. ALL GROUNDING TO INTERIOR GROU ➢ U N RING BY OTHERS. MOTOROLR 15 a INJURY. RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL GROUNDING . ___H OF MOTOROLP SUPPLIED/ INSTALLED - EQUIPMENT. 3 ° F ' 7. NO ACCUMULR.7IDN OF DEBRIS DR DEMOLISHED MATERIALS WILL BE PERMITTED, IF/---ll S. UPON COMPLETION OF THE WORK UNDER THIS DIVISION, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL TOOLS AND MATERIALS, PLANT APPARATUS AND TOOL SHEDS, AND W r L1 J - I� NS'N911 ?TTFS TNTTjgI RUBBISH OF EVERY SORT AND LEAVE THE PREMISES CLEAN, KEPT AND ORDERLY TO ISSUED DRAWINGS TO METRO ONE ' a- THE ENTIRE SATISFACTION OF THE OWNER. :' 11 Jf JGR 'PRODUCT. MGR A C1AI�.BONE PRELIMINARY ONLY (NOT REVIEWED BY JGR) E F I . A iIl) rl 9. ALL. WORK UNDER THIS DIVISION SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND CITY LAWS REAL ESTATE, MDR: Y U 'LPTZI1vI6R P/ AND CODES WITH ALL FROMULGRTIONS OF PUBLIC BODIES HAVING JURISDICTION. REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY CONSTRUCTION MGR• _ 'f '��.' I0. ALL GEMOLITION SHALL BE' DONE DURING HOURS ACCEPTABLE BY THE MALL. THE ❑ a� mN' I REVISIONS VIEWED AND APPROVED BY JGR �A' 0 � 61- IQ,y 'VWTI'TE 'a-4 CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING MANAGER TO COORDINATE DEBRIS ° RpC1I0 ENGINEER 0 REMOVAL AND OELIVERSES. 5TRUCTURRL ENG TS 6PWI CHECKED BY 14 11 . THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS TO MAINTAIN[ FREE ACCESS FOR DATE LILj JGF�' SURVEYOR; 6Nfe 8\°[WEER _ 1p' RLL TENANTG, SERVICE PERSONNEL AND THE PUBLIC THROUGH THE AREAS M 'fLAIP_� INVOLVED. ' �p I! INVOLVED. ' , JUENGERT GRUTZMRCHER ASSOCIATES, P.R. D �nn I R 5 KNAPP CO SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d b a METRO ONE, Petitioner, For a Judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR VERIFIED ANSWER TO PETITION -against- Index No. 91-16060 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR., SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, JR., Constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondents. TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK: Respondents, Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals, by their attorney, Harvey A. Arnoff answering the petition as follows: 1 . Deny each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs designated 23 and 24 of the petition. 2. Deny knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraphs designated 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8 of the petition. 3. Deny each and every allegation set forth in paragraph 20, except admit that the record speaks for itself. 4. Deny each and every allegation set forth in paragraphs designated 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, except admit that the documents referred to in each paragraph speak for themselves. WHEREFORE the respondents pray for an order dismissing the petition in its entirety together with cost and disbursements of this proceeding. Dated: Southold, New York October 22, 1991 Harvey A. Arnoff Attorney for Respondents 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 1516) 765-1800 TO: William D. Moore, Esq. Attorney for Petitioner 315 Westphalia Avenue P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 (516) 298-5674 -2- VERIFICATION STATE OF NEW YORK) ss: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman of the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I am the Chairman of the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals, and I have read the foregoing Answer to the petition and know the contents thereof; that the same is true to my knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe to be true. Gerard P. Goehringer Sworn to before me this day of October, 1991 . Notary Public SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE, Petitioner, For a Judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR AFFIDAVIT IN OPPOSITION -against- Index No. 91-16060 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR., SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, JR., Constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondents. STATE OF NEW YORK) ss: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Gerard P. Goehringer, being duly sworn, deposes and states as follows: 1 . 1 am the Chairman of the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals, the respondent in the above-captioned proceeding. As such, I am fully familiar with the facts and circumstances surrounding this petition and I am submitting this affidavit in opposition to the verified petition. 2. The determination of our Board on application 4022, which was rendered on July 25, 1991, denied the application. A copy of that determination is annexed hereto as Exhibit "A". 3. The Court should be made aware, at the onset, that the Board does and did not take issue with the fact that the petitioner is, in fact, a public utility. Notwithstanding that, however, although the application herein is one which is in part discretionary, it is barred by our Town Code. 4. Petitioners reliance on the fact that they have met the criteria for the granting of a special exception is, at best, naive. The subject premises referred to in the moving papers, upon which our Board made a determination, are zoned Limited Business (LB) . Petitioner is correct in the analysis that by direct reference in our Code the following use is permitted by special exception: "Public utility rights-of-way, as well as structures and other installation necessary to serve areas within the Town, subject to such conditions as the Board of Appeals may oppose in order to protect and promote the health, safety, appearance and general welfare of the community and the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed." (Section 100-31B(6) ). 5. The position of our Board can be summarized as being a two-fold one. The first is that the zone referred to does not permit the use requested, and that certain other zones such as Light-Industrial do. Special exception reference to the LI Zone is as follows: 100-101B(4) Public Utilities structures and uses. 6. It is clear from a reading of both ordinances that the Town intended to promulgate rules and regulations which were different for each zone so designated. In accordance with paragraph 5 of our decision, annexed hereto as Exhibit "A", the .Board clearly indicated the necessity to maintain open rural environmental areas within the low-density residential zones as well as the limited business zone district so as to make same "consistent with the rural and historic character of surrounding areas and uses. . ." -2- 7. It is submitted that this application is not one for a "public utility right-of-way" nor is it one for a "structure and other installation necessary to serve areas within the Town." Rather, it is submitted, it is in fact an application for a commercial structure and use, to wit: a transmission tower. 8. The respondent, Zoning Board of Appeals, in deliberate and well reasoned fashion, determined that this was not a use permitted by the special exception outlined in Section 100-31B(6) of our Code. 9. It is clear that special exceptions are matters over which the Board of Appeals has original jurisdiction. A special exception is one which has been held to be "allowable when the facts and conditions specified in the ordinance as those upon which the exception is permitted, are found to exist." Syosset Holding Corp. v. Schlimm 15 Misc 2nd 10, 159 NYS2nd 88 ( 1956) . A special exception, it was held in the above-cited case, unlike a variance, does not involve the varying of an ordinance but rather compliance with it. 10. The intended use herein is clearly going to be a commercial telecommunications activity, and it is not consistent with the purpose and intent of Section 100-36B(6). [Incidentally the determination by the Board involved a typographical error referring to Section 100-301316) rather than 100-361316)] . The granting of this special exception permit would, it is submitted, be inconsistent with the character of the immediate area and the spirit and intent of the Master Plan of the Town of Southold. 11 . The Board in its consideration ascertained that there were zones within the Town to permit this type of use (transmission tower) and that the commercial use intended by the application could not be authorized by special exception under the current Zoning Code of the Town of Southold in an LB Zone. -3- 12. It is respectfully submitted that the determination of the Board, annexed hereto as Exhibit "A" is neither arbitrary nor capricious, but rather, represents a clear and concise determination after an in-depth factual analysis of the information given to the Board and the Law as applied thereto. The use as requested herein was not one which was specifically designated in the ordinance itself as being conditionally allowed. 13. Wherefore it is respectfully prayed that the court deny this application in its entirety. Gerard P. Goehringer Sworn to before me this day of October, 1991 Notary Public -4- APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Srr?(;{ ''- SCOTT L.HARRIS .�' �� Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. `2 " Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. " R Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CERTIFICATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Attached is a complete set of photocopies (#1-310) of the record under ZBA No. 4022 concerning the Board's decision rendered on July 25, 1991 and filed with the Town Clerk' s Office on August 8, 1991. I hereby certify that I have compared these copies with the original file and find them to be a true and accurate reproduction of same. Dated: September 9, 1991. dada F. Kowalski, Secretary Southold Town Board of Appeals APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr. u Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. ? Robert A.Villa ' Southold,New York 11971 9� *va Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 ° Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CERTIFICATION TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Attached is a complete set of photocopies ( #1-37) of the record under ZBA No. 4023 concerning a pending application for a height variance/interpretation, which has to date not been heard or determined (as agreed due to the effects of the Board' s determination rendered under Appl. no. 4022 for the same premises dismissing the Special Exception application) . I hereby certify that I have compared these copies with the original file and find them to be a true and accurate reproduction of same. Dated: September 9, 1991. Linda F. Kowalski, Secretary Southold Town Board of Appeals APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS `' 'j1,i,' ,�j O Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman �'' h Charles Grigonis,Jr. Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. " } P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 r Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM TO: Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Harvey A. Arnoff, Town Attorney Matthew J. Kiernan, Asst. Town Attorney FROM: Jerry Goehringer, ZBA Chairman DATE: September 6, 1991 SUBJECT: Cellular Telephone Company (as Lessee) v. ZBA Premises owned by William J. Baxter at Mattituck Please find attached copies of the Notice of Petition, Petition and R.J.I . which was expected and which was served upon Charles Grigonis at his home yesterday afternoon. Extra copies are attached for distribution to the Town Board members, the Town' s insurance carrier, and for you. In the interim, we are preparing duplicate sets of our file on both the Special Exception and the height (variance) appeals. Although reference was made to the height variance appeal, the file was held in abeyance pending direction from the property owner' s attorneys. The application was not advertised for a hearing since the interpretation on the Special Exception was not favorable to the applicant. We have -assured Bill Moore, Esq. of this on more than one occasion. It is believed that there is no need to proceed with the variance on the height request at this time, since one is moot without the other. I would be happy to answer any questions that the Town Board may have about the particulars of the ZBA' s determination/inter- pretation of the Special Exception being appealed. 1 J WHIT B REET.N W IOR PUBLISHER B 399—Renueal lnr judicial inlrr,mli"m.13]'1i'nn ZOl.A.6-P0.. ti. 82 WHITE STREET.NEw YORK.N.Y.10013 �. - For Clerk Only Supreme Court, Suffolk County Index No. Full title of action Date Purchased CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a ......_.]As entry date............ IETRO ONE, ........__....._...........assign.....edge..........__. Name of assi ned'ud e REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL . against INTERVENTION Dateof assignment GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, chairman, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, JR. , ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, ❑ Issue joined (date... ....._.............._._... ) (check if applicable) ❑ Bill of particulars served (check if applicable) In the City of New York only: ❑ The City of New York is a party to this action. �* ❑ The Transit Authority (or MAHSTOA)is a party to this action. Res onclent(s) NATURE OF JUDICIAL INTERVENTION (check) ❑ Request for preliminary conference ❑ Other ex parte application Oct 18 1991 ❑ Note of issue and)or certificate of readiness M Notice of petition (return date.. annullneht of zon ngboard__decision ......_...........f..... ❑ Notice of motion(return date __..._._.._._..._...._._.___......_......_........) Relief sought ..... ...._. - Reliefsough[ ..._....___....._....... .................._........_....................._..........._......--- __...... ................................................................................................................................. ........................................._................... ........_.............._................................... _.........._.........._._..... ......_ ...... .____..._. ....__ ..._._..__..._......_.._..... ❑ Notice of medical malpractice action ...... ❑ Order to show cause ❑ Notice of dental malpractice action (Clerk will enter return date _...._..._........... ❑ Statement of net worth Reliefsought ..............._..................................................................................... ❑ Writ of habeas corpus _...._.......-....._.............. ❑ Other(specify): .._.._....__.._........._......................._........ P y):._____........_....._._. .................................................................................................................................. NATURE OF ACTION OR PROCEEDING (check) Tort Special Proceedings ❑ Motor vehicle ❑ Tax certiorari ❑ Medical malpractice ❑ Condemnation ❑ Dental malpractice ❑ Foreclosure ❑ Seaman ❑ Incompetency or conservatorship ❑ Airline Other special proceeding, including but not limited to: ❑ Other tort, including but not limited to personal injury, ❑ Article 75 (arbitration) property damage,slander or libel (specify): ❑ Article 77 (express trusts) ...........................................:...................................................................................... M Article 78 .................................................................................................................................. ❑ Other(specify):............................................................................................ OTHER ACTION ❑ Matrimonial (contested) ❑ Contract ❑ Matrimonial (uncontested) ❑ Other (specify):........................—..................................................................... -Instructions: Attach rider sheets if necessary to provide required information. If any party is appearing pro se (without an attorney), the required information concerning such party is to be entered in the space provided for attorneys. I Attorney(s) for plaintiff(s)/petitioner(s) Name Address Phone Allen M. Smith 737 Roanoke Ave., Riverhead, NY 11901 (516) 727-3947 Moore & Moore 315 Westphalia Ave. , P.O, Box 23, Mattituck, NY 11952 (516) 298-5674 Attorney(s) for defendant(s)/respondent(s) Name Address Phone Harvey Arnoff Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 (516) 765-1800 Name of insurance carriers (if applicable and available) Not applicable RELATED CASES (if none, write"NONE"below) Title Index# Court Nature of relationship "none,, 1 affirm under penalty of perjury that,to my knowledge,other than as noted above,there are and have been no related actions or proceedings,nor has a request for judicial intervention previ us' filed in his action or proceeding. Dated:...9'S�R� _............................................... Moore & Moore sI a re— a na elo ..........................._Attorney .._.. Moore & Moore Office& P.O.Addrm for Petitioner by William D. Moore 315 Westphalia Ave., P.O. "fix 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 � 1, T SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK -------------------------------- x CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a x METRO ONE, x Petitioner, x x NOTICE OF PETITION For a Judgement pursuant to Article x 78 of the CPLR x INDEX NO. x against x ASSIGNED x JUDGE: GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, chairman, x CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, X JR. ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, x JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN x ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, x x Respondent. x ------------------------------- x PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the petition of Cellular Telephone d/b/a Metro One verified the 5th day of September, 1991, the affidavit of Diane Amedeo sworn to the 5th day of September, 1991, and the exhibits and documents attached, copies of which are annexed hereto, an application will be made at an IAS term of the Supreme Court, to be held in and for the County of Suffolk, at the courthouse at Griffing Avenue, Riverhead, New York, on the 18th day of October, 1991 at 9: 30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard for a judgement pursuant to CPLR Article 78, (1) annulling the determination of the respondent zoning board of appeals in decision 4022 ; (2) determining that the petitioner is a public utility; that the criteria for special exception approval have been met and that the proposed radio tower is permitted pursuant to section 230 (D) (1) of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold is exempt from the height limitations of the zoning ordinance as provided for in that section; (3) directing the respondent to issue special exception approval for those property .9 M uses and structures set forth in the petitioner's application and; (4) directing the the respondent to direct the Building Department of the Town of Southold to issue a building permit for construction pursuant to the plans and specifications submitted to the respondent; together with the costs and disbursements of this proceeding and such other and further relief as to the Court is just and proper. Answering affidavits, a certified transcript of the record of the proceedings under consideration, and legal memoranda shall be served at least seven days before such time. Dated: September 5, 1991 Yours, etc. Allen M. Smith, Esq. Attorney for Petitioner 737 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 (516) 727-3947 Moore & Moore Attorneys for Petitioner 315 Westphalia Avenue P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 (516) 298-5674 TO: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK -------------------------------- x CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a x METRO ONE, x Petitioner, x x PETITION For a Judgement pursuant to Article x 78 of the CPLR x INDEX NO. x against x ASSIGNED x JUDGE: GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, chairman, x CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, x JR. ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, x JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN x ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, x x Respondent. x ------------------------------- x TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, SUFFOLK COUNTY: The petition of The Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro one respectfully shows: 1. The Petitioner, Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One (hereinafter Metro One) is a New York partnership formed under the laws of the State of New York with principal offices at 365 West Passaic Street, 5th Floor, Rochelle Park, NJ 07662. 2 . The Petitioner is a public utility company certified by the Public Service Commission of the State of New York pursuant to Section 99 of the Public Service Law. 3. The Petitioner is licensed by the Federal Communications Commission to construct and operate a cellular radio system in the Town of Southold, State of New York. 4. The respondents GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, JR. , ROBERT VILLA, and JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , at all times herein mentioned constituted and still constitute the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS (hereinafter referred to as "Zoning Board") of which the respondent GERARD P. GOEHRINGER is the chairman. 5. This proceeding !iis brought pursuant to Article 78 of New York Civil Practice Law and Rules to challenge the decision of the Zoning Board in Appeal number 4022 which was, upon information and belief rendered July 25, 1991 and filed in the office of the Southold Town Clerk on August 8, 1991, a true copy of which is annexed hereto marked Exhibit "A" . 6. The Petitioner is the lessee of real property located at NYS Route 25 and Elijah Lane, in Mattituck, New York, with the Suffolk County Tax Map Number 1000-108-4-11.3 (Part of 11) . 7. The aforesaid lease is for the purpose of the erection, operation and maintenance of a 104 foot high monopole radio tower with antennaes and an unmanned 20 ft. x 30 ft. concrete building housing electrical equipment. 8. The real property which is the subject of this proceeding is situate on the north side of Route 25 west of Elijah's Lane in Mattituck owned by Gobil, a partnership with offices at 32495 Main Road, Cutchogue, New York. (Lessor) . The Gobil parcel is approximately 2 acres. The lease is for an area approximately 10,000 square feet. The parcel is improved by an existing barn. The lessor through a related entity controls the property south of the proposed tower location. The site conditions are depicted in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. 9. The aforesaid real property at all times alleged herein was zoned by the Town of Southold as a Limited Business (LB) Zone District. 10. At all times alleged herein The Zoning Code of the Town of Southold provided in part that Limited Business (LB) Zone District permitted the following special exception use: S100-e1 B. Uses permitted by special exception by the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as a special exception by the Board of Appeals as hereinafter provided and, except for bed-and-breakfast uses, are subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: (1) Any special exception use as set forth in and regulated by S 100-31D of the Agricultural- conservation District, except wineries are not required to be in connection with a vineyard. 11. At all times alleged herein, Section 100-31B of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold provided in part: 100-31 B. Uses permitted by special exception by the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as hereinafter provided, and, except for the uses set forth in Subsection B(15) hereof, are subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: (6) Public utility rights-of-way as well as structures and other installations necessary to serve areas within the town, subject to such conditions as the Board of Appeals may impose in order to protect and promote the health, safety, appearance and general welfare of the community and the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed. 12. At all times alleged herein Section 100-230(D) (1) of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold provided: t f � r D. Height exceptions. The height limitations of this chapter shall not apply to: (1) Spires, belfries, cupolas and domes not for human occupancy; and monuments, transmission towers, chimneys, derricks, conveyors, flagpoles, radio towers, television towers and television aer�iels, providdd that any television or radio aerial shall not be located nearer than a distance equal to its height above the roof or other permanent structure to which it is attached to any overhead electric transmission line carrying more than two hundred twenty (220) volts. 13 . On or about February 22 , 1991, the Petitioner applied to the Building Department of the Town of Southold to construct, operate and maintain a 104 foot monopole with antennas and support structures on the aforesaid real property of the lessor, a true copy of that application is attached hereto marked Exhibit "C" . 14 . On or about March 13 and March 14, 1991, the Building Department of the Town of Southold by two differenct building inspectors rejected Petitioner's application, true copies of those rejections are attached hereto marked Exhibit "D". 15. On or about March 15, 1991 Petitioner filed an application with the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold in part seeking an interpretation of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold and requesting a special exception permit to construct, operate and maintain the proposed monopole, antennaes, etc. , true copies of which are annexed hereto marked Exhibit "E" . 16. On or about April 16, 1991, the Board of Appeals directed that the aforesaid application should be bifurcated "first to address the issues on the applicability or interpretation under the zoning code for the proposed uses before r proceeding with the height application . . . " a true copy of that direction is attached hereto marked Exhibit "F" . 17 . On April 30, 1991, a public hearing was held before the Board of Appeals on the aforesaid applications of the Petitioner which hearing was held and continued to June 7, 1991 at which time the hearing was closed. 18 . Attached hereto and made a part hereof marked Exhibit "G" are a true copy of the minutes of the Board of Appeals as they relate to the Peitiioner's application heard April 30, 1991 and June 7, 1991. 19. At all times alleged herein, a special exception use by permit of the Zoning Board is regulated by Article XXVI of the Zoning Code and the standards therein to wit: 8 100-263. General standards. No special exception approval shall be granted unless the Board having jurisdiction thereof specifically finds and determines the following: A. That the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacent properties or of properties in adjacent use districts. B. That the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of permitted or legally established uses in the district wherein the proposed use is to be located or of permitted or legally established uses in adjacent use districts. C. That the safety, the health, the welfare, the comfort, the convenience or the order of the town will not be adversely affected by the proposed use and its location. D. That the use will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes and intent of this chapter. E. That the use will be compativle with its surroundings and with the character of the n neighborhood and of the community in general, particularly with regard to visibility, scale and overall appearance. F. That all proposed structures, equipment and material shall be readily accessible for fire and police protection. 8 100-264. Matters do be considered. in making such determination, consideration shall also be given, among other things, to: A. The character of the existing and probable development of uses in the district and the peculiar suitability of such district for the location of any of such permitted uses. H. The conservation of property values and the encouragement of the most appropriate uses of land. C. The effect that the location of the proposed use and the location that entrances and exits may have upon the creation or undue increase of vehicular traffic congestion on public streets, highways or sidewalks to assure the public safety. D. The availability of adequate and proper public or private water supply and facilities for the treatment, removal or discharge of sewage, refuse or other effluent (whether liquid, solid, gaseous or otherwise) that may be caused or created by or as a result of the use. E. Whether the use or the materials incidental thereto or produced threeby may give off obnoxious gases, odors, smoke or soot. F. Whether the use will cuase disturbing emmissions of electrical discharges, dust, light, vibration or noise. G. Whether the operation in pursuance of the use .will cuase undue interference with the orderly enjoyment by the public of parking or of recreational facilities, if existing or if proposed by the town or by other competent governmental agencies. H. The necessity for bituminous-surfaces space for purposes of off-street parking of vehicises incidental to the use and whether such space ' o is reasonably adequate and appropriate and can be furnished by the owner of the plot sought to be used within or adjacent to the plot wherein the use shall be located. I. Whether a hazard to life, limb or property because of fire, flood, erosion or panic may be created by reason of or as a result of the use or by the structures to be used therefor or by the inaccessibility of the property or structures thereon for the convenient entry and operation of fire an other emeregency apparatus or by the undue concentration or assemblage of persons upon such plot. J. Whether the use or the structures to be used therefor will cause an overcrowding of land or undue concentration of population. K. Whether the plot area is sufficient, approporate and adequate for the use and the reasonably anticipated operation and expansion thereof. L. Whether the use to be operated is unreasonably near to a church, school, theater, recreational area or other place of public assembly. M. Whether the site of the proposed use is particulatrly suitable for such use. N. Whether adequate buffer yards and screening can and will be provided to protect adjacent properties and land uses from possible detrimental impacts of the proposed use. 0. Whether adequate provision can and will be made for the collecetion and disposal of stormwater runoff, sewage, refuse and other liquid, solid or gaseous waste which the proposed use will generate. P. Whether the natural characteristics of the site are such that the proposed use may be introduced there without undue disturbance or disruption of important natural features, systems or processes and without risk of pollution to groundwater and surface waters on and off the site. 20. The Petitioner offered proof in support of its application as follows: a) The Petitioner was and is a public utility organized under and licensed by the State of New York (see Exhibit "H") b) The Petitioner is one of two utilities licensed by the FCC to provide cellular mobile communications services within the Town of Southold. c) The location of mobile communication radio towers is dictated by engineering considerations such as the distances between towers, which engineering parameters do not necessarily agree with local zoning codes. d) Limiting towers to "industrial zones" would frustrate the Petitioner's State and Federal charters and licenses. e) Prior similar applications before the Board of Appeals by the Telephone Company were granted (see Exhibit "I") . f) The proposed tower would have no adverse economic effect on the surrounding community (see Exhibit "J") . g) There is no danger to the surrounding properties or to the community by reason of the failure or collapse of the tower. h) Mobile cellular telephone service is required by the local police, fire and ambulance emergency services. i) The proposed tower and support building is screened by surrounding buildings and trees so as to minimize their adverse visual aspects. j) The proposed tower has been licensed by the FAA (see Exhibit "K") . k) The existing structures were used for many years as commerical structures and the proposed use is the only meaningful use proposed for the property in several years. 1) There are no adverse health hazards from this use (see Exhibit 21. No evidence was offered in opposition to Petitioners application. 22. Upon information and belief: a) The Board of Appeals met to consider Petitioners application on July 25, 1991, b) No minutes of the meeting of July 25, 1991 were made, recorded or filed, c) The decision of the Board of Appeals dated July 25, 1991 (Exhibit "A") was drafted at some date thereafter, and d) the members of the Board of Appeals did not have before them the full text of the decision on July 25, 1991. 23 . The actions and determinations of the Zoning Board of Appeals was and is unsupported by substantial evidence, none of which was controverted except by the Board itself, and was and is illegal, arbitrary, capricious, improper, unwarranted, an abuse of discretion and a demonstration of gross negligence and bad faith in that: a. Petitioner is a public utility and the proposed use is a special exception use in the proposed location pursuant to the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold as a matter of law. C b. Pursuant to the standards set forth in the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold for special exception uses, the proposed use must be granted in that all applicable standards have been met by the Petitioner. C. The Respondents'' interpretation of the zoning ordinance restricting the proposed use to the Light Industrial Office (LIO) and Light Industrial (LI) zoning use districts is in error in that the proposed use is not listed as a permitted or special exception use in those zones other than as a public utility. d. The Petitioner was entitled to a single hearing on all aspects of its application and no statutory authority exists for the procedure adopted in this instance. e. The meeting of July 25, 1991 and the action taken at that meeting were in violation of the provisions of the Town Law and Public Officers Law. f. The actions and determination of the Zoning Board of Appeals is void and of no effect in that the effect of the Board's determination is to nullify the decisions and licenses granted by the Public Service Commission and Federal Communications Commission contrary to the laws of the State of New York and the laws of the United States and the constitutions of the State of New York and the United States. 24. The Petitioner has no adequate remedy at law, and no previous application for this relief or similar relief has ever been made. WHEREFORE, petitioner prays that a judgement and order be granted: (1) annulling the determination of the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals in decision 4022 ; (2) determining that the Petitioner is a public utility; that the criteria for special exception approval have been met and that the proposed radio tower is permitted pursuant to section 230(D) (1) of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold and is exempt from the height limitations of the zoning ordinance as provided for in that section; (3) directing the Respondent to issue special exception approval for those property uses and structures set forth in the Petitioner' s application and; (4) directing the Respondent to direct the Building Department of the Town of Southold to issue a building permit for construction pursuant to the plans and specifications submitted to the respondent; together with the costs and disbursements of this proceeding and such other and further relief as to the Court is just and proper. CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE BY: Z Allen M. Smith, Esq. Yours, etc. Allen M. Smith, Esq. Attorney for Petitioner 737 Roanoke Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 (516) 727-3947 Moore & Moore by William D. Moore Attorneys for Petitioner 315 Westphalia Avenue P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 (516) 298-5674 � f SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK -------------------------------- x CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a x METRO ONE, x VERIFICATION Petitioner, x x INDEX NO. For a Judgement pursuant to Article x 78 of the CPLR x ASSIGNED JUDGE: x against x x GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, chairman, x CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, x JR. ROBERT VILLA, JAMES DINIZIO, x JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN x ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, x x Respondent. x ------------------------------- x STATE OF NEW YORK: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: ss. Allen M. Smith, being duly sworn, deposes and says: he is the attorney for the Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One, the above-named petitioner; he has read the foregoing petition and the same is true to his own knowledge, except as to matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters he believes it to be true; the reason this verification is not made by the petitioner is that petitioner is not within the County of Suffolk, which is the county where the deponent has his office. Deponent further says that the grounds of his belief as to all matters therein stated on information and belief, are derived from information provided by petitioner including books and records and information contained in files and records of the respondent and the records of the Town of Southold. A/ Allen M. Smith Sworn to before me the 5th day of September, 1991 Notary Public WILLMM O.MOORE Notary Public.State of New Yb* No.4832728 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expkea January 31,1990- 141Y SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF ',,r'fOLK l STATE OF NEW YORK -- -- --- ---------------•--•-•----- •--. .. -. .-.-...---- x AFFICAViT THE CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE, x Petitioner x x For a Judgment pursuant to Article 79 of the CPLR x x against x x GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman, CHARLES, GRIGONIS, JR. , x SERGE DOYEN, JR. , ROBERT VILLA, JAMES OINIZIO, JR. , x constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD Of APPEALS, x Respondent, x - --------------------- -------------------- x STATE OF NEW JERSEY j COUNTY OF dGRe&) ) Oiane Amedeo, being duly sworn deposes and states as follows: I . I am the Real Estate Manager of The cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One, and as such I am fully familiar with the facts and issues involved in this proceeding. 2. This affidavit is made in support of the petition made pursuant to Article 79 Of New York State Civil Practice and Proceedings Laws and Rules, 3. Metro One is a public utility which was required by law to seek approval from the New York State Public Service commission before it could operate in New York providing radio cellular telephone service. 4. in addition, the New York State Public Service Commission must approve the rate schedules under which Metro One charges customers for the services provided. 5. Metro One has received approval from the Federal Communications Commission to operate cellular telephone services in the geographic area which includes the Town of Southold in the State of New York. Such approval was also necessary before Metro One could commence operations in that area. As part of the approval from the New York State Public Service Commission, Metro One is obligated as a matter of law to provide cellular telephone servic9 in the area in which it has been given approval to ope'vate. 6. Metro One has sited, constructed and operates 160 antenna facilities in New York City, long Island and parts of New Jersey. 7. In order to serve the geographic area east of the Town of Riverhead, engineers from Metro One determined that it would be necessary to locate radio transmission towers in the Town of Southold to provide the cellular telephone service required by those agencies which have authorized Metro One to provide cellular telephone service. 8. Metro One has entered into an agreement with the Town Board of the Town of Southold to construct a cellular radio antenna in P4conig in the Town of Southold at a site used by the Southold Town Police for its headquarters. 9. Metro One engineers determined that an additional transmission tower is necessary for the geographic area west of the Peconic site to complete its cellular system and incorporate it into its western cell sites. 10. Metro One engineers hav4 to consider three criteria for a cell site: 1. availability 2. owners willing to work with Metro One 3. a site that fits engineering criteria needed to provide cellular service, 11 . A property which is the subject of this Article 78 proceeding was selected because it satisfied these criteria. 12. Metro One submitted an application as a public utility for special exception approval of the Southold Town Zoning Board for a propesed radio tower and a concrete block building with affiliated computer equipment to provide cellular radio telephone service necessary to serve areas in the Town of Southold. 13. At the public hearing held on April 30, 1991 , our local counsel Allen N. . ! 9 Smith described the propop-d special exception appllCation-and identified and introduced to the Board each of the experts to describe the proposed structures, uses of the property and the impacts of these on the property and the surrounding area. 14. At the hearing, Roger Grutzmachar, a licensed architect, described the proposed location and configuration of the radio transmission tower and the renovation to the existing concrete block building to house the required computer equipment. 15. Christopher Resavy, the engineering manager for Metro One, testified to describe how the cellular telephone technology works and why the site which was selected was necessary within the cellular telephone system operated by Metro One. Mr. Resavy described the criteria used to select sites and how the site which is the sub.4ect of this proceeding, was selected. 16. John Nickles, a licensed real estate appraiser, with offices in Southold. NY, provided written testimony describing the negligible impact of the proposed use on the surrounding property values when compared with other uses permitted In the particular zoning district in which this property is located. 17. Written evidence was Submitted which was prepared by R.C. Petersen. of AT&T Bell laboratories, who described each of the potential health impacts to the public from the proposed radio transmission tower in which he concluded that there were no health problems as a result of the proposed structure in its use. I$, Peter E. Papay, a professional engineer, testified as to the structural integrity of the proposed radio transmission tower describing its method of construction to address concerns raised by the Zoning Board with respect to the Potential failure and collapse of the monopole radio tower. Mr. Papay testified that the tower is designed to withstand winds of 100 m.p.h. engineered for a loo year design storm, 19. in addition, our 16,-1 counsel submitted a memorand( of law describing the status of public utilities and structures within the context of zoning together with documentary proof of Metro One's status as a public utility regulated by the New York State Public Service Commission and the Federal Communications Commission, 20. All issues raised by members of tha Zoning Board of Appeals were addressed by Metro One and its consultants, either by written submission to the Board or at the public hearings held on April 30, 1991 and June 1, 1991 . 21. Our total counsel submitted a copy of the Order issued April 18, 1985 by the New York State Public Service Commission authorizing Metro One to operate a cellular radio system in the New York City area as proof that Metro One is a public utility. 22. The Zoning Board of Appeals requested additional proof was provided to establish that Metro One is a public utility by providing a copy of an attachment to the public Service Commission order describing the geographic areas for which the Order encompasses to establish that the Town of Southold was covered by Public Service Commissions's authorization and approval to provide cellular telephone service. In addition, a letter was prepared and submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals from the law firm of Fisher, Whelan, Cooper and Leader, the law firm representing Metro One before the Federal Communications Commission describing the FCC approval for Metro One and the geographic area included under such approval . 23. With the submission of this information regarding the public utility status, the Zoning Board of Appeals raised no further questions or issues in this regard and in the two public hearings held never questioned or raised issue with Metro One' s status as a public utility or the status of the proposed structures as public utility structures. 24. No evidence was submitted by anyone in opposition to the 401ie4tidA mada by Metro One. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that this Court find and grant the relief requested in the Petition together with such other and further relief to which the Court seems ,just and properq c� 1KanLe-U Diane Amedeo Sworn to before me this {1' day of 3 r G -7 1991 1¢pL;Wy PUbi-iC G R(Y9lJG YAlSFn A PL"C Ofi N"Jer", y APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman } a QG Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. ( c , Serge Doyen,Jr. „ cz . ; ai Town Hall,53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 ' 3 Robert A.Villa Southold,New York 11971 �, �.���J Fax(516) 765-1823 Telephone (516)765-1809 ,.c--- Telephone (516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. No. 4022. Application of CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE requesting Special Exception approval under Article VIII, Section 100-81B( 1) and Article III, Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a 104 ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, Ny; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15, 1990 , Map No. 8937 . County Tax Map No. 1000-108-4-11. 3 (part of 11. ) WHEREAS, after due notice, public hearings were held on April 30, 1991 and June 7, 1991 and at said hearings, all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding areas; and WHERES, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. The premises in question is located along the westerly side of Elijah' s Lane in the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold, is more particularly identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 108, Block 4, Lot 11.3 (part Of 11) , for which lot lines have been the subject of approval by the Town Planning Board on or about April 9, 1990. i 2. For the record it is also noted that the subject parcel contains a total lot area of 80, 495. 5 square feet, is located in the Limited Business (LB) Zone District, and is surrounded on three sides by residential communities. To the south is a plot of land also owned by William J. Baxter and others improved with a large one-story building and, although unoccupied, is also located in the Limited Business Zone District. Page 2 - Appl. No. 4V 2-SE Matter of CELLULAR Ti 'PHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 3 . By this application, it is requested by Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One, with the consent of the landowners, William J. Baxter and others, that a Special Exception be granted for: ( 1) 1a proposed unmanned telecommunications building in a'n existing concrete block building, and (2) construction of a 104 ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. The section of the Code under which this application has been made is Article III , Section 100-30B( 6) of the Agricultural-Conservation and Low-Density Residential Zone District provisions of the Code which reads as follows: 100-31B. Uses permitted by special exception by the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as herein- after provided, and . are subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: . . . ( 6) Public utility rights-of-way as well as structures and other installations necessary to serve areas within the town, subject to such conditions as the Board of Appeals may impose in order to protect and promote the health, safety, appearance and general welfare of the community and the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed. . .. 4. The proposed unmanned telecommunications building is shown on the site plan maps prepared by Juengert Grutzmacher Associates, P.A. dated February 6, 1991. Also, the tower structure for telecommunications transmissions is shown to be proposed at approximately 103 feet from the northerly side property line, 238+- feet from the westerly rear property line, 62+- feet from the southerly side property line, and 233+- feet from the easterly front property line. The height of the tower, inclusive of antenna mast, is proposed at 104 feet from ground level. The nearest building (telecommunications building) is located approximately nine feet to the east from the proposed tower, and 69 feet to the existing barn structure from the tower. [Buildings therefore are within the direct fall-down area of the proposed tower.] Also, distances have not been provided on the radius map to show building envelopes for future principal structures and accessory structures on the five residentially zoned lands adjacent to this parcel to the north and west. It does appear, however, that future homes on these lots could be located outside of the fall-down range, i.e. 104 feet from the proposed tower location. Page 3 - Appl. No. 4V7-SE Matter of CELLULAR Ti 'PHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 5. The land uses of the Low-Density Residential Zone District, under which this application is made, is intended to provide open rural environmental areas so highly valued by residents and to reasonably regulate the subdivision and development of the lands while honoring the legitimate interests of farmers and farmland owners (Article III, Section 100-30 Purpose) . The uses permitted under these provisions are limited to principal residential uses, agricultural uses, and accessory uses incidental thereto. 6. The land use provisions of the Limited Business (LB) Zone District are intended to provide limited business activities that are consistent with the rural and historic character of surrounding areas and uses and that have been designed to protect the residential and rural character of the area. Permitted_ uses in the LB Zone are limited to antique, art and craft shops and galleries; custom workshops and machine shops; wholesale or retail and display of garden materials and plants, including nursery operations; library; museum; professional office; business office; funeral home; restaurant; barbershop, professional studios, travel agency and other personal service stores and shops; plumbing shop, carpentry shop, motorcycle shops, landscaping and other service businesses; wholesale and warehousing. other uses permitted by Special Exception would include those uses as may be permitted in the Low-Density Residential and Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts and proviked under Article III (ref. paragraph #5 above) . 7 . The uses proposed under this Special Exception request are for commercial telecommunications and radio transmission services by Metro One through Cellular Telephone Company, a company who has received approvals from the Public Service Commission to operate a cellular radio system (see Order issued April 18, 1985 for a "Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to Construct and Operate a Cellular Radio Telecommunication Service in the New York Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area") . 8. On January 10, 1989, a new Zoning Code and Master Plan were adopted by the Town of Southold, and many zoning provisions and requirements were modified or created which are quite different from the previous zoning codes. In applying the provisions of the new master plan and zoning code, one of the first considerations by this Board in a Special Exception request is to determine whether the uses requested fall within the meaning of the Zoning Code as applied. 9. Article XIII, Section 100-130 of the Light Industrial (LI) and Light-Industrial-Office (LIO) Zoning Provisions •Page 4 - Appl. No. 4r'.-SE Matter of CELLULAR TE_ . PHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 authorize this type of use by Special Exception. The purpose of the LIO and LI Zone Districts is to provide for commercial activities which are not appropriate for those uses permitted in residential, agricultural, and aXmited business use zone districts. It is apparent that the use proposed herein will be a principal use involving commercial telecommunications activities. The purpose and intent of Section 100-30B( 6) is to permit only those uses which are not of a business or commercial nature and which are clearly consistent with the rural, residential or agricultural character of the immediate area. A telecommunications use is not a residential or agricultural use. 10. It is, therefore, determined that the meaning of Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) shall apply only to those public utility towers, structures and uses congruently associated with residential or agricultural uses; i.e. TV, VHF, CB, Ham Radio, accessory and incidental thereto, by Special Exception approval by the Board of Appeals. Telecommunication systems such as that proposed herein which are of a commercial nature could be permitted as a principal use under only Article XIII and Article XIV, by Special Exception in the LIO and LI Industrial Zone Districts. This commercial use cannot be authorized by Special Exception under the current zoning code under this particular ( residential/agricultural) provision (Article III, Section 100-30B(6) ) . ACCORDINGLY, on mot-4,,on by Mr. Villa, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for commercial telecommunications activities and structures as applied under Article III , Section 100-30B( 6) , (ref. Article VIII , Section 100-81B) , be and hereby is DISMISSED, for the reasons as noted above. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Messrs. Villa, Doyen and Goehringer. (Member Dinizio abstained and did not participate in discussions or vote. ) (Member Grigonis was absent due to illness. ) This resolution was duly adopted. / (�ERARD P. GOEHRINGER,, CHAIRMAN lk E 475.60 D, ` UN T 6.2 I �D 83.4 GAR D (� FF EL E 73.00 _EAO___ yf RES -__- t^ II o i STORY FRAME � I P « BARN A GAR o p m FF 32.50 1 i•. PROP 39D 102 ON ` F G 30 MONO LE b1•d - 5 SF. F EL RE000 AREA 80495 ` 32.TT ,� SEtBPCK 1 I J948 ACRES 20, '085 0 0.0. 59 ` D PROVIDE(2)SW'- GAR ` PROPoSE0 UNMANNED MRKIME YPACE$ FF EL TELECOM. EQUIPMENT n - 2' POOP IN EXIST.ELOCN a 3 I$ 33.0 ,3� RLDO. �' 3YY` PROPOSED 10'WI I « Ire TY zI 5o uloc c..�c pE R ,�• GRAVEL DRIVE j LB 00, d O /L/ '%19 (SEE SECTION ZI E PROPOSED ED NIN \ U. 1 AZT$ CHAIN LINK FENC uuuu ruw ro acY � � � U ° 8�°p 8 _°__ - -- ------ -- --- 20 F u 6S 1 BlUESTONE 7�Pa�pO 488.05 S Z .299 - DRIVEWAY p '*55'12"W CONC Is NOTE: ` � NFo2M4�t�JNHEF SITE � 1 STORY BLOCK BUILDING �f1 I l _— ( BOARD OF IIEALTII . . . . . . . . . FOnM NO. 1 3 SETS OF PL.I.IS . . . . . . . . . . SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOWN OFSOUTHOLD CHECK _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . BUILDING DEPARTMENT SEPTIC FOR:1 TOWN HALL SOUTHOLII_CLY_ IAU7L NOT 1 FY ; TEL.. 7G51802 CALL . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . atttincd . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 . . . CIA t L TO : 7proved . ... . . . .. . . . . . . .. 19 . . . Pcrmit No. . . . . . . .. . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :approved a/c . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . • • . (Building Iu:peetnr) APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Datca�.aa: ..... ... I5 9f INSTRUCTIONS fr a. 711is application must be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector,wit! ' Of Pb-Ms-accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public strc: areas, and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this ap; ion. . e. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. -d. Upon approval of this application. the Building Inspector will issued a Building Permit to the appiica:tt. Such per- !I be kept on the premises available for inspection throu^hout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until II have been granted by the Building Inspector. a Certificate of Oceupa .: APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issu:rtce of a Building pe^it p_:;�ant to t: !ding Zone Ordinance_of the Town Of Southold, Suffolk County, New Yark, and other applicable Laws, Ordina tees ; nlations. for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or.for removal or demolition, a; he r_u describe. applic:nt acrecs to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances• building cod code aria rcg_!=lions, and t ;it authorzed inspectors on premises and in building for necccsary inspections • • . ^Sinatur . . ( � c tapplicant, orname.iCacorpo:atton)• . . . . . M. .. (Mailing address of apphemn e hctha can is owner, lessee, agent, ••• architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician. plumber or builder ac oC owner of preen' • . . .e� � . . .6'AyTOt_ OT1/t=' .. 7t . . . . .... ............ .... . . I. . . . . . . . .J. . . . . . .. (as on the tax roll or latest deed) -)plicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer. .......... ..... . . . . . (N''ame and title of corporate officer) Builder's License No. ...... Plumber's License No. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . Electrician's License No. . , • , , ,, • _ . . • .. . . . . _ _ . 011tcr Trade's Liccnsc No. .. .. . . . .Ocation of land on which proposed work will be done; ' ... . . . ... . . ... . . . . . . . . .ELI D44 S «N� �11�T17 CSC louse Number . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . . ...... . . . . . . . . .. Sleet L Hamlet aunty Tax \lap No. 1000 Section . , F ubdivision V`t 11.L1 R '� Lot . ��•...... . . . .. . . . . . . �� . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . Filed Map No. _ . . .. . (N:tttte) . . Lot ........ . . .. .. . t:tc existing nsc and occupancy orprcmiscs and intended ttsc an occttd Pancy of proposed construction: A. Existing use and occupancy..f Tl!✓L .l, �.. . S7DRrt�r� • ...H✓1...................... B. 'Intended use and ecuponc .n/ . . .... B4p.'�.��?,C/ST1al l�I�IMph/ G ✓TICI 4 Y.. . .. .. . ........ J .... .... ..1r7 �.7......... TES��Qrr,.��,�(csl n��if �t a 6 w� �o4�Po .>,vwJPoc�.�A �'� .. .._ Nature of work (check whi h applicable): Nety oudJing(� A. . . . . icn • • • • .Ulcra[uon RcpairEf1S:110. ?� .bu1� Cmoval . . . . . . . _Demolition '"t�'r't^� POOL. . , Tennis Court Accessory • • � ' �yy Oui lJ ing. . . . . . . . . . Fence . . . . . . .Otflcr Work . Estimated Cort". BDI,PfCA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `I (to be paid on filing this aoolicaruon) If dwcllin„number of dwcl)inn�t^t units . ,L`t l�, , , , , , , , , Numbcr of dwcllin units on each floor , (J /� Ifgara_c, number of cars , . J` �( g. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If business- commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front . . . . . . . . . Rear - , , . . . . . . Depth .??• - , 11"!:11t . . . . . . . . . . . Nuinbcr of Stories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dimensio s of same structure with alterations or additions: Front ,}�!;✓, , , , , . . . . Rear S�': L . . . . . . . . .- * - Dimensions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Height AQ Numb of Stoncs . . . . . . . . . , Dimensions of entire new construction: Front , , , , , , , Rear • • . . . • Hci_Itt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • Number of Stories . . . . . . . Size of let: Fiont , �,7. 5 , , , • • • • • , Rcar • . . .Dp u ctl • • • . . • . • • Date of Purchase !.Y. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - - 75 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Name of Formcr Owner Zone cruse district in which remises arc situated . . ,fj , , ff BaKT��• ' ' ' ' ' Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or rc••ulation: y,�_ �� ��V� , Y`'I •S`� • • .� Will lot ba regraded . -Aq _, U'' _ "v " ' will excess fill be removed from premises: Yc: Name of Owner of rcmists t t 1 n PjE}X( :__Address .. .... . ..... Pllonc No. . . _ p ... A. . • Name of Archi3ctor . . . . .. jRo rn^� >L Addressl9.K)y%(I�J3?"!t. . .. . (. Phone Nofti.l)B7I-J1 Name ofContraetor . . . . .. ... .. . . . . . . : Address F�6�E"�9o0' ,,, , phone No. . . . . . . -IS this property located within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? ^YIS. . . .11Dr�j *If yes , Southold Town Trustees Permit may be required. PLOT DIAGRAM Locate clearly and distinctly all buildings, whether•exi'sting or proposed, and.indicate all setback dL•n="on- perry lines. Give street and block number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicate sv::_::. -rior or corner lot_ TE OF NE1y�YS�1�q S.S JNTY.OF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . %-L 1 A j1^• (Na • l' s• • • • • • • • • . . . . me of individua i being duly shorn, deposes and says that he is the applic_:gning contract) c named. the . . . .Ft .! ° 2N€"�. . . . . , �LSeAw�� (Contractor, age , corporate officer, etc.) nt id owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file tl: ration: that all statements contained in this application arc true to the best of his knowledge and belief;and that t:: will be performed in tic manner set forth in the application filed therewith. n to before me this day or. Y Public, - &'l&•.S-f/• C. � . . . . ., County CtAIftE L Gl EW d q Notary publl4 State of New Yorlt v r No.4878606 Qualified In Suffolk Courrfy 1 ConrmisalenEu r� ernber8.19 ` - ' ��, (Signature orappliczw • ... ..p tI"r , Ali:.j. ,.. . . :1. . . �.3.i1•.iw.�i.'.�K�.�fa J:ah,.:�_is_ :.i " FORM NO,a TOIVN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMCNT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OP` DISAPPROVAL Date . . MARCH 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. To WILLIAM D. MOORE (ATTORNEY) WILLIAM BA%'T$A7 W.' S- OTHERS. ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . . ..Q., AQK 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MATTITUCK, N.Y. 11952 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated . . .FEB. _22 . 19 91 for permit to CONSTRUCT ANTENNA FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at Location of Property 4 15 ELIJAHS LANE MATTITUCK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . House No. Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . .108. . . . . . . . . . Block .04. . . . . . . . . . . Lot . 11.3 . . . . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lot No. is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds . .V"D ]R.#RTICLE VIII SECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.81 PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS BUSINESS WfTH ANTENNA IS NOT A PERMITTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . USE IN THIS DISTRICT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .ACTION REQUIRED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .�T , O . . . . . . . ua ld g Inspector T110MAS J. PI iER RV 1/80 36 FORM NO,3 TOWN OF SOUTIIOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL /� J Date . . . I !'.Nz� �1. . . . .�. 7. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated c I� ) � � --tt�� t . . .1 . . . . . . . . .�. . . . . ., 19 � ►. . for permit to u q�n� lg1'. . k4,� ,7c -c�4.e, 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . at . . Location of Property . . .�. �. . . . � c�tn1 , ..per,., House No. Street . . ' " " " " " 1 Ham/et County Tax Map No. I000 Section . . . �,F , , , , . Block . . .Q.q. , , , , , Lot . 11. . . . . . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds . ��Lc.cX3LM �¢ ( . . . . . 1`t g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Odg- Inspector RV 1/80 3 for the below-described property for the following uses and purposes (and as shown on the attached plan drawn to scale): Metro One is a public utility regulated by the New York State Public Service Commission . The applicant seeks approval of the following public utility structure : unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building with a 104 foot monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide reliable cellular telephone service . A. Statement of Ownership and Interest. William Baxter Jr . and others _ xjvs4are) the owner(s) of property known and referred to as Eli�ah_' s_ Lane, Mattituck thous_-_e_To­. , Street, HamTet identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 108 , Block 4 Lot (s) 11, 3 which A5kg (is) on a subdivision Map (Filed 5/ 15/90 > "Map of William Baxter Filed Map o. 8937 > and has been approved by the Southold Town Planning Board on April 9 . 1990 as a [ 1R4trx�c �t3PC�xdit3cSchPF�x lot line change and merger The above-described property was acquired by the owner on See attached deeds Exhibit A B. The applicant alleges that the approval of this exception would be in harmony with the intent and purpose of said zoning ordinance and that the proposed use conforms to the standards prescribed therefor in said ordinance and would not be detrimental to property or persons in the neighborhood for the following reasons: Applicant will use existing concrete block building to retain established compatibility of structures with surrounding properties. proposed radio tower with antenna will be located in a wooded area; all trees will remain on the property to minimize any visible impact. Building will be unmanned resulting in no traffic impacts. Proposed use will not affect the ordinary and reasonable uses of neighboring properties. •C. The property which is the subject of this application is zoned Limited Business and [ ) is consistent with the use(s ) described in the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith. [ xJ is not consistent with the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith for the following reason(s) : [ J is vacant land. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Cellular Tel on--�/b/a Metro rSe STATE OF NEW YORK) ss. : By: (S"are illiam D. Moore, or y for. Sworn to before mo this /S day of19W plicant (flntary WA Ic) -- -- - — .n Z82 rev. 2 6 86 •'1.0 ( / / ) f it:'s....;.:f.7 ANYLII.A 11UIV r UK Ft KN%1 1 IVU. .................................... UA I tU ...................... WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO .......................................... Name of Applicant for permit of Clause Commons , Su.ite.. 3,1.,Mattituck.t...14Y ... Street and Number Municipality State ( ) PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY (x ) Building permit for telecommunications building with 104 foot monopole --radio Lower with nbernia I. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY .E1ijahJArie.,..MatUtuck..........11i!niked..R.4157Aes$,,,,,,,,,,,,, Street /Hamlet / Use District on Zoning Map District 1000 Section 10861ock .. Lot 11 Current Owner William J. Baxter & others ................................................8 l3l oc . . Map No. Lot No. Prior Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article VIII ; XXIStection 100-230; 100-82 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) (x ) A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ( ) A VARIANCE due to lock of access (State of New York Town Law Chap. 62 Cons. Laws Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 ( y) Interpretation regarding applicability of section 100-230 4. PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous appeal (kosk(has not) been made with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector or with respect to this property. Such appeal was ( ) request for a special permit ( ) request for a variance and was made in Appeal No. ................................Doted ...................................................................... REASON FOR APPEAL ( ) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 ( x ) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (x ) Interpretation of zoning ordinance is requested for the reason that proposed 104 foot monopole radio tower with antenna exceeds 35 foot height restriction for buildings. * Appellant seeks determination that proposed 124 foot monopole radio tower with antenna is exempt from height restriction pursuant to section 100-230 (D) . In the alternative, appellant requests a variance from the height restriction. Form zBt (Continue on other side) 33 J. The hardship created is UNIQUE and is not shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in this use district because no similar public utility use ana structure is proposed or existing on the properties in the immediate vicinity of this property. 3 The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT because proposed structure will satisfy the need for reliable cellular telephone radio signal transmission as required by tht3: Publi.c Service Commission. The proposed structure will be located within a wooded area 6f the parcel , and all trees will remain on the property to provide natural screening of the structure to the extent possible. SrATE OF NEW YORK ) � / ! COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ss Q� •, ...... . �!!�. ... $ignat re Attorney fOr App cant Sworn to this ..............:� 5.'....................... day af_., la..l:[:L ...L_- y An ...... ......... Notary Public N^hry pa!"^,cth of Ecs Fork 1:7. 5" '�d=u9•Suff.l's fr,rly n, � 7 Gym APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS o SCOTT L. HARRIS y +- Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman �� Charles Grigonis,Jr. 4, � Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN 4 SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-I800 April 16, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons Suite 3, P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: :Appl. No. 4022 - Cellular Telephone Co. Special Exception Dear Mr. Moore: Please find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice confirming the hearing on the proposed uses within the existing building as an unmanned telecommunications building and for the proposed construction of the monopole radio tower with antenna, as applied in the Special Exception application. Also enclosed is a copy of. the Board SEQRA -(Unlisted Action) Declaration determined after review by the board members of the Long Environmental Assessment Form voluntarily furnished by you. The Board Members will, of course, be individually conducting field inspections and reviews as may be required during this process. At the Board's request, the public hearing on the height variance/interpretation request was not, however, placed on this April 30, 1991 calendar. This being a two-fold application, the Board chose first to address the issues on the applicability or interpretation under the zoning code for the proposed uses before proceeding with the height application. The request for the height interpretation/variance will be placed on a separate hearings calendar, immediately following the date of the Board's decision on the Special Exception. Further notice will be sent to you at that time. ' Yours very�ruly,A GERARD P. GOEHRrrI7PILAM 2 2 �/7 IA Enclosures CHAIRMAN N@LSDL/ I 1 71991 �r r� APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ' r74 �� SCOTT L. HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman ': '' Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. Serge Doyen,Jr. >:� ; vL Town Hall,53095 Main Road r, z"" P.O. Box 1179 James Dinizio. Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD QFAPPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 TO: P1. Bd. 4/11/91 SEORA UNLISTED ACTION DECLARATION April 10 , 1991 Appeal No. 4022 SE Project Name: Cellular Telephone Co . , d/b/a Metro One County Tax Map No. 1000- 108-4- 11 . 1 Location of Project: W/S Elijah ' s Lane , Mattituck , NY Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project: Special Exception - Public utility use as principal use in this LB Zone This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted with the subject application indicating that no significant adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be project be implemented as planned, and: ( ) this Board wishes to assume Lead Agency status and urges coordinated written comments by your agency to be submitted with the next 20 days. (X) this Board has taken jurisdiction as Lead Agency, has deemed this Board of Appeals application to be an Unlisted SEQRA Action, and has declared a Negative Declaration for the following reasons: a. An Environmental Assessment/hastbeen0submiitted and evaluated, and/or b. An inspection of the property has been made, or C. Sufficient information has been furnished in the record to evaluate any possible adverse affect of this project as filed, and/or d. This application does not directly relate to new construction or on-site improvements. ( ) this Board refers lead agency status to your agency since the Board of Appeals does not feel its scope of jurisdiction is as broad as the Planning Board concerning site changes and elements under the site plan reviews.- The area of jurisdiction by the Board of Appeals is not directly related to site improvements or new buildings. (However, if you do not wish to assume lead agency status within 15 days of this letter, we will assume you have waived same, and we will be required to proceed as Lead Agency.) For further information, please contact the Office of the Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at (516) 765-1809. Ir 3b APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ; =' l; SCOTT L. HARRIS i 11 ' Supervisor Gerard P.Goehtinger,Chairman Charles Grigonis,Jr.Serge Doyen,Jr. Town Hall,53095 Main Road 3 ' �< .r: P.O. Box 1179 James Dini . Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-IBoo TO: P1. Bd. 4/11/91 SEQRA UNLISTED ACTION DECLARATION April 10 , 1991 Appeal No. 4023 Project Name: Cellular Telephone Co . , d/b/a Metro ONe County Tax Map No. 1000- 108-4-11 . 3 Location of Project: W/S Elijah ' s Lane , Mattituck , NY Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project: Interpretation on height restriction for 104' high tower and if necessary , variance from height restriction . This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted with the subject application indicating that no significant adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be project be implemented as planned, and: { } this Board wishes to assume Lead Agency status and urges coordinated written comments by your agency to be submitted with the next 20 days. { X } this Board has taken jurisdiction as Lead Agency, has deemed this Board of Appeals application to be an Unlisted SEQRA Action, and has declared a Negative Declaration for the followingreasons: a. An Environmental Assessment/h9stheif00sabm'UTed and evaluated, and/ b. An inspection of the property has been made, or c.Sufficient information has been furnished in the record to evaluate any Possible adverse affect of this project as filed, and/or d. This application does not directly relate to new construction or on-site improvements. { } this Board refers lead agency status to your agency since the. . Board of Appeals does not feel its scope of jurisdiction is as broad as the Planning Board concerning site changes and elements under the site plan reviews.— The area of jurisdiction by the Board of Appeals is not directly related to site improvements or new buildings. (However, if you do not wish to assume lead agency status within 15 days of this letter, we will assume you have waived same, and we will be required to proceed as Lead Agency. ) ' For further information, please contact the office of the Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at (516) 765-1809. tr 3 , Page 31 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. Appl. No. : 4022 ., Applicant( s) : Cellular Telephone Company Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-108-4-111 . 3 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for coming in, it' s pleasure meeting you gentlemen. Are you going to leave? MEMBER DINIZIO: Yeah. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are you going to sit here or are you going to leave? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I 'm going to leave. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. 14EMBER DINIZIO: I just want to make a public statement that I t•?ork for a company that perhaps could compete with you gentlemen so I would like to beg off if you don' t mind. I 'm going to leave the room. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a declaration and in the file, also for Mr. Smith that I have a Metro One Telephone. Do you have any objection to that, to my sitting on this hearing, please voice your opinion at this point. The Chairman opened the hearing at 8: 48 pm and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties and I have a copy of a plan produced for Metro One indicating the one story framed barn that presently exists and the concrete building as it presently exists and we will ask Mr. Smith if he would like to continue. MR SMITH: Thank you Mr. Chairman for the record my name is Allen Smith, I appear as counsel to William D. Moore the Attorney of record in this matter. Mr. Moore has had the good fortune of having the local Rotary Club sponsor his trip to Europe and God bless him. He even took his wife who is a rotarian and their baby of less than six months I think or so. For the record this evening, I have with me to address various aspects of this application, Christopher Resavy, Glenn Witte both are engineers with Metro One and both of which I have supplied the resumes for, to you. Mr. Ronald Petersen is an engineer with AT&T and can and will as this matter progresses address any radiological effect questions. Mr. Peter Papay is a licensed engineer who deals with the cn (/ r L � Page 32 - April 30, i991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B. A. MR SMITH, cont'd: issues of the pole, its ability to withstand wind and the like. Mr. John Nickles is a local appraiser in this particular matter and I will introduce his opinion letter in a moment, relative to the effect that the proposed use on the neighborhood. And lastly Roger Grutzmacher is the architect who will address those issues attending to the visual aspects of the proposed use. I will admit readily how provincial I am relative to Metro One and/or Cellular Telephones. The first time that I became aware of the importance of Cellular Telephone was about four or five years ago. Some of you know I 'm a member of the Red Hook and Ladder Company of Riverhead Fire Department. As you may recall, all of us in the fire service were called to a rather large brush fire during the tenure of Chief Richard Gadzinski when the Pine Barrens burned between Eastport and Riverhead. It was at that particular time that they called out our truck 629, which had a Metro One type device in it, in that all the trucks that were responding to the area were unable to communicate, because everybody was stepping all over everybody and on both of the channels that were available to us. You may know that the fire service moved a comparable unit to 629 on the west end of the fire and in fact that particular fire in our locality was coordinated through the use of the cellular telephones because our ordinary radio communications were so messed up they were ineffective. That experience in talking to these gentlemen and the equal at Metro had been duplicated for instance in the Avianca crash. The plane took down all the standard land lines that were available and in fact at the varying units responded and they cluttered the airways yet again, but for the fact that the citizens in that particular area and the chiefs in Nassau County generally have cellular telephones in their chief cars communications was handled in that particular regard. Another particular example was the San Francisco earthquake that we all witnessed during the World Series. Again if there was not a cellular network to coordinate the emergency response there would have been no response because of the severing of all cables on the ground. I have on occasion used car phone, as maybe some of the rest of you have, calling fires. I recall calling in a signal 13 at the Walsh asphalt plant one day. The point of all of this is to say that although this technology is coming to Southold it is not a new technology. It is very much a cart of the utility system both of our area and San Francisco, Nassau County and other places. I find that in the examination of the fire safety manual for the county of Nassau that most of the police in Nassau county and the ambulance service in Nassau County have cellular now. I know that the Wading Department has cellular in every chief ' s car. In fact as you may know the 911 system is integrated into the Metro service, Page 33 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Ccmpany Southold Z.S.A. MR SMITH, cont' d: such that as we travel up and down the road with our cellular telephone we do not have to know the particular phone number for the $outhold P.D. if you will or this tower up, we would simply punch in 911 and we would end up with Southold P.D. Of I suppose the last point in dealing with where this technology is and how integrated it has gotten into our society is to point out how it has become part of commerce and industry of our area. Of one of the customers of Metro One is one of the off-shore boats. As you may know he cannot use his ship to shore to radio for the purposes of commerce, because it violates the rules among other things and if he did he would populate the airwaves to the detriment of everyone else. This particular captain uses about $500 a month in services from Metro One. Essentially coming off the towers in the south fork, so that he knows the market, where he should bring his boat in with his catch, when to bring it in, things of that particular nature. Which he cannot do with the ordinary ship to shore radio. All that being said, I have one tape to show you should you wish, and I 've raised the one issue that brings these people here as exemplified by the coverage issue. At the moment if I were to get into my car this evening and see an accident on the North Road and I dial in 911 the chances are that I would not get a local police station. I would bounce over to Connecticut. There is a gap in service with reference to the Metro One system, this is within their franchise area and that is why they are here and that is why they are building a tower at the police station in Peconic and they propose to build this tower in Mattituck. I have a tape, it' s not a good tape, I can save it for the end, I can show it now. What it shows on the tape, if you are in fact interested, is a testimony of why a police chief in New Jersey, whose radio tower was struck by lightning and he tells you as one municipal board to another how much more in fact that he had cellular capacity. He would have been out of service and out of touch with his cars, but because he had cellular and the redundancy that it provided to his vehicles that he was able to function. The other one that you see is the technology that' s coming into the fire service where a particular town in New Jersey is installing the Metro One service with fax machines, such that as we get an alarm and we respond on our trucks that the fax, there will be pre-plans, say the old Perkins Motel in my community such that pre-plans will be fed into the fax machine by the dispatcher and they would turn out on the trucks as we responded to the alarm. Lastly, on this particular tape, and again I ' ll play it if you wish or I ' ll hold it till the end, is the testimonial by the people in East Hampton, who are doing very much the same thing that the Town of Southold was doing with Metro One at the police . station in terms, in Southampton they've already done it, VO r 1 Page 34 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: where Metro One has in fact built a ter:en: and has brought the police communications up otsttv. the tower-•. I suppose the last thing that I would say in thatpamtticulaatr regard is not a fire service th'ing. It relare�sa to) thw, Z. think it' s called A.L.S. System, that is nor pramtt. o£_ oun. ambulance service and is becoming more a par„ od' oun: ambulance service, advanced life support systtmm,,.. As, rhose> E.K.G. ' s and the other more sophisticated monmutori;n� systems;come into the ambulances as our E.M.T. Is ands A.ML.TL "sc re pemod from areas such as Southold and Riverhead to G.bmd,!. SBmam. tary Hospital, I think you understand that all of that tialemettry,, is not done on the radio wave it is done over: celDama ,, just simply because of the capacity and the refinementis. titaxr. cellular technology affords as opposed to time sdandtmdi emergency treatments we simply operate. The issue i27ti— tie: you., this evening has been properly defined by the chairman. andlby; Mr. Moore and I 'm to deal in this first itsttance, with) the- special exception nature of the application. M my of-' u:a 'tnow7 Judge Stark, who' s probably one of the better- orr Cesti, iMd7gps: that we have in Suffolk County, and is someflne that- gpewrup) here in this particular community and as Mr. Mtzrce, has provided to the chairman a particular decisiom where:, Judgen Stark writes about the special nature of deaLUiingi wiitth� a: public utility structure and a zoning ordimnee,. Ha, wrote„ public utility structures serving the entire aommund+ty havx ; historically been recognized as reasonable and) prop,eev. ixetas; iitn all types of use districts, because of the lmuhnsaaLU. andt. engineering requirements particular to sud j sitructur:.cew i;.rn tame area serve. That' s the whole issue that' s haVana, toes: one tiffeer special exception nature. I have for you, L wiilll hands oue- your decisions some years ago, with referen:ev to, they W&V towers in the community. As the Board Merd%rs, t%AL1J1 node,, oaeN. of the Board Members was in fact present dtn1ng3 tthusg particular decisions, at the bottom of the ff at pm qei t1tatt IL have handed up to you, Mr. Douglas reciteea, tihatt we? cousdtr"tt find any reason to attempt to obstruct you iitn th..w communications here, we have very strict rudlIn%w iim fact to) go by in the State of New York rulings on pu)l:Mcni saavtic@i utilities, etc. There were two hearings tftaftL paw.tiiouL1=, evening. On the last page that I have harsdLmdl ug> troc Y.Mw,, Mr.- Douglas immediately prior to that particulan- mesoMwdiiarr., Again I make a statement that we are contaofflTo2 very, sCnonr0lF by law and public utilities with that as aunt• qutndLmIliias- a will again make a motion, etc. So, althaugku M ann dLrmliing! somewhat with a new technology in terms ol: tth(L-. cs°lluliam. aspects of what is before the Board this e xmt3m2nny„ itiis; nott an a new issue to this particular Board. Mtm ma is at am x..itad m logic that is inherent in dealing with ut3liittiics iiim tt1h s; particular regard as it relates to zoning- IF mt;ptmt-.;e t1s. easiest example would be to deal with electtmy(m wttiildttyes: and • 41 i 4 , Page 35 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont' d: if in fact height restrictions, architecture review and things of that nature were to apply in the strictest sense to electric utilities, in some of your more restricted residential zonings, we could not supply people with electric utilities, the sewer, water, things of that particular nature have this special kind of special exception, if you will, such that the boards state, this Board in particular have granted the right under the ordinances to examine the particular application and make a determination on the particular application whether or not there is an adverse effect on the environment, neighborhood, all the criteria that' s spelled out in your special exception prevision. The last thing I would say with reference to the public utility issue is this, that I have for you and I will introduce later on if it' s of interest to you, some of more precise definition of the longitudes and latitudes that are called out in licensing the papers that you have been given by Mr. Moore, but in fact these people are compelled as a matter of law to serve their franchise area. They and NYNEX in this particular instance. There are two franchisees, if you will, for the Town of Southold. If it were true that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold were to deny to NYNEX or to Metro One any right to engineer if you will, these towers again they must do so considering the neighborhoods, the effect of the tower and all the rest of that. You could as a local zoning board or a local zoning ordnance frustrate the franchises that have been given by the public service commission of the State of New York to this entity and to NYNEX and by the E.C.C. to these two entities to serve this particular area and I suppose I don' t have to give you a citation necessarily but such a result might be contrary to either common sense or to the federal system under which we work. All that being said I would introduce the architect and I have asked him to please depict for you the existing conditions and as the site will appear with the tower. MR GRUTZMACHER: Good evening. My name is Roger Grutzmacher for the record, I 'm an architect, these drawing are prepared under my supervision in my office. As part of the, I' ll keep the presentation brief, I ' ll just go quickly to where we' re locating the tower in a brink, show you some exhibits that show existing and proposed conditions . Metro One primarily needs two items in order to operate. One is a relatively high spot in which to locate their antennas , in this case we Are proposing a monopole tower, the other is an equipment room, to house their equipment which is an accessory structure for that antenna. In this particular site we' re locating both of those facilities, the tower and the building to the rear of this one story framed building which is Page 36 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A MR GRUTZMACHER, cont'd: located toward, if there is a front yard, certainly toward the front yard of what we' re proposing. Access to our facility in the rear which is a modification to an existing building, it is not a new building, we' re merely going to give it a face lift and recondition the interior to meet our purposes. The actual building is shielded from the front by this existing frame and access will be by a road toward the rear, we' ll also be introducing two parking spaces back here. We don' t really need a lot of parking because visits to the site are on a nature of possibly two times a month to check equipment. The actual room itself is unmanned. I think at this point I would like to show what this existing structure looks like currently and what we propose to do to it. The building, it ' s about 720 square feet, it' s a block, structure. It is shielded by some natural vegetation and landscaping. The building, structurally sound is a bit lacking ascetically certainly, we do also have to put a new roof on this structure. We are going to give it a total face lift and I ' ll show you what I mean by that. This is a rendering of that same scene. Let me put them next to one another so you can really see it. The, what we would do to just quickly go through it, the building we know it' s structurally sound, we would sound the block and make sure that .it' s cleaned up and which then we could apply the new stucco finish which is here. Colors, it' s very flexible, we would chose an earth tone brown because it seems to fit in with the area a bit more appropriately than some thing that might be a more in the primary colors or what have you. As I said it' s an existing building, we will not be extending it at all. We are merely giving it a face lift. The building to operate it requires no sewage. There is no water to this site, the utilities that we do bring into the site is telephone and power, electricity. That is all. And it is brought in through ground lines, it would be buried, there are no overhead lines here that we would be adding or bring into the site. Let me show you now the mono-pole. CIIAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to see these, we could move the, what I ' ll ask you do is just move the easel back a little bit. Maybe you want to change your set over to this side. MR GRUTZMACHER: Okay, as I mentioned there is an existing, the two existing structures. This is our equipment room which we're are proposing the face lifting for. This is the existing barn structure towards the front and this is the proposed 100 foot mono-pole. I believe it' s actually 102 feet. Chris is that correct? Okay. Give me an idea, this is pretty accurate because we ' ve transposed it onto an actual l:q Page 37 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR GRUTZMACHER, cont'd: photograph of the site, we ' ve rendered on the new finish here and we've located the mono- pole to scale. To give you an idea of scale, trees in the background are in the area of 45 ;'to 50 feet in height and as I said the mono-pole is about 102 feet in height. Both structures are located to the rear, again, I ' ll give you some dimensions on the mono-pole at the base it' s about, and Pete I guess you could bail me out is this an eight foot base mono-pole? 14R PAPAY: The actual base of the steel mono-pole itself would be 37 inches in diameter. But the concrete foundation will be in the neighborhood of six to eight feet. MR GRUTZMACHER: The platform at the top is approximately, it' s three sided, it' s a triangle , each side would be about 12 feet in width. The actual size of the antennas of which there will be nine mounted on the top about four feet in height. If you have any questions , I ' d be glad to answer them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have questions Bob? Do you want me to go, okay. There will be some lighting on top of this? MR GRUTZMACHER: That' s, we could check into that. METRO ONE: Do you want me to address that now or? MR SMITH: We' ll get you up in a second I ' ll answer it now and then we' ll answer it again. The lighting is subject to an F.A.A. approval the consulting engineer, not this particular gentlemen but he can testify to it. It says that there shouldn' t, the striping and lighting aspects are not required but this gentlemen will address that in a moment. Whatever the Board does as in the other applications that I have in the east end, I will produce for you and I would have to in any event before any building permit would be issued the F.A.A. determinations relative to lighting and striping if any. They don' t believe at this particular moment that it would be required. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Because of height Allen? MR SMITH: Height is one of the considerations where they actually file with the F.A.A. and different places they don' t have to. For instance , the one that' s somewhat higher nearer the Banks is not going to be particularly lighted because they don' t, it does not effect aviation. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What is the width of the actual Y Page 38 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: antenna on top of the mono-pole? MR GRUTZMACHER: It' s approximately 12 to 14 inches in that range. 1 ,1 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And what is the length? MR GRUTZMACHER: Four feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Four feet total? MR GRUTZMACHER: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Four feet in height? MR GRUTZMACHER: In height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay what is the width this way? i?R GRUTZMACHER: Well the whole triangle, the platform, there are three of those antennas mounted on each triangular leg. It' s about twelve feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are there steps leading to that antenna in anyway? MR GRUTZMACHER: What' s usually located on mono-poles are they' re little struts that run up the pole. If Pete, Mr. Papay the structure engineer, he' s more familiar with the actual tower design, but generally the workmen that come out to maintain and actually install the antennas have these legs that they will put in as they go up. Some are located on, but to a certain height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So no one will climb. MR GRUTZMACHER: That' s correct. And the compound we' re going to secure as well with a fence around the entire perimeter. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Have any of these been constructed in an area that we could visit within the next couple of weeks? MR RESAVY: The closest mono-pole we currently have constructed is Laurelton which is right out the JFK Airport. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right outside JFK? MR RESAVY: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would it be easily, could I just have r Page 39 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: your name for the record. MR RESAVY: Christopher Resavy. , ! CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Would it be easily depicted if I was to see it bearing in mind that there are many antennas near Kennedy Airport. MR RESAVY: Yes you can easily depict which side it is. we can give you exact directions on how to get to the location. That particular pole I believe is only 75 foot and the F.A.A. has requested we put a marked red light on the top for observance features only. It' s not a requirement, but they've asked us to do that as a courtesy. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: very good. Thank you. Do you have any thing else that you'd like. Great thank you. MR SMITH: Mr. Resavy, this young man is the engineer for, together with his comrades on my left who can explain to liberal arts students like myself how these things work and why you need one in Peconic and you need one in Mattituck and you need another in Northville and one over in Montauk. It is somewhat technical on, I thought about reducing it to writing and trying to submit it to you. It just would go on forever. I 'm going to let him try to explain to you how this system works and why they have multiple sites and probably just try to answer your questions there. MR RESAVY: For the record my name is Christopher Resavy, I 'm the engineering manager for Metro One. If I can I want to use some exhibits to try to give you an idea of how the cellular works. The map that' s located on this board is the entire area that Metro one is licensed to serve from the F.C.C. The areas of New York that are outlined here is what' s granted to us both by the F.C.C. and the New York 7 C.P.C.H. to give you public utility status in the State of New York. Cellular is based upon the ability to reuse frequencies and some of you are aware, mobile telephone service has been in operation for many, many years. The first service actually started in 1946 with the Hobockin police, the first ones to use mobile radio as a form of communication. From that it has grown to a mobile telephone service that you needed an operator, operators assistance in order to place a call. A few years later, that was replaced with an automatic type system with one transmitter, located with very high power, with one receiver. From that you could have unlimited amount of users on, because I believe at that time it was only four channels still and that was in the early fifties. From that grew the next generation of mobile r Page 40 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. 14R RESAVY, cont'd: telephone service in which there was still only one high powered transmitter but the service was enhanced to twelve channels and 4t that time it was also invoked or developed in a point' that there was multiple receiver locations because what they found was although that high powered transmitter could get out long distances, the weakest link between the mobile and that transmitter was the received passed back to the people, so they set up a system of multiple receiving locations so that the conversations could be a lot clearer than what they were in the oast. Although in about the mid sixties Bell Labs, Motorola, spun the idea of cellular and that' s where it really started and that was the ability to reuse frequencies in a multiple pattern over and over and over again. While working with the F.C.C. , and going through many, many, many years of development and trials and measurements and things that they were trying to do, lone about the mid seventies the F.C.C. granted Bell Labs permission to do trials in a few areas of the system, of the country to get some actual measured data in a much unused, unutilized frequency ban. That frequency ban correlates to what used to be on a lot of the older T.V' s and that was channel 67 to channel 83 on your UHF dial. If you remember those two step dials that we used to have, I still have one in my house although I can' t tune into a frequency I don't know why. Selectively of the channel I guess . They were re-allocated later to cite. The trials that I mentioned, they were done I think in four parts of the country, one was in Newark, Chicago, L.A. , and I believe some place in Texas, I'm not sure were. But from that cellular was born in 1976, where they actually started to invoke and develop all the specks and everything else that goes into what we have today as you know is cellular. I was lucky enough and I 'm not, I 'm luckily still a young person I think, but I was lucky enough to get into cellular back in 1981, so I got to learn from some of the best designers and engineers of this system, how this stuff actually worked. To give you a little idea, they went through numerous generations of what kind of polyarn was the most regular reuse thing to use, they tried squares, they tried pentagons, hexagons, and it came up that one of the Bell Labs engineers actually wrote a paper on beehive study that he had preformed and he was doing something for the military on structural support. Well it happened that one of the other engineers in Bell Labs was working on Cellular, so that pattern that he had put together and it was so regularly shaped that after a little bit of work with that it was then determined and accepted that a hexagon would be the most regularly reused shape to use for cellular'. From that, you can reuse frequencies in a regular patterned shape. We have depicted here on the board is a hexagon in many forms abutting each other and as you can see C- Page 41 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z .B.A. MR RESAVY, cont'd: they can be readily reused. What we currently have is a situation on the North Fork of Long Island where we have a new site that we are beginning construction in Southold and Penonic, the proposed location here in Mattituck which would be our missing cell site and some of our existing locations. We go back to the ability to reuse these frequencies, this missing cell location here would be the Mattituck site. This could be the site down on the bottom here, site 71, down here site 72 could be out here and this could be Riverhead out here which by way is our water tank, it just happened to fall that way in the plan. The ability to reuse frequencies comes in a regular type pattern, in our particular system, it' s like a chess move, the ability to read it' s frequency and that' s a knight move if anybody remembers that. The knight takes two steps up and one over. So, the same type of example here, one, two over, these two locations would read it' s frequencies. With this site missing, this signal is stretched into this area, thus stretching it' s ability to reuse its frequencies. This guy has a greater potential for interference in here and if anybody is familiar with C.B. ' s, when C.B. ' s first came out with 23 channels, everybody could use it with very readily ease because it wasn' t a lot out there, but as it got more and more popular people got accustom to their own home base channel as it were at the time. If it was channel two, then you had two people trying to talk in the same general location apart from each other, usually the conversations got walked on and you couldn' t hear that party that well. Cellular uses the same kind of concept. We have to keep separation distance involved in. That' s how we can' t come up with our regularly spaced intervals for the south side so we currently have located here. It' s done by process of grids placed over the map from which we develop a search area that we look and .we search for. Now we had three criteria for a cell site, availability, owners willing to deal with us, and that the site fits the criteria that we need for coverage. In particular the location that we have picked in Mattituck we were able to find those three criterias. We were able to get a piece of property that was available to us , in a zone that was pretty amenable I guess to our uses, and we were able to get a landlord that was willing to deal with us and the best case, which was the last one that worked for us. So that' s kind of the particulars about this location. MR SMITH: I 'm going to steal a little bit of his thunder and I 've worked on this a little bit. What he' s leaving onset is the glass half full or half empty. Is that as you begin to move the tower to the west, he begins to fall out of these grid patterns that he has described to make the system as he moves to the east he has a similar problem. c1;, a Page 42 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: As a consequence in the area where they need the town, this is within the area and as he has probably described the issue. Again I suppose the one thing that' s left unsaid is that what makes This work as the gentlemen from AT&T will say in a moment 'is that the wattages, the power involved in these things are relatively low. They don' t bleed over from one area to another. You could probably make a tower in Orient or Montauk big enough to reach all the way back into the city, but it would step on everything in between and the system would be infected. The reason that this works is that these are very low power sites and that actually the signal is transferred by telephone line from station to station and that' s what makes it clear. True? MR RESAVY: Very true. MR SMITH: Why don' t you let these folks ask you questions. MR RESAVY: Do you have any questions? Let me clarify the F.A.A. point about light that was brought up earlier. We initially filed this location with the F.A.A. and they came back and gave us a ruling that lighting and marking would be required. We reviewed that we questioned why, because there are particular rules that apply to part 77 for flight aviation patterns. So we contacted a consultant that we use, Mr. James Hennesy a number of years ago was the head of the F.A.A. and for many years ran that organization. We gave all the particulars of this location to him for his review and his opinion. After a very careful review and some contact with the F.A.A. it is his opinion that we do not need lighting nor marking. On our behalf he has re-filed this location with the F.A.A. , he is right now seeking an interpretation of the initial ruling that they gave for the location and we expect that within the next two weeks to thirty days it takes anywhere in between that to get the final answer of the F.A.A. and once we have that we will submit that to the Town, but at this time it is Metro One' s opinion that we will not need lighting and marking. As in the case with Laurelton if the F.A.A. wishes us to light this for safety reasons without the marking we will do so. MR SMITH: That way we will supply that in the contents of the lights consideration. MR RESAVY: And that would be the flashing red lights on the top. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: At all times or only during night time hours? Page 43 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z .B.A. MR RESAVY: Whatever they specify for us. That is specified by night we must adhere to it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I tell you the reason why it concerns me having flown in several small airplanes, that is a circling area and having the benefit of having a private airport in the great hamlet of Mattituck, the tower I would assume at being 104 feet in height could be a hazard to pilots, I have not had the luxury of flying, either flying in or flying out of Mattituck either in early hours of the morning prior to the sun coming up or to the sun going down. But those are the times that most concern me. MR SMITH: Certainly if the Board wanted to call out something more than the F.A.A. would require, we would be happy to do so. Certainly we can' t do less, I guess is what I'm saying. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I understand. Okay. Yes, question? (UNIDENTIFIED) : Bill and I live right across the street from the Baxter building and the flight of the planes going to Mattituck Airport is only one block away from our houses. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I know the feeling. There are many more questions we are going to ask here so, you know, and it appears that these gentlemen and ladies have brought a substantial crew of people here so. METRO ONE: We' ll try to answer as many questions as we can. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Believe it or not it' s still a fairly early hour for this Board. Thank you. MR SMITH: I reduced Mr. Nickles' statement to writing, it will make things go a little faster. MEMBER VILLA: Before the engineer sits down I have .a question and that question is why do you need the height of 102 feet when you know you said the one in Kennedy is like 75 feet? MR RESAVY: I believe the Southold tank tower is 125 feet, the proposed location out here in Northville is 100 feet and each of the locations here we are an existing 300 footer here that we' re at 150 feet in Southampton, We' re on the Hampton Bays water tank and believe our. MR SMITH: I believe he' s asking why 104 here. 1 Page 44 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: I 'm getting to that. According to the topology, we need vary and different heights, we did actual drive tests in this location to determine the lowest height that we can go for this location and it waslbvaluated that with the proposed location in both Northville and Southold, the Peconic police station that the 100 foot, 102 foot overall height is what Metro One would require to provide the service that we need to provide to our customers . MR SMITH: The next, witness is Mr. Nickles. As I stated to the Chairman when I began to a degree that I could pre-file some of this testimony I would do so, Mr. Nickles is present, the aspect of the special exception that he testifies to is the effect. The letter reads in closing, it is my opinion that the mass would not have any measurable effects upon the neighborhoods fair market value beyond the effect of the existing L.B. use or future L.B. uses as allowed under the Southold Town code. In the brief, that was presented by Mr. Moore, he goes into some detail in mentioning the other possible uses of the Baxter site, Mr. Baxter is in fact present should there be any question about the existing structures and the fact that they remain vacant for some period of time and have been used for commercial purposes. If there are any questions of the Board of Mr. Nickles I can have him answer those questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no specific questions of Mr. Nickles at this time. I do want to address a question to Mr. Baxter later. MR SMITH: This brings us to two of the health issues. Mr. Petersen' s resume has been given to you earlier, he is an expert with AT&T Bell Labs and the, he goes into rather great detail, I'm not sure that I understand a great deal of the detail, but in the closing paragraph, closing phrase of this particular letter. The proposed Mattituck Cellular Radio installation will not present any health problems to members of the public. He is of course referring to the nature of radio waves and light as the previous engineer stated to the Board this frequency and the strength of the signal is the same as was used in our T.V. sets some years ago so I don' t know that this is an issue_ But if anybody has a question, I ' ll have Mr . Petersen answer the questions as health effects and radio waves. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: My only concern is that of disruption to any particular devices that might exist in the local houses around the antenna site. MR SMITH: That's an engineering question that this young man Page 45 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont' d: can address . MR RESAVY: I can address that. We can provide a document to the Board that we' ll give Allen'�1Smith. We've got a letter from the F.C.C. in charge of the New York area which encompasses all of this location that the five years that Metro One has been in service we have not interfered with any commercial consumer device within our service area. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That includes cablevision in any form? MR RESAVY: That includes cable t.v. , microwave ovens , t.v. service, any consumer electronic device that is made for the market place. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What about a hamm radio. MR RESAVY: No. The ability to reuse frequencies is also that we can co-locate in many different areas, so as we are located on the tower in Southampton we are also co-located there with several hamm operators as well. Several other services. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: Mr. Chairman, one of the other gentlemen has given me a copy of a letter dated February 28, 1991, of the F.C.C. which appears to be the letter that was referenced. One of the additional issues that arises here and I did not have the opportunity to pre-file it, is the structural engineers inquiries, Mr. Papay will address those, maybe to save us all I will tell you my experience in briefing this particular matter I said to Mr. Papay, "Can we blow this tower down", and he said, "Of course we can blow the tower down. " I said well oh isn' t that a matter of concern, he says no. He says the force of the winds necessary to blow this tower down you are not going to worry about the tower coming because your neighbor' s car is going to be coming across your yard at the same time. But I ' ll let him say that in his own style of engineering ease and answer any fall down questions that anybody may have. MR PAPAY: The mono-pole itself is very similar to the light posts and transmission towers that you all see along the L.I .E. or what have you. The design of the tower itself forth by E.I .A. which is Electronics Industry Association to 22D which is a national standard what has been also adopted by the American National Standard Institute. The design criteria of the tower itself is a fifty year design storm for this part of Long Island it would be eighty five miles an i r Page 46 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR PAPAY, cont'd: hour. Metro One has opted for a hundred year design storm which correlates to a one hundred mile an hour wind. So that would be the, design wind itself of thirty three feet above the ground surface. You take that wind speed and you apply factors of the thing to basically accelerating the speed and the pressure so that you finally come up with a final design and like Allen has said, if upon failure there would be cars rolling across the landscape. It would take a tremendous force. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the same also with the antenna, I didn' t mean to cut you off, the possibility of the antenna blowing off? MR PAPAY: That' s an interesting question, I would imagine that there would be possibly particles of antennas that would dislodge before failure goes out. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me just tell you the problem that we've had in the past. This Board has wrestled with some interesting situations in reference to wind generating towers. Now we don' t have the sophistication in wind generating towers that we have here it appears and in no way am I enhancing or not enhancing this particular project, however, we 've had situations with the Coast Guard on North Dumpling Island in reference to height, wind velocity and so on and so forth, as to the disruption of their particular light which sits on top of an old Coast Guard station. In zones that would effect boating and so on and so forth. However, it has been this Board' s policy in the past and even with that of a prior council person who constructed a tower that if the tower should fall it would at least fall on his own persons ' property. We have an unique situation here in the respect that Mr. Baxter owns the piece of property to the south, which I ' ll address in a moment. In this particular case, if the wind was to blow and if we were to have the tornado that we had in the early 80' s and some how dislodge this particular tower, we would of course land on the neighbor' s property to the north and if it .did it in a very small fashion, you know, maybe ten or fifteen or twenty feet of the tower would end up on that neighbor' s property, being ninety five feet away from the northwesterly property line so to speak. However for the tower to fall on the south side it would definitely fall on Mr. Baxter' s property since he is the current owner of the property. Is there any need for any tie backs on a tower of this particular nature? MR PAPAY: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Why? Page 47 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR PAPAY: Because the tower itself is designed as a free standing structure. It is not designed as a guy structure. In fact you can get into complications if you were to guy a structure that was intended to deflect under load. If a guy was to restrain it from deflecting and had failed itself, it may cause the tower to fail, where as if the tower was not guyed and was allowed to relieve itself it would not go. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How far is this tower penetrating the ground surface? MR PAPAY: The foundation itself varies depending on the soil conditions, it would be approximately six to eight foot in diameter, would extend about twenty five or so feet into the earth. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Encased in cement, six to eight feet. MR PAPAY: That would be a concrete shell that' s reinforced with steel. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don' t have any further questions unless you do Bill. MR SMITH: I have two things. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. MR SMITH: We can develop for you the engineering relative to the affixing of the antenna, as a distinct object from the pole itself . If the fall down radius is a matter of concern, I think we can safely offer to' move the pole to the south to some degree, such that if it came down it would not fall in the yard to the north at all. If that' s a. . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the other question I would ask Mr. Baxter and I 've met Mr. Baxter in the rear at one time, but I would ask him also if he would covenant his piece of property to the south to the same distance so as during the period of this lease that there would be no construction on that particular piece other than it appears to be a concrete building at this time, to the attune of 104 feet to a degree, whatever degree you move it. MR SMITH: I can discuss that with Mr. Baxter and I will get that back to you. The way we have expressed it in other jurisdictions when this issue has arisen, we would detail a fall down pattern and the way those have been expressed in other places, that they would not erect any structures in those areas. They could be parking lots and the like, but no ` l Page 48 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: structures within the fall down area. I ' ll discuss that with him. He has counsel that represents him in dealing with the lease ald that is a lease question. So I don' t know that that would; be fair of me ask tonight, but, I will get you an answer. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: This young man may be able to answer the antenna issue in terms of fall down. MR RESAVY: I just want to clarify one part about the antennas themselves. The affixing we can supply the details and he can come up with the calculations for the affixing to the tower, but the antennas that we use in our system are made from a manufacturer who has supplied us a letter that they will withstand a 150 mile an hour wind. So we can supply that letter also, we had just applied that to a previous owner of a Town so that' s readily available and we' ll forward that to Allen Smith. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: I 've pretty much have had let the engineers have their say and I ' ll let Mr. Baxter jump to his feet in a moment. We've come down at least through my mental recollection of the check list in this special exception portion of the hearing. To the legal end of it, I believe that in submitting public utilities portion to the Board in advance as Mr. Moore has done with the brief, a question was raised relative to some can say in real English whether Southold was within the franchise area and I again have Chris ' statement to that fact reduced to writing and I' ll put it in the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I ask the question of the difference between NYNEX and Metro One, are they interrelated in anyway? Not necessarily at the remainder of the hearing, but. . . MR RESAVY: Since I used to work for NYNEX I think I can' answer that, many years ago. The F.C.C. when they created the cellular franchises or the ability to provide cellular service, they did it a little differently than they did many years ago with the regional Bell operated companies. What they decided to do is provide for not one but two entities that could provide the service to the public. That way there is not a monopoly on one side of the fence, so each company has in its guidelines of its license, operating license to provide the best quality service to its customers that it Page 49 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z .B.A. METRO ONE, cont'd: can and NYNEX is our competitor in this particular market place. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank youJ' MR SMITH: That' s pretty much the presentation, Mr. Chairman, I ' ll invite Mr. Baxter up, he' s not a witness of mine in such, he is obviously interested and you can ask him any questions you wish" to ask him, he wishes to answer. Mr. Baxter. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How are you Mr. Baxter? MR BAXTER: Hi, can I help you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The concern of the Board is that of , my concern, not necessarily the concern of the Board is that of the antenna falling on your property. In that this particular time you do own both parcels. If this organization intends to abide by the normal conditions that we request, and the tower is moved another nine feet to the south, it of course encroaches that much more on your southerly parcel. Our concern is that during the period of the time of the lease that there be no construction within approximately 104 feet of the, except what' s there now which we can' t you know, but that there be no construction within 104 feet of that antenna to the rear of that existing cement block building that you have now and that' s basically one of the requests that we deal with and I 'm just addressing it at this point. It' s not necessarily something that you have to come up with an answer for tonight, as Mr. Smith said that you know, that this is a situation you might want to review with your attorneys but we have found that in the past if we use that as a criteria that we start out with that it usually ends up to be pretty good all the way around. MR BAXTER: What is the distance from the pole to our property line? MR SAMBURG: Let me see the revised statement if that' s all you have. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure no problem. MR SAMBURG: Okay. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the same one? MR SA14BURG: No. Page 50 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. MR SAMBURG: They have already taken the liberty of moving it to the south. The area we are concerned with of course is the fall down below. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Why don' t you show that to Mr. Baxter. MR SAMBURG: Sure. I think he' s familiar. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have a date on that? MR SAMBURG: Yeah, this is a revised date of 4/23/91 . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You can give us a copy of that. MS KOWALSKI : We need about seven of them. Mkt SAMBURG: Seven? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yeah. MR SMITH: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Baxter will give you a written reply to that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Great. MR SMITH: That is my formal presentation, you have folks in the neighborhood and neighbors to address the Board and if they have concerns that I can answer, I ' ll try to do so. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. At the end of this discussion, I will then recess for about two minutes and discuss with the Board if we' re going to close this hearing or if we' re going to venture up to Laurelton and take a look at this antenna and then if we have any other further questions and we' ll let you know. MR SMITH: Thank you sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you gentlemen like to address the Board in anyway, feel free to do it in whatever fashion you like, I know your concerns, you live close to the property and I would have similar concerns and in no way are we. MR SAMBURG: There are two questions I was going to ask today. Page 51 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I just have your name for the record. MR SAMBURG: Ed Samburg. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Mr. Samburg. Do you have any other questions sir. MR SAMBURG: They answered everything very well. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, I guess at this time we' ll take a short recess and I guess we ' ll go over to the office and kick this around. Yes. MR SMITH: I do have that video. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh yeah, that' s right. MR SMITH: It' s nothing much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is it a video? MR SMITH: Yes, it ' s, they hate it. If you want to see it, it probably takes a couple, three minutes, it shows how this new technology in the fire trucks works and stuff . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well if you want to sure, if you want to set it up while we' re taking the recess. (Video was shown for approximately 10 minutes concerning Lincoln Park, New Jersey safety services systems . ) MR SMITH: The other two things, I guess that I did mention, it reminds me of it. These are now used by the police in a number of different areas within my experience. I tried to find out whether they used it in the hostage negotiations when the young man took over the place across the street in Mattituck from the theater. The reason that they do it, they supply a discreet channel to the hostage that thev can talk to with this where they don' t have everybody and their brother listening in. I 'm also told now that the fire chiefs are liking these better and so are the police when they go to a fatal, because it' s the nature of things such as all of us who have monitors that we pick up the police signal and they don' t get the turnout of people when they start calling in names and things of that nature and asking for the M.E. office, that they do when they use the fire channel to ask for the M.E. and stuff like that. And I guess you guys know all about these things, but I mean that' s the size of it now and the fact is there is some a little smaller. Page 52 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: That' s antique at this point. They have them small enough to fit in your shirt pocket phone. MR SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright the only last two questions that we have are, were there any other alternate sites in Mattituck that were investigated and. . . MR SMITH: Yes, the commercial areas are to the west of this location, westerly generally at the school and up in that area. The degradation of the signal is the problem that happens to us when we get that far '.pest. It is this technology that the wind is testified to earlier. They have made a legitimate effort to identify parcels where they could go that would satisfy the engineering. It begs the question, we've a very similar experience in Riverhead in trying to identify sites. The water towers in Polish Town which is one of the sites that' s existing. They had to go up into essentially a residential farm area, if you will, up on the west end of town of the Brookhaven line. And the last one was in Vernon Well' s field in Northville, towards the tanks as close as we could get. It is the dilemma that this Board faces the technology is such that it dictates certain things if we had our brothers we might do other wise. The problem, I guess, with zoning is nobody had this technology in mind, when we zoned either at Riverhead or Southold or the next place. That' s the problem. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The other. point is, I guess it' s the suggestion of the Board to recess the hearing and ask you to come back with that determination if you can give us a 104 foot circumference all the way around. MR SMITH: I have a plan for three items that I 'm getting for you. I have to speak to Mr. Baxter and solve the fall down issue, I 've agreed to get you this information on the antenna and when it comes loose, if it comes loose from the tower itself, and lastly we' re going to try to get for you the F.A.A. stuff. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay and you are going to get us the address of the tower that presently exists, which is 75 feet high in Laurelton. MR SMITH: We shall. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: Thank you. Page 53 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Surely. MEMBER VILLA: How many of these are we looking at for the Town of Southold now. Is this going to be the last one or are we looking at more? MR SMITH: I ' ll try to answer and then I ' ll have one of the engineers answer. They' re speaking to the Village of Greenport about going up on the water tower there and are there any other sites in Southold? MR RESAVY: At this time we don' t anticipate any for the foreseeable future, that being our forecast for the next three years that we have locked at. And as technology changes that may be extended or it may be brought in. But at this time we do not see anything in the next three years, at this point. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would utilize this antenna, other than yourself . Would you rent space on this antenna to anybody else? MR RESAVY: We will not rent space on this tower to anybody else except for the Town if they so desire to enhance their services in that area. But as a practice of Metro One, we do not do that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What about if the fire district in the immediate hamlet? MR RESAVY: We will be more than happy to support any of the safety net, fire safety, anything in that vain. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: That is already true on the tower that' s going up. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. We thank you very much and we hope to see you at the next meeting or so. MR SMITH: The clerk will advise me or Mr. Moore when it will be back? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, I make a motion recessing the hearing. Page 54 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. All in Favor - AYE. By t (Transcribed by Tape) (Not Present at the Hearing) APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman ,�y ^ Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. " Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doven,Jr. ` ? z n James Dinizio,Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Robert A. Villa Southold,New York 11971 Fax (516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 "= Telephone (516)765-1800 n� BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OV SOUTHOLD TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON JUNE 7 , 1991 Appl. No. 4022-SE - CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. This hearing was recessed from the April 30, 1991 meeting, and the statements made during the hearing are as follows: 8: 12 p .m. - Hearing reconvened . CHAIRMAN: Ok. We ' ll go back to the application for Metro One, Cellular Telephone, which was opened at the last regularly scheduled meeting, and we had some questions of Mr. Smith at that point. Mr. Smith, are you going to continue. ALLEN M. SMITH, ESQ . : I was going to defer to my young friend whose name is really on this application (William Moore, Esq.) and is now back from (a journey) with his wife . But to take the lead, I shall. When we left off last together, there were a number of items that you wished addressed. The first was to move the tower as such that it would not fall down on the property to the north if it were to come down, and we 've done that. And I understand that Mr. Moore had provided you with a stipulation from Mr. Baxter relative to the parcel to the south. He has a drawing I believe he may have drawn that depicts that for you. One of the board members or member of the audience asked a question relative to the structural integrity of the antenna as distinct from the structural integrity of the monopole, and I have sent Mr. Goehringer the information that relates to the fact that the antenna will take at least as much force, wind force, as with the pole . Relative to the FAA, the position of the FAA remains the same, such that you can understand both the `r Page 2 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 ALLEN SMITH, continued: engineering and legalistic gobbilly-gook that contained in the FAA letter. It says that it1b6 lighted with a white strob light during daylight hours, and lighted with a red light during the evening. we supplied for you to location of not only the JFK tower, the monopole that was referenced. - in the earlier testimony that I provided you, although not owned by Metro but are of a similar design. The last thing that I sent to Mr. Goehringer since our last meeting was a decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Town of Riverhead, which has considered similar applications to the one that is before you for whatever it is worth as I said in the letter. I believe that is the checklist that we left off with the other day. If there are any additional questions, we will answer them. I do recall one. Mr. Moore has in fact spoken with some representatives of the AEMTs associated with the Mattituck Fire Department. I believe that we ' re authorized to say that they consider the enhancement of the cellular mobile facilities on the North Fork to be an advantage to them. The reason is that if I were to have a heart-attack and they were to come get me with their more sophisticated apparatis, they actually hook me into certain monitoring of devices . A heart monitor, block pressure and the like . And that data is relayed by Cellular Telephone, I believe, to a hospital on the South Side. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: South Side Hospital in Bay Shore . MR. SMITH: South Side hospital on Long Island, where if I 'm being transported to Central Suffolk (Hospital) or if I 'm being transported to wherever the emergency system dictates on the AEMTs in the Mattituck ambulance or rescue vehicle can in fact buy As I understand it, by reason of the fact that we do not have in this area on the North Fork a detailed telephone system. There are sometimes difficulties in doing the transmitting back to South Side Hospital, and I believe we ' re authorized to say that. Other than that I think we 've answered everything that we had left open from the earlier meeting. If there are any other questions, I ' ll attempt to answer them. • r Page 3 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The approximate, and I apologize for this- but the approximate height of the antenna is 104 feet, is that not correct? I� MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN: We 're at 104 feet, is that correct? Ok. And we are 95 feet from the northerly property line. Ok. Now we ' re at 103 . MR. SMITH. Yes (referring to map) . CHAIRMAN: So we ' re right on, approximately. And this is going to be the fall-back area right in here (referring to map) . MR. SMITH: Yeah, and he ' s going to sign a covenant to that effect. MR. (neighbor) : I just wanted to see that. CHAIRMAN: Now, what did you want to look at, Bob? BOB That; I just wanted to see it for what it-- Let ' s see. It would impinge on that one. This one would definitely. This was the one that I was concerned about. Ok. CHAIRMAN: All right. Good. Did you have anything else for the record? MR. SMITH: I tried to be responsive as best I could. I cb n't have anything more or less to say. I 'd appreciate a decision at the board ' s convenience. CHAIRMAN: I have not gotten to Laurelton yet. I tried to go today, and I didn 't make it. What I 'm going to ask is both the indulgence of both you and Mr. Moore and what I 'm going to do is request the board that we close this hearing as to any further verbatim testimony, and that we just close the hearing as a matter of formality at the next regularly scheduled meeting, when I do make it up there and if I do have further questions, I can communicate with you by mail. Does anyone have any objec- tions to that? MR. SMITH: Very good, sir. None. Thank you. Have a good evening. Page 4 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in behalf of this application? ,I (No response. ) Hearing no further questions, I ' ll make ' a motion recessing this until the next regularly scheduled meeting, at which time we will close it as a matter of formality (written record to be closed and file sealed at next regularly scheduled meeting) and-- BOARD CLERK: Closing all verbatim testimony? CHAIRMAN: And we are closing all verbatim testimony (at this time) . MEMBER VILLA: Second. The verbatim portion of the hearing was declared closed and the written portion of the record was permitted to remain open for questions and answers, by mail, until the next regularly scheduled meeting at which time the file would be sealed (record concluded) . VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES : Messrs. Goehringer, Villa, Doyen and Grigonis . (Member Dinizio was absent from this particular hearing. ) Respectfully submitted, Linda 7. Kowalski, Board Clerk STATE OF NEW PORK ON PUBLIC SERVICE At a 5e88ion of the Public Service ppR 2g �965 Commission onld in the C!tY Of Albany January 11 , 1984 COMMISSIONERS P Paul L. Oioiar Chairman Harold . A. Jerry , Jr . Anne F . HSadpooler gAR2 �[J g Rosemary 3 - Petition for a Certificate CASE 28693 - Cellular Telephone Company to construct and of Public Convenience and Necessity operew ate A c andardrrietropolitanio oSatistical AunicatiO rea. in the ORDER ISSUING CERTIFICATE OF ORDER CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY ( Issued April 18 , 1985 ) By petition filed November 21 , 1983 , Cellular Telephone Company (CTC) sought authority pursuant to Section 99 of the Public Service Law to operate a cellular radio system in the NOW York City area. The petitioner had applied to the Federal Communications Commission for a construction permit. A 1984r we determined that publ t our session of January 11, convenience and necessity require the construction of facilities by Cellular Telephone Company• we approved the request but withheld t) certificate pending ceceipt of FCC approval . On October 19r 1984 ? _iin • �nry.a 3r� : -- ):j131.1 j ; : 9f rc, 0r 1171 rCC granted CTC permissirJ.. to operate its proposed ', stem in the New York SHSA. A copy of the FCC construction permit was forwarded to us on April 8, 1985. Because of the extent of the plant to be constructed, CTC has requested a 12 month interval from the date of this order for filing of its tariffs. Accordingly it is: C E R T I F I E D that subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth in this order, and not otherwise, public convenience and necessity require that Cellular Telephone Company be authorized to construct and operate cellular telephone facilities which shall emit reliable radio signals within the contours defined by the directions. and distaneoa set forth in Attachment I. Additionally, Cellular Telephone Company shall be authorized to and it is further O R D E R E D: 1. That this order constitutes a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity authorizing Cellular Telephone Companyeto provide cellular radio telephone seevice in the New York Standard M&tropolitan Statistical Area; 2. That appropriate tariff schedules should be filed with the. Commission within 12 months of this order provided that such schedules are filed 60 days prior to the commencement of service; 3 . That the Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity set forth in this 'Order will be revoked without further notice if Collular Telephone Company fails to file its schedule of tariffs with the Commission within the prescribed period. Ill} U.H.1 . 31;')-Q.�i 31d Id li.jj :=5 :'3f IF. • kit flyl t ' 4 . That this _der is effective immediat`� _yp and 5. That this proceeding is continued. By the Commission, ( Signed ) JOHN J . KELLIHER Secretary cellular ' e lepn0Re (.;01nzany Rellable 5*rvice Area f Loci iCae #lA Nahapac: LGcatiOris 11B Mahopac Lat. - 41'22'4.0'W. Lan . 73'44'43" N. Lat. 41*22' 4" W. L�on - 73'44' 43" N• 39, c9U Hasa n "' dBu alarzn • 9.0 miles N 0' E Liao N 450 5• 8 .9 45" 13 . 1/ • 10. 2 900 9. 135' 7. 3 135' 4.5 O. 4. 3 180' 4. 2 225' 6.5 225' 4.2 270' 10.6 270� 3 .6 313 ' 10 . 7 315 6.3 )cation: 02 Mohegan Lake Locations 03A Katonah N. Lat. 41 '17158" W. Lon . 13'51 ' 28" N. Lat. 41#16146" W�Lop 73.37*33" ®a daU Hea�si 39 c9811- N 0' H 6 . 2 Miles N 0' E 7.5 miles 45' 6 . 2 45' 4.4 90' 7 .8 qOG 3.8 133 ' 9. 1 1351 5.9 L80' 9 .0 1804 7. 6 2250 10.2 223' 5.4 270' 9 .0 270' 4a7 315' 7 .6 315' 5.9 MAR 22 ' 91 16! 26 518 . 465 9313 PAGE . 007 200 ' 39Hd 3140-0813W WOad 9c : 11 16 , Lz 8HW Locations 04 Ossining Location) #5 Btcnsy point N. Lat, 41'09157" W. ?on 73'S1 '42" N. Las. 41414' 10" W. ton • 73'59' f.0" >3sarin u earin 39�c�U— 8,4 miles N 0' E 8.4 miles 45' 8.4 45' 8.4 90' 8.4 904 8.4 135' 8.4 135' 8.9 180' 8.6 180' 8.4 225' 9.4 225' 8.4 270• 044 270• 8.4 315' 9. 3 315' 8.4 Locations #6 Spring Va119y LOcatiOnt 07 Elmsford N. Lat. 41'05' 35" W. Lanq. 74#02138" & Lat. 41'03 '25" w. Lon 73'4912.0 Sserin deU aarin4 (130 N 0' E 8.0 miles N 0' E 5. 9 miles 45' 13.4 45' S.5 90' 13 .9 9o• 5. 5 135' 13 , 9 135' 7, 1 1804 1349 1804 6.4 225' 12 .0 2250 $of 270' 8.3 2.70' 6. 8 3i5' 8.0 315' 6.8 MAR 22 191 16: 26 $18 465 9313 PAGS. 008 E00 ' 39tid 3N0-08-L 3W• WOa j 96 : l 1 16 , LZ aijw ' r toc�ns to Harrison Locations 19 Yonkers N. Lat. 40059154" w Long. 73042 ' 1 .0" N. Lat. 40•56' 15" an W. Long�, 73'51 ' 31" 8earxn , 8U 8®an 39 dau N 0' E 3 .0 pules 14 0' 3 9 .9 Mil** 43' 2.5 450 9.4 90' 1.7 90' 12.0 135' 3. 3 1351 12.4 180' 3.9 180' 11.9 225' 6.1 225' 11. 1 270' 5 . 5 2706 11 .4 3154 S . 5 315' 10.9 Location: #10 Harrington Park, NJ Locationt #11 Ramsay, NJ N. . at. 40'SB' 58" W. Long. 73138144" N. Lat, W 63 ' 26" W. ton . 740$$'47" Bede n� zu 88ar n 39 B N 0' E 8. 4 miles N 00 E 8.4 miles 430 8. S 451 8.4 90• 8.4 904 11.2 135, 0.4 135' 12.8 1800 9.4 180' 12.3 225' 9 . 3 225' 8.4 2700 8.4 210' 0.4 3139 0.4 315' 8,4 MAR 22 '91 16 r 27 318 ''46S 9313 Pb139 . 009 h00 ' 30Fid 3NO-0813W W0d.1 46 e 1 1 16. Lz duw W atianl #12 Pompton Lakes. NJ N. Lat. 40459146" W. Lon 74'ib ' S1" ssr. n N 0' E 11.0 mllea 45' 11.2 9o' 11 .6 133" 13.0 180' 13. 5 225' 11 .5 270' 9.o 313' 7 . 7 Location! #14 Fort Lost NJ Location. 015 Secaucus. NJ No Lat, 40'51' 17" W. Lon . 73958 ' 44" No La . 40.4b'48" +' .W. LOn 74004' 50" saran dHU Sear : 13 U N 0' •L" 11.8 miles N 45'ID 9.4 miles 4y 10.9 135' 12.6 13V 8.4 180' 12 .4 1000' 8.4 225• 12.9 225' 8.4 270' 11.8 270' 8.4 315' 12.0 3150 o.a i. 4 MAR 22 191 18127 i; d "�l; $18 465 9313 PAGE.010 • 900 ' 39Ud 3N0-081*3W'WOad L0.: 11 16 . LZ HUW 1Q p #16 Orange# NJ N. Lat, 40'50141" W. Lon 74•14' 36P ear>n Bu N 0' 2 11.4 miles 45' 12.6 90' 13 .7 135' 13 .8 180' I1.6 225' 11. 1 270' 12.7 - 315' 12.0 )cation: #26 Staten Inland Lgeations #27 Coney Island N;1 40'32147" W. Lon . 74.9 ' 35" N. Lat. 40'36' 36" W4 Lcng- 73- 59'24" Bearing 3 eArin 39 dau 9.3 miles N 0' E 8.4 miles 451 9.3 45' 9.4 90' 9.9 90' 8.6 135' 8.2 136' i.6 180' 5.4 1804 866 225• 4.9 2250 8.6 370' 5.0 270• 8.4 315' 7 . 8 3154 814 k MAR 22 '91 161 29 i 818 •4,69 , 9313 PAGE. 01 1 ••,14 900 ' 39Hd 3N0-02113W; Woad 8EIIt . t6 . 42 813W LOCatlO 1 #28 Jersey City, NJ Locationt S29 Brooklyn 'aa ' la" W. Lon- 74'02' 24" N. Lat. 40.411494 W. Long. 73#591360 � Lat. ao d$U Heasin U ��arxn N 0• E 8.9 Miles N 0' S 8 .4 miles .3 45• 9.0 9d� 9 . 8.4 goo 8.9 135' 9. 1 1354 9.3 180• 9i8 180� 8.9 225 8.4 225' 8. 6 270' 9.6 313' 8.8 313' 9.2 31S• Loeatio = 030 Manhattan LooatiOnt #31 North Bergen# NJ ao'sA' 23" W,.�. L�ox_�. 73'59' 25° N. Lat. 40'48' 16" on . 73 99145" N_.�Lat,�. 39 a]5u Hear n- d NeO. iE 992 miles N 0' 1; 10.9 Milos 4S' 10.6 45� 10.5 • 10 .1 90 11.8 135' 10. 3 13E 10.9 180' 10.1 180, 11 . 6 225' 10.9 225 2'70* 11 -3 11.3 270' 10.4 . 11 . 1 315• 10 .2 315 MAR 22 ' 91 16128 518 .465 9313 PAOE . 912 LF3t3 ' 39t1d 3NO'ON13W WONA 9e : 1.1 16 . 12 duw Location: #32 Long island City Locations 633 Brooklyn N. Lat. 40045120" We Long#- 73'56' 45" N. Lat. 40.42644" 14_ Long.: 13•56 , 28" Bearzn 3-9dBU earina T -C7, u -- N 0' E 8.4 miles N 0' E 9. 5 miles 45' 8 .6 45' 8. 7 go* 8 .4 90' 8.4 135' 8.4 135' 8.9 180' 8.4 190' 8.8 225' 9.0 225' 8.9 270' 8.4 270' 9 .0 3150 8 .4 315' 8.7 Location: #34 Richmond Hill Location: #35 Rronx N. yet. 40141 ' 29" W. Lonq. 73 'S0 ' 43" N. Lat, 40•48' 57" W. LL_oriq. 73.W 13" Bearin 39 dBU Bsar ng 3 dB N 0' E 8.4 miles N 00 E 8.4 miles 45' 8 .4 45• 10.0 9o' 8.4 90' 10.1 135' 8 .9 135' 9.4 180' 8.9 190' 9.2 225• 8 .8 2250 10 . 3 970' 8.4 970' 9.6 315' 8.4 315' 9.4 MAR 82 191 16c28 519 465 931.9 PAGE . 013 8GJ0 ' 3JFid 3N9-ON131.1 Wopj j 66 t 1 1 16 . 43 duw �Iocationl 040 Jericho laaationr W. Huntington . Lat. 40.46'49" '1 Long. 73933 ' 26" N. Lat. 40°52 ' 2" W LOn 73'24' 37" `le00 0 E '3� 4 miles earinQ 93 dBUq !!.4 miles 45' 8.4 N 0450 6. 1 miles 135, 9.8 900 9.2 ° 10.2 225• 19.7 i 180° 111.3 2700 4 8. 2250 9 .7 315° 270° 8.4 3150 64 .4 =Ation! #42 Farmingdale Locations 143 St. James Lat. 40043139" W. Long. 73427 '4" N. Lat. 40°52 ' S5" W. Lon % r taring 39 dBD — Bear sfa --- -g.. 73 9 29 0' E 1.9 d8U 48' 7.9 miles N 0• R 9.3 6.1 miles 90, 10.19 45. 6. 7 _000 11 .2 1356 10.6 25' 11 . 2 180• 11 .4 70° 10 . 2 225 10 . 2 15• 8.7 2700 6.8 3159 9.4 MAR' 22 ' 91 16: 29 51S 493 9313 p6E . 015 0I0 ' 39Hd 3110-0813W Woaj 0t' : 11 16 , 42 NNW .0catiant #44 Uyville Locations 045 Shirley .4. Lat. 40'44' 46" W. LOnl- 73'5' 23" N. Lat. 40•47139" W. Lon 72•52* 35":enrin d$II- Paz na 3 d8U 1 0• E 8.4 miles N 00 E 45 1 8. 7 45• 8.6 miles 90' 10.1 90, 9. 2 135' 10 .2 1359 9. 1801 10.2 ?.3 2250 10.2 2230 7.4 • 9. 7 270* 6.9 3131 8.9 3150 9 .0 e.a ocaticnt 1446 Riverhead Location: 447 shelt,sc Island Lat. 40•55 ' 28" W. Long, 72.41136" N. LLa_t- 41.4130" W. LO 3ar n gZ•21 '12"g 39 dBu BQarsn3 3..g.. 00 E 4. 2 milYd 45• N 0' E 5 . 6 miles 3o• 45. 8. 2 7.8 350 . 90. 9.9 30• 135 9.0 8.7 25' 180 8 .6 7o• 7 ..9 225.• 8. 2 15' 4.8 3150 5. 5 . 1 MAR 22 191 16:30 518 465 9313 PAGE. 016 110 ' 39Hd 3N0-ON13W IdO>Jj 0h : ► 1 16 . 2Z NH14 ,ocatictt� t4a Southhampton ljocationt #49 Eaat Hampton a. Lat. _40'53' 32" W. on 72'24 ' 13° 8ea` Lat. 40'59' 34" We Ean 72'10' 19" 39 go 3earia � 0. B 11 .0 miles N 0' E 8.4 miles 45' 8.6 46' 9.0 • 10.5 90' 8.8 90• 10.7 135' 8.9 180' 10.5 190' 0.7 223' 10 .7 225' S.6 270' 10.9 270' 8.4 315' 10 .6 3154 8.2 518 463 9313 PAGE . 017 210 ' 39Hd . y Tv;:d BOARD OF AP ALS -4- Sept, ber 27 , 1979 -er here so we won ' t have that big drop. JJ-,L .SS : Well , -1 noticed that George (Fisher) has given you already. He has allowed 20%, the Building Depart- - - _e g ; e 20? in a case like that. It brings you up 7-`7"ATH: Right. CJTi?i: L: What ' s the setback for the existing house? 37 ' 3 " and 38 ' 8 " . It' s on a little bit of an angle. What are they asking? A bigger house. A deeper house. Yeah, because they have more room in back of this. ;r uF- stiation and inspection, the Board finds that the appli- =st_: a. 33-Zeot fron-tyard setback and a 15-foot rearyard set- t3=.:r e prcoosed 'house ' s closeness to the pond and the elevatign x Bcara agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. ~ tc z DC>?a:d finds that strict application of the Ordinance would x -rriq;_ical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship stunique and would not be shared by all properties alike in C 'Ic iiakc vicinity of the property and in the same use district; m variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and w srv.erthe spirit of the ordinance. ~ notion made by Mr. Grigonis, seconddd by Mr. Doyen, it was � v 0TrFP, tha`_ Joan Kienath, 380 Deer Drive, Mattituck, New York, _D4_a; var ,rce to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III , Section Schedule for permission to construct a dwelling ci:,nt frontyard setback of not less than 33 feet and -rsu- ici ,nt rearyard setback of not less than 15 feet. o _progPrc,r: Soundview Avenue, Mattituck, New York; bounded S�str;dvrew Avenue, west by Kienath, south by Robinson, east `1I:'LON FOP APPROVAL: Suffolk County Planning Commission approval. eyaf the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Douglass, Grigonis, Tuthill, n. s#tp.' t. ,95 Avenue of the Americas, New Yor ,,F�*' variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIIy '"rainsion to install a 90-foot pole with two rac �•!-?.d' Ynrd• Location of property: Main Road, Cute), t :at;i rr✓• c SO=TOLG TOWN BOARD OF AV ALS -4- Sept, her 27, 1979 closer over here so we won ' t have that big drop. MR. DOUGLASS: Well , I noticed that George (Fisher) has given you a sideyard variance already. He has allowed 20%, the Building Depart- ment has allowed to give 20% in a case like that. It brings you up from 15 to 11.3. MRS. KIENATH: Right. L MR. TUTHILL: What' s the setback for the existing house? MR. DOUGLASS: 37 ' 8" and 38 ' 8" . It' s on a little bit of an angle. MR. TUTHILL: What are they asking? MR. DOUGLASS: 33 . MR. TUTHILL: A bigger house. A deeper house. MR. DOUGLASS : Yeah, because they have more room in back of this. '# Thank you, ma 'am. After investigation and inspection, the Board finds that the appli- cant requests a 33-foot frontyard setback and a 15-foot rearyard set- back due to the proposed house ' s closeness to the pond and the elevation of the lot. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant, tv z The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would x produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in c - the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; 0 and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and F = - will observe the spirit of the ordinance. On motion made by Mr. Grigonis, seconddd by Mr. Doyen, it was v. �c - w RESOLVED, that Joan Kienath, 380 Deer Drive, Mattituck, New York, be GRANTED a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100731 Bulk & Parking Schedule for permission to construct a dwelling with an insufficient £rontyard setback of not less than 33 feet and with an insufficient rearyard setback of not less than 15 feet. Location of property: Soundview Avenue, Mattituck, New York; bounded north by Soundview Avenue, west by Kienath, south by Robinson, east _ by Krupski. CONDITION FOR APPROVAL: Suffolk County Planning Commission approval. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Douglass, Grigonis, Tuthill, and Doyen. z ( K7 ere,, �kSa PAYr 4 �:a �Yi . t„a n p $fie 095 Avenue of the Americas, New Yor. ,, Necv or , 10036 for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII; Section r; ., 100-71 for permission to install a 90-foot pole with two radio an- tennas in side yard. Location of property: Main Road, Cutchogue, New i,,. ::041TIIOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -5- September 27 , 1979 York, bounded on the no4 .i by Sterling, east by ImL iano and Boyd, South by Main Road, west by S & E Realty Co. The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at 7 : 52 P.M. by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing as advertised in the local newspapers, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notification to ad- joining property owners was made to S & E Realty Co. , Anthony & G. Imbriano, and L.G. Boyd; fee paid $15 . 00 . MR. DOUGLASS: We have copies of the general arrangement site Plan and a copy of the County Tax Map showing the surrounding properties and the subject property. Is there anybody who wishes to speak for this application? DAVID L. SOHN: 183 Main Street, Huntington, New York, and I represent the New York Telephone Company. I would just like to correct one thing, Mr. Chairman. We kind of repeated the language in the Cutchogue and Greenport applications, in the one place where you read there , water towers with respect to Cutchogue, it should read radio tower because there is already one at the backyard of this property. t t MR. DOUGLASS: Yes, that ' s right, it ' s the little one that' s t out at the back of the building there. MR. SOHN: It was g p y t just that that of transposed the same Way as t the Greenport one, and the fact that the water tower does exist to the north. So we ' ll be talking about these tonight and I apologize C ;lso for that statement that you didn ' t get prior to the meeting, out the statement that I am going to make now is really supposed to be that. We 'll be talking about both of these because they both are the Greenport site and the Cutchogue site, part of the system T and networth. r c MR. DOUGLASS: Yes, but they will have to be taken up individually. F n MR. SOHN: Yes, but lots of the things that we'll be saying about the system and the technology that's involved in the system apply to both sites. That ' s the only po.int. .I wanted to make. Yes, we will treat each one separately for the zoning. This is a request for an area variance from the height regulations applicable to the B-1 District, wherein New York Telephone Company owns and operates a central-office facility located on the north side of Main Road in Cutchogue. At this site the Telephone Company proposes to erect a 90-foot steel mono-pole support structure for the two radio signal antennas. One is an 8-foot parabolic dish, if you will, antenna; and the other is a 6-foot parabolic antenna. They're fixed pros- pectively for, it ' s supposed to be fixed prospectively on this tower 85 feet and 70 feet above grade. Since the Southold Zoning Code Bulk Schedule restricts building height to 35 feet in the B-1 Dis- trict, the Building Inspector has ruled that this proposed structure requires a variance because of its 90-foot height. Before going into the nature of this proposal and why the variance being sought is necessary, if you would allow me I would like to state for the _,ecord a kind of a divergence of opinion that we have with the Build- ing Inspector on his interpretation of the Ordinance in respect to c SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -6- Se?- ember 27, 1979 this proposal. Itts not really a serious one but it's one I think that should be stated. While I would hope that the Board would agree with le in this interpretation, and if you would we could establish what I believe to be a legally correct view of this proposed use as an acces- sory use, not requiring the Bulk Variance. Please understand that we are prepared to deal with this case as a straightforward height variance and to submit to the Board ' s judgment on that issue should the Board end up agreeing with the Building Inspector. These remarks apply as well to the next item on the agenda, the height variance matter relating to the Telephone Company property in Greenport. These general remarks. In short, we believe that the proposed mono-pole ^< support is nothing more or less than the accessory structure that is G customary with and incidental to the primary structure and permitted use of the sites, both sites, as telephone exchanges. Indeed the C Building Inspector does agree with this concept, the use part of the concept, but he requires that this clearly accessory structure be also subject to the Bulk requirements of the Code and Schedule as well . r Ordinarily we would agree with that interpretation as in a case, for r example, where a garage was accessory to a single-family home, and r that still had to comply with the bulk requirements in the residence C district. That makes alot of sense. But here, with the Special Ex- ception basis of the telephone exchange, both of them, include in r their authorizations those accessory uses and structures related to c a telephone exchange. And here where the distinction should be made. ` The radio-telephone antenna is clearly accessory to the telephone exchange principal use, and as such the telephone company is not k permitted to use such an accessory structure above 35 feet because of , T 'r-he height restrictions of the Bulk Schedule, it is in effect denied � Ehe right to operate the accessory use as permitted under Section 100-70 (c) of the Ordinance, as we will now discuss these structures had to be at the height as nna will receive and code and re-transmit othe signals be vthat e. Tare eatnaefres n quency of 11 gigahertz . Such a signal frequency has to have a clearLy and 'unobstructed path to its neighboring antenna, and in the case of such installation, the antenna to be located in Greenport, that's ` not correct I 've just been told--what does Cutchogue have in connec- tion to--Noyack, or West Riverhead. Accordingly, in order to, for the circuitry to operate at all, the antennas must be able to kind of see each other. And that word site in there should be s-i-g-h-t. Line of sight. MR. DOUGLASS : No, it' s not spelled that way. MR. SOHN: No, I noticed that. And on a direct visual basis these things have to, you know, if a guy were sitting up on top of one of the them, he could see the guide or he could see at least a mirror flash, you know 15 to 20 miles away. They have to in effect see each other. For this reason, they must be raised to the heights involved, for if they were any lower trees, hills, buildings between them would block the signal and interfere with the telephone services being rendered over the system. So what we're really saying is, is that this is an accessory use not to be subject ents to the Bulk require- - � le an accessory use because it is so customarily incidental to _lie telephone exchange, and if it had to comply with the height requirements, you would never be able to use it. That 's really what we are saying. And that' s the difference of opinion we have with the Building Inspector. And that ' s why we think it' s. a little bit SObT_-HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -7- September 27, 1979 different from the acces6 ory garage to a single-family dwelling which has to comply with the Bulk. But as I say, let ' s go on to the regular part of the variance. I just wanted to make that point. It' s a, it' s not an unusual ,point to make and there have been locations, and I realize none of it is binding on this Board, in- on Long Island where that exact procedure has been followed. MR. DOUGLASS; Yeah, but accessory use for a tennis court is a fence around it when it comes into the Bulk. MR. SOHN: Sure, we agree with that. The system of which the Cutchogue installation is a vital part is best described as back-bone digital, radio-telephone network designed to serve the Eastern section of Long Island. This network will enable the Telephone Company to introduce and maintain the latest kinds of telephone service, includ- ing the transmission of digital data. The network will supplement, expand and in some cases replace land cables that are becoming obsolete because of sheer age and because of the cost of maintaining them. Thus there is a great economic advantage to both the Company and its i subscribers in the use of this kind of technology by keeping the cost = of maintainance and installation of these needed facilities at the lowest available within the State of New York. The difference in ' cost between the radio system and the digital land cables performing t t the same function would be on the order over the long trended pull of t a 20-year period, which is how we look at our money, our investment in this kind of thing. The difference would be on the order of about 25% and we're talking in the area of initial first costs, between a t cost of the radio system of about $7 million to a cost of the land system of about $19 million. Balancing the need, the technological superiority and the economic benefit as well as the environmental benefit of fewer land cables strung in and over the streets against the community interests that be asserted against this variance request, the following factors are apparent. The variance will not materially alter the character of the use permitted already at the site; this is so because there already exists the mono-pole at the rear of the t property and that is, as unobtrusive as the proposed mono-pole would t be. Incidentally, that accessory pole was permitted without requir- ing a height variance. The site itself is well screened by mature ' tree cover on the east and on the north. To the west is the busy commercial use represented by the shopping center. Across Main Road are residents and an open field where some mature tree cover exists. I spoke myself to a lady that lives in the residence across the way on Main Road and she informed me that the proposed use would be of no special concern to her. She, I think, was not the owner of the property, she ' said her son ' s. I bought some of her gladiolus. The extent of the variance needed is not inconsistent with the require- ment of the Telephone Company considered against the consequences to efficient telephone service without the variance. In other words, it' s not an unreasonable use of the land in view of the public bene- fit that will result when we enhance and improve the telephone service. So, in conclusion, we believe that we demonstrated that a practical difficulty indeed exists and the use of this land justifies the grant of the height variance to this special purpose. A special public Utility use. In the final analysis the practical difficulty is that there is just not enough high ground in this area in such close ( proximity to the telephone exchange that is available to implement the special engineering requirements of this kind of radio network. r SOUTiiOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -8- September 27, 1979 MR. SOHN (continued) : I would on the basis of these facts and the plans submitted respectfully request that, that the variance be granted to erect this accessory structure as proposed . We have with us tonight some highly expert gentlemen in respect to radio and transmission matters in case any questions might arise in that res- pect, and we will be pleased to answer them. (\ MR. DOUGLASS : May I ask, a question. What influence does nearness to, like the situation you have in Cutchogue, where you want to put it, if you came back towards the rear corner of the building does a distance like that influence the value of the unit any? MR. SOHN: Indeed it does. I asked the very question before we came in here that you are asking now, and the reason for that is that you lose the integrity of the signal when you separate it by distance so far from the equipment that it is connected to at these z frequencies; and there ' s also a problem, a technical engineering problem that involves what they call a wave guide, that is that carries the signal up to the antenna, that has to be in the kind of proximity to that exchange to that equipment inside the building 0 where the equipment to that thing that it is connected to will be located. It has to be that close. That' s the reason why the exist- '9 to ing pole out there in the backyard can operate the way it does t' because it is not connected to that kind of equipment and not sub- b ject to that kind of need, tolerance need. x 0 z MR. DOUGLASS: That ' s just a regular radio. [7 0 MR. SOHN: Yeah. It ' s operating at these tremendously high frequencies for a radio. You know the reason for that, that' s the, z the idea there is to pack as many telephone signals and calls into a small area. ro MR. DOUGLASS : Right. Have you anything else to offer? w MR. SOHN: Not on this application, no, sir. ~ N MR. DOUGLASS : Thank you. Is there anybody else that would L' like to speak in favor of this application? %D (THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. ) MR. DOUGLASS: As you have heard, he has technical men that can answer questions. Is there anybody that would desire to speak against this application? (THERE WAS NO RESPONSE. ) MR. DOUGLASS : In that respect, we have received a letter to the"Southold Town Board of Appeals, reference variance requested by New York Telephone Company, Main Road, Cutchogue, to install a 90-foot pole with two saucers. As out-of-state owners of the adjoin- ing property, we have carefully studied the plans and specifications of the proposed pole installation. Mr. Boyd and I both object to the granting of a variance. With its girth, height and two saucers we feel that an installation such as this would be okay on Cape Cannaveral but not in Cutchogue. As former permanent residents of Cutchogue and Southold for the past 25 years, we as well as others have enjoyed the rural aspect of the North Fork. We feel that this .:'uiuUliu iUM4 i3UAkD Ur' ',i'Y12%L5 -3- September 27 , 1979 proposed installation ` �s not lend itself to thei, iral atmosphere. It ' s much too commerciai . Again, we both object. Sincerely, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Boyd, 5400 Gulk Drive, Holmes Beach, Florida 33510. I don' t know when Mr . and Mrs. Boyd left Cutchogue but from their hand-written letter here it sounds like they left before the shopping Cdistrict was built and that I don ' t know. MR. SOHN: They wrote to us, Mr: Chairman, and asked us for copies of the plans and we sent them on down. NANCY GILLIES : Just for information, Mr. Chairman, they sold their house just this summer. ' Yeah, I just happen to know, MR. DOUGLASS: So they are not the owners next door then? MRS. GILLIES: No, no, they sold their home in Southold this summer and moved permanently to Florida. They maintained a Florida address as well as a Southold address and their sons are 'living in Southold, they still will continue to be. c MR. DOUGLASS: Would you give your name please, ma 'am? MRS. GILLIES: Oh I 'm sorry, Nancy Gillies. t t t MR. DOUGLASS : Thanks alot for the information. MR. TUTHILL: What did Boyd own? t c M. DOUGLASS : Ft was the property adjoining it to the east. 'They sold out. She just said they sold out. They actually don' t "own it now. MRS. GILLIES: They sold their home down near Pine Tree, z and this is a vacant lot. a MR. DOUGLASS : This is a vacant lot. There is no house on it then, that they own? Y n MRS. GILLIES : (Nodded yes. ) �c MR. DOUGLASS: Well, we were out there and we took pictures `of it and so on, and the antenna in the back that' s there now I would estimate is about 60-foot high, is that correct? MR. SOHN: No, sir, that's 95. Five foot higher. MR. DOUGLASS : That ' s 95? It doesn 't look it from the road. MR. SOHN: I know, it ' s deceiving. MR. DOUGLASS : We couldn' t find any reason to attempt to obstruct you in communications here. We have very strict rulings in fact to go by under the State of New York rulings on Public Service Utilities, and so under this control I would recommend that this request for the additional height be granted. After investigation and inspection, the Board finds that ^G OUTIOLD TOWN BOARD OF �PPliALS -10- Geptember 27 , 1979 the applicant is requcq ing a 90-foot pole in sic;_ yard at the New York Telephone Company premises, Main Road, Cutchogue in addition to the existing radio pole in the backyard of the subject premises. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the (-) i hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the r neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the ordinance. On motion made by Mr. Tuthill, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was y RESOLVED, that the New York Telephone Company, 1095 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10036, be GRANTED a variance to " the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71 for permission to install a 90-foot pole with two radio antennas in side yard. Loca- tion of property: Main Road, Cutchogue, New York; bounded on the c north by Sterling, east by Imbriano and Boyd, south by Main Road, west by S & E Realty Co. n v v approval.CONDITION FOR APPROVAL: Suffolk County Planning Commission Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Douglass, Grigonis, Tut- hill and Doyen. 77 Upon application of the "R T 1t pe p o ' a y 1095 Avenue of the Americas, New York, ' rYor �16 , for�}a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIZ, r Section 100-71 for permission to install a 85-foot pole in side yard. h Location of property: Main Road and Moore ' s Lane, Greenport, New x York, bounded on the north by Village of Greenport, east by Moore' s z Lane, south by Main Road, and Kavanagh, west by Zipkas. t� The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at 8 :18 P.M. by O reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing as advertised in the local newspapers, affidavits attesting to its z publication in the official newspapers, Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, and letter from the Town Clerk that notifi- cation to adjoining property owners was made to the Village of �p Greenport, James Kavanagh and Andrew Zipkas Estate; fee paid $15. 00. w w r MR. DOUGLASS : I also have a section of the County Tax Map showing it and the surrounding area, and we also have a complete copy of General Arrangement of the Site Plan and desire of where they are going to put it. I ask again is there anybody desiring to speak in favor of this application? DAVID L. SOliN: 188 Plain Street, Huntington, New York, re- presenting New York Telephone Company. Many of the comments, as a matter of fact, all of them relating to the technology here we spoke of in respect to the Cutchogue application are on all fours with this. In other words they apply equally to this application. SOUT}IOLD TOWN BOARD Or APPEALS -11- September 27 , 1979 MR. DOUGLASS : 4ou c•:on ' t have to go over aim that. MR. SOHN : And I won ' t. MR. TUTHILL: I have a question as a matter of curiosity, you ion' t have the antenna mast attached to the building. It ' s detached. Hill you have some loss of signals then, or were you as a practical matter able to put it closer? MR. SOHN: You mean on top of the building or something like that? MR. TUTHILL: well I 've seen them in Riverhead on the top of the building, but I mean the other one is right up close , in Cutchogue to the building. This one is not. It is 20 feet away. MR. SOHN: Yeah, the idea here was we didn' t want to encroach into that side area. we want to leave some room open for parking. If we stuck it right next to the building it would have eliminated the driveway on that side. That was what the designers were thinking about there. MR. TUTHILL: It' s not too far in other words to be- MR. SOHN: That ' s right. It ' s close but not too far. So, I don' t think it' s necessary to get into that technical business we were talking about. The same facts apply. However, at this location x at Main Road, Moore ' s Lane, Greenport where we own the Telephone 3 Company and the existing central office as in Cutchogue, we propose tom+ to erect also in the B-1 District a 85-foot mono-pole support struc- ture attached to which would be one 6-foot diameter parabolic antenna x aesigned for the same radio system that will serve the Cutchogue z central office. The difference between the two locations is, of course, the sites themselves and the comments we had made with n regard to the Cutchogue site regarding the practical difficulty as 3 it related to a demonstration that the grant of the variance would roy not materially alter the character of that neighborhood, that being K one of the factors. It 's really the essential difference between these two applications. The character of the neighborhood at the Greenport site, I think, an examination of the site would show ti ought to be even less affected by the grant of the variance than that involved in the other application. This is for the reason that at the Greenport site the surrounding area is already deter- mined by the existence of comparable structures of the similar use uNi and height. To say a similar use is not totally accurate, but for the moment that might become apparent. To the north of the site is the municipal ballfield with its many approximately 40 or 45-foot high lighting stands. To the east of the site diagonally across from the site on Moore ' s Lane is the stack of the municipal light- ing plant. Further to the north and it is visible is a rather large water tower. Across Main Road and to the west is an area devoted mainly to various commercial uses. Accordingly the advent of the proposed mono-pole should have very little effect on the immediate area that is so determined by existing high structures. Beyond that I don' t think I have much to add in regard to the Greenport site. And we request the variance and respectfully submit to this Board ` .:hat practical difficulty does exist here for the reasons set forth in the other discussion. There was an additional problem that the SOUTHOLD TOW11 DOARD OF APPEALS -12- September 27 , 1979 Building Inspector brow c up here that I discussed with him about the sideyard. And again we ' ve got a little diversion because I think that ' s the rearyard and he admitted that and said well he really wasn ' t sure because of the way the definitions read in the Ordinance so he thought he would throw it over to you to see what you thought about it. MR. DOUGLASS : He threw it at us. �l MR. SOHN: He sure did. And I , he said it was unclear and if you do read it, it ' s sort of unclear, but we think that anything behind the building is the rearyard and we ,' think that ' s where it is. MR. DOUGLASS : Well, you have a special problem there. You have two frontyards. MR. SOHN: Oh on the corner? I see. MR. DOUGLASS : And it puts you in an entirely different cate- gory than in Cutchogue. MR. SOHN: Oh. MR. DOUGLASS : With two frontyards you've got two sideyards., r but the definition is where do you find the rearyard,--in a Business Zone. If this was in a Residential Zone, it' s very simple because the " owner of the property choses one sideyard as his rearyard. He can choose this , but in a Business Zone you cannot. However, we went over this rather thoroughly. He used it as one of the things of disapproving ~ your application, and you did not in your application, not knowing it, r you did not apply for a variance for use in a sideyard. However, we a went over this today and went over it very thoroughly and if you read C jC the ordinance and then take a corner lot, a business lot like yours, and draw it out, why it becomes that from going down tr g g parallel to your building and across to your side-lot line next to the ballfield, if ('r you draw a line right down your building and then you start over on ` Moore' s Lane and you draw a line right down your building all the way S to the rear of the property line on the west, that little piece in K their becomes rearyard and you happen to be sitting in it with your pole. So you're all right, you 're in the clear, you 're in the rear- 'C yard. However, there was one other thing which you did not show us O on this survey, e was how far-it didn' t state how far away from the a rearyard line the pole would be installed. The antenna would be ~ installed how far. But I , going over it, worked it out and I think " it comes out, and tell me if I 'm wron property line. 9, at about 7-1/2 ' from the a MR. SOHN: Yeah, that ' s what we determined. MR. DOUGLASS : And you 're allowed to go within three on your rear line, so you 're all right there. By sheer luck. MR. SOHN: I ' ll tell you what threw me . Some ordinances require on a corner lot the shortest measurement is your front yard, you know, the shortest. But you don' t have-. MR. DOUGLASS : In here you have two frontyards. that. MR. SOHN: Yeah, I 'm stuck with that - yeah, . I didn't realize y . SOUTIIOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS -13- September 27 , 1979 MR. DOUGLASS : :. e only variance that you turn out to need is the one on the height. Is there, is that all you have , sir? Is there anybody else wishing to speak in favor of this application? Is there anyone who wishes to speak against this application? (THERE 1-71AS NO RESPONSE. ) MR. DOUGLASS : Again, I make the statement that we are con- trolled very strongly by the New York Law on Public Utilities and with that as our guidelines, again I will make a motion that this applica- tion for a height from 35 feet to 85feet of antenna for public service telephone network be granted. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant is requesting a 85-foot pole antenna at the New York Tele- phone Company, Main Road & Moore ' s Lane, Greenport for which a variance is required. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of the property and in the same use district; and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. was On motion made by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Tuthill, it RESOLVED, that the New York Telephone Company, 1095 Avenue of the Americas, New York, New York 10036 , be GRANTED a variance to the toning ordinance, Article VII , Section 100-71 for permission to install all 85-foot pole, subject to the following condition: That applicant obtain approval from the Suffolk County Planning Commission. i i Location of property: Main Road and Moore ' s Lane, Greenport, New York; bounded on the north by Village of Greenport, east by Moore' s i Lane, south by Main Road and Kavanagh, west by Zipkas. Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Douglass, Grigonis , Tuthill and Doyen. t PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2594 . Upon application of Eileen M. Lembeck, 448 Greene Avenue, Sayville, New York 11782 , for �a variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III , Section 100-31, Bulk and Parking Schedule, for permission to construct a dwelling with insufficient frontyard and rearyard setbacks. Location of property: a Deerfoot Path, Cutchogue, New York; bounded on the north by Fitzpatrick, east by Deerfoot Path, south by Jester, west by Leskody. s F The Acting Chairman opened the hearing at 8 : 33 P.M. by read- ing the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing as adver- L 'ised in the local newspapers, affidavits attesting to its publication i LEN,VIS NICKLES REAL ESTATE East Main Road.Southold.New York 11971 • (516)765 3416 William D. Moore, Esq. April 29, 1991 Clause Commons, Suite 3 P.O. Box 23 t Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Metro One Dear Bill : In confirmation of our telephone conversation, I have investigated what effects, if any, the construction of a monopole radio transmission tower approximately 104 feet in height to be located in a Limited Business zoning district may have on surrounding property values. Specifically, I have addressed the proposed construction to be done on property owned by William J. Baxter, Jr. and others at Elijah's Lane and NYS Route 25 in Mattituck (SCTM# 1000-105-4- 11 .3) which is zoned Limited Business (LB) and which abuts property Zoned R-40 and LB. In this instance, any impact caused is created by "Economic Obsolescence", which is defined generally as follows: Economic Obsolescence is always evidenced or caused by conditions outside of the property lines. Examples: 1. A $100,000 home located in a neighborhood where the typical home is in the value range of $40,000 to $50,000 2. Oversupply of houses on the market in the area 3. Excessively high real estate taxes 4. Changes in the zoning regulations 5. Deferred maintenance or poorly kept up homes in the area. I have personally inspected the proposed mast site, the surrounding neighborhood, similar mast sites and reviewed the Southold Town Zoning Map and uses allowed under the Limited Business Zone, which is the zoning of approximately 4.5 acres on the North West corner of Elijah's Lane and NYS Rt. 25, Mattituck. Based on the premises that this Metro One mast would not be an "attractive nuisance", emit noise, cause electrical disturbances, give off deleterious radio/micro waves or cause any measurable increased vehicular traffic to the area and would be partially obscured by buildings and a backdrop of trees, it is my opinion that the mast would not have any measurable effect on the neighborhood's Fair Market Value beyond the effect of the existing LB use or future LB uses as allowed under The Southold Town Zoning Code. Sincer ly, MEMBER: rs hn J. l es, Realtor, GRI y New}ork titan•Sotien'ul Rral Isr.uc.\ppra National.\ssociation of 13E.\1.1,olls I W' a National Institute of Farms.Land lirokers International Real F_titaw I-eder Lion o i Comrnerrial and Investment Division of NY:ti,\R - 4f National Marketing ItIstllute to t US Department Eastern Region Filzgerald Federa Building of Transportation Joan F Kennedy Federal Aviation International Avp d Administration Jamaica.New Yo k,I 1430 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION ---------------------------------- ---------------------------- ------------ CITY STATE LATITUDE/LONGITUDE MSL A L AMSL MATTITUCK ---------NY 40-59-56 . 00 072-30-39 . 00------30---J 00 130 ---------- ------------------------------ =---------- METRO ONE CELLULAR TELEPHONE CO. AERONAUTICAL S UDY ATTN: GLENN WITTE NO: 91-AEA-010 -OE 365 WEST PASSAIC STREET NEW ROCHELLE, NY 07662 Type Structure: ANTENNA TOWER The Federal Aviation Administration hereby acknowledges receipt of notice dated 01/11/91 concerning the proposed constructioi or alteration contained herein. A study has been conducted under the provisions of Part 77 of he Federal Aviation Regulations to determine whether the propo ed construction would be an obstruction to air navigation, whethe7 it should be marked and lighted to enhance safety in air navigat on, and whether supplemental notice of start and completion of construction is required to permit timely charting and notification to airmen. The findings of that study are as follows: The proposed construction would not exceed FAA obstructionG standards and would not be a hazard to air navigation. However, the following applies to the construction propose, ? The structure should be obstruction marked and lightel per FAA Advisory Circular AC 70/7460-1, 'Obstruction Markinr a d Lighting' . CHAPTERS : �7},3 t}]\4 �]-5 [ ] -6 ( ] -7 ( ] 8 9 , This determination expires on 08/27/91 unless application is ///��� made, (if subject to the licensing authority of the Federal Communications Commission) , to the FCC before that date, or it. is otherwise extended, revised or terminated. If the structure is subject to the licensing authority of the FCC, a copy of this acknowledgement will be sent to that Agenc . OTICE IS REQUIRED ANYTIME THE PROJECT IS ABANDONED OR THE PROPOSAL IS MODIFIED IGNEDL << f ' 1 -V'r, ( ; Specialist, Systems Management Branch j Robert P. Alexander (718) 917-1230/1228 SSUED IN: Jamaica, New York ON 02/25/91 i I i I r r ==�►Ts&T AT&T Bell Laboratories 600 Mountain Avenue P.O. Box 636 Murray Hill, NJ 07974-0636 908.582-3000 April 17, 1991 Lynne Lorimer Metro-One System Implementation Department 365 West Passaic Street Rochelle Paris,NJ 07662-3015 Dear Ms.Lorimer. In response to your request for an estimate of the levels of exposure to electromagnetic energy associated with a proposed cellular-radio installation located at Route 25 & Elijahs Lane, Mattituck,New York and an opinion regarding the concem for public health associated with long term exposure at these levels,please be advised of the following: The proposed system will ultimately consist of three directional transmitting antennas (Celwave PD 10176) located at an elevation of approximately 100 ft. above grade on a monople. Six receiving antennas will also be mounted at approximately the same height. A maximum of twenty-four transmitters will be connected to each transmitting antenna. The maximum effective radiated power (ERP) is 100 watts per channel which corresponds to a maximum antenna input power of less than 12.6 watts per channel. Hence, the actual radiated power will be less than 302 watts per antenna or 906 watts total for the three antennas (assuming all transmitters operate simultaneously which is rarely, if ever, the case). This is an extremely low power system when compared with other familiar radio systems, such as AM, FM, and television broadcast, which operate upwards of 50,000 watts. For the case at hand, the maximum exposure levels associated with the cellular radio system can be readily calculated at any point in a plane at any height above grade. Based on the information provided above and an antenna gain of approximately 13.15 dBi, the maximum power density in a horizontal plane 6 ft. above a plane that passes through grade directly under the antennas will be less than 3.0 millionths of a watt per centimeter squared (3.0 µW/cmZ) and will be less than 4.OµW/cm2 at any point in a corresponding plane 25 ft. above grade. The latter is representative of the maximum power density immediately outside of the upper floor of nearby dwellings (assuming level terrain). Further, the antenna pattem is such that the energy is propagated in a relatively narrow beam (in the vertical plane) which is directed toward the horizon. The reason for this is to provide uniform coverage. Hence, exposure levels directly under the antennas are not remarkably different from the levels at points more distant. M L. Lorimer- 2 The above values are the theoretical maxima that could occur and are not typical values. The calculations include the effect of field reinforcement from in-phase reflections and, the assumption was made that all transmitters operate simultaneously and continuously(which is not the usual case). Although the above values are obtained analytically, experience has shown that the technique used is extremely conservative. That is, the calculated power density levels have always been found to be greater than the corresponding measured levels. In order to put these levels in perspective, the maximum power density at points considered normally accessible, i.e., 3.0-4.0 µW/cm2 can be compared with the current federal occupational exposure guide of 10,000 µW/cm2 (OSHA -29 CFR 1910.97) for continuous exposure or the 1982 ANSI' radiofrequency protection guide (RFPG) of 2,700 µW/cm2, the New Jersey environmental limits of 2,700 µW/cm2 or the Massachusetts environmental limits of 530 µW/cm at cellular-radio frequencies. (There are no applicable State of New York or federal limits for exposure of the public to radiofrequency electromagnetic energy.) The total power density at any point a few feet above grade, including contributions from all antennas will be, in fact, considerably lower than any health standard used anywhere in the world. Moreover, at any distance greater than approximately 200 ft from the antennas, regardless of elevation or direction, the power density will also be below any health standard used anywhere in the world. The levels inside nearby buildings or homes at cellular radio frequencies will be significantly lower than those immediately outside because of the high attenuation of common building materials at these frequencies and, hence, also will be lower than any health standard used anywhere in the world. A possible concern about exposure to electromagnetic energy is understandable. Many people feel uneasy about new technology and often want absolute proof that something is safe. Such guarantees are not possible since one is asking for proof that something does not exist. However, sound judgements can be made as to the safety of a physical agent based on knowledge of the scientific literature. This is exactly how health standards are developed. Because all unequivocal scientific evidence indicates that biological effects associated with exposure to radiofrequency energy are threshold effects, i.e., unless the exposure level is sufficiently high the effect will not occur regardless of exposure duration, it is relatively straightforward to derive safe limits. (Unlike ionizing radiation, e.g., X-rays and nuclear radiation, repeated exposures to low level radiofrequency/microwave radiation, or nonionizing radiation, are not cumulative.) By adding safety factors to the level at which the most sensitive effect occurs,conservative exposure guides have been developed to ensure safety. At present, well over 6,000 reports are in the scientific literature which address the subject of microwave and radiofrequency bioeffects. These reports, most of which describe the results of epidemiological studies and animal studies, have been critically reviewed by leading researchers in the field and all new studies are continuously being reviewed by various groups and organizations whose interest is developing health standards. These include the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the National Council on Radiation.Protection and Measurements, the American National Standards Institute, the World Health Organization, the International Radiation Protection Association, etc. All of these groups have recently either reaffirmed existing health standards, developed and 1. American National Standard "Safety levels with respect to human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields 300 kHz to 100 GHz.'ANSI C95.1-1982. American National Standards Institute.New York.NY. L.Lorimer- 3 adopted new health standards or have proposed health standards for exposure to radiofmquency and microwave energy. For example, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements has recently (April 1986) published recommended limits for occupational and public exposure . These recommendations were based on the results of an extensive critical review of the scientific literature by a cwminittee of the leading researchers in the field of bioelectromagnetics. The literature selected included many controversial studies reporting effects at low levels. The results of all studies selected were weighed and analyzed and an exposure guide of approximately 2,700 µW/cm2 (at cellular-radio frequencies) was recommended for continuous occupational exposure and approximately 530 4W/cm2 for continuous exposure of the public. Similarly, the Environmental Protection Agency recently (July 30, 1986)1 published a notice in the Federal Register, calling for public comment on recommended guidance for exposure of the public. Three different limits, ranging from approximately 270 to 2,700 µW/cm2, were proposed. Further, the latest draft of the ANSI C95.1 standard (July, 1990), which resulted from an extensive critical review of the scientific literature, reaffirmed the 1982 RFPG for occupational exposure and recommends 530 µW/cm2 for exposure of the general public at cellular radio frequencies. Also, the USSR, which traditionally had the lowest exposure guides, has recently revised upward its limits for public exposure. Enough is now known to allow unequivocal judgements to be made as to what power density levels are safe and what levels may be potentially harmful. With respect to the proposed cellular-radio system, be assured that the exposure levels in the vicinity of the Mattituck installation will be below any health standard used anywhere in the world and literally thousands of times below any level reported to be associated with any functional change in humans or laboratory animals. This holds true even when all transmitters operate simultaneously and continuously (which is not the normal operating mode). Power density levels of this magnitude are not even a subject of speculation with regard to an association with adverse health effects. Anyone interested can obtain additional information about the environmental impact of ccllular- radio from: Dr. Robert Cleveland,Jr. Federal Communications Office of Engineering and Technology Room 7002 1919 M Street NW Washington, DC 20554 (202)653-8169 2. NCRP - "Biological effects and exposure criteria for radiofrequency electromagnetic fields,"NCRP Report No. 86.National Council on Radiation Protection and NleasmernmLs.Bethesda,NID. 3. Federal Register, Vol.51.No. 146. Wednesday, July 30. 1986. L. Lorimer-4 and Norbert Hankin USEPA, Office of Radiation Programs(ANR461) 401 M Street NW Washington, DC 20460 (202)475-9626 A substantial amount of knowledge exists relating to the health implications associated with exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic energy. However,perhaps because of the anticipated lack of general interest, little of this information is imparted to the public by the media. But you can be assured that based on what is known, the proposed Mattituck cellular-radio installation will not present any health problem to members of the public. Sincerely, R. C. Petersen NIR Manager/Consulting Engineer S E P - 4 - Ski WED' 10 : p T M O O R E Q M O O R E P . u 2 APPLICA N FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO R DS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SECTION 1 . TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT INSTF.UCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Please complote Section I of this form. Givv dw forth to the afroncy Freedom of Information Officer. The Freedom of Information Office-r will return one cony to you as a response to your request, or as an interim reslym.N(-- TO: FRRr)OP.I OF INFORMATION OFFICER AGENCY NAME: Towiv OP' SvkrHOt.L 20Nlive- Q04RD 000F�POBAc$ AGIiNCY ADDRESS : Spclr'HOLD 7ovV1-V /-14LL I MR, IV P046, $owrflo�0, Aly I HEREBY APPLY TO INSPECT THE FOLLOWING RECORD (Please describe tho nx-ord sought. If possible, supply a date, a file title and number, and any other informi- tion that will help locate the record desired): MIfvHrFS o,�- 7'yc` 7 LILy SJ /99/ 2486 MEc`TrNb ; l31Vd ,I/Vy p.9&r OF T'HS n46E7 A T.eANSGFL1or 'rHRr Ae4/9reS To mc-r/eo t>"t O� N4Y1R1gb / 1 14L%A K tj Oar Signature of Applicant and Printed Name: Applicant Represents: M17-A d d N E Appl i cant's Mai l ing Address: P,o. eoX 'o( 3� M srrr r r&ter-, ry y Date of Application: S.Epr. y. 1991 SECTION' II . FOR USE BY AGENCY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ONL' [ J Approved [ J Dvnieci: (for the reason(s) checked below) [ j Confidential Disclosure ( J Part of investigatory Files ( J Unwarranted Invasion of Privacy ( I Record of Which This Agency is Legal Custodian Cannot be Found ( ] Record is Not Maintained by This Agency ( J Excnpted by Statute Other Than the Freedom of Information Act [ ] Other (specify): [ J Receipt of this request is acknowledged. There will be a delay in supplying the requested record until for the follbwing reason: Signature: Title: Date: Freedom of Information Officer SECTION III . NOTICE TO;tAPPLICANT YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION IN WRITING Y.'ITII- IN 30 DAYS OF THE DENIAL. INFORMATION AS TO THE PERSON TO CONTACT IS SHOWN BELOW. THE CONTACTED PERSON MUST RESPOND TO YOU IN WRITING WITHIN SEVEN BUSINESS DAYS OF RECEIPT OF YOUR APPEAL, Name: Southold Tc :r, Board Businese Address: 53095 Clain Road Telechone: Southold, New, York 516-765-1500 � tr✓ — a — s i wcu. a, � a r•iuuKc �•• • • •• �. •� � - MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax (516) 298.5664 William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary FACSIMILE COVER SJUM TO RE:._ 4 Ol ' C� — TOTAL NUMBED. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER SHEET IF TRANSMISSION IS FAULTY OR INCOMPLETE, PLEASE CALL BACK.AS SOON AS POSSIBLE CLIENT NAME• ---- CASE OPERATOR: M,ARGARET -- A, Page 31 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. Appl. No. : 4022 . ,Applicant(s) : Cellular Telephone Company Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-108-4i11 . 3 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for coming in, it' s pleasure meeting you gentlemen. Are you going to leave? MEMBER DINIZIO: Yeah. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are you going to sit here or are you going to leave? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I 'm going to leave. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. MEMBER DINIZIO: I just want to make a public statement that I work for a company that perhaps could compete with you gentlemen so I would like to beg off if you don' t mind. I 'm going to leave the room. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a declaration and in the file, also for Mr. Smith that I have a Metro One Telephone. Do you have any objection to that, to my sitting on this hearing, please voice your opinion at this point. The Chairman opened the hearing at 8: 48 pm and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties and I have a copy of a plan produced for Metro One indicating the one story framed barn that presently exists and the concrete building as it presently exists and we will ask Mr. Smith if he would like to continue. MR SMITH: Thank you Mr . Chairman for the record my name is Allen Smith, I appear as counsel to William D. Moore the Attorney of record in this matter. Mr. Moore has had the good fortune of having the local Rotary Club sponsor his trip to Europe and God bless him. He even took his wife who is a rotarian and their baby of less than six months I think or so. For the record this evening, I have with me to address various aspects of this application, Christopher Resavy, Glenn Witte both are engineers with Metro One and both of which I have supplied the resumes for, to you. Mr. Ronald Petersen is an engineer with AT&T and can and will as this matter progresses address any radiological effect questions. Mr. Peter Papay is a licensed engineer who deals with the Page 32 - April 30, ' 991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cent'd: issues of the pole, its ability to withstand wind and the like. Mr. John Nickles is a local appraiser in this particular matter and I will introduce his opinion letter in a moment, relative to the effect that the proposed use on the neighborhood. And lastly Roger Grutzmacher is the architect who will address those issues attending to the visual aspects of the proposed use. I will admit readily. how provincial I am relative to Metro One and/or Cellular Telephones. The first time that I became aware of the importance of Cellular Telephone was about four or five years ago. Some of you know I 'm a member of the Red Hook and Ladder Company of Riverhead Fire Department. As you may recall, all of us in the fire service were called to a rather large brush fire during the tenure of Chief Richard Gadzinski when the Pine Barrens burned between Eastport and Riverhead. It was at that particular time that they called out our truck 629, which had a Metro One type device in it, in that all the trucks that were responding to the area were unable to communicate, because everybody was stepping all over everybody and on both of the channels that were available to us. You may know that the fire service moved a comparable unit to 629 on the west end of the fire and in fact that particular fire in our locality was coordinated through the use of the cellular telephones because our ordinary radio communications were so messed up they were ineffective. That experience in talking to these gentlemen and the equal at Metro had been duplicated for instance in the Avianca crash. The plane took down all the standard land lines that were available and in fact at the varying units responded and they cluttered the airways yet again, but for the fact that the citizens in that particular area and the chiefs in Nassau County generally have cellular telephones in their chief cars communications was handled in that particular regard. Another particular example was the San Francisco earthquake that we all witnessed during the World Series. Again if there was not a cellular network to coordinate the emergency response there would have been no response because of the severing of all cables on the ground. I have on occasion used car phone, as maybe some of the rest of you have, calling fires. I recall calling in a signal 13 at the Walsh asphalt plant one day. The point of all of this is to say that although this technology is coming to Southold it is not a new technology. It is very much a cart of the utility system both of our area and San Francisco, Nassau County and other places . I find that in the examination of the fire safety manual for the county of Nassau that most of the police in Nassau county and the ambulance service in Nassau County have cellular now. I know that the Wading Department has cellular in every chief ' s car. In fact as you may know the 911 system is integrated into the Metro service, Page 33 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.S.A. MR SMITH, cont' d: such that as we travel up and down the road with our cellular telephone we do not have to know the particular phone number for the Southold P.D. if you will or this tower up, we would simply punch in 911 and we would end up with Southold P.D. Of I suppose the last point in dealing with where this technology is and how integrated it has gotten into our society is to point out how it has become part of commerce and industry of our area. Of one of the customers of Metro One is one of the off-shore boats. As you may know he cannot use his ship to shore to radio for the purposes of commerce, because it violates the rules among other things and if he did he would populate the airwaves to the detriment of everyone else. This particular captain uses about $500 a month in services from Metro One. Essentially coming off the towers in the south fork, so that he knows the market, where he should bring his boat in with his catch, when to bring it in, things of that particular nature. Which he cannot do with the ordinary ship to shore radio. All that being said, I have one tape to show you should you wish, and I 've raised the one issue that brings these people here as exemplified by the coverage issue. At the moment if I were to get into my car this evening and see an accident on the North Road and I dial in 911 the chances are that I would not get a local police station. I would bounce over to Connecticut. There is a gap in service with reference to the Metro One system, this is within their franchise area and that is why they are here and that is why they are building a tower at the police station in Peconic and they propose to build this tower in Mattituck. I have a tape, it' s not a good tape, I can save it for the end, I can show it now. What it shows on the tape, if you are in fact interested, is a testimony of why a police chief in New Jersey, whose radio tower was struck by lightning and he tells you as one municipal board to another how much more in fact that he had cellular capacity. He would have been out of service and out of touch with his cars, but because he had cellular and the redundancy that it provided to his vehicles that he was able to function. The other one that you see is the technology that' s coming into the fire service where a particular town in New Jersey is installing the Metro One service with fax machines, such that as we get an alarm and we respond on our trucks that the fax, there will be pre-plans, say the old Perkins Motel in my community such that pre-plans will be fed into the fax machine by the dispatcher and they would turn out on the trucks as we responded to the alarm. Lastly, on this particular tape, and again I ' ll play it if you wish or I ' ll hold it till the end, is the testimonial by the people in East Hampton, who are doing very much the same thing that the Town of Southold was doing with Metro One at the police . station in terms, in Southampton they've already done it, Page 34 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: where Metro One has in fact built a tower and has brought the police communications up onto the tower. I suppose the last thing that I would say in that particular regard is not a fire service thing. It relates to the, I think it' s called A.L.S. System, that is now part of our ambulance service and is becoming more a part of our ambulance service, advanced life support system. As those E.K.G. ' s and the other more sophisticated monitoring systems come into the ambulances as our E.M.T. ' s and A.M.T. ' s respond from areas such as Southold and Riverhead to Good Samaritan Hospital, I think you understand that all of that telemetry is not done on the radio wave it is done over cellular, just simply because of the capacity and the refinements that cellular technology affords as opposed to the standard emergency treatments we simply operate. The issue before you this evening has been properly defined by the chairman and by Mr. Moore and I 'm to deal in this first instance with the special exception nature of the application. Many of us know Judge Stark, who' s probably one of the better or best judges that we have in Suffolk County, and is someone that grew up here in this particular community and as Mr. Moore has provided to the chairman a particular decision where Judge Stark writes about the special nature of dealing with a public utility structure and a zoning ordinance. He wrote, public utility structures serving the entire community have historically been recognized as reasonable and proper uses in all types of use districts, because of the technical and engineering requirements particular to such structures in the area serve. That' s the whole issue that' s before us on the special exception nature. I have for you, I will hand out your decisions some years ago, with reference to the AT&T towers in the community. As the Board Members will note, one of the Board Members was in fact present during these particular decisions, at the bottom of the first page that I have handed up to you, Mr. Douglas recites, that we couldn't find any reason to attempt to obstruct you in the communications here, we have very strict rulings in fact to go by in the State of New York rulings on public service utilities, etc. There were two hearings that particular evening. On the last page that I have handed up to you, Mr. Douglas immediately prior to that particular resolution. Again I make a statement that we are controlled very strongly by law and public utilities with that as our guidelines. I will again make a motion, etc. So, although I am dealing somewhat with a new technology in terms of the cellular aspects of what is before the Board this evening, it is not an a new issue to this particular Board. There is a certain logic that is inherent in dealing with utilities in this particular regard as it relates to zoning. I suppose the easiest example would be to deal with electric utilities and Page 35 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z .B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: if in fact height restrictions, architecture review and things of that nature. were to apply in the strictest sense to electric utilities, in some of your more restricted residential zonings, we could not supply people with electric utilities, the sewer, water, things of that particular nature have this special kind of special exception, if you will, such that the boards state, this Board in particular have granted the right under the ordinances to examine the particular application and make a determination on the particular application whether or not there is an adverse effect on the environment, neighborhood, all the criteria that' s spelled out in your special exception prevision. The last thing I would say with reference to the public utility issue is this, that I have for you and I will introduce later on if it' s of interest to you, some of more precise definition of the longitudes and latitudes that are called out in licensing the papers that you have been given by Mr. Moore, but in fact these people are compelled as s matter of law to serve their franchise area. They and NYNEX in this particular instance. There are two franchisees, if you will, for the Town of Southold. If it were true that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold were to deny to NYNEX or to Metro One any right to engineer if you will, these towers again they must do so considering the neighborhoods, the effect of the tower and all the rest of that. You could as a local zoning board or a local zoning ordnance frustrate the franchises that have been given by the public service commission of the State of New York to this entity and to NYNEX and by the F.C.C. to these two entities to serve this particular area and I suppose I don't have to give you a citation necessarily but such a result might be contrary to either common sense or to the federal system under which we work. All that being said I would introduce the architect and I have asked him to please depict for you the existing conditions and as the site will appear with the tower. MR GRUTZMACHER: Good evening. My name is Roger Grutzmacher for the record, I 'm an architect, these drawing are prepared under my supervision in my office. As part of the, I' ll keep the presentation brief , I ' ll just go quickly to where we' re locating the tower in a brink, show you some exhibits that show existing and proposed conditions. Metro One primarily needs two items in order to operate. One is a relatively high spot in which to locate their antennas, in this case we Are proposing a monopole tower, the other is an equipment room, to house their equipment which is an accessory structure for that antenna. In this particular site we' re locating both of those facilities, the tower and the building to the rear of this one story framed building which is Page 36 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A MR GRUTZMACHER, cont'd: located toward, if there is a front yard, certainly toward the front yard of what we' re proposing. Access to our facility in the rear which is a modification to an existing building, it is not a new building, we' re merely going to give it a face lift and recondition the interior to meet our purposes. The actual building is shielded from the front by this existing frame and access will be by a road toward the rear, we' ll also be introducing two parking spaces back here. We don't really need a lot of parking because visits to the site are on a nature of possibly two times a month to check equipment. The actual room itself is unmanned. I think at this point I would like to show what this existing structure looks like currently and what we propose to do to it. The building, it' s about 720 square feet, it' s a block structure. It is shielded by some natural vegetation and landscaping. The building, structurally sound is a bit lacking ascetically certainly, we do also have to put a new roof on this structure. We are going to give it a total face lift and I' ll show you what I mean by that. This is a rendering of that same scene. Let me put them next to one another so you can really see it. The, what we would do to just quickly go through it, the building we know it' s structurally sound, we would sound the block and make sure that .it' s cleaned up and which then we could apply the new stucco finish which is here. Colors, it' s very flexible, we would chose an earth tone brown because it seems to fit in with the area a bit more appropriately than some thing that might be a more in the primary colors or what have you. As I said it' s an existing building, we will not be extending it at all. We are merely giving it a face lift. The building to operate it requires no sewage. There is no water to this site, the utilities that we do bring into the site is telephone and power, electricity. That is all. And it is brought in through ground lines, it would be buried, there are no overhead lines here that we would be adding or bring into the site. Let me show you now the mono-pole. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to see these, we could move the, what I ' ll ask you do is just move the easel back a little bit. Maybe you want to change your set over to this side. MR GRUTZMACHER: Okay, as I mentioned there is an existing, the two existing structures. This is our equipment room which we' re are proposing the face lifting for. This is the existing barn structure towards the front and this is the proposed 100 foot mono-pole. I believe it' s actually 102 feet. Chris is that correct? Okay. Give me an idea, this is pretty accurate because we've transposed it onto an actual Page 37 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR GRUTZMACHER, cont'd: photograph of the site, we've rendered on the new finish here and we've located the mono- pole to scale. To give you an idea of scale, trees in the background are in the area of 4S to 50 feet in height and as I said the mono-pole is about 102 feet in height. Both structures are located to the rear, again, I ' ll give you some dimensions on the mono-pole at the base it' s about, and Pete I guess you could bail me out is this an eight foot base mono-pole? MR PAPAY: The actual base of the steel mono-pole itself would be 37 inches in diameter. But the concrete foundation will be in the neighborhood of six to eight feet. MR GRUTZMACHER: The platform at the top is approximately, it' s three sided, it' s a triangle, each side would be about 12 feet in width. The actual size of the antennas of which there will be nine mounted on the top about four feet in height. If you have any questions , I 'd be glad to answer them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have questions Bob? Do you want me to go, okay. There will be some lighting on top of this? MR GRUTZMACHER: That' s, we could check into that. METRO ONE: Do you want me to address that now or? MR SMITH: We' ll get you up in a second I' ll answer it now and then we' ll answer it again. The lighting is subject to an F.A.A. approval the consulting engineer, not this particular gentlemen but he can testify to it. It says that there shouldn't, the striping and lighting aspects are not required but this gentlemen will address that in a moment. Whatever the Board does as in the other applications that I have in the east end, I will produce for you and I would have to in any event before any building permit would be issued the F.A.A. determinations relative to lighting and striping if any. They don' t believe at this particular moment that it would be required. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Because of height Allen? MR SMITH: Height is one of the considerations where they actually file with the F.A.A. and different places they don' t have to. For instance, the one that' s somewhat higher nearer the Banks is not going to be particularly lighted because they don' t, it does not effect aviation. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What is the width of the actual ( - Page 38 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: antenna on top of the mono-pole? MR GRUTZMACHER: It' s approximately 12 to 14 inches in that range. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And what is the length? MR GRUTZMACHER: Four feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Four feet total? MR GRUTZMACHER: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Four feet in height? MR GRUTZMACHER: In height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay what is the width this way? MR GRUTZMACHER: Well the whole triangle, the platform, there are three of those antennas mounted on each triangular leg. It' s about twelve feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are there steps leading to that antenna in anyway? MR GRUTZMACHER: What' s usually located on mono-poles are they' re little struts that run up the pole. If Pete, Mr. Papay the structure engineer, he' s more familiar with the actual tower design, but generally the workmen that come out to maintain and actually install the antennas have these legs that they will put in as they go up. Some are located on, but to a certain height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So no one will climb. MR GRUTZMACHER: That' s correct. And the compound we' re going to secure as well with a fence around the entire perimeter. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Have any of these been constructed in an area that we could visit within the next couple of weeks? MR RESAVY: The closest mono-pole we currently have constructed is Laurelton which is right out the JFK Airport. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right outside JFK? MR RESAVY: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would it be easily, could I just have Page 39 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: your name for the record. MR RESAVY: Christopher Resavy. , CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Would it be easily depicted if I was to see it bearing in mind that there are many antennas near Kennedy Airport. MR RESAVY: Yes you can easily depict which side it is. We can give you exact directions on how to get to the location. That particular pole I believe is only 75 foot and the F.A.A. has requested we put a marked red light on the top for observance features only. It' s not a requirement, but they've asked us to do that as a courtesy. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Very good. Thank you. Do you have any thing else that you'd like. Great thank you. MR SMITH: Mr. Resavy, this young man is the engineer for, together with his comrades on my left who can explain to liberal arts students like myself how these things work and why you need one in Peconic and you need one in Mattituck and you need another in Northville and one over in Montauk. It is somewhat technical on, I thought about reducing it to writing and trying to submit it to you. It just would go on forever. I 'm going to let him try to explain to you how this system works and why they have multiple sites and probably just try to answer your questions there. MR RESAVY: For the record my name is Christopher Resavy, I 'm the engineering manager for Metro One. If I can I want to use some exhibits to try to give you an idea of how the cellular works. The map that' s located on this board is the entire area that Metro One is licensed to serve from the F.C.C. The areas of New York that are outlined here is what' s granted to us both by the F.C.C. and the New York C.P.C.N. to give you public utility status in the State of New York. Cellular is based upon the ability to reuse frequencies and some of you are aware, mobile telephone service has been in operation for many, many years. The first service actually started in 1946 with the Hobockin police, the first ones to use mobile radio as a form of communication. From that it has grown to a mobile telephone service that you needed an operator, operators assistance in order to place a call. A few years later, that was replaced with an automatic type system with one transmitter, located with very high power, with one receiver. From that you could have unlimited amount of users on, because I believe at that time it was only four channels still and that was in the early fifties. From that grew the next generation of mobile Page 40 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY, cont'd: telephone service in which there was still only one high powered transmitter but the service was enhanced to twelve channels and at that time it was also invoked or developed in a point' that there was multiple receiver locations because what they found was although that high powered transmitter could get out long distances, the weakest link between the mobile and that transmitter was the received passed back to the people, so they set up a system of multiple receiving locations so that the conversations could be a lot clearer than what they were in the past. Although in about the mid sixties Bell Labs, Motorola, spun the idea of cellular and that' s where it really started and that was the ability to reuse frequencies in a multiple pattern over and over and over again. While working with the F.C. C. , and going through many, many, many years of development and trials and measurements and things that they were trying to do, lone about the mid seventies the F.C.C. granted Bell Labs permission to do trials in a few areas of the system, of the country to get some actual measured data in a much unused, unutilized frequency ban. That frequency ban correlates to what used to be on a lot of the older T.V' s and that was channel 67 to channel 83 on your UHF dial. If you remember those two step dials that we used to have, I still have one in my house although I can' t tune into a frequency I don't know why. Selectively of the channel I guess . They were re-allocated later to cite. The trials that I mentioned, they were done I think in four parts of the country, one was in Newark, Chicago, L.A. , and I believe some place in Texas, I'm not sure were. But from that cellular was born in 1976, where they actually started to invoke and develop all the specks and everything else that goes into what we have today as you know is cellular. I was lucky enough and I 'm not, I 'm luckily still a young person I think, but I was lucky enough to get into cellular back in 1981, so I got to learn from some of the best designers and engineers of this system, how this stuff actually worked. To give you a little idea, they went through numerous generations of what kind of polyarn was the most regular reuse thing to use, they tried squares, they tried pentagons, hexagons, and it came up that one of the Bell Labs engineers actually wrote a paper on beehive study that he had preformed and he was doing something for the military on structural support. well it happened that one of the other engineers in Bell Labs was working on Cellular, so that pattern that he had put together and it was so regularly shaped that after a little bit of work with that it was then determined and accepted that a hexagon would be the most regularly reused shape to use for cellular. From that, you can reuse frequencies in a regular patterned shape. We have depicted here on the board is a hexagon in many forms abutting each other and as you can see Page 41 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY, cont' d: they can be readily reused. What we currently have is a situation on the North Fork of Long Island where we have a new site that we are beginning construction in Southold and Pe6onic, the proposed location here in Mattituck which would be our missing cell site and some of our existing locations. We go back to the ability to reuse these frequencies, this missing cell location here would be the Mattituck site. This could be the site down on the bottom here, site 71, down here site 72 could be out here and this could be Riverhead out here which by way is our water tank, it just happened to fall that way in the plan. The ability to reuse frequencies comes in a regular type pattern, in our particular system, it' s like a chess move, the ability to read it' s frequency and that' s a knight move if anybody remembers that. The knight takes two steps up and one over. So, the same type of example here, one, two over, these two locations would read it' s frequencies. With this site missing, this signal is stretched into this area, thus stretching it' s ability to reuse its frequencies. This guy has a greater potential for interference in here and if anybody is familiar with C.B. ' s, when C.B. ' s first came out with 23 channels, everybody could use it with very readily ease because it wasn' t a lot out there, but as it got more and more popular people got accustom to their own home base channel as it were at the time. If it was channel two, then you had two people trying to talk in the same general location apart from each other, usually the conversations got walked on and you couldn' t hear that party that well. Cellular uses the same kind of concept. We have to keep separation distance involved in. That' s how we can' t come up with our regularly spaced intervals for the. south side so we currently have located here. It' s done by process of grids placed over the map from which we develop a search area that we look and .we search for. Now we had three criteria for a cell site, availability, owners willing to deal with us, and that the site fits the criteria that we need for coverage. In particular the location that we have picked in Mattituck we were able to find those three criterias. We were able to get a piece of property that was available to us, in a zone that was pretty amenable I guess to our uses, and we were able to get a landlord that was willing to deal with us and the best case, which was the last one that worked for us. So that' s kind of the particulars about this location. MR SMITH: I 'm going to steal a little bit of his thunder and I 've worked on this a little bit. What he' s leaving onset is the glass half full or half empty. Is that as you begin to move the tower to the west, he begins to fall out of these grid patterns that he has described to make the system as he moves to the east he has a similar problem. Page 42 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: As a consequence in the area where they need the town, this is within the area and as he has probably described the issue. Again I suppose the one thing that' s left unsaid is that what makes this work as the gentlemen from AT&T will say in a moment is that the wattages, the power involved in these things are relatively low. They don't bleed over from one area to another. You could probably make a tower in Orient or Montauk big enough to reach all the way back into the city, but it would step on everything in between and the system would be infected. The reason that this works is that these are very low power sites and that actually the signal is transferred by telephone line from station to station and that' s what makes it clear. True? MR RESAVY: Very true. MR SMITH: Why don' t you let these folks ask you questions. MR RESAVY: Do you have any questions? Let me clarify the F.A.A. point about light that was brought up earlier. We initially filed this location with the F.A.A. and they came back and gave us a ruling that lighting and marking would be required. We reviewed that we questioned why, because there are particular rules that apply to part 77 for flight aviation patterns. So we contacted a consultant that we use, Mr. James Hennesy a number of years ago was the head of the F.A.A. and for many years ran that organization. We gave all the particulars of this location to him for his review and his opinion. After a very careful review and some contact with the F.A.A. it is his opinion that we do not need lighting nor marking. On our behalf he has re-filed this location with the F.A.A. , he is right now seeking an interpretation of the initial ruling that they gave for the location and we expect that within the next two weeks to thirty days it takes anywhere in between that to get the final answer of the F.A.A. and once we have that we will submit that to the Town, but at this time it is Metro One' s opinion that we will not need lighting and marking. As in the case with Laurelton if the F.A.A. wishes us to light this for safety reasons without the marking we will do so. MR SMITH: That way we will supply that in the contents of the lights consideration. MR RESAVY: And that would be the flashing red lights on the top. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: At all times or only during night time hours? r j Page 43 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. ISM RESAVY: Whatever they specify for us. That is specified by night we must adhere to it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I tell you the reason why it concerns me having flown in several small airplanes, that is a circling area and having the benefit of having a private airport in the great hamlet of Mattituck, the tower I would assume at being 104 feet in height could be a hazard to pilots, I have not had the luxury of flying, either flying in or flying out of Mattituck either in early hours of the morning prior to the sun coming up or to the sun going down. But those are the times that most concern me. MR SMITH: Certainly if the Board wanted to call out something more than the F.A.A. would require, we would be happy to do so. Certainly we can't do less, I guess is what I 'm saying. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I understand. Okay. Yes, question? (UNIDENTIFIED) : Bill and I live right across the street from the Baxter building and the flight of the planes going to Mattituck Airport is only one block away from our houses. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I know the feeling. There are many more questions we are going to ask here so, you know, and it appears that these gentlemen and ladies have brought a substantial crew of people here so. METRO ONE: We' ll try to answer as many questions as we can. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Believe it or not it' s still a fairly early hour for this Board. Thank you. MR SMITH: I reduced Mr. Nickles' statement to writing, it will make things go a little faster. MEMBER VILLA: Before the engineer sits down I have a question and that question is why do you need the height of 102 feet when you know you said the one in Kennedy is like 75 feet? MR RESAVY: I believe the Southold tank tower is 125 feet, the proposed location out here in Northville is 100 feet and each of the locations here we are an existing 300 footer here that we' re at 150 feet in Southampton, We' re on the Hampton Bays water tank and believe our. MR SMITH: I believe he' s asking why 104 here. Page 44 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: I 'm getting to that. According to the topology, we need vary and different heights, we did actual drive tests in this location to determine the lowest height that we can go for this location and it was evaluated that with the proposed location in both Northville and Southold, the Peconic police station that the 100 foot, 102 foot overall height is what Metro One would require to provide the service that we need to provide to our customers. MR SMITH: The next witness is Mr. Nickles. As I stated to the Chairman when I began to a degree that I could pre-file some of this testimony I would do so, Mr. Nickles is present, the aspect of the special exception that he testifies to is the effect. The letter reads in closing, it is my opinion that the mass would not have any measurable effects upon the neighborhoods fair market value beyond the effect of the existing L.B. use or future L.B. uses as allowed under the Southold Town code. In the brief, that was presented by Mr. Moore, he goes into some detail in mentioning the other possible uses of the Baxter site, Mr. Baxter is in fact present should there be any question about the existing structures and the fact that they remain vacant for some period of time and have been used for commercial purposes. If there are any questions of the Board of Mr. Nickles I can have him answer those questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no specific questions of Mr. Nickles at this time. I do want to address a question to Mr. Baxter later. MR SMITH: This brings us to two of the health issues. Mr. Petersen' s resume has been given to you earlier, he is an expert with AT&T Bell Labs and the, he goes into rather great detail, I 'm not sure that I understand a great deal of the detail, but in the closing paragraph, closing phrase of this particular letter. The proposed Mattituck Cellular Radio installation will not present any health problems to members of the public. He is of course referring to the nature of radio waves and light as the previous engineer stated to the Board this frequency and the strength of the signal is the same as was used in our T.V. sets some years ago so I don' t know that this is an issue. But if anybody has a question, I ' ll have Mr. Petersen answer the questions as health effects and radio waves. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: My only concern is that of disruption to any particular devices that might exist in the local houses around the antenna site. MR SMITH: That' s an engineering question that this young man Page 45 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: can address. MR RESAVY: I can address that. We can provide a document to the Board that we' ll give Allen' Smith. We've got a letter from the F.C.C. in charge of the New York area which encompasses all of this location that the five years that Metro One has been in service we have not interfered with any commercial consumer device within our service area. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That includes cablevision in any form? MR RESAVY: That includes cable t.v. , microwave ovens, t.v. service, any consumer electronic device that is made for the market place. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What about a hamm radio. MR RESAVY: . No. The ability to reuse frequencies is also that we can co-locate in many different areas, so as we are located on the tower in Southampton we are also co-located there with several hamm operators as well. Several other services. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: Mr. Chairman, one of the other gentlemen has given me a copy of a letter dated February 28, 1991, of the F.C.C. which appears to be the letter that was referenced. One of the additional issues that arises here and I did not have the opportunity to pre-file it, is the structural engineers inquiries, Mr. Papay will address those, maybe to save us all I will tell you my experience in briefing this particular matter I said to Mr. Papay, "Can we blow this tower down" , and he said, "Of course we can blow the tower down. " I said well ch isn' t that a matter of concern, he says no. He says the force of the winds necessary to blow this tower down you are not going to worry about the tower coming because your neighbor' s car is going to be coming across your yard at the same time. But I ' ll let him say that in his own style of engineering ease and answer any fall down questions that anybody may have. MR PAPAY: The mono-pole itself is very similar to the light posts and transmission towers that you all see along the L.I .E. or what have you. The design of the tower itself forth by E.I .A. which is Electronics Industry Association to 22D which is a national standard what has been also adopted by the American National Standard Institute. The design criteria of the tower itself is a fifty year design storm for this part of Long Island it would be eighty five miles an t Page 46 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR PAPAY, cont'd: hour. Metro One has opted for a hundred year design storm which correlates to a one hundred mile an hour wind. So that would be the design wind itself of thirty three feet above the ground surface. You take that wind speed and you apply factors of the thing to basically accelerating the speed and the pressure so that you finally come up with a final design and like Allen has said, if upon failure there would be cars rolling across the landscape. It would take a tremendous force. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the same also with the antenna, I didn' t mean to cut you off, the possibility of the antenna blowing off? MR PAPAY: That' s an interesting question, I would imagine that there would be possibly particles of antennas that would dislodge before failure goes out. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me just tell you the problem that we've had in the past. This Board has wrestled with some interesting situations in reference to wind generating towers. Now we don' t have the sophistication in wind generating towers that we have here it appears and in no way am I enhancing or not enhancing this particular project, however, we've had situations with the Coast Guard on North Dumpling Island in reference to height, wind velocity and so on and so forth, as to the disruption of their particular light which sits on top of an old Coast Guard station. In zones that would effect boating and so on and so forth. However, it has been this Board' s policy in the past and even with that of a prior council person who constructed a tower that if the tower should fall it would at least fall on his own persons ' property. We have an unique situation here in the respect that Mr. Baxter owns the piece of property to the south, which I ' ll address in a moment. In this particular case, if the wind was to blow and if we were to have the tornado that we had in the early 80 ' s and some how dislodge this particular tower, we would of course land on the neighbor' s property to the north and if it .did it in a very small fashion, you know, maybe ten or fifteen or twenty feet of the tower would end up on that neighbor' s property, being ninety five feet away from the northwesterly property line so to speak. However for the tower to fall on the south side it would definitely fall on Mr. Baxter' s property since he is the current owner of the property. Is there any need for any tie backs on a tower of this particular nature? MR PAPAY: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Why? Page 47 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR PAPAY: Because the tower itself is designed as a free standing structure. It is not designed as a guy structure. In fact you can get into complications if you were to guy a structure that was intended to deflect under load. If a guy was to restrain it from deflecting and had failed itself, it may cause the tower to fail, where as if the tower was not guyed and was allowed to relieve itself it would not go. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How far is this tower penetrating the ground surface? MR PAPAY: The foundation itself varies depending on the soil conditions, it would be approximately six to eight foot in diameter, would extend about twenty five or so feet into the earth. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Encased in cement, six to eight feet. MR PAPAY: That would be a concrete shell that' s reinforced with steel. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don' t have any further questions unless you do Bill. MR SMITH: I have two things. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. MR SMITH: We can develop for you the engineering relative to the affixing of the antenna, as a distinct object from the pole itself. If the fall down radius is a matter of concern, I think we can safely offer to move the pole to the south to some degree, such that if it came down it would not fall in the yard to the north at all. If that' s a. . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the other question I would ask Mr. Baxter and I've met Mr. Baxter in the rear at one time, but I would ask him also if he would covenant his piece of property to the south to the same distance so as during the period of this lease that there would be no construction on that particular piece other than it appears to be a concrete building at this time, to the attune of 104 feet to a degree, whatever degree you move it. MR SMITH: I can discuss that with Mr. Baxter and I will get that back to you. The way we have expressed it in other jurisdictions when this issue has arisen, we would detail a fall down pattern and the way those have been expressed in other places, that they would not erect any structures in those areas. They could be parking lots and the like, but no C Page 48 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: structures within the fall down area. I ' ll discuss that with him. He has counsel that represents him in dealing with the lease and that is a lease question. So I don' t know that that wouldibe fair of me ask tonight, but, I will get you an answer. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: This young man may be able to answer the antenna issue in terms of fall down. MR RESAVY: I just want to clarify one part about the antennas themselves. The affixing we can supply the details and he can come up with the calculations for the affixing to the tower, but the antennas that we use in our system are made from a manufacturer who has supplied us a letter that they will withstand a 150 mile an hour wind. So we can supply that letter also, we had just applied that to a previous owner of a Town so that' s readily available and we' ll forward that to Allen Smith. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: I 've pretty much have had let the engineers have their say and I ' ll let Mr. Baxter jump to his feet in a moment. We've come down at least through my mental recollection of the check list in this special exception portion of the hearing. To the legal end of it, I believe that in submitting public utilities portion to the Board in advance as Mr. Moore has done with the brief, a question was raised relative to some can say in real English whether Southold was within the franchise area and I again have Chris' statement to that fact reduced to writing and I ' ll put it in the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I ask the question of the difference between NYNEX and Metro One, are they interrelated in anyway? Not necessarily at the remainder of the hearing, but. . . MR RESAVY: Since I used to work for NYNEX I think I can' answer that, many years ago. The F.C.C. when they created the cellular franchises or the ability to provide cellular service, they did it a little differently than they did many years ago with the regional Bell operated companies. What they decided to do is provide for not one but two entities that could provide the service to the public. That way there is not a monopoly on one side of the fence, so each company has in its guidelines of its license, operating license to provide the best quality service to its customers that it w jf Page 49 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. METRO ONE, cont'd: can and NYNEX is our competitor in this particular market place. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you: MR SMITH: That' s pretty much the presentation, Mr. Chairman, I ' ll invite Mr. Baxter up, he' s not a witness of mine in such, he is obviously interested and you can ask him any questions you wish to ask him, he wishes to answer. Mr. Baxter. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How are you Mr. Baxter? MR BAXTER: Hi, can I help you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The concern of the Board is that of, my concern, not necessarily the concern of the Board is that of the antenna falling on your property. In that this particular time you do own both parcels . If this organization intends to abide by the normal conditions that we request, and the tower is moved another nine feet to the south, it of course encroaches that much more on your southerly parcel. Our concern is that during the period of the time of the lease that there be no construction within approximately 104 feet of the, except what' s there now which we can' t you know, but that there be no construction within 104 feet of that antenna to the rear of that existing cement block building that you have now and that' s basically one of the requests that we deal with and I 'm just addressing it at this point. It' s not necessarily something that you have to come up with an answer for tonight, as Mr. Smith said that you know, that this is a situation you might want to review with your attorneys but we have found that in the past if we use that as a criteria that we start out with that it usually ends up to be pretty good all the way around. MR BAXTER: What is the distance from the pole to our property line? MR SAMBURG: Let me see the revised statement if that' s all you have. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure no problem. MR SAMBURG: Okay. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the same one? MR SAMBURG: No. Page 50 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. MR SAMBURG: They have already taken the liberty of moving it to the south. The area we are concerned with of course is the fall down below. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Why don' t you show that to Mr. Baxter. MR SAMBURG: Sure. I think he' s familiar. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have a date on that? MR SAMBURG: Yeah, this is a revised date of 4/23/91 . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You can give us a copy of that. MS KOWALSKI: We need about seven of them. MR SAMBURG: Seven? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yeah. MR SMITH: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Baxter will give you a written reply to that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Great. MR SMITH: That is my formal presentation, you have folks in the neighborhood and neighbors to address the Board and if they have concerns that I can answer, I ' ll try to do so. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. At the end of this discussion, I will then recess for about two minutes and discuss with the Board if we' re going to close this hearing or if we' re going to venture up to Laurelton and take a look at this antenna and then if we have any other further questions and we' ll let you know. MR SMITH: Thank you sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you gentlemen like to address the Board in anyway, feel free to do it in whatever fashion you like, I know your concerns, you live close to the property and I would have similar concerns and in no way are we. MR SAMBURG: There are two questions I was going to ask today. Page 51 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I just have your name for the record. MR SAMBURG: Ed Samburg. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Mr. Samburg. Do you have any other questions sir . MR SAMBURG: They answered everything very well. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: okay, I guess at this time we' ll take a short recess and I guess we' ll go over to the office and kick this around. Yes. MR SMITH: I do have that video. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh yeah, that' s right. MR SMITH: It' s nothing much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is it a video? MR SMITH: Yes, it' s, they hate it. If you want to see it, it probably takes a couple, three minutes, it shows how this new technology in the fire trucks works and stuff . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well if you want to sure, if you want to set it up while we' re taking the recess. (Video was shown for approximately 10 minutes concerning Lincoln Park, New Jersey safety services systems. ) MR SMITH: The other two things, I guess that I did mention, it reminds me of it. These are now used by the police in a number of different areas within my experience. I tried to find out whether they used it in the hostage negotiations when the young man took over the place across the street in Mattituck from the theater. The reason that they do it, they supply a discreet channel to the hostage that they can talk to with this where they don' t have everybody and their brother listening in. I 'm also told now that the fire chiefs are liking these better and so are the police when they go to a fatal, because it' s the nature of things such as all of us who have monitors that we pick up the police signal and they don't get the turnout of people when they start calling in names and things of that nature and asking for the M.E. office, that they do when they use the fire channel to ask for the M.E. and stuff like that. And I guess you guys know all about these things, but I mean that' s the size of it now and the fact is there is some a little smaller. Page 52 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: That' s antique at this point. They have them small enough to fit in your shirt pocket phone. MR SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright the only last two questions that we have are, were there any other alternate sites in Mattituck that were investigated and. . . MR SMITH: Yes, the commercial areas are to the west of this location, westerly generally at the school and up in that area. The degradation of the signal is the problem that happens to us when we get that far west. It is this technology that the wind is testified to earlier. They have made a legitimate effort to identify parcels where they could go that would satisfy the engineering. It begs the question, we've a very similar experience in Riverhead in trying to identify sites. The water towers in Polish Town which is one of the sites that' s existing. They had to go up into essentially a residential farm area, if you will, up on the west end of town of the Brookhaven line. And the last one was in Vernon Well' s field in Northville, towards the tanks as close as we could get. It is the dilemma that this Board faces the technology is such that it dictates certain things if we had our brothers we might do other wise. The problem, I guess, with zoning is nobody had this technology in mind, when we zoned either at Riverhead or Southold or the next place. That' s the problem. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The other point is, I guess it' s the suggestion of the Board to recess the hearing and ask you to come back with that determination if you can give us a 104 foot circumference all the way around. MR SMITH: I have a plan for three items that I 'm getting for you. I have to speak to Mr. Baxter and solve the fall down issue, I've agreed to get you this information on the antenna and when it comes loose, if it comes loose from the tower itself, and lastly we' re going to try to get for you the F.A.A. stuff . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay and you are going to get us the address of the tower that presently exists, which is 75 feet high in Laurelton. MR SMITH: We shall. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: Thank you. Page 53 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Surely. MEMBER VILLA: How many of these are we looking at for the Town of Southold now. Is this going to be the last one or are we looking at more? MR SMITH: I' ll try to answer and then I ' ll have one of the engineers answer. They' re speaking to the Village of Greenport about going up on the water tower there and are there any other sites in Southold? MR RESAVY: At this time we don' t anticipate any for the foreseeable future, that being our forecast for the next three years that we have looked at. And as technology changes that may be extended or it may be brought in. But at this time we do not see anything in the next three years, at this point. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would utilize this antenna, other than yourself. Would you rent space on this antenna to anybody else? MR RESAVY: We will not rent space on this tower to anybody else except for the Town if they so desire to enhance their services in that area. But as a practice of Metro One, we do not do that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What about if the fire district in the immediate hamlet? MR RESAVY: We will be more than happy to support any of the safety net, fire safety, anything in that vain. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: That is already true on the tower that' s going up. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. We thank you very much and we hope to see you at the next meeting or so. MR SMITH: The clerk will advise me or Mr. Moore when it will be back? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER; Right. MR SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, I make a motion recessing the hearing. Page 54 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. All in Favor - AYE. / C�BY ' (Transcribed by Tape) (Not Present at the Hearing) , `: - APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS , ,;;ts" l,.'- SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman rz y Charles Grigonis,Jr. Serge Doyen,Jr. ( -i ; Town Hall,53095 Main Road James Dinizio,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 s /. "c* ' Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa -1823 o Fax (516)765 Telephone(516)765-1809 �� Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN Off'SOUTHOLD TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON JUNE 7 , 1991 Appl. No. 4022-SE - CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE. This hearing was recessed from the April 30, 1991 meeting, and the statements made during the hearing are as follows: 8 : 12 p .m. - Hearing reconvened . CHAIRMAN: Ok. We ' ll go back to the application for Metro One, Cellular Telephone, which was opened at the last regularly scheduled meeting, and we had some questions of Mr. Smith at that point. Mr. Smith, are you going to continue. ALLEN M. SMITH, ESQ . : I was going to defer to my young friend whose name is really on this application (William Moore, Esq.) and is now back from (a journey) with his wife. But to take the lead, I shall. When we left off last together, there were a number of items that you wished addressed. The first was to move the tower as such that it would not fall down on the property to the north if it were to come down, and we 've done that. And I understand that Mr. Moore had provided you with a stipulation from Mr. Baxter relative to the parcel to the south. He has a drawing I believe he may have drawn that depicts that for you. One of the board members or member of the audience asked a question relative to the structural integrity of the antenna as distinct from the structural integrity of the monopole, and I have sent Mr. Goehringer the information that relates to the fact that the antenna will take at least as much force, wind force, as with the pole. Relative to the FAA, the position of the FAA remains the same, such that you can understand both the ti Page 2 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 ALLEN SMITH, continued: engineering and legalistic gobbilly-gook that contained in the FAA letter. It says that itibe lighted with a white strob light during daylight hours, and lighted with a red light during the evening. We supplied for you to location of not only the JFK tower, the monopole that was referenced. - in the earlier testimony that I provided you, although not owned by Metro but are of a similar design. The last thing that I sent to Mr. Goehringer since our last meeting was a decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Town of Riverhead, which has considered similar applications to the one that is before you for whatever it is worth as I said in the letter. I believe that is the checklist that we left off with the other day. If there are any additional questions, we will answer them. I do recall one. Mr. Moore has in fact spoken with some representatives of the AEMTs associated with the Mattituck Fire Department. I believe that we ' re authorized to say that they consider the enhancement of the cellular mobile facilities on the North Fork to be an advantage to them. The reason is that if I were to have a heart-attack and they were to come get me with their more sophisticated apparatis, they actually hook me into certain monitoring of devices. A heart monitor, block pressure and the like . And that data is relayed by Cellular Telephone, I believe, to a hospital on the South Side. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: South Side Hospital in Bay Shore. MR. SMITH: South Side hospital on Long Island, where if I 'm being transported to Central Suffolk (Hospital) or if I 'm being transported to wherever the emergency system dictates on , the AEMTs in the Mattituck ambulance or rescue vehicle can in fact buy As I understand it, by reason of the fact that we do not have in this area on the North Fork a detailed telephone system. There are sometimes difficulties in doing the transmitting back to South Side Hospital, and I believe we 're authorized to say that. Other than that I think we 've answered everything that we had left open from the earlier meeting. If there are any other questions, I ' ll attempt to answer them. r Page 3 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The approximate, and I apologize for this- but the approximate height of the antenna is 104 feet, is that not correct? I MR. SMITH: Yes, sir. CHAIRMAN: we 're at 104 feet, is that correct? Ok. And we are 95 feet from the northerly property line. Ok. Now we ' re at 103 . MR. SMITH. Yes (referring to map) . CHAIRMAN: So we ' re right on, approximately. And this is going to be the fall-back area right in here (referring to map) . MR. SMITH: Yeah, and he ' s going to sign a covenant to that effect. MR. (neighbor) : I just wanted to see that. CHAIRMAN: Now, what did you want to look at, Bob? BOB That; I just wanted to see it for what it-- Let ' s see. It would impinge on that one. This one would definitely. This was the one that I was concerned about. Ok. CHAIRMAN: All right. Good. Did you have anything else for the record? MR. SMITH: I tried to be responsive as best I could. I don' t have anything more or less to say. I 'd appreciate a decision at the board' s convenience. CHAIRMAN: I have not gotten to Laurelton yet. I tried to go today, and I didn' t make it. What I 'm going to ask is both the indulgence of both you and Mr. Moore and what I'm going to do is request the board that we close this hearing as to any further verbatim testimony, and that we just close the hearing as a matter of formality at the next regularly scheduled meeting, when I do make it up there and if I do have further questions, I can communicate with you by mail. Does anyone have any objec- tions to that? MR. SMITH: Very good, sir. None. Thank you. Have a good evening. Page 4 - Hearing Transcript for Cellular Telephone Co. ZBA Meeting of June 7 , 1991 CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in behalf of this application? � (No response.) Hearing no further questions, I' ll make a motion recessing this until the next regularly scheduled meeting, at which time we will close it as a matter of formality (written record to be closed and file sealed at next regularly scheduled meeting) and-- BOARD CLERK: Closing all verbatim testimony? CHAIRMAN: And we are closing all verbatim testimony (at thi s time) . MEMBER VILLA: Second. The verbatim portion of the hearing was declared closed and the written portion of the record was permitted to remain open for questions and answers, by mail, until the next regularly scheduled meeting at which time the file would be sealed (record concluded) . VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES : Messrs . Goehringer, Villa, Doyen and Grigonis . (Member Dinizio was absent from this particular hearing.) Respectfully submitted, Linda T. Kowalski, Board Clerk APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman '` Charles Grigoms,Jr. Serge Doyen,Jr. Town Hall,SBOoX51Main Road James Robert A. i a Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa =� Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone (516)765-1809 x Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 9, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Moore & Moore Main Road, Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Freedom of Information Request - Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One Dear Bill: I am in receipt of your Freedom of Information form requesting a " . . .copy of tape of Zoning Board meeting (portion of tape) at which board denied special exception application of Cellular Telephone Co. (Metro One) ." The meeting at which the board rendered a decision on the special exception was a Special Meeting held on Thursday, July 25, 1991. No tape recording was made of this Special Meeting. For your convenience, I am enclosing an additional copy of the board' s determination concerning the Special Exception which has been filed with the Town Clerk and mailed yesterday morning to you, with copies to Allen Smith, Esq. The board' s July 25, 1991 determination does contain the specific findings and resolution of the board. Very truly yours, Linda Kowalski Enclosure APPLICATO FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO REC9bS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SECTION I . TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Please complete Section I of this form. Give the form to the agency Freedom of Information Officer. The Freedom of Information Officer will return one copy to you as a response to your request, or as an interim response. TO: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER AGENCY NAME: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals AGENCY ADDRESS : Town Hall , Southold, NY I HEREBY APPLY TO INSPECT THE FOLLOWING RECORD (Please describe the record sought. If possible, supply a date, a file title and number, and any other informa- tion that will help locate the record desired): Copy of tape of Zoning Board meeting (portion of tape) at which board denied special exception application of Cellular Telephone Co. (Metro One) Signature of Applicant and Printed Name: Applicant Represents: Cellular Telephone Co. Applicant's Mailing Address: P.O. Box 23 , Mattituck, New York 11952 Date of Application: August 6 , 1991 SECTION II . FOR USE BY AGENCY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ONLY [ ] Approved [ ] Denied: (for the reason(s) checked below) ( ] Confidential Disclosure [ ] Part of investigatory Files [ ] Unwarranted Invasion of Privacy [ ] Record of Which This Agency is Legal Custodian Cannot be Found [ ] Record is Not Maintained by This Agency [ ] Exempted by Statute Other Than the Freedom of Information Act [ ] Other (specify): [ ] Receipt of this request is acknowledged. There will be a delay in supplying the requested record until for the following reason: Signature: Title: Date: Freedom of Information Officer SECTION III . NOTICE TO APPLICANT YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION IN WRITING WITH- IN 30 DAYS OF THE DENIAL. INFORMATION AS TO THE PERSON TO CONTACT IS SHOWN BELOW. THE CONTACTED PERSON MUST RESPOND TO YOU IN WRITING WITHIN SEVEN BUSINESS DAYS OF RECEIPT OF YOUR APPEAL. Name: Southold Town Board Business Address: 53095 Main Road Telephone: Southold, New York 516-765-1500 MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law Clause Commons Suite 3 AUG 8 �991 Main Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 �i Tel: (516) 298-5674 --- — JwI Fax (516) 298-5664 William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary August 7, 1991 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Attention: Ms. Linda Kowalski Re: Cellular Telephone Co. Dear Linda: Enclosed please find an application made pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act requesting a copy of the tape of the Zoning Board meeting at which time the Board considered the Special Exception Application of the above referenced client. Thank you for your cooperation. Very 4. 00re� , t WDM/mr Enc. cc: Allen M. Smith, Esq. Metro One - Att: Diane Amedeo APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ,u z m.j' SCOTT L.HARRIS Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman ~ V�� Supervisor Charles Grigonis,Jr. ? ( 1 Serge Doyen,Jr. v, t u Town Hall,53095 Main Road P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A.Villa 1> Fax(516)765-1823 n Telephone(516)765-1809 i Telephone(516)765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. No. 4022. Application of CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY d/b/a METRO ONE requesting Special Exception approval under Article VIII , Section 100-8113( 1) and Article III , Section 100-31B( 6) for an unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building and construction of a 104 ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, Ny; also shown on Planning Board Map of May 15 , 1990, Map No. 8937 . County Tax Map No. 1000-108-4-11. 3 (part of 11. ) WHEREAS, after due notice, public hearings were held on April 30, 1991 and June 7, 1991 and at said hearings, all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, Board members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question and the surrounding areas; and WHERES, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. The premises in question is located along the westerly side of Elijah' s Lane in the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold, is more particularly identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 108, Block 4, Lot 11.3 (part of 11) , for which lot lines have been the subject of approval by the Town Planning Board on or about April 9, 1990. 2. For the record it is also noted that the subject parcel contains a total lot area of 80,495. 5 square feet, is located in the Limited Business (LB) Zone District, and is surrounded on three sides by residential communities. To the south is a plot of land also owned by William J. Baxter and others improved with a large one-story building and, although unoccupied, is also located in the Limited Business Zone District. Page 2 - Appl. No. 22-SE t. Matter of CELLULAR ELEPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 3 . By this application, it is requested by Cellular Telephone Company d/b/a Metro One, with the consent of the landowners, William J. Baxter and others, that a Special Exception be granted for: ( 1) la proposed unmanned telecommunications building in an existing concrete block building, and (2) construction of a 104 ft. high monopole radio tower with antenna for transmitting and receiving radio signals to provide cellular telephone services. The section of the Code under which this application has been made is Article III , Section 100-30B( 6) of the Agricultural-Conservation and Low-Density Residential Zone District provisions of the Code which reads as follows: 100-31B. Uses permitted by special exception by the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as herein- after provided, and . . . are subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: . . . ( 6) Public utility rights-of-way as well as structures and other installations necessary to serve areas within the town, subject to such conditions as the Board of Appeals may impose in order to protect and promote the health, safety, appearance and general welfare of the community and the character of the neighborhood in which the proposed structure is to be constructed. . . . 4. The proposed unmanned telecommunications building is shown on the site plan maps prepared by Juengert Grutzmacher Associates, P.A. dated February 6, 1991. Also, the tower structure for telecommunications transmissions is shown to be proposed at approximately 103 feet from the northerly side property line, 238+- feet from the westerly rear property line, 62+- feet from the southerly side property line, and 233+- feet from the easterly front property line. The height of the tower, inclusive of antenna mast, is proposed at 104 feet from ground level. The nearest building (telecommunications building) is located approximately nine feet to the east from the proposed tower, and 69 feet to the existing barn structure from the tower. Buildings therefore are within the direct fall-down area of the proposed tower. Also, distances have not been provided on the radius map to show building envelopes for future principal structures and accessory structures on the five residentially zoned lands adjacent to this parcel to the north and west. It does appear, however, that future homes on these lots could be located outside of the fall-down range, i.e. 104 feet from the proposed tower location. •*PgEge 3 '- Appl. No. SE Matter of CELLULAR T EPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 5. The land uses of the Low-Density Residential Zone District, under which this application is made, is intended to provide open rural environmental areas so highly valued by residents and to reasonably regulate the subdivision and development of the lands while honoring the legitimate interests of farmers and farmland owners (Article III, Section 100-30 Purpose) . The uses permitted under these provisions are limited to principal residential uses, agricultural uses, and accessory uses incidental thereto. 6. The land use provisions of the Limited Business (LB) Zone District are intended to provide limited business activities that are consistent with the rural and historic character of surrounding areas and uses and that have been designed to protect the residential and rural character of the area. Permitted uses in the LB Zone are limited to antique, art and craft shops and galleries; custom workshops and machine shops; wholesale or retail and display of garden materials and plants, including nursery operations; library; museum; professional office; business office; funeral home; restaurant; barbershop, professional studios, travel agency and other personal service stores and shops; plumbing shop, carpentry shop, motorcycle shops, landscaping and other service businesses; wholesale and warehousing. Other uses permitted by Special Exception would include those uses as may be permitted in the Low-Density Residential and Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts and provided under Article III (ref. paragraph #5 above) . 7 . The uses proposed under this Special Exception request are for commercial telecommunications and radio transmission services by Metro One through Cellular Telephone Company, a company who has received approvals from the Public Service Commission to operate a cellular radio system (see Order issued April 18, 1985 for a "Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to Construct and Operate a Cellular Radio Telecommunication Service in the New York Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area" ) . 8. On January 10, 1989, a new Zoning Code and Master Plan were adopted by the Town of Southold, and many zoning provisions and requirements were modified or created which are quite different from the previous zoning codes. In applying the provisions of the new master plan and zoning code, one of the first considerations by this Board in a Special Exception request is to determine whether the uses requested fall within the meaning of the Zoning Code as applied. 9. Article XIII, Section 100-130 of the Light Industrial (LI ) and Light-Industrial-Office (LIO) Zoning Provisions V Page 4 - Appl. No. 22-SE • 'V Matter of CELLULAR ELEPHONE COMPANY Decision Rendered July 25, 1991 authorize this type of use by Special Exception. The purpose of the LIo and LI Zone Districts is to provide for commercial activities which are not appropriate for those uses permitted in residential, agricultural, and aimited business use zone districts. It is apparent that the use proposed herein will be a principal use involving commercial telecommunications activities. The purpose and intent of Section 100-30B( 6) is to permit only those uses which are not of a business or commercial nature and which are clearly consistent with the rural, residential or agricultural character of the immediate area. A telecommunications use is not a residential or agricultural use. 10. It is, therefore, determined that the meaning of Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) shall apply only to those public utility towers, structures and uses congruently associated with residential or agricultural uses; i.e. TV, VHF, CB, Ham Radio, accessory and incidental thereto, by Special Exception approval by the Board of Appeals. Telecommunication systems such as that proposed herein which are of a commercial nature could be permitted as a principal use under only Article XIII and Article XIV, by Special Exception in the LIO and LI Industrial Zone Districts. This commercial use cannot be authorized by Special Exception under the current zoning code under this particular (residential/agricultural) provision (Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) ) . ACCORDINGLY, on motion by Mr. Villa, seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was RESOLVED, that the application for a Special Exception for commercial telecommunications activities and structures as applied under Article III, Section 100-30B( 6) , (ref. Article VIII, Section 100-81B) , be and hereby is DISMISSED, for the reasons as noted above. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Messrs. Villa, Doyen and Goehringer. (Member Dinizio abstained and did not participate in discussions or vote. ) (Member Grigonis was absent due to illness. ) This resolution was duly adopted. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN lk ;' y 1 • O Phone 298.8833 MATTITUCK FIRE DISTRICT P.O. BOX 666, 1000 PIKE STREET MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND, N.Y. 11952 ilI July 29, 1991 Mr. Gerry Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals Town of Southold Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re : Metro One Communication Tower Dear Sir: It is understood that consideration is being given to the instal- lation of a Metro One Communication tower within the boundries of the Mattituck Fire District. Please be advised that the Board of Fire Commissioners of the Mattituck Fire District beleives that the Metro One Tower will be a vital , and necessary, link in the emergency communication system within the Town of Southold and will enhance the system' s capabilities throughout the entire County. Sincerelyyattituck oh A. K� ect. Fire ist. CC: Southold Town Supervisor Southold Town Board Allen M. (Smith ALLorney and CounMelor at LaW 21991 737 Qoanoke Avenue, Poxt Office 15ox 1240 Tel: (516) 727-3947 Riverhead, New York 11901 August 1, 1991 Honorable Gerard P. Goehringer Board of Appeals Town of Southold P. O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Re: Appeal No. 4022 Cellular Telephone Co. ^aar Mr. Go3hri-gel: I am constrained to send you this correspondence by reason of an article in the Suffolk Times newspaper this date (a copy of which I enclose for your reference) . The article reports that your Board met on an unspecified date and rendered a decision ad- verse to my client. I am advised by Mr. Moore that your Board last met in public session on Thursday, July 25, 1991. I am fur- ther advised by Mr. Moore that he verbally requested a copy of the decision on July 26, 1991 and again in person on July 30, 1991. On both occasions, he was advised that the decision had not been written. A matter such as is before you requires your Board to make findings of fact and conclusions of law prior to passing upon the issue before it. It is difficult for me to imagine that such findings and conclusions were considered and voted upon by your Board verbally, conceptually or in the abstract. I have asked Mr. Moore to request the tape of your meeting to review my con- cerns. To the degree that the procedure followed by your Board in this instance did not result in the members having before them each of the elements required to be considered and found by them, I respectfully object to the same. Very truly yours, O�QL Allen M. Smith AMS/jpm Enclosure CC : William D. Moore Diane Amedeo A2 The Suffolk Times • August 1, 1991 A16 The Suffolk Times • August 1, 1991 Town Kayos Metro One Tower Bid By Ruth Je►niek wetlands thing they're taking all the Carisen's property — which is in an SOUTHOLD—It has not been a great Town Mall Notes way to the Point," Mr. Blank added Agriculture/Conservation zone — at- year for Bill Baxter. about the controversial condemnation of tended the Town Board work session on First the town pulled out of negotia- resident Peter Blank to build homes on Private land on Hallocks Bay in Orient. Tuesday and were informed by Mr. tions to lease or purchase the Baxter two undersized lots. DEC marine resource specialist Don Arnoff that Mr. Carlsen is "about to Brothers Building on Route 25 in Mr. Blank's property—which flanks Ninivaggi was unavailable for comment submit an application to the ZBA for an Mattituck as a new home for Southold's a private road leading to Pete's Neck prior to presstime on the letter he wrote interpretation as to whether aquaculhve human resources center. Then the Point — falls within five-acre zoning to the ZBA last week requesting a denial can be the same as agriculture." county reneged on its offer to purchase requirements,but condemnation of more of Mr.Blank's application. Mr. Arnoff also responded to letters Fort Corchaug/Baxter Farms for $3 than 11 acres of his land two years ago ■A Home Occupation? written to the Town Board about the million. And now the Zoning Board of by the state Department of Some town residents assumed that seeming inequity in two metiers: the Appeals has denied an application made Environmental Conservation left Mr. Sandy Carlsen's problems ended when town prosecution of Cu a Metro by Metro One to erect a cellular tele- Blank with just over 1 1/2 acres of land Southold enacted its Home Occupations gas station owner John Chase, who erected a canopy over his gas pumps phone tower on Mr. Baxter's Mattituck per IoL Law.But that was not the case. without a building permit or site plan property, Mr. Blank does not plan to build Mr. Carlsen's seafood business on approval, and the town's failure to In denying the request for a special homes immediately on the lots, despite Lower Road in Southold"was excluded prosecute Mr. Carlsen and other viola- exception to install the 100-foot tower the favorable ruling. "We're going to from the home occupations law" and lots of the Town Code. and to use the building to house un- court with the DEC," he said Tuesday. "can never come into conformance"with "if a property owner takes legitimate manned computer equipment, the ZBA "The main thing was just to get it the new zoning amendment that forbids steps to terminate the violation by ap- ruled that such towers are permissible straightened out so we know what we baymen to sell shellfish from their plying to one of our boards or changing, only for ham radios, televisions or other have.We're still continuing to fight." homes,according to town attorney Har- we will not prosecute,"Mr. Arnoff said. uses that are accessories to a residence. The DEC has offered to pay Mr. vey Amoff. "We prosecuted the Metro station be- . ■ The DEC Did /t Blank for the condemned land,but he is Neighbors who complained this cause they didn't do anything." At the same time, the ZBA approved not wilting to accept the price offered, spring about alleged noise, truck traffic In yet another matter,the owner of a the variance requests.made by Orient he said. "This is all part of the whole and noxious odors emanating from Mr. piece of property on the Main Road in Mattituck —whose tenants are operat- ing a used-car lot—has applied to the ZBA for permission to continue that —.. �Aww•� use. "If it is granted, okay," said Mr. Arnoff. "ifw not, it will e to be re- moved or we will prosecute." ,.i " z' y �' + • ■ Down Comes the House Principal building inspector Victor Lessard was issued a demolition permit Tuesday to raze a dilapidated East Mar- ion house. The unsafe building was the subject of a condemnation heating this spring, �1 but the Town Board waned until this i iiw.l11 > Mmi.n...i^le..ir.1�.T ! w" APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman _ Charles Grigonis,Jr. t� Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. _ _ P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 March 20, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons Suite 3 , Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Application for Special Exception/Interpretation/Variance Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One Dear Mr. Moore: This letter will acknowledge receipt by our office of your recent three-fold application for: (1) a determination as to whether or not the structure and use as proposed meets the requirements for a Special Exception under the residential provisions of the Zoning Code, to wit: Section 100-31B of the Agricultural-Conservation Zone District, as referenced in Section 100-81B; (2) an Appeal for an Interpretation regarding appli- cability of the height restrictions for the proposed tower at a height of approximately 104 feet from ground level, and the question of an exemption under Section 100-230D; (3) and if a variance is deemed necessary, an appeal for relief concerning height of the tower as an alternative. Our office has also agreed to recommend a return of $200. 00 which was applied toward the variance from the $500.00 filing fee, after a public hearing under the appeal for the interpretation, if the Board should determine that such a variance was not necessary . Also, this filing should not be construed as a waiver of this board' s jurisdiction to determine whether or not this project is a use authorized in the Limited Business or Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts. As you recall, our previous letter dated March 4, 1991 indicated that a telecommunications use is not listed as a permitted use, by Special Exception or otherwise, in the Limited Business or Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts, and further reference was made to the principal uses, by Special Exception, listed under the Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park LIO Zone District regulations of the zoning code. It is additionally noted under this preliminary review that you have furnished a copy of an Order issued April 18, 1985 by the N.Y.S. Public Service Commission to "operate a cellular radio system in the New York City Area" as proof that the applicant is a public utility. Please elaborate furnishing additional evidence that the applicant is a public utility in the Town of Southold area, and furnish "Attachment I" which is referred to on Page 2 of the Order, and if this Order is not current, please furnish documents from the Public Service Commission which are in effect and which may apply in this project. This matter is expected to be heard on April 30, 1991. It is requested, however, that you file the above requested information by April 5, 1991 for distribution to the Board, review, and on-site inspections. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN lk ' i • Aj APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L.HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P.Goehringer,Chairman J, l e Charles Grigonis,Jr. Town Hall,53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O.Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. Southold,New York 11971 Robert A. Villa BOARD OF APPEALS Fax(516)765-1823 Telephone(516)765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone(516)765-1800 March 4, 1991 William D. Moore, Esq. Clause Commons Suite 3, Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Application for Special Exception Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a Metro One Dear Mr. Moore: This letter will acknowledge review of your recent Special Exception application left with our office on February 22, 1991. It is our understanding that you do not wish to file the Special Exception application if there is a need for a variance concerning the height of the principal antenna building, which is at approximately 104 feet above average ground level, and that you are in the process of requesting a determination or Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector, which has not been furnished with the Special Exception documents. Pursuant to Article XXVI, Section 100-262 of the zoning code, we are returning your Special Exception application forms requesting telecommunications building (antenna) and change of principal use to permit telecommunications for the following reasons: a) Telecommunications is not a use permitted in the Limited Business or Agricultural-Conservation Zone Districts ( see Light Industrial Park/Planned Office Park LIO Zone District regulations) ; b) a written determination by way of a Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector concerning conformance or nonconformance with the zoning code has not been furnished as )Page 2 - March 4, Ol . To: William D. Moore, Esq. Re: Cellular Telephone Co. required in the filing of applications to the Board of Appeals, for either a Special Exception or Variance (please see instructions sheet with ZBA form packet and Article XXVI, Section 100-262A) ; c) a Notice of Disclosure for the applicant-corporation, Cellular Telephone Co. , must be provided; d) a Consent from the property owner authorizing the applicant-corporation(s) to file the subject application must be provided. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN lk Enclosures cc: Building Department Planning Board TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK • APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION Application No. Date Filed: TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK: Metro One c/o Moore & Moore I (We) , Cellular Teleohone Co. d/b/a of esi ence, ouse No. and Street Mattituck New York 11952 298- 6 am e a e, ip ode, a ep one Number) hereby apply to THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS for a SPECIAL EXCEPTION in accordance with the ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE viiI , SECTION 100-81 , SUBSECTION (B) (I ) for the below-described property for the following uses and purposes (and as shown on the attached plan drawn to scale): Property with Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-108-4-11. 3 (Northwest of intersection of Elijah' s Lane and Main Road (NYS Rt. 25) , Mattituck Proposed use is a public utility unmanned telecommunications building to be located in existing concrete block building and construction of 104 foot monopoleeantenna. A. Statement of Ownership annd� I�nt+erest. propar y known and err refed to asexs—. ' (are) the owner(s) of Wo'A e o. , reet, am e identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section B ock , Lot(s) 11. 3 which 1<9 (is) on a subdivision Map (Filed 4 5/90 "Map of Filed Map No. and has been approved by a Southold Town Planning Board on aril a , iegn as atx�t�C� �x �t1E3e �R>Ex lot line change and merger The above-described property was acquired by the owner onsee etrarhpa aePag F.xh; Fit 'A B. The applicant alleges that the approval of this exception would be in harmony with the intent and purpose of said zoning ordinance and that the proposed use conforms to the standards prescribed therefor in said ordinance and would not be detrimental to property or persons in the neighborhood for the following reasons:Applicant will use existing concrete block building to retain established compatibility of structures with surrounding properties. Proposed antenna will be located in a wooded area; all trees will remain on the property to minimize any visible impact. Building will be unmanned resulting in no traffic impacts. Proposed use will not affect the ordinary and reasonable uses of neighboring properties. C. The property which is the subject of this application is zoned Limited Businessand [ ] is consistent with the .use(s) described in the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith. [x ) is not consistent with the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith for the following reason(s) : change of use and zoning has changed several [ ] times since certificate of occupancy issued is vacant land. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Cellular W Q Co. d/b/a Metro One STATE OF NEW YORK) ss. : By: ig a i .,- lliam D. Moore, A or y for Sworn to before me this day of /r 1p, . Applicant !!Cc 4 tcc�� , otary u ic) DORIS MARIE HARRISON ZB2 (rev. 2/6/86) WbgPuE:t!gStatsofNewYork No. 62 4605206.Suffolk Cou Commh:,,n Expires April 30,192/ rrs awss.s•w-ssrs.w rN s .Ma cf a at�.s,r 4s.rr,A,b— womb"* 8010 tT T044 MWYB sat'ou UWssw Tuts uSM MWW—TM 1N/. WWW Mom N � ST t4�e OM.R a-�` , 6 � uB�a4960 .. p Aicr ," Q!� THIS 1100 TMY4 made the /� day o< . . nineteen hundred aMd sii£gwne + EETOI I'fiOCA 71,0771o or, ration c/o 57 Park Avenue, Bay Shores +' New York j D i !l ' � i r; Jr. 1i.7. party of the fuse part, and WILLIAM J . BAX"_ER, residing at 22" Pa1sl6r.Av4, N.0 Rciah*12 and JANE P. GOELLSR, Birch Lane, Greenwich, Conn. Recorded on May 2, 1961 in Liber 4980 at page 507 party of the second part, WITNESSETH, that the party of the first part, in consideration of Ten Dollars and other valuable con. sideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, ALL that certain plot, piece or pared of land, with the buildings and improvwnents thereon erected situate, lying and being in the Hamlet of Mattituck, in the Tcwn of Southolds County of Suffolk and State if New Yorks bounded and described as followst BEGINNING at a monument set in the ground at the intersection of the northerly line of Main State Road, with the westerly lire of Elijah's Lane; running 'THENCE along the said northerly line of Main State Road north 84 degrees 45 minutes 40 seconds west 395.38 feet to a monument set in the ground at an angle in said line of Main State Road; Ni THENCE still along said northerly line of Main State Road north 85 degrees 36 minutes 30 se-inda west 31.49 feet to the easterly line of land of John J. McManus; THENCE along land of Mid ,: .hr. , . McManus, north 1? iegrees 07 m'nu%es 00 seconds west ldl.19 feet to the southerly line of ::,' d of Martin cilia; 1 I ?HENCE along said southerly line of land of Martin Fills north 77 depress 06 minutes W seconds east 357,46 feet to a monument set in the ground on the westerly line of Elijah 's Lane; and THENCE Along the westerly line of hlijah 's Lane south 25 decrees 09 minutes 10 seconds east 320.50 feet to the point or place of beginning. n L TOGETHER with all right, title and interest, if any, of the., party of the first part is and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof; TOGETHER with the a o appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs A41 or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever. AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered any- thing whereby the said premises have been encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law,covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consideration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any pact of the total of the same for any other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read "parties" whenever the sense of this indaMtl II14 4r� requires IN WITNESS WHEEEOIs, the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the above written. b IN rasasaQ or: t PROGAN, INC. M g;?r t�., Map by— Fa rr ant.ors vice-p COPY Sundard N.Y.B.T.U.Form 8007.7.70 M—aupm./ d Sale Deed.wi,h Covenant spirt Gramm'a Art,—Individual of Corporation. t CONSULT YOUR LAWYER R SIGNVf MIS INSTRUMENT—THISMfTRUMIA SHOW E USED BY LAWYERS ONLY. 71M QVDENIXI , made the 2nd day of April nineteen hundred and ae'"K aty-one BEfW " xUasT J• B4I', JB., residing at 31 Mohegan ROad,Larahaant, New York 10538 party of the first part, and W71a= J0 andP his wife, residing at 31 110hegan Road Ilarc moovo Ifew x0ric, rr,d DIM Per CC'='ER, his wile, residing at Birch Lane kral • C:ee:zA_ c , u0meavloulao party of the second part, ONE and 00/1 WrMESSEPH, that the party of the first part, in consideration of dollars, lawful money of the United States, and other good and "laable Consideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being at I%ttituok, in the Town Of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows REGINNIN at a concrete zonument, set in the ground an the Northerly line of the ?lean or State Road, said monument being located 426.87 feet; Westerly from the Westerly line of Elijah's Lase, as the samo intersects the said Northerly side or line of Bain Or State Road) running thence along the Northerly line Of said Main or state Road, North 850 36' 30" West 60.0 feet; to a concrete mocunant set in the grcuad and being the Easterly lino of land formerly owned by Clarence Tuthill and Ralph ZUthilll running thence Northerly and along said land foMerly of Clarence 'Tuthill and Ealph Tuthill North 20. 44' 00" West 164.41 feet to a concrete monurAt t set in the ground; running thence Easterly and still along land formerly of Clarence Tuthill and Ralph Tuthill North 77° 06' 00" East 60 feet to a concrete mmument set in the ground and land now or formerly of Willian L. Strickland; running thence Southerly and along the Westerly line of land now or formerly of Said William L. Strickland South 19' 07' CO" East 181,79 feet to a concrete mmameat set in the Y bra � Said point beI6 the NorELerly line of said Z'Lin Or State goed, tto point or place of mnmm. 33MIG AND INTENDED TO BE the some premises as conveyed to the party of the first Dart by deed dated November 41 1970 and recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk' s Office in Libor 6w cp 997. ,y 1 t TOGM-HER with all right, title ac.nterest, if any, of the party of terst pa(' i and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof, TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises, s herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premise successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever. AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part ljas not done or suffered anything whereby the said premises have been incumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consid- eration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for any other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read "parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. IN Wrf74M WHEREOF,the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first above written. 1N PRESENCE OF: r� r. .E OF NEW TORE.COUNTT OF a sin STATE OF NEW TORE,C+YY OF ps the 2nd de. of A ril 1971, before me On the day of 19 , before me ,tersomlly came yVjj, J• $u"M JL personally came to me known to be the individual described in and who to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that executed the same, executed the same. NOMF O STATE OF NEW YORK. COUNTY OF BE: STATE OF NEW YORE, COUNTY OF o: On the day of 19 before me On the day of 19 before me personally came personally came to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he resides at No. say that he resides at No. that he is the that he is the of of the corporation described the corporation described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the board of directors of said corpora- affixed by order of the board of directors of said corpora- tion, and that he signed It name thereto by like order, tion, and that he signed h name thereto by like order. Pacgain anb *ale 39eeb SECTION WITH COVENANT AGAINST GRANTOR'S ACTS BLOCK TITLE No. LOT �tT.� COUNTY OR TOWN SOUTH !� tr w�a Ja unmil n4 .ly TO VnZ M J�S/e��DAryMFI=*�JJED 9a�d�PpAMOIA p�A+�+ryp��y R1/iRCISLf A• M ODA Recorded At Requen of The Title Gumotee Compeer aA= pa GOELM RETURN BY MAIL TO: STANDARD FORM OF NEW YORK BOARD OF nns UNDERWRITERS D;;or „rd by WMILam Nickhent Eaq, THE TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY rALin Road Eattittick, 1;&W York U952 Zip No. W V_ 0 Q u c FY 0 2 .r 0 W N .1 W V st M N CONSULT YOUR 4AWY[Ree(�� 16NIMrV'HIS INSTRUMENT —THIS IN SNf�I It USED BY LAWYERS ONLY. LIBER 6639 Pig 536 THIS INDENTURE, made the loth day of 0 e t ob a :r, nineteen hundred and sixty—nine, BETWEEN MARTIN FILIA, residing at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, - : ��; , ��j 1' j:; Y. oj r r I• i , 1 _. . + :�'11t, party of the first part,and WILLIAM J. BAXTER, JR. and PATRICIA BAXTER, his wife, as tenants by the entirety, holding a one-half undivided interest, both residing at Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, New York, and ROBERT A. GOELLER� 'nd JANE P. GOELLER, his wife, as tenants `O by the entirety, holding a one-half undivided interest, both re- `,.n siding at Haywaters Road, Nassau Point, Suffolk County, New York, d V °C party of the second part, WITNESSETH, that the party of the first part, in consideration of Ten and 00/100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ($10.00) . . . . . . . . . . . . dollars, other lawful money of the United States, and/good and valuable consideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the second part, the heirs or d• successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, ALL. that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected• situate, lying andbeingaLdx at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a monument on the westerly line of Elijah' s Lane distant 320. 50 feet northerly from a monument at the intersection of the westerly line of Elijah' s Lane and the northerly line of Main Road; THENCE from said point of beginning the following seven (7) courses and distances: 1. South 77' 06' 00' West 417.46 feet along lands of William J. Baxter, Jr. , et ano. , and McManus to a monument; 2. South 20° 44' 0011 East 164.41 feet along said lands of McManus to a monument situate onthe northerly line of Main Road; 3. North 85° 30' 40" West 69. 74 feet along the northerly line of Main Road to lands now or formerly of Joseph Neville; 4. North 230 08' 10" West along said last mentioned lands 161.95 feet to a post and lands now or formerly of Anjef Associates, Inc. ; 5. North 23' 52' 10" West along said last mentioned land 101.47 feet to the northwest corner of the premises herein described; 6. North 70° 30' 50" East 475.60 feet along lands of Anjef Associates, Inc. , and Maston to a pipe situate on the west- erly line of Elijah' s Lane at the northeast corner of the premises herein described; 7. Thence South 25° 09' 10" East along said westerly line of Elijah' s Lane 175.50 feet to the monument at the point or place of BEGINNING. BEING AND INTENDED TO BE the same premises and more conveyed to Martin Filla by deed from Ralph W. Tuthill and Laura F. Tuthill his wife, dated September 7, 1954, and recorded September 8, 1954, in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffdk, in Liber 3754 cp 249. ., v..l.a@eM:. .?. �.:..Ar:ti.iu.P.P •. •,.Ii(iY1 TOGETHER with all rights, title and interest, if any, of the party of the first part in and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof, TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises, TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever. r: AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything whereby the said premises have been incumbered in any tray whatever, except as aforesaid. AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first.part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consid- eration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for any other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read,"parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first above written. Ir RESESCE OF* Martin Filla t STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ss: STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SS: On the loth day of OC It o Ve r 1969 , before me On the day of 19 before me personally came MARTIN FILIA personally came to me known to be the individual described in and who to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the for ent, and ac• e ge at executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he exec t me. executed the same. i RICH;ARD' T CRON Notary PW'c i%the Stitt of N.Y. No.52-:tN•2Wf-Sues Rtar.30Ik pttr�D 117 Com - Lss.on Exi STATE OF-NEW YORK, COUNTY OF u. STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SS.: On the day of 19 before me On the day of 19 before me personally came personally came the subscribing witness to the foregoing instrument, with sayt known,who,being by me duly sworn,did depose and whom I am personally acquainted, who, being b me duly say that he resides at No. p Y 4 8 Y Y that he is the sworn, did depose and say that he resides ar No. of that he knows , the corporation described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he to be the individual knows the seal of said corporation; that the seal affixed described in and who executed the foregoing instrument; to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so that Ile, said subscribing witness, was present and saw affixed by order of the board of directors of said corpora- execute the same; and that he, said wimess, rion, and that he signed h name thereto by like order. at the same time subscribed h name as witness thereto. V U r In Bargain end *alp DPPh SECTION With Covenant Against Grantor's Acts ReocK Title No. 35-`/e4r Q LOT COUNTY OR TOWN MARTIN FILLA TO WILLIAM J. BAXTER,JR. and ux, and Reenraea At neyatrt of ' ROBERT A. GOELLER and ux INTER-COUNTY Tille Guaranty and Moriosoo Company RETURN BY 31AIL TO STANDARD FORM Or NEW YOU ROARD OF TITLE ONDIRWOTIRS wnsu,d by INTER-COUNTY TITLE GUARANTY William Wickham, Esq. and MORTGAGE COMPANY Main Road CHARTERED 1927 IN NEW YORK Mattituck, N. Y. 11952 7.1P No. u \ o OCT, 14 i9eg a ,03 /oM, LESTER M. ALBERTSON Clerk of SUM& Comfy as i= '- --1 : -J i 40 I /r I �` •�4 �JI r � I V r R-80 - '-- IMW - A-C46 1 - R-80 LB I ~ �- iy A C a/may , _ CoA, _ 1 '* 8 II — ag ao - I i O„ O / -80 Downs A-C � �4 (� y, N�SJ R p C/NA r� , .ralN ua M, n . � AN NN ' LINE NNrcN k uxr NNttx uN! ' " '' ,rcN ♦rN[ rrEx E =NrtxLI Am. _I a P4 9 .P,.m�f A ea rIN E, PJ x.,nn 40.1 <O 0 ao �5 I 4 ♦� ob P 4 •�'� t i.)Ilrl a O RS :nn O IV ul - ull i9 ✓ 4` i 1 E ' d 4 �)•M.I R� LPN FOUR �� � fi �✓ u ✓ .nt4' I I� � F 4(.. .w 1 i � i .4. �•� I r .n.kl�'�r �(�j�. '• \a. „ P� lNkl e . Ef.Ekl tf n,19 h '1 �! Al. zz[[ •nc cE sa U r°"" [r na ^ xzMtl a MPIN R=z m i�..oz°°z.I Narc. [sczoN °o LINE EcIN°M?ux RZII roil RzM° ♦RRD r n.w , �.• N "' •x.GpEENPORT erc MPTTITUC x t Pe-.d --- r .. .. - '° COUN Y OF SUFFOLK SOUTH °��^' - - _ - ea ProPerlY Tax Sarvica Agency .e cr 1000o M�08 ' ,L1 R co-. .m., o-�r.x,No br.rMud, I,N, Yorl N..wrr.r IIOIFvry pAP 'h' � '' /II'MM�YIT'YRIM A'dkr�,ll' ,. r�IWWNNy�'.I'�F'Na{1:Nf�y11M '�1�1:'.• .MM:.R" . .1F 1'. . n.ir .. . i.. . MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law Clause Commons Suite 3 Main Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax (516) 298-5664 William D. Moore Margaret Rutkowski Patricia C. Moore Secretary February 22, 1991 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: SCTM # 1000-108-4-11.3 Special exception / Metro One Dear Chairman Goehringer and Members of the Board: Enclosed please find an application for a special exception use for a public utility telecommunications building and monopole antenna. This application is made pursuant to Article VIII section 100-81 (B)(1) [section 100-31 (B)(6) which is incorporated into 100- 81(B)(1)]. Enclosed please find the following: A. Application (in triplicate) B. Notice to Adjoining Property Owners with receipts C. Environmental Assessment Form D. ZBA Questionnaire E. Certificates of Occupancy F. Deeds G. Site plan; property survey; 500' radius map, outline and topographic survey; architectural plans and details; electrical and mechanical plans; and specifications / details (4 sets) H. Filing fee - our firm's check #1707 in the sum of $300.00 I. Authorization letter Application for site plan approval has been submitted to the Southold Town Planning Board simultaneously with this application. Please advise if there is any additional information you require. Very ou , . l i oore WDM/mr Encls. cc: Lynne Lorimer, Metro One John Toscano, Carmen & Dunne Ju.tvti tW � w �I1ZIq TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION Application No. Date Filed: TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK: Metro One c/o Moore & Moore I (We) , Cellular Telephone Co. d/b/a of nc Box 7'�_ esi ee, ouse No. and Street Mattituck New York 11952 298-5674 (Hamlet, State, Zip Code, Telephone Number) hereby apply to THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS for a SPECIAL EXCEPTION in accordance with the ZONING ORDINANCE, ARTICLE vIiI , SECTION 100-81 , SUBSECTION (B) (1 ) for the below-described property for the following uses and purposes (and as shown on the attached plan drawn to scale) : Property with Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-108-4-11. 3 (Northwest of intersection of Elijah' s Lane and Main Road (NYS Rt. 25) , Mattituck Proposed use is a public utility unmanned telecommunications building to be located in existing concrete block building and construction of 104 foot monopole.:antenna. A. Statement of Ownership and Interest. d _otherr B (are) the owner(s) of proper y known and referred tno as ou e No. , reet, am e identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 108 , Block Lot(s) 11. 3 which 4(9c (is) on a subdivision Map (Filed —M 5/90 , "Map of William aav*Pr Filed Map o. 8937 , and has been approved by the Southold Town Planning Board on April g , seen as a [�r1crk�gxYci�Rx lot line change and merger The above-described property was acquired by the owner onGPP attarhPd deads Exhibit A B. The applicant alleges that the approval of this exception would be in harmony with the intent and purpose of said zoning ordinance and that the proposed use conforms to the standards prescribed therefor in said ordinance and would not be detrimental to property or persons in the neighborhood for the following reasons:Applicant will use existing concrete block building to retain established compatibility of structures with surrounding properties. Proposed antenna will be located in a wooded area; all trees will remain on the property to minimize any visible impact. Building will be unmanned resulting in no traffic impacts. Proposed use will not affect the ordinary and reasonable uses of neighboring properties. C. The property which is the subject of this application is zoned Limited Businessand [ ] is consistent with the use(s) described in the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith. [x ] is not consistent with the Certificate of Occupancy being furnished herewith for the following reason(s) : change of use and zoning has changed several [ ] times since certificate of occupancy issued is vacant land. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Cellular TeLeLphon Co. d/b/a Metro one STATE OF NEW YORK) ss. : ; y By: r Sworn to before ma this day of �2� Ts 1 9 a u e ,William D. Moore, A or Y °- /��� 1JY� APplic3: t - C��I�-C �BcLG�d'it� o t a ry u i s DORIS MARIE HARRISM ZB2 (rev. 2/6/86) lnteryPulfc,State of Kea York - No. S 4605206-Suffolk Count' n.nw.b•....ewe.-. �__.�. ... n. BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter or the Petition of METRO ONE NOTICE TO to the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold ADJACENT TO: PROPERTY OWNER yy�� r YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1.That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold to request a (VA04mg) Special Exception ftaadad>P.eotttiat) (Other) [circle choice] 1. 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-108-4-11. 3 Elijah' s Lane northwest of intersection of Elijah' s Lane and Main Road (NYS Rt. 25) 3. That the property yyvvhich is the subject of such Petition is located in the following zoning district: Limited Business `LB) r D 4 That by such Petition, the undersigned will request the following relief: Special exception approval of unmanned telecommunications b ui l di ncr in existincr concrete ' 11 -rk building and o€-104—foot menopnls antenna 5. That the provisions of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to the relief sought by the under- signed are Article VII I Section 100-81 (B) ( 1 ) T [ ] Section 280-A, New York Town Law for approval of access over right(s)-of-way. 6. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road Southold, New York and you may then and there examine the same during regular office hours. (516) 7t 5-1809. 7. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Board of Appeals; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Dated: Fahr„a ry 91 1991 Petitioner Metro One Owners ' Names - cla Mnnrp & Mnore Post Office Address Clause Commons , Suite 3 , P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Tel . No . ( 516 ) 298-5674 [Copy of sketch or plan showing proposal to be attached for convenience purposes . ] PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS NAME ADDRESS T , Riverside, CT 06878 Mattituck, NY 11952 J N O a N reet, Greenport, NY 11944 L+t oo, 1 1� , Southold, NY 11971 m W '` S4 ru LL_ d' � reenwich, CT 06830 Hsi y ru W> q c $ ; ane , Mattituck, NY 11952 — N a v LL 3°. 30 n m U. o ro N LL Nd o e' `o U (. a• > is �y d' v .. S p a Z Y.1 W : ro vv m u m ° ma ua m: 'e , a c) ^ Aa v ° v �E a g a—, O !t do v0 e A n ` w a E y ' o a 'c 3 '- y� sss-eez-sea�'o'a'e's'n=: s96t aunr 'eegE Wioj Sd Q N N O N L1 O n1 W > ru LLn� v E t` 2 -2 RJ W >Q N a) vz d o _ u7 tJ R T~ c v v CC -, IT. U. = o a '' c°v m mC v - O.i 2.� -4- y > w a as ° a W C.ro �p'� LL d D Gl R y� O u o 6 W y•ri .� m 'o c o c m `n aci 0r ON e v 61 5ai a E w ow a£ a° v a w `m; `a'm p o sssroca-ses�'oe'e'sn:' g861 aun t' '006f:wioj Sd STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) _ Margaret Rutkowski residing at , being duly sworn, deposes and says that on I h"le.12nd day of February 119 91 deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth on the re- verse side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names;that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold;that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Of- fice at Mattituck, NY ;that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by (certified) (1WiAkftxR mail. rargaret Rutkowski Sworn to before me this 22nd day of F r y , 199— [ ry Public M JAM D.MOORE Notary Public,State of New York No.4832728 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires January 31, 199e 9� ( This side does not have to be -completed on form transmitted to adjoining property owners . ) i 1 1 475.60 Ln j6,2 A 11. }355 > u 1 83.4 GAR 1 UP FF EL OV iD 1� 31 ° 20� Q1 uE 33.00 ____ ERHEAD -_ WIRES li 1 STORY FRAME BARN GAR i u FF EL ni 32.5C PROPOSED 100' HIOH - MONOPOLE � AREA - 804955 S.F. GAR 30, FF EL 1.848 ACRES 2634 yg5 0 7 32.77 SESBACK j PROPOSED UNMANNED y_ 0 0 5p' PROVIDE (2) 8.3'[20' GAR TELECOM. EQUIPMENT PARKING SPACES _ ROOM IN EXIST. BLOCK n FF EL 9 . _. 1 BLDG. j 1Ay 33.09 �J/ +1 L n , 9.B' B. ' (a) 5,7 WIDE cc,'rE PROPOSED 10 WIyf N .. ZONE LB 26� " © 13 q . g y20 GRAVEL DRIVEWAYI LID PROPOSED 6.0' HIGH 0. ��. I 11 ,(SEE SECTION2/63Z% -4 CHAIN LINK FENCE (INSTALL TREES FENCE ES As m ao'D.1 -A 08 _ U A M gboo g o o o m Sz ---------- } w �,0 ---- ---- �, w I- �s'I .. Q� 29!N 31F-- 3?� ¢ 1- �1� �- i' }Ib6 7� N ° ,y4� y6g2 BLUESTONE }may 1/ 488. 05 ' `T DRIVEWAY S87° 55� 1 2 nW CDNC j„n 'L • r... ' � Lit "CT LO.NUMBER �. NEW YORK STATE D .DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION. " "' • ' .' I DIVISION OF REGULATORY AFFAIRS LAK Slate EnYlronmental Quality ReYlew SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I Project Information(To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) r 1. AppllunVrpomor 7. Prefect Name �. Prelecl I.M..". MenlclPamy Town of Southold �• I, county Suffolk IF..action: ® New ❑ Evelio" ❑ ModiBcatlon/alt".11" S. De,cNbe ruelect btlello, Reconstruction of existing one story concrete block building for use unmanned telecommunications equipment ro as om and construction of 104 foot high monopole antenna e. hecbe loutlon leosd Intersection,,preminent 6rymnLs, etc.or nrovlde map, Northwest corner of intersection of Elijah Lane and State Route 25 Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-108-4-11 .3 7. Amount of land allegled acres: Initially G 2 ------�_ UIIImatrIY acres ® e. Will"-Poled anion,ornply with ni„In!ronln t Or other eal„In,land use retbictlonst Yes U No 11 No,de,uibe briefly 9. What h 111111 land me In ,lcinity of prole,,# T� Relidenlid ❑ Indunrial ® Camrnerclal IA Apicullnre Oe,cobe ❑ PsAIsnd/npen,pea ❑ Other South of proposed site predominantly agricultural use Abandoned auto repair shop abuts premises 10. Ooes action involve• permiUaPPrord,or fun in,now nr vlllmalnly, Iron,any n,her lovernmenbl a i- F}Fa} 3 ® Ye, El NoIf yes, list a,eneytsl and permipa ten<r ITepast.tlate p -call# Southold Town Planning Board —npSite Plan Suffolk County Planning F. C. C. 11. Ooes any aspect of the ocllon have a currently valid permit or annmvall ❑ Yes IJ No If yes,list seency name and PermlVannroval lypa T]. lb--of W.Pmed action will eaillin! Yes IN No permlVspproval reeuire modilicallonf U I CERTIFY THAT TIIE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS iRUE TO TIIE BEST Or MY KNOWLEDGE APPlicsnWpom r n 0 DUE Date. 2-21 —91 SIln,lure: ant .._._.. ; It the action Is In the Coastal Aron, and you are a state agency, complels.1he Coastal Assessment Form bolore proceeding With this assessment OVEi The N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act requires submission Of this form, and an environmental review will be made Ly this Board before any action is taken. SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORD{ - ' INSTRUCTIONS• order to answer the questions in this short EAF it is assumed that the preparer will use currently available information co Project and the likely impacts of the action. It is not expe ncerning the cted that additional studies, research or other investigations will be undertaken. (b) If any question has been answered nificant and completed Environmental Assessme Yes the project may be sig- nt Form is necessary. (c) If all questions have been answered No it is likely that the project is not significant. (d) Environmental Assessment 1. Will project result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter more than 10 acres of land? -Yes X-NO 2• Will there be a major change to any unique or unusual land form on the site? 1• _Yes X—No 3. Will project alter or have a large effect on an existing body of water. _Yes �No 4. Will project have a potentially large- impact on groundwater quality? _Yes �No 5. Will project significantly effect drainage flow on adjacent sites? , Yes '�( No 6. Will project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? Yes �No 7. Will project result in a major adverse effect on air quality? _Yes X—No 8. Will project have a major effect on visual char- acter of the community or scenic views or vistas 'known to be important to the community? Yes X_No ' 9. Will project adversely impact any site or struct- ure of historic, pre-historic, or paleontological importance or any site designated as a critical environmental area by a local agency? -Yes KNo _. 10. Will project have a major effect on existing or ,future recreational opportunities? __Yes 2�No 11. Will project result in major traffic problems or cause a�major effect to existing transportation ' systems. _Yes '�No 12. Will project regularly cause objectionable odors, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical disturb- ance as a result of the project's operation? -Yes XNo 13. Will project have any impact on public health or safety? —Yes No 14. Will project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in permanent popula- tion of more than S percent over a one-year y period or have a major negative effect on the �YC3 11.No character of the community or neighborhood? 15. Is there pub is protect? rov 'SY concerning the XPreparer-s S Yes yp ignature: Representing: �(Ld ZSA y/75 Date: Z-ZO.•�j j QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FILING WITH YOUR Z.B.A. APPLICATION A. Please disclose the names of the owner(s) and any other individuals (and entities) having a financial interest in the subject premises and a description of their interests: (Separate sheet may be attached. ) William J. Baxter, Jr. Robert A. ,o llp . Jr. Patricia Baxter Jane Goeller Metro One ftpnantl B. Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale or being shown to prospective buyers? { ) Yes ( X) No. (If Yes, please attach copy of "conditions" of sale. ) C. Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? ( ) Yes {X) No D. 1. Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses? no 2. Are the wetland areas shown on the map submitted with this application? n/a 3. Is the property bulkheaded between the wetlands area and the upland building area? n/a 4. If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? n/a E. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? no (If not applicable, state "N.A. " ) F. Are there any patios, concrete barriers, bulkheads or fences which exist and are not shown on the survey map that you are submitting? no If none exist, please state "none." G. Do you have any construction taking place at this time concerning your premises? no If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and map as approved by the Building Department. If none, please state. H. Do you or any co-owner also own other land close to this parcel? FiY If yes, please explain where or submit copies of deeds. OU7K, l I. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel existing barn used for storage and proposed use a ecommunica ions building wi antenna. //& Attorney for Applicant A zed Sig ature and Date 3/87, 10/901k § 97-13 WETLANDS § 97-13 TOWN — The Town of Southold. TRUSTEES — The Board of Trustees of the Town of Southold. [Added 6.5.84 by L.L. No. 6-19841 WETLANDS (Amended 8-26-76 by L.L. No.2-1976; 3-26- 85 by L.L. No.6-19851: -! Ar `fIDALWETLANDS: (1) All lands generally covered or intermittently cov- ered with,or which border on,tidal waters,or lands lying beneath tidal waters, which at mean low tide are covered by tidal waters to a maximum depth of five (5) feet, including but not limited to banks, bogs, salt marsh, swamps, meadows, flats or other low lying lands subject to tidal action; (2) All banks, bogs, meadows, flats and tidal marsh subject to such tides and upon which grows or may grow some or any of the following: salt hay, black grass, saltworts, sea lavender, tall cordgrass, high bush, cattails, groundsel, marshmallow and low march cordgrass;and/or (3) All land immediately adjacent to a tidal wetland as defined in Subsection A(2) and lying within seven- ty-five (75) feet landward of the most landward edge of such a tidal wetland. B. FRESHWATER WETLANDS: (1) "Freshwater wetlands" as defined in Article 24, Ti- tle 1, § 24-0107, Subdivisions 1(a) to 1(d) inclusive, of the Environmental Conservation Law of the State of New York; and (2) All land immediately adjacent to a"freshwater wet- land,"as defined in Subsection B(1)and lying with- in seventy-five(75) feet landward of the most land- ward edge of a"freshwater wetland." 9705 2-25-85 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD. N. Y. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY - - No. .Z...1104........ Date .......... ...................NV-U!t.. ...... 19J4 Hattituck THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at Elijmh.:e...La. .4 At.....$5......... Street MapNO. ............ Block No. ..........w* .....Lot ..40. ..........•#*...........................................I....... conforms Substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office Z 1417 dated ............1'WY...z.3....................... 19..61 pursuant to which Building Permit No. .................... dated .......... kWy ........................ 19.61.., waF issued. and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is SIN BUILDING issuedIs ....... ....................BU..........s88................. .... ... ................................ ..... ................................................... i W1111am J. Baxter, Jr. , & Jane P. Goller, owners Thiscertificate is issued to ............................ ..................................... ................................ .... ... ..... (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. W� Building Inspetor TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE — - SOUTHOLD, N. Y. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY No. ...,7.....a72....... Date .............................;.Ine....14......... 19-65. THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at ....7........... Street Map No. ..PCX............ Block No. ........VCX...... Lot No- ..xz.........Ratt1•tusk-7.....,N.`L.............. conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated ..........................................F.eh......9.:...... 19.65.. pursuant to which Building Permit No. 2632..Z dated ..............................Feb......U.......... 19..65., was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is ........ ...........13=.1j .Sa..bui1d1M9.............................................................................................................. The certificate is issued to .....Wm.Hnxter..Jr..&..Athers...................Mexx........................... (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. ..................................�:......................:.... �.............. Building Inspector i O CAW* rhW dErftw VW*iArr 44bfKW*. January 21 , 1991 Southhold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, N .Y. 11971 RE: Metro One Dear Ladies/Gentlemen : The undersigned , on behalf of Metro One, hereby authorizes the law firm of Moore & Moore to submit any applications and supporting documents which may be necessary for approval of proposed telecommunications facilities and structures in the Town of Southold. Sincerely, Lynne Lorimer Real Estate Consultant Metro One 365 West Passaic Street, Rochelle Park, New Jersey 07662-3015 •(201) 587-7886 000 3` Hd 311!)-C,d13I,l ldn,dd LS : 11 16 , ZZ 83d ---- -- O W N E R S G U I D E PAGE 705 1TE 12/04/90 S O U TN O L D ADDRESS ZIP A% MAIP NO. LAST K'IO'WN OR REPUTED OWNER - - // 597 11952 IN-VILLF JOSEPH R WE -- MATTITUCK NY 73'5? _________________________________________ �0`.+.-4-11.2✓ ydAXTER WILLIAM J JR 8 ANO GRFcNUICH CT 05330 73339 _- _____________________________________ ----10�0 E PUTNAM 4_11-3� dAXTSR Jd uILLIAY J B ORS J _.. --- - GREENUICN CORN 06830 — _ _.~ _______________________ _______-_--_ _ -. ELTJ AHS LAN -12 ✓ rz STDN CORNELIUS L 8 WE MATTITUCK NY 11952 _____________________ ------- SKUNK LANE 09,-1-1 SCHPOEDER GEORGE 8 GWEN _ -. C'JTCHOGUE NY 11935 738d9 ____________________ 09._1-2 SOL-CKI JULIAN 8 WE CUTCHOSUE NY ----- .733'i9 _. .. _________________________________________________________________ ______________ ----------------------- MAIN 70AD 1193 O9.-1-3 PACE LILLIAN PO 80X 87 CIITC40GUE NY -- - �73839 -____ 09._1_5 LOBE WILLIAM D B WE uATTITUCK N Y 11952 ____-- 7__ ________________________________ 109.-1-5 ALEC RUDI ROYAL OAK MI 43073 _________________________ _ ___ _. 109.-1-7 ALE' GEORGE CUTCHOGOE NY 11935 j 4736A4 _______ -. - - _ __---_-_____--0 PRIVATE_-D_______________________ __________________________________ 33 109.-1-3.7 PFEIFLE RI_CHA_RD P 8 ORS - - EAST PATCHOGUE NY 11772 4734;� ________________________________________________________________ ______________ :+AIR PD 109,-1-3.3 CROSS JAME$ 8 CUTCHOGU% NY 11935 -- --- ________________________________________________________ MAIN ROAD 109.-1-3.9 KPFSPACH FREDERICK _ CUTCHOGV, NY 11935 � 473?P9 box 134 ------------------ ----------------------------------------------------- ___________________________________ - 500 OLD COUNTRY RD 1 G9,-1-10.1 CARNATION PROPERTIES INC GARDEN CITY NY 115?J 473t49 I . _______________________________________________ 109.-1-11 WICKHAM WILLIAM ___ _ _ -- CUTCHOGUE NY 11935 4733'9 __________________________________________ __- -_-__ ----------�---- - 10315 MAIN PJ 109.-1-12 WICKHAM HOMESTEAD INC RATTITUCK NY 1195_ 473Si? ._.. . ______________________________ C/0 J GRISTINA 109.-1-13 CUT[H_GU° FARMS LTD_ CUTCHOGUE NYPo Box 1009 11935 ------------------- 473319 _ -- __________________________ - MAIN kC -109.-1-14 8AR0N ZYGMUNT 8 WE COTCHOGUP NY 11935 4733,q - --_ ___________________________________________________ —._ __________________________ -__ -----------------------' 33 PO'd'c LL ST 109,-1-15 PETRASH ROSE - - - LANSFORD PA 1323e 473339 ____ AX MAP NO. _ LAST KNOWN OR REPUTED OWNER _ _.. ADIRESS ZIP /08.-4'-7.8 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. _. __. _ _._ S OUTHOLD NY 11971 733` 4 _7 MOORF. RICHAPD A 2 AUDREY MATS UCK NY 11952 73ii9 _____________ ___ ___ __. -- . -_ _. ________________ FL WOOD V B WF ______________________________________________________- CR.-4-7.10 ROW' _ - f LIJAHS LA MATTI UCK 11952 73339 ----- --- NY ----- ---------------- 7.11 MCO_R>OTT JCHN 4 Wf - 75 MAnTIN COURT JERICHO 11753 73 359 ..__ - 03.-4-7.12 D'LUJA VITO 4_ EVELYN RFD ''41 :OX 160D 73319 143 WOODCLIFF DRIVE MATTITUCK 4Y 11952 ________________________________ ____________ ________________________________ __________________________ '_f_______________________; 01.-4-7.13 7%LY-A JAMES -... -. _._ _. _ RR 1?[ 73'3`+7 ELIJAHS LANE '1 A T T I T UC< Y 1195_ ______„ )i.-4-7.14 RELY-A JA /-S 4 WE __ ELIJAH3 LANE -- - 7- 105E-RR1 AATTITUCK NY 11952 --- ___________________________---_________________________________________________________________ SCHMITZ WILLIAN A 4 JEAN- 2645 ELIJAH3 L44E -MATTITUCK NY 1195? 7 i39 ,1 -4-7.16 SIMI STANTON 8 WE _ RD 27A5 EL IJAHS A4c - - _ M47TITUCK NY 11952 ----- ZIMNOSKI MA CELLA - - - RFD ELIJAH LAN EMATTITUCK NY 11952 73 '.39 )F,.-4-7,19 SULLIVAN JOS-PH M 4 W_ F `_LIJAHS LA 73369 RR 1 90% 105A MATTITUCK NY 11952 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POWER CONSULTANTS INTL INC - _ 2?2 GRAND AVE FNGLEWOOD NJ 07631 733.1) - _._ ___________________________________________________ ;3•-4-7.20 PARK f,9ACF KE YOUNG 'QX 10A1 3435 ELIJAHS LA 738d9 MATTITUCK ".Y_ 11952 ____ ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ _________o____ J )9.-4-7,21 A9K r0U4"-JA - - - - '3G% 1064 3435 ELIJAHS LA 9 'MATTITUCK NY 11952 -- -----------"-'-'--'--'--'�--"�"��___COUNT_______________________ •a__G_7.22 SUFFOLK COUNTY COUNTY C NTER 9 PTVERit@Pp 4y 11 71 -________________________f____ NaTTB FORK HOUSING ALLIANCE 110 SCUTH STREET 6 REE'JnORT yy 11744 _________________________________________________________________________________________________i 3.-4-7.24 NORTH FORK HOUSING ALLIANCE 11011TH <TREET 3REEry!POR , NY 11941 r i>.-4-7.2>5 NORTH FORK HOUSING ALLIANCE - .-- - - --- 110 50'1TH STREET '3839 - ---- ---T NY ----- NOPT4 FORK HOUSING ALLIANCE _ 110 50'�ITH STREET . 4-„26 _ . _. RE E7lPORT NY 1194, .._,.._______________________________________-