Loading...
PC 08.b. CUP 14-008 Valley RoadMEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: TERESA MCCLISH, COMMUNIN DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR BY: Kk KELLY HEFFERNON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER SUBJECT: CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-008; LOCATION - VALLEY ROAD; APPLICANT - VERIZON WIRELESS; REPRESENTATIVE - RUSSELL STORYlNSA DATE: MARCH 3,2015 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 14-008. IMPACT ON FINANCIAL AND PERSONNEL RESOURCES: No financial impact is projected. BACKGROUND: ation: PLANNING COMMISSION CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-008 MARCH 3,2015 PAGE 2 This project was continued from the November 18, 2014 Planning Commission meeting to a date uncertain to further review and return with: 1) revised Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements that include small cell facilities; 2) more information regarding the cost and feasibility associated with underground vaulting for the ground equipment; and 3) traffic bollard specifications. These issues are discussed below under Analysis of Issues. The November 18, 2014 Planning Commission meeting minutes are included as Attachment 1. The project site is located on the east side of Valley Road within the public right-of-way, and approximately 150 feet south of Arroyo Grande High School. The site is primarily surrounded by active agricultural land. Verizon Wireless proposes to install small cell telecommunication antennas and related equipment on an existing wood utility pole and an adjacent equipment cabinet approximately 2.5' tall mounted on a raised concrete pad. The applicant proposes to install the following types of equipment on the pole: 0 One 2' dual band panel antenna at 29' high from the ground with related mounting equipment. e 3" conduit painted brown running up the pole. 8 One GPS antenna at 15' high. 8 Two Remote Radio Units (RRUs) at 13.5' high from ground. 8 PG&E shutdown switch inside a small enclosure painted brown. 8 One electrical meter painted brown (bottom of meter at 7'). 8 Underground conduit for power, COAX and fiber. Staff Advisory Committee (SAC): The SAC reviewed the proposed project on October 8, 2014. Issues and comments discussed included: 8 The need for an encroachment permit. m Protection of the equipment cabinet from vehicles and agricultural machinery with either bollards or placing the equipment in an underground vault. w Visual impactsnack of camouflage. 8 Future undergrounding of overhead utilities. Confirmation that the site is within the public right-of-way. Members of the SAC were in support of the project. Architectural Review Committee (ARC): The ARC considered this project on November 3, 2014 (Attachment 2) and recommended approval as proposed with the following suggestions: 0 Exclude the use of bollards around the equipment cabinet for protection as recommended by the SAC. As an alternative, consider moving the cabinet behind the utility pole. It appears that there is sufficient public right-of-way to relocate the cabinet further away from the street, which will help protect the cabinet and eliminate the need for bollards. Place the RRUs inside the equipment cabinet instead of on the pole to reduce visual impacts (applicant confirmed this is feasible). Consider adopting guidelines for siting these small cell facilities. PLANNING COMMISSION CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-008 MARCH 3,2015 PAGE 3 ANALYSIS OF ISSUES: The purpose of this facility is to provide greater capacity within the Verizon network for faster data processing to handle increasing wireless data demands (i.e. help reduce the number of dropped calls at peak hours by providing additional antennas at key locations). It is anticipated that more applications for these facilities will be submitted in the future from various cell phone carriers to improve service. The primary issue discussed during the SAC, ARC and Planning Commission meetings was how to reduce the visual and safety impacts of the equipment cabinet. Since there is nothing existing in the immediate vicinity to help screen the cabinet (e.g. landscaping), the equipment cabinet is highly visible. Vehicular safety concerns stem from the proximity of the cabinet to the existing right-of-way and adjacent agricultural operations. Safety and economic concerns also include protection of the cabinet. In response to SAC comments, the applicant confirmed that placing bollards around the equipment cabinet for protection is acceptable to Verizon (this issue is discussed further below). However, the applicant indicates that placing the equipment in an underground vault would be cost prohibitive. The applicant has provided the following additional information in rebuttal to placing equipment in an underground vault: 0 Placing the equipment in a vault would increase ground disturbance for construction; Vaulting creates ventilation concerns, including dangerous gaslfumes build up; * Vaulting increases the potential for water leaks and associated problems; * There are more maintenance requirements associated with vaulting; Vaulting increases the possibility of electrical malfunctions, with repairs ranging from $20,000 to $30,000; 0 Vaulting increases the possibility of electrical malfunctions impacting 911 emergency services; and * Costs are increased by approximately $30,000 to install a vault. The applicant also provided information regarding required clearances around existing wooden Joint Powers Association (JPA) utility poles. Per General Order 95 (GO 95) Guidelines issued by the California Public Utilities Commission, carriers must maintain at least three feet (3') of clearance (preferably 4') from the pole. This includes a required 30" clearance necessary to be maintained around the pole for worker climbing space. It was originally thought that there was insufficient area to install the cabinet on the east side of the pole given these clearance requirements and existing right-of-way. However, the applicant has determined that there is adequate space available to install the cabinet behind the pole per Planning Commission's suggestion on November 18, 2014 (see Attachment 3 for cabinet relocation exhibit). This new cabinet location will help reduce visual impacts from Valley Road. As added justification for allowing an above-ground cabinet instead of placing the equipment underground, the applicant has provided pictures of existing similar equipment cabinets throughout the City (see Attachment 4). Staff is concerned that as these small cell facilities become more prevalent, there could be many more equipment cabinets that cumulatively will have a considerable negative visual impact. If placing the PLANNING COMMISSION CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-008 MARCH 3,2015 PAGE 4 cabinets in an underground vault proves infeasible as the applicant has indicated, staff has identified an option to consider, which is to paint the cabinets with artwork similar to the "Utility Box Art Program" in San Luis Obispo. The City of San Luis Obispo's Art in Public Places Program commissioned local artists to create art pieces on 32 utility boxes featured in downtown San Luis Obispo as part of the "BoxArt" program. This concept would require approval of the Arroyo Grande Art Committee and City Council, but the Planning Commission could make a recommendation regarding this concept as part of the project's approval. Regarding information pertaining to bollards, the City has used a company called Traffic Guard Direct in the past. Staff researched the cost of bollards and determined that they range from $300 to $2,000 each depending on the type. Bollards would provide protection for the cabinet; however, it has been discussed that they could actually cause more harm to a vehicle and bodily injury in the event of a collision than would a solo equipment cabinet. For this reason, and the concern that bollards would not improve the visual impact of the above-ground equipment cabinet, staff does not recommend requiring bollards for this project. To help address safety concerns if the equipment is to remain above-ground, staff recommends requiring reflective tape or paint to be placed on the equipment cabinet. This would help avoid collisions during nighttime hours when the cabinet is harder to see. As mentioned in the November 18, 2014 Planning Commission staff report, this type of smaller facility does not warrant the level of visual impact mitigation as the larger network facilities (e.g. the towers camouflaged as pine trees, or "monopines", at City Reservoirs 1 and 2). For this project, the applicant proposes to paint the pole-mounted and ground equipment "Mesa Brown" to match the color of the utility pole as a means of reducing visual impacts. Given that this is the City's first small cell facility, staff maintains that a precedent is being set for similar small cell facilities in the future. Staff has therefore been working with Verizon representatives to amend the Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements to address visual concerns of these smaller cell sites, as well as other amendments (see Attachment 4). Regarding the potential conflict between this project and the undergrounding of overhead utilities along Valley Road, staff does not believe there is an issue. The City does not have plans to improve or widen Valley Road at this time, and since the surrounding area is mostly agriculture, it is unlikely that any development will be proposed in the near future that would require the undergrounding of overhead utilities. The project site will also not conflict with the City's plans to improve and realign Castillo Del Mar. Based on SAC and ARC comments, and the additional information described above, the draft conditions include the following: w Obtain an encroachment permit prior to any work done in the public right-of-way. Provide a copy of the Joint Pole Authority Agreement, identifying the language regarding co-location. PLANNING COMMISSION CONTINUED CONSlDERATlON OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-008 MARCH 3,2015 PAGE 5 Paint the pole mounted equipment and ground equipment "Mesa Brown" to match the existing wood pole and blend with the surrounding environment. In addition, place reflective tape or paint on the equipment cabinet for safety purposes. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, provide an exhibit, for review and approval of the Community Development Director, of how the reflective tape or paint will be applied to the equipment cabinet. Confirm no radio frequency interference with City communication facilities. Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements: On November 27, 2001 the City Council adopted "Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements". Per these requirements, the applicant has submitted information regarding radio frequency exposure (Attachment 5) and visual impacts (Attachment 6). The applicant's representative has also indicated that co- location with other carriers is feasible at this location. Because these siting requirements were created for larger telecommunication facilities and not necessarily for small cell sites as proposed, staff proposes that these requirements be amended as indicated in Attachment 4. These amendments will formally be considered at a later date with a separate project and are provided here for review and direction only. Note that the project as proposed does not meet the proposed Draft Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements since the equipment cabinet is not within an interior building space, behind a parapet wall, within an underground fault, or within a landscaped area. This particular site is a challenge given its location within the right-of-way and lack of camouflage capability. For this reason, staff recommends the project be approved with the relocation of the equipment cabinet and as conditioned. ALTERNATIVES: The following alternatives are presented for Planning Commission consideration: 1. Adopt the attached Resolution, approving CUP 14-008; 2. Do not adopt the attached Resolution; or 3. Provide direction to staff. ADVANTAGES: The proposed wireless communication facility would provide greater capacity within the Verizon network, which will help reduce the number of dropped calls at peak hours. DISADVANTAGES: There will be temporary impacts related to minor noise, dust and truck traffic during construction. This project also sets a precedent for future small cell facilities. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Staff has reviewed this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, and has determined that the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15311 of the CEQA guidelines regarding construction or placement of minor structures accessory to existing facilities. PLANNiNG COMMISSION CONTINUED CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMiT CASE NO. 14-008 MARCH 3, 2015 PAGE 6 PUBLIC NOTICE AND COMMENT: A notice of public hearing was mailed to all property owners within 300' of the project site and also published in The Tribune on Friday, February 20, 2015. The agenda and staff report were posted at City Hall and on the City's website on Friday, February 27, 2015. Staff has not received any public comment regarding the proposed project. Attachments: 1. November 18, 2014 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes 2. November 3, 2014 Architectural Review Committee Meeting Minutes 3. Equipment Cabinet Relocation Exhibit (not available) 4. Pictures of existing equipment cabinets in Arroyo Grande 5. Draft Amendments to the Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements 6. Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Exposure Report 7. Photo Simulations 8. Project Plans (under separate cover) RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-008, APPLIED FOR BY VERIZON WIRELESS, LOCATED ON VALLEY ROAD WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande considered Conditional Use Permit Case No. 14-008 on November 18, 2014, filed by Verizon Wireless, to install small cell telecommunication antennas and related equipment on an existing wood utility pole and an adjacent equipment cabinet; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission continued consideration of this item to a date uncertain pending additional information pertaining to: 1) revised Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements that include small cell facilities; 2) more information regarding the cost and feasibility associated with underground vaulting for the ground equipment; and 3) traffic bollard specifications; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on this application in accordance with the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has found that this project is consistent with the General Plan and the environmental documents associated therewith; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed this project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Arroyo Grande Rules and Procedures for Implementation of CEQA and has determined that the project is exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 1531 1 ; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds after due study, deliberation and public hearing, the following circumstances exist: Conditional Use Permit Findings: 1. The proposed use is conditionally permitted within the subject district pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.16.050 of the Development Code, and complies with all applicable provisions of the Development Code, the goals and objectives of the Arroyo Grande General Plan, and the development policies and standards of the City. In addition, the facility will operate in full compliance with all state and federal regulations including the Telecommunications Act of 1996. 2. The proposed use will not impair the integrity and character of the district in which it is to be established or located. The installation of the facility will not result in any material changes to the character of the immediate neighborhood or local community. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 2 3. The site is suitable for the type and intensity of use or development that is proposed. The facility is not located within a predominantly residential neighborhood. 4. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure the public health and safety. 5. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties and improvements in the vicinity. The telecommunication facility will be unstaffed, have no impact on circulation systems, and will generate no noise, odor, smoke or any other adverse impacts to adjacent land uses. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Arroyo Grande hereby approves Conditional Use Permit Case No. 14-008, with the above findings and subject to the conditions set forth in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. On a motion by Commissioner , seconded by Commissioner and by the following roll call vote to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: the foregoing Resolution was adopted this 3rd day of March 201 5. ATTEST: DEBBIE WEiCHlNGER SECRETARY TO THE COMMISSION AS TO CONTENT: LAN GEORGE, CHAIR TERESA MCCLISH DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITV DEVELOPMENT RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 3 EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-008 VERIZON WIRELESS VALLEY ROAD COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION GENERAL CONDITIONS This approval authorizes the installation of small cell telecommunication antennas and related equipment on an existing wood utility pole and an adjacent equipment cabinet mounted on a raised concrete pad. 1. The applicant shall ascertain and comply with all Federal, State, County and City requirements as are applicable to this project. 2. The applicant shall comply with all conditions of approval for Conditional use Permit Case No. 14-008. 3. This application shall automatically expire on March 3, 2017, unless a building permit is issued. Thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the approval, the applicant may apply for an extension of one (1) year from the original date of expiration. 4. Development shall occur in substantial conformance with the plans presented to the Planning Commission at the meeting of March 3, 2015 and marked Exhibits "B-1 through B-7". 5. The applicant shall agree to defend at hislher sole expense any action brought against the City, its present or former agents, officers, or employees because of the issuance of said approval, or in anyway relating to the implementation thereof, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any court costs and attorney's fee's which the City, its agents, officers or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of hislher obligations under this condition. 6. Construction shall be limited to between the hours of 7 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. No construction shall occur on Saturday or Sunday. RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 4 SPECIAL CONDITIONS 7. The facility shall not bear any signs or advertising devices other than certification, warning, or other FCC required seals or signage. 8. The equipment cabinet shall be placed behind the utility pole further away from Valley Road to help reduce visual and safety impacts. The ground equipment cabinet shall be further protected with either reflective tape or paint. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the applicant shall provide an exhibit, for review and approval of the Community Development Director, of how the reflective tape or paint will be applied to the equipment cabinet. 9. Per the August 21, 2014 Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Exposure Report prepared for this facility, install NOC INFORMATION Sign(s), GUIDELINES Sign(s) and CAUTION Sign(s) at the pole's climbing access point where they will be clearly visible to tower climbers. Signage should be mounted preferably away from public view and high on the pole to minimize unnecessary alarm. 10. The Remote Radio Units (RRUs) shall be placed inside the equipment cabinet instead of on the pole. 11. The power pedestal shall be located adjacent to the equipment cabinet instead of on the pole and painted "Mesa Brown" or an equivalent color. 12. The pole-mounted equipment and the equipment cabinet shall be painted to match the color of the utility pole ("Mesa Brown" or an equivalent color). ENGINEERING DIVISION GENERAL IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS 13. Site Maintenance - The developer shall be responsible during construction for cleaning city streets, curbs, gutters, and sidewalks of dirt tracked from the project site. The flushing of dirt or debris to storm drain or sanitary sewer facilities shall not be permitted. The cleaning shall be done after each day's work or as directed by the Public Works Director. SPECIAL CONDITIONS 14. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit prior to any work done in the public right-of way. 15. Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall provide a copy of the Joint Pole Authority Agreement, identifying the language regarding co-location. 16. Zero Conflict with Citv's Communication - Prior to issuance of building permit, the applicant shall perform a radio frequency study to determine possible RESOLUTION NO. PAGE 5 conflicts with the City's communication system, and to develop alternatives to eliminate any such conflicts. Prior to activation of the proposed Verizon Wireless system, the applicant shall perform a live radio test to ensure that there is no unanticipated interference with the City's radio system. If the proposed system does interfere with the operation of the City's communication system, the proposed system shall remain inactive until such time that the proposed system can be made to cause zero interference. BUILDING DIVISION 17. The project shall comply with the most recent editions of all California Building and Fire Codes, as adopted by the City of Arroyo Grande. 18. Any review costs generated by outside consultants shall be paid by the applicant 19. Building Permit fees shall be based on codes and rates in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 20. Building permit shall be obtained prior to installation ATTACHMENT 1 ACTION MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18,2014 COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 215 EAST BRANCH STREET ARROYO GRANDE. CALIFORNIA 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Sperow called the Regular Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:00 p.m 2. ROLL CALL Planning Commission: Commissioners Lan George, Tom Goss, John Keen, Randy Russom, and Vice Chair Lisa Sperow were present. Staff Present: Community Development Director Teresa McClish, Associate Planner Kelly Heffernon, Assistant Planner Mathew Downing; City Engineer Matt Horn and Secretary Debbie Weichinger were present. 3. FLAG SALUTE Commissioner George led the Flag Salute. 4. AGENDA REVIEW None 5. COMMUNIN COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS None 6. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS The Commission received the following material after preparation of the agenda: 1. An email transmitting a memo from Assistant Planner Matt Downing to the Planning Commission, dated November 17, 2014 regarding Item 8.b. Architectural Review Committee recommendations. 7. CONSENT AGENDA Action: Commissioner George moved, and Commissioner Keen seconded the motion to approve the November 4, 2014 minutes, as modified, under 6. add the following: ..... to a date certain "of December 2, 2014. The motion passed on the following roll call vote: AYES: George, Keen, Goss, Russom, Sperow NOES: None ABSENT: None 7.a. Consideration of Approval of Minutes Action: Approved the minutes of the Regular Planning Commission meeting of November 4, 2014 as modified. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS 8.a. CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-008; LOCATION - VALLEY ROAD; APPLICANT - VERIZON WIRELESS; REPRESENTATIVE - RUSSELL STORYINSA Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report and recommended that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit No. 14-008, with direction PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES NOVEMBER 18,2014 PAGE 2 regarding amending the Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and amending Condition No. 8 to specify protection of the equipment cabinet. Associate Planner Heffernon responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project. Russell StoryINSA representing Verizon Wireless, responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project. Vice Chair Sperow opened the public hearing, and upon hearing no comments, she closed the public hearing. m: Commissioner Goss moved to continue this matter to a date uncertain and directed staff to return with siting guidelines that include small cell facilities, more information regarding the cost associated with underground vaulting and bollard specifications. Commissioner George seconded, and the motion passed on the following roll vote: AYES: Goss, George, Keen, Russom, Sperow NOES: None ABSENT: None Commissioner Russom recused himself from Item 8.b. due to having a conflict of interest and stepped down from the dais. CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 14-002, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 14-001, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CASE NO. 14-009, AND ING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14-001; SUBDlVlSlON OF TWO (2) MERCIAL PARCELS INTO FORTY-ONE (41) RESIDENTIAL LOTS, ONE (1) REA LOT, AND TWO (2) COMMERCIAL LOTS; LOCATION - CORNER OF EAST GRAND AVENUE AND SOUTH COURTLAND ANTS - MFI LIMITED AND NKT COMMERCIAL; - RRM DESIGN GROUP Assistant Planner the staff report and recommended that the Planning Commission and make a recommendation to the City Council. Assistant Planner Downing and Direct& responded to questions from the Commission regarding the proposed project. Debbie Rudd representative, and Scott RRM Design Group, presented the proposed project to the Commission. b a, Nick Tompkins, ownerlapplicant, responded to questions fr regarding the proposed project. B Andy Magano, applicant, responded to questions from the commissh4egarding the costs of the proposed homes. Vice Chair Sperow open the public hearing. 'k John Fowler, CEO, Peoples' Self Help Housing, referred to his written correspond& and spoke in support of the proposed project. 9 \ ATTACHMENT 2 FINAL MINUTES CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ARC) SPECIAL MEETING MONDAY, NOVEMBER 3,2014 1. CALL TO ORDER The special meeting of the City of Arroyo Grande Architectural Review Committee was called to order at 1:30 p.m. by Chair Warren Hoag. 2. ROLL CALL Present were Committee members Bruce Berlin, Barbara Harmon, Mary Hertel, Vice Chair Michael Peachey, and Chair Hoag. 3. FLAG SALUTE Bruce Berlin led the Flag Salute. 4. COMMUNITY COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS None 5. APPRQVAL OF MINUTES None 6. PROJECTS 6.a. Consideration of Conditional Use Permit 14-008; Installation of a small cell telecommunication facility: Location - Valley Road: Applicant - Verizon Wireless: Representative - Russell Story (NSA Wireless) Staff Contact: Kelly Heffernon Associate Planner Heffernon presented the staff report. Russell Story, representative, spoke briefly in support of the project. The Committee asked questions regarding distance from the equipment to the road, ideas for additional equipment protection, proximity to the high school, and potential for collocation of similar facilities for multiple carriers. The Committee commented that they must consider precedent due to this being the first of these small cell facilities, preference for less visual clutter and equipment being placed underground, location will play a part in future requests, equipment must remain ARC MINUTES NOVEMBER 3,2014 PAGE 2 outside of farm operation pathways, and reduction of equipment placed on the utility pole. Barbara Harmon made a motion, seconded by Bruce Berlin to recommend to the Planning Commission approval of the project with the following conditions: 1. Exclude the use of bollards; 2. Consider locating the utility cabinet behind the utility pole; 3. Place the RRUs in the utility cabinet; 4. Paint the cabinet in the "Mesa Brown" color as suggested. The mot~on carried on a 5-0 voice vote. 6.b. Consideration of Architectural Review 14-008; New single-family residence in Tract 3018; Location - Lot 3, Old Ranch Road; Applicant - CCT Ventures, L?C: Representative - Jennifer Martin, Elements Architecture & Desiqn Staff ~onta&<,~atthew Downing \ Assistant Planni~in~ provided the staff report for the project. Committee membershked questions regarding setbacks, similarity to the other homes reviewed by the ARC, ahgrading required for the design. \ Jennifer Martin, Fuentes, applicant, spoke briefly in support of the project. Committee members asked removal of eucalyptus trees and grading required. The Committee commented that the aesthetically pleasing, has good landscape, will provide an upgrade to the od with unique elements and color palette. Barbara Harmon made a motion, seconded by Mary recommend approval of the project to the Community Development Director 1. Integrate base detailing on exposed foundations; and 2. Minimize driveway appearance using The motion carried on a 5-0 voice vote. Chair Hoag called for a break at 3:25 pm. The Committee reconvened Vice Chair Peachey recused himself for Item 6.c. due to his firm doing work applicant. ATTACHMENT 3 This Attachment (Equipment Cabinet Relocation Exhibit) was not available from the applicant at the time of staff report distribution. ATTACHME Russell Story 8058958831 Russell Story 805 895 8831 Russell Story 805 895 8831 Russell Story 805 895 8831 Russell Story 805 895 8831 ATTACHMENT 5 City of ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL , TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES SITING and PERMIT SUBMITTAL I. SITING REQUIREMENTS The following requirements are intended to assist telecommunication service providers and the community in understanding the City's standards and permit process for such facilities. The goal is to balance the needs of wireless communication providers, the regulatory functions of the City, the rights guaranteed by the federal government, and the potential impacts upon the community and neighboring property owners in the design and siting of telecommunication facilities. A. General Reauirements: 1. Telecommunication facilities shail avoid any unreasonable interference with views from neighboring properties. -. -. . -. . .\ * - Left: 1.25", No bullets or 2. Telecommunication facilities shall not cause anv interference with Citip- communication svstems. - and Numbering ~~. ........ 7 I . ~ ~- - ~.~~~~~~ 3.No monopoles or towers shall be installed on top of an exposed* jfo~m~:8~~~~~dN)?~~!9~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ .: ridgeline or prominent slope when alternative sites are available. I , - - ---- .. .............. ~~~ 4.Telecommunication facilities shall be painted color(s) that are most.- <- mrmattd ~ulletsand Numbering ...... ........ . ~ ,. I compatible with their surroundings. 1 Llnnovative design shall be used whenever the screening potential for the site is low. For example, designing structures that are compatible with surrounding architecture, or appear as a natural environmental feature, could help mitigate the visual impact of a facility. I 6.Telecommunication facilities are got allowed on _a_nypropeoy with a-::',:' Residential land use designation with the exception of concealedi?'. 1 2015Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklisl , . _, Page l - - . -. . - .. - facilities on non-residentiai structures !ha? are allowablein residential-- - joe!adiyured districts (such as within church steeples), ~~ - - - - - - - - - . .. any residentiaiiy-used smciuie or any 1 newfaciiiw on pmpew with a Residential 6. The City lists the placement of facilities in the following preferential I iand USCdeSignation ..... ..~~.. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~ . order: I a. Side-mount antenna on existing structures (buildings, water tanks, etc.) when integrated into the existing structure, completely hidden from public view or painted and blended to match existing structures; b. Within or on existing signs to be completely hidden from public view; c. Atop existing structures (buildings, water tanks, etc.) with appropriate visual/architectural screening to be completely hidden from public view; d. Alternative tower structures (or stealth structures), such as man- made trees, clock towers, flagpoles, steeples, false chimneys, etc., that camouflage or conceal the presence of antennas. e. Existing monopoles, existing electric transmission towers, and existing lattice towers; f. New locations 7. The City encourages co-iocation of telecommunication facilities, but only if it results in a brvisual impact. 1 8. Small Cells shall be considered an accessow use in ail districts. B. Requirements for Buildinq Mounted Antennas: 1. Building mounted antennas and all other equipment shall be in scale and architecturally integrated with the building design in such a manner as to be visually unobtrusive. 2. Colors and materials shall match the existing building. 3. All equipment shall be screened from public view, 4. Building mounted antennas and all other equipment shall avoid any unreasonable interference with views from neighboring properties. , Formattd Font: mid 6. Definition and Requirements for Small Cell Facili~ea: ... L ?----- -. -- .I Formatted: Font: Bcid 1. A Small Cell Facilitv means awireless teiec%munication facility that*<-.. +~-------- - may consist of one or more radio receive., antennas, interconnectinq , '$2Ew'Fon-d cables. ~ower supplv. other associated electronics and accessory prnamd: BUIIP~S and Numbering equiament, which are attached to a structure. Pe!Z~F 1 I DetM Novernber2007 ~Teiecornrnunication Faciiifis Siting Requiremenb and Checklisb, ,: --- ----- -- ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~' Page 2 - - . -. . . . . -. . Formatted: indent: Left: 0.75'. No bullek or 2. ntennas shall not exceed an ov~ra!iJens!h,of iwo !e-e!./2% te screened fr%view so .as that they are not visible from any , ,, 3. Equipment cabinets shall be located as follows so fhat they areno(.:.': , visible from anv public street: I a, intt .- ~ L..:,A:-- l i - J -, c--- , , . Formatted: No! Highlight ,",..,I-. --. %matted: Not Hiyhiight . ... b. behind oald~-l YY--~ . . . . . ...I, , c. within an underground vault; or " ,, % ,, , ,, vet-: compieieiy d. fully screened within a landscaped area - -. . .~ ~~ ~~ - - - - -. ~. . ~ ~. - - 1 p. Facilities shall not pose a safe@ hazard by $eir p!a_cem_eni adiacer??to2,i'"c . . . .. .. Formawed: NotHiyhiight sensitive land uses. I>' :. , Ddeted: to not be visibie to passerby on - . ' F"."..Cd. hl^t "i"iii"h, -1 A - . .. ------ -. . . . ~~ Requirements for Monopoles 2~ .... . . .. .. _. 1. Monopoles and towers may be considered only when the applicz .- reasonably demonstrates that the proposed facility cannot be placi on an existing building or structure. ,, , LL~~M: or I --. 2. Monopoles and towers shall be encouraqed on roperl lies zoned Public .,.; 1 Deleted: SO as to not be "ism to Facilitv over other zoninci districts. ;dpasserby on any pvbiic street. 7 i Formatted -- - J Deleted: is 3 . .S~ostantial ~andscaplng or other screening should be prov~oed to __ . . .-.--. ~ Formatted: ':,'i '.cl t~. 1 l.! ::t -+ v sua~ly buffer any a010 n~ng res oental Jses from tne potentlal v s~al . . . - lmpacis of !ne facility. Landscape screentng shoulo be oesigneo to Formalted: .,:c .C C: : '.. : ::; ?. achieve its desired appearance in a reasonable period of time. I numbering 4.For monopoles or towers proposed within 300 feet of residentially zoned property, the facility should be set back at least 50 feet or the height of the facility, whichever is greater. Otherwise, the standard ,, setback for the applicable zoning district shall apply. -. ~ ---- ~ --- .. .~~ .. .~.~ --- Requirements for Facilities in the Public RiqM-of-Wav: 1. Facilities shall be desianed and installed in compliance with all-' reauirelnents of California Public Utilities Commission General Order 95, inciudina all separation and climbinci space requirements. 2. Facilities shall be installed and maintained in a manner that does not unreasonably jmpede public access and use of the riaht-of-wav. _ ~~ -3 3. The desian and location of qround-mounted facilities shall reasonably mitiaate aesthetic impacts when feasible. Ground-mounted cabinets shall be painted $ neuJral color to match the surroundnt -- ~~ ~ ~~ ed: Font: (Defauk) Aiial, No! Bold, i - ~~ - - ~~ - - ~. - ~ ~~ - - - - - - ..,, i Formatted: Underline PE~RM~~UBMITTAL~~U~REMENTS~~)~~~~~~TIQMAL USE PERMITS ' : . *' - - I Any new telecommunication facility proposed within a zonina district of the City of ,> Arroyo Grande is subject to review and approval through the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. The applicant shall submit the following additional items . 2015Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklisb- . . ~ ~~ 2Z ' Page 3 and information (unless waived by the Community Development Director based on written justification provided by the applicant) along with the standard CUP application materials. The following list of requirements will be used to check&.-, - application for completeness afler it is submitted. If &. appl@!lon_ .is.n_ot.:: - complete, a copy of this list, andlor the CUP checklist, will be returned to &. - applicant with additional requirements noted. A. Site Information: Submit a site plan, Assessor's Parcel Map(s), or a recent aerial photo that clearly illustrates the following information: 1. The lease area of the proposed project. 2. The lease areas of all other facilities on the parcel where the proposed facility is located. 3. Property boundaries of the site and the legal lot. 4. Location of all habitable structures within 500 feet of the proposed facility with the distance from the proposed antenna facility to the closest structure clearly marked. B. Technoloav Information: 1. A aeneral written description of the type of technology and type of -- ~ - --- consumer services the carrier will provide to its customers. 2. An explanation of site selection (reason the site was chosen over .' I I alternative sites). I/ ./, 3. imenziw plans showingthe proposed.. heightl $jre_ction @nd.type.ofi: ktenna proposed (i.e.. panel, whip, dish)aa!l_ accessory_: , structures/equipment requested as a part of the proposed antenna facility. ; 4. Detailed engineering calculations for foundation wind loads. L.. . ----..... ... . .~~~ ~~~~ .. , , C. Radio Freauencv Exposure Information: ARadio Freauencv $missions ~~~ statement - certified bv a qualified radio fie-<,:' professional demonstratina compliance with Federal Communications ,D,,,,:,,,CityofAiroy Commission auidelines. I the same infomistion submi ! reoaidino adio fleouenw ( D. Co-Location Information: Co-location is defined as the coincident placement of telecommunication carriers' antennas on the same wireless tower or antenna-mounting structure. The principal benefit from co-location is that fewer towers are needed to serve a given area, thereby reducing the overall visual impact of towers on a community. The City encourages the co-location between carriers, or the use of existing towers wherever possible to discourage the unnecessary proliferation of towers. The City also encourages the design of new towers which allow for future co- location whenever feasible. Applicants proposing to site the antenna(s) must demonstrate that reasonable efforts have been made to locate the antennas(s) on existing antenlia-mounting structures. ' aniappfcationto establish a now or expand an ; I existing communication faniiOi. if the simpie, easy to read terns, demonstrating 1 1. If not co-located, provide information pertaining to the feasibility of joint- , Saidcompiia"ee use antenna facilities. and discuss the reasons whv such ioint use is not a . PP!t?!.. , , : Deleted: NovemberZOOl Z015Telecommunicatian Faciii!ias Si!ing Requirements and Checkiisb~~ ~~ ,, . . , '" Lp--..--..-.-~~~~~~~~-~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~. , .......--. I Page 4 viable option or alternative to a new facility site. This includes written notification of refusal of the existing antenna-mountinq_structure owner to lease space on the structure. Include information on lack of existing wireless towers in the area, topography, frequency or signal interference. line of site problems, and available land zoning restrictions as applicable. E. Visual lmuact Information: The following information provides staff with criteria for determining the significance of project visual impacts for CEQA purposes. - 1. Submit a preliminary environmental review with special emphasis placed upon the nature and extent of visual and aesthetic impacts. 2. Submit photo mock-ups or digital computer representations of the project site "before" and "after" installation. Physical samples of facility materials andlor a three-dimensional model may also be required. Show the proposed tower, antenna(s), equipment shelters, and any landscaping or screening proposed to lessen the visual impact of the project. 3. Submit information regarding the location of existing towers of the same, or similar design as the proposal facility, located within 10 miles of Arroyo Grande for viewing purposes. 4. If the project site is located within % mile of a public road, residence. public park, public hiking trail, or private easement open to the public, or if visible from such areas, show the proposed project site from multiple vantage points. Multiple viewpoints will require an index map and key for identification. I . . . .. .. . .. - -win::::-z:~.~.:j 5. Provide a sample of the proposed color of the tower in the form of a minimum one square foot paint sample, and explain the reasons why that color is best for the location proposed. 6. Describe the type of landscaping proposed to screen the facility to the maximum extent feasible, or the reasons why landscaping is not necessary or feasible. 7. Proposed communication facilities should not be sited on ridgelines or hilltops when alternative sites are available. If a ridgeline location is proposed, submit written justification to the Community Development Director. If no alternative site exists, the communications facility must be located to minimize silhouetting on the ridgeline and must blend with the surrounding environment to decrease visibility from off site. 8. At the time of permit renewal, any major modification to the existing permit, or change-out of major equipment, the permit site and existing I equipment shall be reviewed for gpuo~unifies messen _vis_ua! !mp@s_.. - ~~-;~;;;~;,y;;;;;",;,""in the Community Development Director determines that a change ~ould.. substantially lessen the visual impacts of the facility, or if they would result J 1 2015Telecammunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklisi, _ . . ~~ ' ~~~~~-~~~~~~.~ ~~. ........ ~~~~~~ Page 5 -.. in a substantial benefit to the public, the permitee pay be reauked to-: 4 make those changes. 1 9. If there is a change of lessee, information regarding the type ofathat will be used by the new lessee shall be submitted to the Community Development Department within ten (10) days of that change. If the transfer would require any changes to the facilities approved in the original CUP, an Amended Conditional Use Permit application must be submitted. The new lessee shall use the most currentgtealthina techn&~available-- if it would Lessen .viW impags.of.th.e. siteA -andd fl-it would yes_u_lt. [n. a_- - - @e_ne!t to theeeuP!ic.. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ._ - - 1 10. Describe if the proposed facility is intended to be a "Coverage" "Capacity" site. F. AntennalSite Capacity Information: I ~~~ ---. ~~.., 1. Submit information on the total svaiiable mountinq heiqhts for antennas -' oelaed: aotennacapaclv - - ........ ! for the proposed antenna tower and any otherstructures f&theproposed project. This information may be used for future co-location of antennas from other companies. 2. There shall be a maximum of two towers per assessor's parcel or developed site. I ~ ~~~~ . PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC*- - - Formaned:Indeni: ieft: 0". Hanging: 0.5.. 1 ~. - - - ~.~~~~ RIGHT-OF-WAY California Public Utilities Code 67901 grants tele~llone corporations the riaht to place facilities in the public riahts-of-way subiect only to reasonable time. place and manner restrictions as provided under California Public Utilities Code - 67901 .I. Under CPUC 32r restrictions must be applied to ail entities in an equivalent manner. Heiqht, soaclrLs?rgcl~;,l and snfei! r$&je_nleilts:or w 'eless k!fLes 0,-, uiiI!'r 3c.ssP.i'i -- ne 113h.-oirjay.;!e.;eyi..atec .!y Ca_lor?a .?.IN'~ -t I: es '3.0~>.ss!or: Gs.ej?! brde 95 encroachment perm!( process ~ ~~ Any new telecommunication laci~itvproposed ~~~~~~ within the public riahtoCwav of the^- City of Arroyo Grande is subiect to review and approval throiah the The applicant shall submit the followinq additional items and information (uniess waived by the Director of Public Works based on ~ ~~-~ dent Lei? Level: I + Numbenno i desisned to complv with California PublicYtiliti~ Commissic and to minimize visual impacts minimize aesthetic impacts 2015Teiecommunication Facifities Siting Requirements and Check!isb- ~. ~ . . ~ ~ ~~ d5 " Page 6 7 Dtech communications ATTACHMENT 6 RADIO FREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS EXPOSURE REPORT Prepared for Verizon C/O NSA Wireless Site Name: Arrtryo Grande HS Site Type: Utility Pole Located at: (Near) Valley Road 75' S/O Arroyo Grande High School Arroyo Grande, CA 93420 Latitude: 35.1134 / Longitude: -120.5807 Report Date: 8/21/2014 Report By: Jamie Santos Based on FCC Rules and Regulations, Verizon Wireless will be compliant provided recommendation(s) are implemented. % Page 1/14 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. GENEMI- SUMMA 2. SITE MAP 3. AN'I'ENNA 4. EMISSIONS 5 STATE,MEN'I' OF COMPLIANC 5.1 Recommendation(s) ............................................................................................................... 5.2 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 10 5.3 Certification 10 Appendix A: Background Appendix B: Measurem Appendix C: Limitation Appendix D: Verizon RE advisory signs Appendix E: Antennaview@ .......................................................................................................... 14 P Dfech 7~-~~=~~~~~ Il526S.mr lri st. i r r. aitg~. 921-1 A 858.792.0066 A lur,ittch.ixontx i3age 2/14 1. GENERAL SUMMARY Dtech Communications, LLC ("Dtech") has been retained by NSA Wireless, contractors to Venton, to determine whether its wireless communications facility complies with the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") Radio Frequency ("RF") Safety Guidelines. This report contains a computer-simulated analysis of the Electromagnetic Fields ("EMF") exposure resulting from the facility. 'he table below summarizes the result at a glance: Table I: EMl' .Yznunay The wireless telecommunication facility is located on the ground. The antennas are mounted on a woodcn utility tower and connected to the equipment via coaxial cables. j ~iech cornn.t,ncan;.rls 11326 .Cormto L,'ellg Rood, Ste. F A .Son Die~o, CA 92121 A 858.792.0066 A ~m~~il,.iilrrhm.com Page 3/14 2. SITE EMAP Finare 7: Site MUD 3. ANTENNA INVENTORY Technical specifications provided below are gathered from physical field surveys where possible, provided drawings and/or other documents provided by our clients, site/buildig managers and other licensees at this facility. "Generic", "Others", "Unknown" and conservative estimates are used where information is not available. Table 2: Site Technical Spcnjcatiom A> Yerizon Ampheooi H~WWf3ll<1114FOOO Penpi 7W 10 10 19 84 2 ill 27 1 19 ( A? Velrm Amphenol HXWWS3111'1I+FMU Pane! 1100 10 67 19 11 9 2 1092 27, 191 9~te.h "omm7tJNCU"rL' 11526 Snmnto l/illv l<ood Ste. f' A .Tm Dleyo, (2 92121 A 858.792.0016 A i~wii~.il~~~hcom.mm Page 5/14 4. EMISSIONS PREDICTIONS F@re 2: Kp~nlts- The top (birrii !ye) uie~z' 4th nsziltiq FCC General l'cg~ulation PIPE &Iaax+mi,m Pemirribie E-qosure) map su?7-onnding ih~jaN:ii~y, 0 Diech zO ,a"S I! $26 So,mm 1 .o& Kiiild (2~' 1: A il/n /)it:<%, Ci 92/21 A 8587920iitii A ii~.~/t~r,lLi,~i,.~: page 6/14 F&re 3: Results- The top (bird's eye) vieus ftbe resulting FCC General Popnlatio/z IWE (Ma.xim/~m Permissible EF:uposnrrj map surrounding rbe&ciIi9. D D fech 2" m.-<,,co 1 I 'I! 0. I. 1 A \' 1.0 1 It A Y 5. 7. A ,,,, Page 7/ 14 5. STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE On the ground, calculations for Verizon's site resulted in exposure levels below the FCC's most stringent General Population MPE Limits. At antenna elevation, the highest calculated exposure level is above the FCC's General Population MI'E Ljmits near the Verizon antennas (see figure 3). The overexposed (yellow and blue) areas extend 10-feet from the front face of the Verizon antenna. From the provided drawings, there are no other buildings or surrounding structures within 10-feet of the Verizon antenna. Beyond 10-feet, exposure levels are predicted to be below the FCC's most stringent General Population MPE Limits. The antennas are mounted on a tall tower and tl~erefore not accessible by the general public. It is presumed that Verizon employees and contractors are aware of the transmitting antennas and will take appropriate precautions when workg near them. However, there may be situations where worlrers i.e. utility pole personnel etc. may fmd themselves directly in front of the antennas. Individuals entering the site or working nearjin front of antennas must receive appropriate RI' safety training' and be made aware of the HotZones (areas where RF exposure may potentially exceed FCC safety hits). In addition, contact information should be made available in the event work is req~lired within the IIotZones. For the facility to be classified as an OccupationallControlled environment, the following action(s) axe recommended in accordance with the FCC's and Verizon's RF Safety Guidelines2 (see figure 4): 1) Install NOC INFORMATION Sign(s), GUIDELINES Sign(s) and CACTION Sign(s) at each tower climbing access point or base of the tower, where they will be clearly visible to tower climbers.) a. Signage should be mounted preferably away from public view and high on the tower to miimize unnecessary al.arm. ' Scc ,\ppcndin 1: for lltcch Cornmunicarion's lli: Safcty trainkg program - AntennztVicw@ 2 Vctiznn Radio l'rcqucncy Cornpliancc @<l'C) Sigisge & l>crnarcatioi~ l'olicy - l>eccrnbcr 2012 0 Dtech z~mmcJncO"m t 2 or 11 St. F A So a, CA 2 A 7.06 A .do. Page 8/14 5.2 Conclusion Based on the above results, analysis and recommendation(s), it is the undersigned's professionai opinion that Vcrizon Wireless' site will be compliant with the FCC's RF Safety Guidelines provided recommendation(s) are implemented. 5.3 Certification This report has been prepared by or under the direction of the following Registered Professional Engieer: Ilarang Tech, holding California registration number 16000, with renewal date of 06/30/15. Daran ec , P.E. w I Dfech 7wnuo' ?f526 Sarrenlo Valb~ Rood, it. F A Im Ui~o CA 92r2f A 8ii7920066 A .umd.*~~rn~o,n Page lO/il Appendix A: Background Dtech uses the FCC's guidelines described in detail in Office of Engineering &Technology, Bulletin No. 65 ("OET-65") "Evaluating Compliance with FCC Guidelines for Jluman Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields." Thc table below summarizes the current Maximum Permissible Exposure ("MPE") safety limits classiilcd into two groups: General population and Occupational. Table 7: FCC IMPE Limils @m OET-65) Generalpopulation/uncontrofledlimits apply in situations in which the general public may be exposed or in which persons who are exposed as a consequence of their employment, and may not be fully aware of the potential for exposure or cannot exercise control over their exposure. The~zefore, members of the general public always fall under this category when exposure is not employment-related. 300 - 1500 1500 - 100.000 Occupational/controUedlimits apply in situations in which persons are exposed as a consequence of their employment, and those persons have been made fully aware of the potential for exposure can exercise control over their exposure. Occupational/controlled limits also apply where exposure is of a transient nature as a result of incidental passage through a location where exposure levels may be above general population/uncontrolled limits, as long as the exposed person has been made fully aware of the potential for exposure and can exercise control over his or her exposure by leaving the area or by some other appropriate means. It is important to understand that the FCC guidelines specify exposun limits not emijsian limits. For a transmitting facility to be out of compliance with the FCC's RF safety guidelines an area or areas where levels exceed the MPE limits must, fu-st of all, be in some way accessible to the public or to workers. When accessibility to an area where excessive levels is appropriately restricted, the facility or operation can certify that it complies with the FCC requirements. Frequency (Mhz)/1500 (0.2 - 1.0) 1.0 9 tech Commun'cobrr 11526 Somnto VO!!~ Koad, Ste. F A Son Die,o. CA 92121 A 858.792.0066 A wwaiiitechcorn.com Page 11 /14 30 30 Frequency (Mhz)/300 (1.0 - 5.0) 5.0 6 6 Appendix B: Measurement and/or Computer Simulation Methods Spatial averaging measurement technique is used. An area between 2 and 6 feet, approximately the size of an average human, is scanned in single passes from top to bottom in multiple planes. When possible, measurements were made at very close proximity to the antennas and inside the main beam where most of the energy is emitted. 'The spatial averaged values were recorded. Dtech uses an industry standard power density prediction cotnputer model' to assess the worse-case, cumulative EMF impact of the surrounding areas of the subject site. For purposes of a cumulative study, nearby w~nsinitters are included where possible. ln addition, the analysis is performed at 100% duty cycle-all transmitters are active at all ties and transmitting at maximum power. The result is a surrounding area map coloc-coded to percentages of the applicable FCC's MPE Limits. A result higher than 100% exceeds the Limits. Appendix C: Limitations Dtech performed this analysis based on data provided by our clients that Dtech believes to be true and correct. Estimates where noted, are based on common industry practices and our best interpretation of available information. As mobile technologies continuously change, these data and results may also change. Therefore, Dtech disclaims all other warranties either expressed or implied. tiny use of this document constitutes an agreement to hold Dtech and its employees harmless and indemnify it for any and all liability, claims, demands, litigation expenses and attorneys fees arising from such use. This is a technical document and may contain minor grammatical and/or spelling errors. 5 Diech 20~:1n~~I~~~~- r 15. .rumat" !V'O//!J~ R& ste. .r A ir* itg go, Cl 92727 i 8i8.792.0066 A u.rlbnuco#t Page 12/1 I Appendix D: Verizon RF advisory signs GUIEDLINES Sign ! Radlohsquensy Wid* beyond Lhir Mint may exEaeb the FCC 1 : O~Y~/Imw.~smm~.*Di~.1-ll".~ , : lora.lins,nnb,*hqu.nry , ~w,,o"~,~. 1 I . . ; ~~--~-, NOTICE Sign WARNING Sign I This is a ~eriqd" Wireless Antenna Site NOC INFORMATION Sign Beyand fhlbpalnf RNlb heQusnw Reldl at thbssm, I may exceed FCC miss lo? human "Polun CAUTION Sign Appendix E: AntennaViewB Dtech Communications offers 3 unique, online tool (AntennaVieu.8) to train, identifir and inform individuals of site-specific HotZones -areas that exceed the FCC's Safety Limits. AntennaViewB is an online, interactive training tool that. will educate nontechnical people in about tcn minutcs. It is a site-specific, RF safctp training program that rcquircs thc end user to sign an on!ine agreement thereby limiting the liability to the landlord and carriers. Some of the advantages include: e Virtual walk-throug11 in 3-D with corresponding photographs e Site-specific, interactive, simple to understanci * Delivers pertinent information i.e. HotZones (areas cxceedng FCC safety limits), site owners and contact numbers. User online agreement = accountability We invite you to take a quick tour at wuru:.Ai~rcn~~aVie'r*~.co~n aid see how easy to understand and informative AntennaViewB is. LinderArtic/e 47 CFR ;R I, 1307(b), the FCC' d- 0.Y)-L-q mandaies ujireless operatori/&ciii~~~ utvraers lo have an RF s~~nxy completed ilzc/aditg a s.ieop/~zrz and lrainin,a to ensure lhai their tennnts, employees (2nd mniructocr u/ho work in or arontln RF .rites ore uzuare o/'t/iepoteiziinln'skkrposed by RF rudiilton. Mosf ceLl.iites are located on bnildinx m@op.r wheru HV~C,' mfrfractors, window tvasheis, pazdeiil?, etc. routine4 work and~enernlly do noL knuu~ u)hfzt aiztennar evefz look like. Ditch Con~municaiions cnfz help n,iih onto& FCC/OS~LA compliarza aizdpror'idt practl trainin, thiri is ea!y io nndersiand & &yon$ rgcrd/e.ir gtheir iechnicd back~ro~~fzd. ATTACHMENT 7