Chair rules Aerosmith/AT&T antenna modification application incomplete after review

The Greenburgh Antenna Review Board on April 15 unanimously found an application from Aerosmith Development on behalf of AT&T Mobility Corporation to modify rooftop antennas at 280 North Central Avenue incomplete, citing multiple missing or unclear documents and the applicant’s absence from the meeting.

The board’s chair said the submission lacked names, addresses, qualifications and signatures for the people who prepared the report and the site-acquisition specialist, and that the affidavit of ownership and lease materials were illegible or appeared to reference a lease that expired in 2017. “We do not have signatures, we do not have qualifications, and we don’t have names or addresses for any of the people who have put this report together,” the chair said.

Members also flagged technical and safety gaps. The structural analysis prepared for the site dates to 2021 and does not reflect recently proposed steel dunnage work on the roof, the chair said, reading from a building-department letter that placed the application on hold until all three providers on the rooftop submitted complete applications. “This structural analysis does not take into consideration the fact that there are going to be steel plates put on the roof. Therefore it is incomplete,” the chair said.

On radio-frequency and monitoring requirements, the board said the RF exposure exhibits list a compliance percentage for AT&T (reported in the submission as 1.954) but do not provide a cumulative calculation across all three rooftop providers. The chair said the application’s monitoring language in exhibit C improperly shifts responsibility to the town to detect noncompliance rather than requiring AT&T to supply a defined monitoring schedule and an annual reporting date. “They must come to the town before they make a modification, not rely on the town to find them,” the chair said.

The board also found the noise documentation inadequate. Exhibit materials included a noise evaluation based on manufacturer ratings rather than on-site baseline measurements; a committee member said manufacturer ratings are acceptable for uninstalled equipment but the existing site conditions must be measured and reported. “For existing conditions, there should be a reading,” the committee member said.

Other deficiencies the board listed: the application did not clearly state how many antennas currently exist or how many would be removed or installed; plans did not include required elevation measurements above ground and sea level or clearly identify materials, colors, signage and the owner/operator of each antenna; the required stainless-steel or aluminum permit sign (with permit number, issuance date and emergency contact) was not shown on the plans; and the insurance certificate omitted the site address.

After the checklist review, the chair moved to deem the application incomplete; Donna Chonikman seconded and the board voted unanimously to mark the application incomplete. The chair said she would initial the incomplete checklist and have the building department send the initialed notice to the applicant. The board adjourned at 12:17 p.m.

The action does not approve any modification; the board’s determination was procedural—finding the application incomplete under the town’s antenna submission requirements—and the applicant may return with corrected materials.