Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the T Mobile Colocation Pulaski topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board assumes lead agency, advances T-Mobile colocation application in Goshen without public hearing
Summary
The board assumed SEQR lead agency and classified the T-Mobile Northeast colocation proposal on County Road 6 as an unlisted action, directed referrals and asked counsel to draft a conditional resolution; the board did not require a public hearing for the minor modification to an existing 150-foot monopole site.
The Goshen Planning Board on July 17 assumed lead agency status under SEQR and classified a T-Mobile Northeast LLC colocation application on County Road 6 as an unlisted action, advancing the proposal for referrals and for staff review without holding a public hearing.
Frank Ferraro, appearing for the applicant, said T-Mobile proposes to colocate on an existing 150-foot monopole currently occupied by AT&T. The company seeks to install eight panel antennas at the 137-foot centerline (the applicant later agreed to reduce antenna size to keep the application within the town’s minor-facility definition). On the ground, T-Mobile proposes equipment cabinets and a small concrete pad within the existing fenced compound; a temporary dish for backhaul was described as likely until permanent fiber arrives.
Ferraro said the applicant’s structural analysis—prepared previously for larger antennas—shows ample capacity; the applicant will revise and supply an updated structural report reflecting the reduced antenna size. Planning staff reminded the board that the code requires a structural certification and an RF-engineer certification that operations will not interfere with emergency networks; both documents were requested as part of the submission.
The board discussed the option of requiring a removal bond if the site is unused for an extended period; applicants commonly request a bond waiver because carriers typically maintain multi-decade leases. The board also agreed to make required referrals under the General Municipal Law; the county referral timeline may affect the earliest date for final action. Because staff determined the change did not represent a substantial modification to the previously approved tower, the board waived a public hearing.
The board voted to authorize counsel to prepare a draft conditional resolution of approval and directed the applicant to supply the final structural analysis, RF certification and SEQR materials (an EAF/SCIF) for the board packet.
