Supplement

William P. Johnson and Steven M. Ciccarelli RF Engineering Consultants P.O. Box 20263

Rochester, New York

14602

August 31, 2026 Town of Webster Planning Board Attn: Josh Artuso, Director of Community Development Town of Webster 1000 Ridge Road Webster, NY 14580 RE:

Proposed Wireless Telecommunications Services Facility Supplemental RF Site Review, Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems LLC d/b/a Verizon – “Webster North” Near 1222 Wildflower Drive, Town of Webster, NY (Tax Parcel # 065.05-1-48) Proposed 135’ New Monopole Tower plus 4’ Lightning Rod (139’ overall)

Dear Mr. Artuso, This supplemental report discusses the radio-frequency (RF) aspects of the proposed Bell Atlantic Mobile Systems LLC d/b/a Verizon (Applicant) “Webster North” project in the Town of Webster. Applicant’s supplemental submission, dated August 27, 2026, includes Exhibits Q, the Revised Webster North RF Justification and Exhibit R, the Federal Airways & Airspace Summary Report. Subsequent reports, if needed, will address any remaining questions or issues that arise during public hearings at the request of the Town. Additional background information related to technical matters is included in our Preliminary RF Report, dated July 24, 2026. Applicant’s August 27, 2026 submission responds to the open findings identified in our July 24, 2026 Preliminary RF Site Review. The memorandum includes Applicant’s revised Webster North RF Justification as Exhibit Q and a Federal Airways & Airspace Summary Report as Exhibit R. Accordingly, this supplemental review addresses the materials submitted by Applicant to date and evaluates whether the open RF-related findings from our Preliminary RF Report have been satisfied for purposes of RF review. The following materials form the basis for this report: 1. Permit application materials dated March 10, 2026 including Exhibits A through P: •

•

•

08/31/26 Town of Webster – “Webster North” •

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

2. Applicant’s supplemental submission, dated August 27, 2026, including Exhibit Q, Revised Webster North RF Justification, and Exhibit R, Federal Airways & Airspace Summary Report). Summary of Findings Disposition and Technical Basis The following section summarizes the disposition of the open findings from our July 24, 2026 Preliminary RF Report and identifies the technical basis for each disposition based on Applicant’s supplemental RFJ and related materials. Finding 2 – Holt and Lake Small Cell Applicant’s supplemental RFJ (Exhibit Q) includes low-band and mid-band Best Server propagation plots for the Holt & Lake small-cell facility. The RFJ identifies Holt & Lake as a 45.6-foot ACL small-cell facility that has been constructed and is awaiting fiber service before activation. The submitted materials describe Holt & Lake as a localized solution intended to serve high-use areas near the Webster Turkey Trot, Webster Park pavilions, and The White House, including shoreline areas near that site that are not expected to be adequately served by Webster North due to distance and terrain. Based on the submitted propagation plots, Holt & Lake appears to provide localized service in its immediate area and does not appear to materially affect the need, siting, or minimum-height analysis for

Page 2 of 5

08/31/26 Town of Webster – “Webster North” the proposed Webster North facility. Therefore, Finding 2 from our Preliminary RF Report has been satisfied for purposes of RF review. Finding 4 – Capacity/Best Server Presentation Issues Applicant’s supplemental RFJ addresses the presentation issues identified in Finding 4. The revised Four Mile Creek Beta capacity slide now presents the ASEU data on a readable scale and indicates that the low-band control-channel loading for the Four Mile Creek Beta sector is at or above the exhaustion threshold for much of the period shown. This supports the capacity-relief concern identified in our Preliminary RF Report. In addition, the colors representing the neighboring Best Server sectors have been corrected and align properly with the corresponding sector labels on the revised Best Server plots. We note that the antenna-height values shown in the legends on pages 16, 17, 21, and 22 still appear to be inaccurate or inconsistent; however, these height-label issues do not materially affect interpretation of the Best Server coverage areas or the expected off-load relationships. Therefore, the presentation concerns identified in Finding 4 have been adequately addressed, and Finding 4 is satisfied for purposes of RF review. Finding 5 – Height Justification Regarding Finding 5, height justification, Applicant’s supplemental RFJ provides additional reduced-height propagation materials comparing the proposed 130-foot ACL design with lower antenna centerline heights of 111 feet ACL and 91 feet ACL. These materials indicate that reducing the proposed antenna centerline height, even to 111 feet ACL, would result in material degradation of the predicted Webster North coverage footprint, particularly for mid-band service. Based on visual review of the submitted plots, reduced-height operation appears to create or expand weak-signal areas north of the proposed site, along portions of Schlegel Road to the east and Shoemaker Road to the west, and within residential areas surrounding the proposed facility. The supplemental RFJ further includes drone-view materials indicating that surrounding tree canopy / area clutter reaches as high as 115 feet in the vicinity of the proposed site. Applicant states that the proposed 130-foot ACL places the antenna panels only approximately 10 to 15 feet above this clutter, which is typically the minimum clearance needed to maintain effective RF performance under these site-specific conditions. Taken together, the reduced-height plots and drone-view clutter materials support Applicant’s position that a lower antenna centerline height would materially compromise the site’s intended coverage and capacityrelief objectives. Therefore, Finding 5 from our Preliminary RF Report has been satisfied for purposes of RF review. Finding 6 – Two-Year Planned Sites Map Applicant’s supplemental RFJ includes a Town of Webster two-year planned-sites map on page 40. The map identifies Verizon’s planned sites within the Town during the relevant two-year planning period, including Gravel Rd, Webster North, Holt & Lake, and Lake Road. The RFJ further states that Gravel Rd and Holt & Lake are constructed and awaiting fiber service for activation, and that Webster North and Lake Road are macro sites currently in zoning review. Based on this submission, Applicant has provided the requested Townwide planned-sites information and has clarified the status of the neighboring planned deployments relevant to the Webster North review. In addition, based on the distances, Page 3 of 5

08/31/26 Town of Webster – “Webster North” terrain, and service objectives reflected in the supplemental RFJ, these planned neighboring sites are not expected to materially affect the required height of the proposed Webster North tower. Therefore, Finding 6 from our Preliminary RF Report has been satisfied for purposes of RF review. Finding 9 – FAA Review Applicant’s supplemental submission includes a Federal Airways & Airspace Summary Report as Exhibit R. The report evaluates the proposed Webster North structure at a height of 139 feet AGL, with a site elevation of 349 feet AMSL and an overall height of 488 feet AMSL. The report states that notice to the FAA is not required at the analyzed location and height for slope, height, or straight-in procedures, and the notice-criteria section identifies no required FAA notice under the evaluated criteria. The report also identifies no C-Band 3.7–3.98 GHz coordination-zone conflict and states that an AM study is not required. Based on this submission, Applicant has provided airspace documentation addressing the requested FAA/airspace item. Therefore, Finding 9 from our Preliminary RF Report has been satisfied for purposes of RF review. Site Details from Preliminary RF Report Applicant proposes a new unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on lands of Robby C. and Dina M. Villa near 1222 Wildflower Drive, Town of Webster, Monroe County, New York, identified as Tax Parcel No. 065.05-1-48. The proposed wireless facility is to be located within an 80' x 125' lease area, with ground equipment enclosed within an approximately 34' x 77' fenced compound. The proposed tower is described as a new 135-foot monopole, with an overall height of approximately 139 feet including a proposed 4-foot lightning rod. Verizon’s antennas are proposed at an antenna centerline height (ACL) of 130 feet AGL, with a top of antenna height of approximately 134 feet AGL. The tower is proposed to be designed for a total of three wireless carriers, with Verizon at the upper position and two future co-locator positions located at 115 feet ACL and 100 feet ACL respectively. The Site Plan (page 143 of 147 of the permit application materials dated March 10, 2026) identifies Verizon’s final antenna count as 12 antennas. Based on the RF Justification and application narrative, Applicant proposes to provide service using low-band and mid-band spectrum, including 700/850 MHz, PCS 1900 MHz, AWS 2100 MHz, and C-Band / upper mid-band spectrum. The RF materials state that the proposed Webster North facility is intended to improve both coverage and capacity in the project area, including off-loading overloaded or weakly serving sectors at the existing Webster, Four Mile Creek, and Webster Park sites, and creating a new dominant server in the Webster North area. Ground equipment consists primarily of Verizon exterior equipment cabinets on an 11' x 12.5' concrete slab with ice canopy, a Verizon battery cabinet, utility/RF equipment on an H-frame, cable bridge, associated conduits, and related appurtenances, together with a proposed 50 kW diesel generator including tertiary containment tank on a separate 4' x 8' concrete slab. Access is proposed from Wildflower Drive by way of approximately 900 Page 4 of 5

08/31/26 Town of Webster – “Webster North” feet of existing asphalt driveway, with an additional approximately 360 feet of proposed 12-foot-wide gravel access driveway to reach the compound. Conclusion Overall, Applicant’s supplemental submission moves the review forward and appears to resolve or substantially address the remaining technical findings identified in our Preliminary RF Report. Based on the materials submitted to date, Findings 2, 4, 5, 6, and 9 have been satisfied for purposes of RF review. In addition, the general recommendations in Findings 8 and 12 from our Preliminary RF Report remain applicable, although they are not treated here as unresolved technical-information requests. Applicant has also responded to Findings 8, 12, and 13 in its August 27, 2026 memorandum; to the extent those responses raise legal or procedural issues, they should be reviewed by the Board’s counsel. The information in this report concerns RF engineering issues related to the proposed project and is intended to assist the Board in weighing alternatives and planning for the future of the community. Engineering design choices may also implicate aesthetic and legal issues. However, this report must not be relied upon for legal advice or direction. Legal advice regarding action on these issues should be obtained from the Board’s counsel. Thank you for the opportunity to assist the Town of Webster. We will stand by to assist as the Town’s review of the project progresses. Please feel free to contact us if you have additional questions or concerns at this time. Sincerely,

William P. Johnson Consultant

Steven M. Ciccarelli Consultant

Page 5 of 5