HomeMy WebLinkAbout20260901 ROW Adj to 27 Henry St Verizon Utility Pole Application
Subject to the FCC Shot Clock of 60 days for Small Wireless Facility Using an
Existing Structure - 83 Fed Reg 51867 codified at 47 CFR § 1.6003(c)(1)(i)
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD
CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS, SARATOGA COUNTY, NEW YORK
In the Matter of the Application of
______________________________________________________________
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP
d/b/a Verizon Wireless
Utility Pole No. NG ½, VZ 5
Adj. to 27 Henry Street,
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
____________________________________________________________
APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL
and STATEMENT OF INTENT
Submitted by:
Verizon Wireless
Kathy Pomponio – Network Real Estate
175 Calkins Rd
Rochester, New York 14623
(585) 321-5365
Tectonic Engineering & Surveying Consultants, P.C.
Steven Matthews, P.E.
36 British American Blvd, Suite 101
Latham, New York 12110
(518) 783-1630
Tectonic Engineering & Surveying Consultants, P.C.
Nathan Keenan
36 British American Blvd, Suite 101
Latham, New York 12110
(518) 783-1630
Please Direct All Correspondence To:
Young/Sommer LLC
David C. Brennan, Esq.
500 Federal Street, 5th Floor
Troy NY, 12180
(518) 438-9907
Dated: October 9, 2026
Subject to the FCC Shot Clock of 60 days for Small Wireless Facility
Using an Existing Structure - 83 Fed Reg 51867 codified at 47 CFR § 1.6003(c)(1)(i)
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA SPRINGS
SARATOGA COUNTY, NEW YORK
In the Matter of the Application of
___________________________________________________________________
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a Verizon Wireless
Premises: Utility Pole No. NG ½, VZ 5 – Adj. to 27 Henry Street
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF INTENT and
APPLICATION FOR DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL
I. Purpose and Need
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a Verizon Wireless (“Verizon Wireless” or the
“Applicant”) proposes the collocation of an unmanned public utility/personal wireless service
facility (a “communications facility”) at the above location. More specifically, Verizon Wireless is
proposing to add wireless telecommunications equipment to an existing utility pole.
The Applicant proposes to install on an existing utility pole: a single, cylindrical antenna
(approximately 24” tall x 14.6” in diameter) mounted at the top of the pole at a tip height of 38.1±
feet along with the installation of electric and telecommunications equipment on the utility pole
at a minimum height of 8’ above grade. All proposed equipment will be painted brown as noted on
Sheet C-2B and consistent with prior DRB approvals for similar projects. The existing utility pole
measures 34.9± feet in height. The property is located in the right of way along Henry St., City of
Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County, New York (NG ½, VZ 5). [Zoning Site Plan Drawings of
Tectonic Engineering Consultants, Geologists & Land Surveyors, D.P.C at TAB 6].
Upon completion, the proposed facility will provide additional wireless network
bandwidth and improved performance across the northern portion of Congress Park and
generally along Spring St and Phila St between Broadway and Circular St., as shown in the
accompanying coverage maps [Radio Frequency Analysis at TAB 3]. More specifically, the site
is proposed to extend reliable wireless 4G/5G service along 0.3± mile portions of Spring St and
Phila St (generally between Broadway to and beyond Circular St), ¼ mi along Henry St north of
Spring St and extending beyond Caroline St, and 1-2 block sections of Washington St, Putnam St,
Lafayette St, Circular St, and East Congress St., including across northern Congress Park and into
the multiple restaurants, businesses and office buildings, homes, apartments, and parking
lots/garages along these roads [TAB 3].
Verizon Wireless is considered a public utility for land use purposes under New York
decisional law (Cellular Telephone Company v. Rosenberg1, 82 N.Y.2d 364 [1993]), and a provider of
1 In Rosenberg, the State’s highest Court determined that the ordinary variance standard is inapplicable and a cellular
2
“personal wireless services” under the federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the “TCA”).
Verizon Wireless’ equipment will be in operation twenty-four (24) hours a day, seven (7) days a
week, three hundred sixty-five (365) days a year.
Verizon Wireless is applying for review by the Design Review Board.2 The existing utility
pole is located in the Urban Core (UC) Zoning District. The facility is located in the Historic
Review District and the Architectural Review District.
The proposed communications facility is unmanned and will be visited for routine
maintenance purposes approximately two times per year (only as needed). As such, the project
will not have any impact on existing water and sewage services. In addition, neither pedestrian
nor vehicular access to the premises will be impacted [TAB 6].
II. Compliance with City Requirements
The proposed communications facility complies in all material respects with City
requirements:
1. SEQRA: A Short Environmental Assessment Form is attached as TAB 2.
2. Minimum Visual Impact: As noted above, Verizon Wireless’ proposed facility is
designed to have a minimum possible visual effect on the surrounding community
and neighborhood [TAB 4].
3. Site Plan: The Applicant has provided a Zoning Site Plan that identifies the
proposed improvements [TAB 6].
Based upon the foregoing, Verizon Wireless respectfully submits that approval is
appropriate in this case.
III. Conclusion
The communications facility proposed is a public necessity under Rosenberg in that it is
required to render adequate and safe service to this area of the City of Saratoga Springs. In an
effort to supplement existing telecommunications services to this area of the City Verizon
Wireless has identified an appropriate location for the deployment of a small cell facility. Verizon
Wireless’ existing macro cell sites in the area do not provide adequate coverage and capacity to
this area of the City. The City of Saratoga Springs will be lacking adequate and safe capacity, and
the failure to approve this application will eliminate the means to provide necessary capacity.
This, combined with the federal mandate to expeditiously deploy advanced wireless services
across the nation and Verizon Wireless’ FCC licenses to provide such services in the City of
Saratoga Springs, demonstrates that Verizon Wireless’ facility is a public necessity. Without the
construction of the communications facility proposed, the public would be deprived of an
telephone company applying for relief need only show that (1) the relief is “required to render safe and adequate
service,” and (2) there are “compelling reasons, economic or otherwise,” for needing the variance. Cellular Telephone
Company v. Rosenberg, 82 N.Y.2d 364, 372 (1993).
2 For the reasons set forth herein, Verizon Wireless believes that its project complies in all material respects with the
provisions of the City of Saratoga Springs Land Use Laws and, consistent with the application process established by
the City for prior Small Cell applications, that no additional approvals or relief are required. To the extent that an
additional approval or relief is required, Verizon Wireless submits these materials in support of such approval(s).
3
essential means of communication, which, in turn, would jeopardize the safety and welfare of the
community and traveling public.
The small cell facility will not be noticeable to the traveling public or nearby property
owners. The communications system proposed has been sited to have the least practical adverse
visual effect on the environment, and any resulting impact(s) may properly be considered as
minimal in nature and scope.
Attached to this Application and Statement of Intent are the following:
1) An Application for Architectural/Historic Review by the Design Review Board;
2) A Short Environmental Assessment Form;
3) Radio Frequency Analysis with Proposed Coverage Plots, prepared by Verizon Wireless
Radio Frequency (RF) Design Engineer Rick Andras;
4) Photosimulations of the proposed installation and SEQRA Visual EAF Addendum;
5) Radio Frequency – Site Compliance Report; and
6) Project Zoning Drawings.
Kindly place this matter on the agenda for discussion at the next available meeting of the
Design Review Board. In the meantime, if you should have any questions or require any
additional information concerning this project, I can be reached at (518) 438-9907.
Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP d/b/a Verizon Wireless
David C. Brennan, Esq.
Regional Local Counsel
Dated: October 9, 2026
TAB 1
TAB 2
TAB 3
Network Engineering
175 Calkins Road
Rochester, New York 14623
Henry and Spring Micro Cell Communications Facility
Radio Frequency Analysis
Verizon is proposing to collocate a new microcell facility on an existing utility pole near the intersection of
Spring St and Henry St in the City of Saratoga Springs, Saratoga County, New York. This microcell is needed
to improve coverage and network performance across the northern portion of Congress Park and generally
along Spring St and Phila St between Broadway and Circular St . Due to heavy network usage during peak
tourist months and track season, and the closely-spaced buildings along and between Spring St and Phila St,
Verizon’s existing neighboring macro sites are not capable of providing reliable mobile voice and data services
to this targeted improvement area, and into the multiple restaurants, businesses and office buildings, homes
and apartments.
General Methodology – Network Design/Micro Cell Placement
The proposed micro cell is a significantly paired down version of a typical macro cell (i.e., a standard 3 -sectored
antenna array placed on a tall tower, building or water tank as commonly seen on wireless communications
facilities in Saratoga Springs and the surrounding area - for example the 245 ft. tall guyed tower off West Ave
(from Lincoln Ave near Saratoga Springs High School)). The proposed micro cell consists of radios and other
ancillary equipment inside an enclosure mounted approximately 12 ft. above ground level and connected via
coaxial cable to a 2 ft. tall canister antenna mounted on top of the existing 3 4.9± ft. tall utility pole at the east
end of Putnam Street Parking Lot and on the north side of the Spring St / Henry St Intersection.
Verizon’s specific “Henry and Spring” microcell objectives are to extend reliable wireless 4G/5G service along
0.3± mile portions of Spring St and Phila St (generally between Broadway to and beyond Circular St), ¼ mi
along Henry St north of Spring St and extending beyond Caroline St, and 1-2 block sections of Washington St,
Putnam St, Lafayette St, Circular St, and East Congress St., including across northern Congress P ark and into
the multiple restaurants, businesses and office buildings, homes, apartments, and parking lots/garages along
these roads. The proposed microcell will also add localized 4G/5G capacity to support Emergency Services,
traffic control, etc. as well as the locals and visitors to the downtown Saratoga Springs area and especially
during large events (Chowder Fest, Travers weekend, large concerts at SPAC, special concerts on Broadway,
etc.).
Verizon’s closest wireless facilities to the proposed microcell are its its “Saratoga City Hall” site 0.3± miles
north on the Hampton Inn & Suites Hotel, “Stonequist” site 0.42 ± miles southwest on the Stonequist
Apartments rooftop, and “Saratoga II” site 0.3± miles northwest on the Wise Building rooftop at the intersection
of Railroad Pl and Division St. Due to distance and the associated closely-spaced buildings in the Saratoga
Springs downtown area, patches of dense tree canopy to the south and east, the 30 ft - 40 ft. drop in ground
elevation between Broadway and Circular St, and the surges of wireless network usage generated in/around
the Congress Park, Phila St, Spring St, Henry St, and Putnam St area of the City , available coverage and
network capacity from these and all other neighboring wireless facilities (particularly in Verizon’s mid-frequency
channels in the 1900 MHz – 3500 MHz range) is unable to reliably serve the targeted improvement area.
In researching the existing co-locatable structures at and generally within 1 block of the Spring St / Henry St
intersection, the existing utility pole adjacent to 27 Henry St was identified as a potential candidate to achieve
Verizon’s intended coverage, performance improvement and capacity objectives. The specific pole was
chosen as it is positioned near the center of the targeted improvement area where it maintains relatively
unobstructed views along portions of Congress Park, Spring St, Phila St, Henry St and Putnam St. A microcell
at this location is also able to provide needed network capacity and inbuilding level coverage to the nearby
restaurants, businesses and office buildings. When considering these inherently desirable characteristics,
Verizon is proposing to collocate its microcell facility on Pole # NG ½, VZ 5.
2
Calculated coverage from the proposed Henry and Spring microcell facility is shown in the street and aerial
maps at Figure 1 below. When viewing the maps, the green-shaded area illustrates new and/or improved
coverage from the proposed facility at Verizon’s 2100 MHz frequency band, and the black circle near the map
center labeled “Henry and Spring” is placed at the proposed microcell location (on the existing utility pole). As
the results demonstrate, the proposed micro cell will successfully cover the targeted section of downtown
Saratoga Springs and particularly along Spring St, Henry St and Phila St . When complete, mobile devices
attempting to access or remain connected to Verizon’s network will seamlessly and reliably connect via the
Henry and Spring microcell site, effectively improving mid-band 4G/5G coverage and capacity across the
targeted area.
Figure 1 – Expected Coverage and Performance Improvement Area (Green-Shaded Region) from the
Proposed Henry and Spring Microcell
Conclusion
To summarize, Verizon is proposing to install a small canister antenna (measuring 24 in. high by 14.6 in. wide)
on top of an existing 34.9± ft. tall utility pole with associated radios and ancillary equipment inside an enclosure
installed 12 ft above ground level on the pole. The proposed microcell is needed to provide reliable coverage
and supplement wireless network capacity surrounding the Spring St / Henry St intersection; coverage and
capacity is limited in this area due to the nearby buildings and tree canopy, as well as surges in network usage
during peak tourist and visitor seasons (particularly during large city, SPAC and Saratoga race track events).
The proposed facility will resolve this gap in reliable service.
Date: October 7, 2026
Prepared by:
Rick Andras
Radio Frequency (RF) Design Engineer
Verizon Wireless
TAB 4
12861.052A
Looking north adjacent to #27 Henry Street
Proposed equipment will be visible from this location P-1
12861.052A
Looking north adjacent to #27 Henry Street
Proposed equipment shown as visible from this location S-1
TAB 5
1
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
EMF/FCC Compliance Report
Prepared for
October 7, 2026
Verizon Project ID:16085141
Verizon Site Name:Henry and Spring
Site Location
Adj to 27 Henry St
Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Saratoga County
43.0797 N
-73.7832 W
Multi-Licensee Facility No
FCC Standard OET Bulletin 65 Edition 97-01
ANSI/IEEE / OSHA Standard Std C95.1 / 1910.97
Site Classification Low Centerline
Structure Type Utility Pole
SStatementt off Complia nce Verizon will be compliant with
FCC Rules and Regulations.
2
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
Table of Contents
1.0 Scope ...................................................................................................................................................3
2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................3
3.0 Background on FCC MPE Limits..........................................................................................................4
4.0 Results and Conclusions .....................................................................................................................6
5.0 Appurtenance Configuration .............................................................................................................7
6.0 Certifications.......................................................................................................................................8
7.0 APPENDIX A - Predictive Modeling Technique ..................................................................................9
3
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
11.0 Scope
Airosmith Engineering has been requested to perform an analysis on the proposed Verizon antenna
installation as compared to the FCC limits on Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) as outlined in FCC’s
OET Bulletin 65. The theoretical RF Emissions were analyzed using IXUS analysis software. Selected output
from the analysis is included in this report.
2.00 Introductionn
Radio Frequency (RF) signals are electromagnetic waves and are characterized by their cycle time
(wavelength) which is measured in meters. Frequency is defined as the number of complete cycles a wave
can complete per second, which is called a Hertz. An illustration of the inverse relationship between
wavelength and frequency of RF signals is shown in Figure 1 below[1]. Verizon operates within several
different frequency spectrum bands including, but not limited to: 700MHz, 850MHz, 1900MHz, 2100MHz,
3.5GHz, and 4.0GHz. When considering field strength of an RF signal note that the power decreases as the
distance from the antenna decreases.
Figuree 1:: Radioo Frequency Spectrumm
The FCC exposure guidelines are applicable to radio frequency spectrum between 300kHZ and 100GHz. The
FCC’s exposure guidelines are further discussed in Section 3.0, but it is important to note that the exposure
limits are conservative and incorporate a substantial margin for safety.
[1] Federal Communications Commission, A Location Government Official’s Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF
Emissions Safety: Rules, Procedures, and Practical Guidance, June 2, 2000.
4
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
33.0 Background on FCC MPE Limits
Since 1985, the FCC has had guidelines in place to evaluate human exposure to RF emissions. The most
recent guidelines were adopted in 1996 and incorporate limits for the maximum permissible exposure
(MPE) in terms of both electric and magnetic field strength and power density. Frequencies from 300kHz
to 100GHz are considered as part of these guidelines. These FCC Guidelines are documented in OET Bulletin
65 and are based on the exposure limits recommended by the National Council on Radiation Protection
and Measurements (NCRP), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc (IEEE), and the
American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
For the purposes of determining exposure risk and the resulting compliance, the FCC Guidelines consider
two tiers of exposure: occupational/controlled exposure, and general population/uncontrolled exposure.
Occupational/controlled: these limits are to be considered when a person is exposed to RF
emissions as a consequence of their employment. Additionally, this person must have been made
fully aware of the potential exposure and has the ability to exercise control over their own
exposure.
General population/uncontrolled: these limits are to be considered in all other situations. Namely,
when an individual may be exposed to RF emissions without being aware. This can happen as a
consequence of their employment or not. Additionally, this person does not have the ability to
exercise control over their exposure.
The FCC limits for maximum permissible exposure are derived from a whole-body averaged specific
absorption rate (SAR). The limits incorporate safety factors in order to implement extra precautions when
considering the protection of the population that may be at risk. Additionally, the limits set by the FCC are
based on data that has determined there are certain ranges of frequencies where the human body absorbs
RF energy more efficiently: this frequency range is 30-300MHz.
The specific MPE limit per frequency range is provided in the table below in terms of Electric Field Strength
(V/m), Magnetic Field Strength (A/m), and Power Density (mW/cm2). It should be noted that the limits are
more restrictive for the General Population/Uncontrolled exposure.
5
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
TTablee 1:: FCCC Limitss forr Maximumm Permissiblee Exposuree (MPE))
The most common way to determine the compliance of a site is to compare the RF power density to the
Maximum Permissible Exposure Limits outlined in the tables above, and to represent it as a percentage of
the limit. This is shown graphically below in Figure 2.
Figuree 2:: FCCC Limitss forr Maximumm Permissiblee Exposuree (MPE)
6
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
It is important to note that the FCC rules specifically state that compliance is the shared responsibility of all
licensed transmitters on a site if their power density levels are equal to or greater than 5% of the exposure
limit in an area. When conducting predictive modeling, applicants are expected to make a “good faith”
effort in factoring in the other transmitters on site.
RReferences::
47 CFR, FCC Rules and Regulations, Part 1 (Practice and Procedure), Section 1.1310 (Radiofrequency
radiation exposure limits).
FCC Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) Bulletin 65, “Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines
for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields”, Edition 97-01, August 1997.
IEEE Std C95.1-2019, “IEEE Standard for Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Electric,
Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields, 0 Hz to 300 GHz”.
4.00 Resultss andd Conclusionss
Upon reviewing the results of this analysis, the calculated non-ionizing radiation for this proposed Verizon
antenna installation is considered CCOMPLIANTT when compared to General Population FCC exposure
limitations. The analysis results are summarized below.
Generall Results
Verizon Maximum General Population MPE % 0.2672% at Ground Level
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440 460 480 500%
o
f
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
P
o
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
M
P
E
L
i
m
i
t
Linear Distance from Antenna (ft)
Compliance Analysis Results
% MPE Results Normalized FCC MPE Limit
7
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
55.0 Appurtenance Configuration
Colocator Data:܆Estimate ܆Actual Data ܈N/A
Operator Antt
IIDD
ZZ CCenterlinee
Elev..
(ft)
Antenna Type, Manufaacturer,, && Model Frequencyy
Bandd
Totall TPOO (W) Azz (°)
Verizon 1 37.1 Panel/JMA Wireless/CX16OMI236-BFxy 4GHz 320 45
8
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
66.0 Certifications
a. Preparer Certification
I, Emily McPherson, the preparer of this report, am familiar with the Rules and Regulations of both the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(OSHA) with regard to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation. I am also familiar with Verizon’s
RF Compliance: Signage & Demarcation document. I have reviewed this Radio Frequency Exposure
Assessment report and believe it to be both true and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Emily McPherson, PE
10/7/2026
b. Reviewer Certification
I, Emily McPherson, the reviewer and approver of this report, am fully aware of and familiar with the
Rules and Regulations of both the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) with regard to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation.
I am also familiar with Verizon’s RF Compliance: Signage & Demarcation document. I have reviewed this
Radio Frequency Exposure Assessment report and believe it to be both true and accurate to the best of
my knowledge.
Emily McPherson, PE
Senior Manager - RF Engineering
10/7/2026
APPROVED BY: Emily A. McPherson, P.E.
NY License #: 108843, EXP: 11/30/28
Airosmith Development
Joseph Johnston Engineering, D.P.C
DBA: Airosmith Engineering
COA: 021469, EXP: 5/31/29
10/7/202610/7/2
9
318 West Ave, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866
Office 518-306-1711 – Fax 518-306-1711
www.airosmithdevelopment.com
77.0 APPENDIX A -Predictive Modeling Technique
Airosmith Engineering has performed worst case predictive modeling on the proposed Verizon antenna
installation as compared to the FCC limits on Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) as outlined in FCC’s
OET Bulletin 65 using IXUS EMF Compliance Management Software, Version 4.18 (0)2026.1.0 (Calculator:
2026.1). IXUS is a commercially available software developed by Alphawave.
IXUS uses Ray-Tracing RF exposure modeling to calculate the power density and compares it with FCC
Limits. The ray tracing method is an advanced computation method described by an international standards
protocol: IEC 62232.
RF power density levels are calculated using the IXUS Modeler. IXUS employs a synthetic ray tracing method
for panel and omnidirectional antennas and a cylindrical envelope method for microwave dish (parabolic
reflector / aperture) antennas.
IXUS uses elemental sources, which are representative of how an antenna emits RF energy. These
elemental sources are selected by an analysis of the antennas and their manufacturers’ datasheets. All of
the sources representing all of the antennas are summed to determine power density. Ray tracing
algorithms typically overestimate RF power density because they do not take into account absorption of RF
energy in the ground, building walls and other man-made structures.
The power density summation works as follows:
To calculate exposure and compliance boundaries, power density from each source (exposure value by
frequency EVf) is divided by the appropriate exposure limit (ELf), creating an exposure ratio (ERf).
ܧܴ =ܧܸ
ܧܮ
Ratios from each source are combined to determine a total exposure ratio ܶܧܴ. This ratio is used to
determine exposure and compliance boundaries.
ܶܧܴ =ܧܴ
ୀଵ
IXUS uses the calculated ܶܧܴ to create graphical 3D compliance boundaries around all of the antennas
combined and to determine the exposure at any location.
Additionally, a conservative and verified modelling technique for 5G beamforming antennas in IXUS is also
used. The simulation accuracy of the IXUS calculation module has been verified extensively with full-wave
EM simulations using FEKO. All antenna models that are used in the IXUS modeler undergo a rigorous
verification process, whereby manufacturer data obtained from datasheets or pattern information is
compared to that of the IXUS antenna model, during the synthesis process.
TAB 6
NY industrial code rule 753 requires no less than two
working days notice, but not more than ten days notice.
Before You Dig, Drill Or Blast!
CALL US TOLL FREE 1-800-962-7962
UNDERGROUND FACILITIES
PROTECTIVE ORGANIZATION
New York
Dig Safely.
·
·
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
_______________
MAIN OFFICE (FOR ALL MAIL): 500 FEDERAL STREET, 5TH FLOOR, TROY, NEW YORK 12180
ALBANY OFFICE: 41 STATE STREET, STE 604-12, ALBANY, NEW YORK 12207
_______________
Phone: 518-438-9907 • Fax: 518-438-9914
_______________
www.youngsommer.com
David C. Brennan, Esq.
Writer’s Telephone Extension: 224
dbrennan@youngsommer.com
October 9, 2026
Via Federal Express
Mark Graham
Administrative Assistant for OPED
City of Saratoga Springs
474 Broadway
Saratoga Springs, New York 12866
RE: Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless Application for DRB Approval
Utility Pole No. NG 1/2 , VZ 5 – Adj. to 27 Henry Street.
Dear Mr. Graham:
Please find enclosed an application to the Design Review Board for a proposal to add a
wireless small cell antenna and equipment to an existing utility pole in the public right of way.
Also enclosed is a check in the amount of $650.00 for the application fee.
We look forward to discussing this further with the Design Review Board at an upcoming
meeting. In the meantime, if you have any questions concerning this letter or the enclosed
materials, please contact me at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
David C. Brennan, Esq.
Encl.