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