Greenburgh panel deems AT&T rooftop antenna application incomplete over missing drawings and RF data

Chair Catherine Letter of Plasquette convened the Antenna Review Board on Jan. 16 and moved that the application by AT&T for rooftop antennas at 280 North Central Avenue in Hartsdale be deemed incomplete, citing multiple missing or inconsistent items in the submission.

The board's review identified a set of specific corrections the applicant must make before the filing can be considered complete. Chair Catherine Letter of Plasquette said the submission must correct a notary place-name (it lists "Mount Visco" and must read "Mount Kisco"), make the cover-sheet project description match the detailed scope and construction schedule, remove the phrase "ground level" from the construction drawings and replace it with "roof level," and include precise heights for all identified objects (parapet, bulkhead, chimney, existing and proposed equipment, elevated platform with handrail and RRHs).

The board also asked for clearer documentation of cabling and signage locations. Members instructed the applicant to show the location of interior signage for both roof doors on the drawings, state material (the applicant said aluminum) and confirm that signs will not exceed the stated height.

On technical safety documentation, the board asked AT&T to provide directional RF information showing coverage/spill to the right, left and rear of rooftop antennas, not only forward-facing charts. "We need a statement from you in writing exactly how much goes to the right and the left and behind," Chair Letter of Plasquette said, citing experience at another site where rooftop-mounted antennas produced concentrated side and rear exposure patterns. An applicant representative replied that RF engineers model exposure over the entire rooftop and that the report is comprehensive, but agreed to obtain clearer imagery and delineation to show how the analysis was performed.

The board also asked that the monitoring-plan language explicitly state the site will comply with applicable FCC regulations and that annual monitoring reports verify continued compliance. Separately, members asked the applicant to rework the noise-study conclusion to cite the Town of Greenburgh's noise ordinance (applying the lower residential threshold where applicable) rather than a generic concluding sentence.

After the board read and confirmed a checklist of outstanding items, Chair Letter of Plasquette moved to deem the application incomplete. The motion was seconded, members voiced their approval and the chair declared the motion carried. No individual roll-call vote tally was provided on the record; the board directed staff to mark the application as incomplete and return the stamped materials to the applicant.

Applicant representatives said they would return revised materials as soon as practicable; staff estimated revisions and printing could take up to two weeks, after which the board would schedule a follow-up review. The board adjourned the meeting at the conclusion of the vote.