CC 2017-04-25_10a Intro Ordinance_Telecom FacilitiesMEMORANDUM
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TERESA McCLISH, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: KELLY HEFFERNON, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 15-001;
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND REGULATIONS REGARDING SMALL
CELL TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES AND A RESOLUTION
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY’S TELECOMMUNICATION
SITING AND SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS; LOCATION – CITYWIDE;
APPLICANT – VERIZON WIRELESS
DATE: APRIL 25, 2017
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council: 1) Introduce an Ordinance amending Arroyo
Grande Municipal Code (AGMC) Section 16.04.070(C), Table 16.36.030(A) and Table
16.44.040-A relating to small cell telecommunication facilities; and 2) Adopt a
Resolution approving amendments to the City’s Telecommunication Facilities Siting and
Permit Submittal Requirements.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no identified direct impact to financial and personnel resources. This item is not
identified in the City’s Critical Needs Action Plan.
BACKGROUND:
The first generation of cell phones began in the 1980’s, which included large phones
with limited ability to make and receive phone calls. This was followed in the 1990’s by
second and third generation phones that were made smaller in size while expanding
capabilities including texting, internet access, and Global Positioning System (GPS)
navigation on a digital network. During this time, providers began to rapidly expand
their network infrastructure. The idea of co-locating was not developed yet, with each
telecom carrier establishing their own towers and antennas. As a result of this
inundation of new technology combined with concerns regarding visual and other
potentially adverse impacts, many local jurisdictions reacted by prohibiting these
facilities.
In response to this reaction, Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA)
was adopted which preserved local zoning authority while imposing the following
limitations for local government:
Item 10.a. - Page 1
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 15-001
APRIL 25, 2017
PAGE 2
1. Local agencies shall not “unreasonably discriminate” among providers of
functionally equivalent services and shall not prohibit or have the effect of
prohibiting service.
2. Local agencies must act on a request within “reasonable period of time”. This
was further defined in 2009 by the “shot clock” ruling which requires localities to
act upon most wireless applications within 90 days for co-locations and 150 days
for new towers.
3. Any decision to deny must be “in writing” and supported by “substantial
evidence”.
4. All sites must conform to all published Federal Code and Practices concerning
radio frequency (RF) emissions.
The Federal Communication Commission (FCC) is the federal agency charged with
creating rules and policies under the TCA and other telecommunications laws. The FCC
also manages and licenses commercial users (cell providers, telecommunications
wholesalers and tower companies), as well as non-commercial users (e.g. local
governments). As a result, both the TCA and FCC rulings impact interactions between
the cell industry and local government.
The significant changes in the wireless industry and related shared wireless
infrastructures, combined with consumer demand for fast and reliable service on mobile
devices, have created pressure for large and small cell site development in most cities,
including Arroyo Grande. In 2000, the City began actively planning for wireless
telecommunication facilities mainly due to the influx of land use applications to construct
these facilities. In 2001, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 3569 approving the
“Telecommunication Siting and Submittal Requirements”, which address concerns
regarding the visual impact of wireless infrastructure, radio frequency (RF) exposure,
site capacity, and other issues (see Attachment 1 for Resolution). To date, the City has
approved twelve (12) wireless telecommunication facilities that are in operation, mostly
located on City-owned property. There are also three (3) wireless telecommunication
facilities that have received land use entitlements with pending lease agreements, and
one application for a facility located on private property in the Fair Oaks Mixed Use
(FOMU) zoning district that has not been deemed complete (see Attachment 2 for a
summary table of wireless telecommunication facilities within the City).
On December 20, 2016 the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution recommending
that the City Council adopt an Ordinance approving the proposed Development Code
Amendment with an amendment to require the Historical Resources Committee (HRC)
to review all small cell telecommunication facilities proposed in the Village Core
Downtown (VCD) district that are visible to the public (see Attachment 3 for Planning
Commission meeting minutes). This amendment has been made to the proposed
Ordinance.
Item 10.a. - Page 2
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 15-001
APRIL 25, 2017
PAGE 3
ANALYSIS OF ISSUES:
Verizon Wireless is requesting that the City amend the Development Code to allow
small cell telecommunication facilities in the Village Core Downtown (VCD) zoning
district. The purpose of this request is to offload some the capacity issues that
telecommunication carriers are having with heavy data traffic, especially within the
village core area. Most carriers have located their facilities on City-owned properties
(typically at water tank sites), which are at higher elevations and relatively far from the
village core vicinity.
The term “small cell” refers to wireless telecommunication facilities that are limited in
size and used to provide targeted capacity or greater service coverage to weak areas.
Small cell facilities can consist of one or more radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial
cable, power supply, and other associated electronics. They are generally made up of
an equipment enclosure and antenna, and are usually attached to an existing structure.
The public benefit of these facilities includes improved (faster) cell service and reduced
visual impacts because of the smaller stealth equipment that can be hidden from public
view. For example, the small size of the antennas allow them to be placed behind a
parapet or camouflaged in other ways such as on a flag pole, street light, sign, etc. The
associated ground equipment is typically screened from public view as well.
Currently, the Development Code allows “telecommunication facilities” in the Public
Facility (PF) zoning district with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), and all commercial
zoning districts except VCD with either a CUP or a Minor Use Permit (MUP). These
facilities are not permitted in any residential district. The Development Code does not
define the term “small cell telecommunication facilities”, nor is this term listed in the
allowable use table. The broader term “telecommunication facilities” is likewise not
defined in the Development Code.
The proposed amendments to the Development Code would provide definitions for both
“wireless telecommunication facilities” and “small cell telecommunication facilities”,
modify Table 16.36.030(A) to add small cell telecommunication facilities to the list of
allowed land uses and permit requirements within commercial districts, and modify
Table 16.44.040-A to add wireless telecommunication facilities and small cell
telecommunication facilities to the list of allowed land uses and permit requirements
within the Public/Quasi-Public District, and more clearly specify these uses in the PF
zoning district.
The proposed definitions are as follows:
16.04.070 - Definitions.
“Small cell telecommunication facility” means an unmanned facility, excluding a
satellite television dish antenna, established for the purpose of providing wireless voice,
data and/or image transmission within a designated service area. A small cell
telecommunications facility and may consist of one or more radio receivers, antennas,
interconnecting cables, power supply, other associated electronics, and accessory
Item 10.a. - Page 3
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 15-001
APRIL 25, 2017
PAGE 4
equipment. Small cell telecommunication antennas may be installed on existing
rooftops, buildings, utility poles, light standards, or support structures where permitted in
accordance with the City’s Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal
Requirements, as adopted by resolution of the City Council. Related telecommunication
equipment may be located within a building, an equipment cabinet outside a building, or
an equipment room within a building. Small cell antennas shall have a maximum length
of two (2) feet and a maximum volume of six (6) cubic feet. All related small cell
telecommunication equipment shall be concealed from public view.
“Wireless Telecommunication facility” means any unmanned exterior facility,
including an antenna, antenna array or other communications equipment, excluding a
satellite television dish antenna, established for the purpose of providing wireless voice,
data and image transmission within a designated service area and which includes
equipment consisting of personal wireless services, as defined in the Federal
Telecommunications Act of 1996. Wireless telecommunication equipment and network
components may include towers, utility poles, transmitters, base stations and
emergency power systems. Antennas may be mounted to a building, a building rooftop
or a freestanding pole in accordance with the City’s Telecommunication Facilities Siting
and Permit Submittal Requirements, as adopted by resolution of the City Council.
Equipment may be located within a building, an equipment cabinet, or an equipment
room within a building. Small cell telecommunication facilities are defined separately.
Below are the proposed modifications to allow small cell telecommunication facilities in
commercial zoning districts, and to require all wireless telecommunication facilities to be
subject to the City’s Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal
Requirements as adopted by City Council Resolution. These requirements have been
updated to include specific information regarding small cells, and are included as Exhibit
A of the attached Resolution.
Development Code Table 16.36.030(A)
Uses Permitted Within Mixed Use and Commercial Districts
Allowed Land
Uses and
Permit
Requirements
– LAND USE
IMU TMU
D-
2.11
VCD
HCO
D-2.4
VMU
D-
2.11
HCO
D-
2.4
GMU FOMU HMU OMU
D-
2.20
RC Specific Use
Standards and
other references
B. SERVICES
- GENERAL
Small Cell
Tele-
communication
facilities
(commercial)
MUP MUP CUP4 CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Subject to the
Telecommunication
Facilities Siting and
Permit Submittal
Requirements as
adopted by City
Council Resolution
Item 10.a. - Page 4
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 15-001
APRIL 25, 2017
PAGE 5
Allowed Land
Uses and
Permit
Requirements
– LAND USE
IMU TMU
D-
2.11
VCD
HCO
D-2.4
VMU
D-
2.11
HCO
D-
2.4
GMU FOMU HMU OMU
D-
2.20
RC Specific Use
Standards and
other references
Wireless Tele-
communication
facilities
(commercial)
CUP MUP NP CUP CUP CUP MUP CUP CUP Subject to the
Telecommunication
Facilities Siting and
Permit Submittal
Requirements
4 The Historic Resources Committee shall review applications for small cell telecommunication facilities that are
proposed in the Village Core Downtown district and are publically visible.
The purpose of requiring a CUP and not an MUP for small cell facilities in the Village
Mixed Use (VMU) and VCD zoning districts is primarily because these districts are also
within the Historic Character Overlay District (Design Overlay District 2.4). The CUP
process provides the means to evaluate any potentially significant visual or historic
impacts that might occur with the installation of these facilities on structures determined
to be locally historic or contribute to the historic significance of the village core historic
district. It also requires a public hearing, and therefore allows public input on any given
proposal.
Currently, the uses listed in the PF zoning district do not specifically address
telecommunication facilities and instead lists “public utilities and public service
substations, reservoirs, pumping plants and similar installations not including public
utility offices” as a similar use allowable with a CUP. As shown in the table below, the
proposed Development Code Amendment would list both small cell telecommunication
facilities and the larger telecommunication facilities as a MUP and CUP, respectively,
subject to the Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements.
Development Code Table 16.44.040-A
Uses Permitted Within Public/Quasi-Public District
Use PF
A. Public/Quasi-Public Uses
15. Small Cell Telecommunication facilities (commercial)MUP
(subject to the
Telecommunication
Facilities Siting and Permit
Submittal Requirements as
adopted by City Council
Resolution)
Item 10.a. - Page 5
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 15-001
APRIL 25, 2017
PAGE 6
Use PF
16. Wireless Telecommunication facilities (commercial)
CUP
(subject to the
Telecommunication
Facilities Siting and Permit
Submittal Requirements as
adopted by City Council
Resolution)
As mentioned above, the primary changes made to the Telecommunication Facilities
Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements are to include information about small cells.
This includes provisions relating to small cell facilities in the public right-of-way, which
would be approved through the encroachment permit process. Other changes have
been made to include requirements that have more recently been included as special
conditions of approval for telecommunication projects, such as magnetic attachment
systems where appropriate, zero interference with City communication systems, and
specific requirements for facilities in the public right of way.
ALTERNATIVES:
The following alternatives are provided for Council’s consideration:
1. Introduce the attached Ordinance amending AGMC Section 16.04.070(C), Table
16.36.030(A) and Table 16.44.040-A relating to small cell telecommunication
facilities, and a Resolution amending the City’s Telecommunication Facilities
Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements;
2. Modify and introduce the attached Ordinance amending Arroyo Grande
Municipal Code Section 16.04.070(C), Table 16.36.030(A) and Table 16.44.040-
A relating to small cell telecommunication facilities, and a Resolution amending
the City’s Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal
Requirements;
3. Do not introduce the attached Ordinance and deny the project supported by
specific findings and direct staff to return with an appropriate Resolution; or
4. Provide other direction to staff.
ADVANTAGES:
Adoption of an ordinance to allow small cell telecommunication facilities in the VCD
zoning district will enable telecommunication carriers to increase capacity for their
networks, thereby providing improved service to existing customers and the ability to
meet future demand. The proposed permitting process allows an opportunity for a
public hearing to consider the potential visual and historic impacts of proposals. The
amended Telecommunication Siting and Submittal Requirements include stipulations
specific to small cell technology and sanction requirements usually included as special
conditions of approval for new telecommunication facilities.
Item 10.a. - Page 6
CITY COUNCIL
CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 15-001
APRIL 25, 2017
PAGE 7
DISADVANTAGES:
Implementation of an ordinance allowing small cell telecommunication facilities in the
VCD zoning district could create unintended visual impacts, such as higher parapets to
hide equipment. An ordinance adding a new Chapter to the AGMC regarding
telecommunication facilities would be superior to having the standalone
Telecommunication Siting and Submittal Requirements. However, that is a larger effort
that would take a great deal more staff time, and thus far has not been considered a
priority.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), it has been
determined that the proposed ordinance is categorically exempt per Section 15311 of
the CEQA Guidelines regarding construction or placement of minor structures
accessory to existing facilities.
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION:
A notice of public hearing was published in The Tribune on Friday, April 14, 2017. The
Agenda was posted at City Hall and on the City’s website in accordance with
Government Code Section 54954.2.
Attachments:
1. City Council Resolution No. 3569 approving “Telecommunication Siting and
Submittal Requirements”
2. Summary table of telecommunication facilities within the City
3. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of December 20, 2016
Item 10.a. - Page 7
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARROYO
GRANDE AMENDING SECTION 16.04.070(C), TABLE 16.36.030(A)
AND TABLE 16.44.040-A OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL
CODE RELATING TO SMALL CELL TELECOMMUNICATION
FACILITIES
WHEREAS, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 was the first comprehensive rewrite of
the Communications Act of 1934 (the “Act”) and dramatically changed the rules for
competition and regulation in most all sectors of the communications industry; and
WHEREAS, technology has changed rapidly since adoption of the Act, including the
advent of small cell telecommunication facilities, which allow for capacity building for
carriers using smaller scale infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, in 2001 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 3569 approving
Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the City’s Municipal Code to
define and allow small cell telecommunication facilities in all commercial districts subject
to the Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed
public hearing and recommended the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending
the City’s Municipal Code regarding small cell telecommunication facilities; and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the proposed revisions to Title 16 are exempt
per Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
regarding construction or placement of minor structures accessory to existing facilities;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council has held a duly noticed public hearing on April 25, 2017
and, after consideration of all testimony and all relevant evidence, has determined that
the following Development Code Amendment findings can be made in the affirmative
manner:
A. The proposed revisions to Title 16 is consistent with the goals, objectives,
policies and implementation measures of the General Plan, particularly the Land
Use Element, and is therefore desirable to implement the provisions of the
General Plan.
Item 10.a. - Page 8
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 2
The proposed Development Code Amendment is consistent with the General
Plan by providing improved cell service for current and future residents of the
City while protecting the visual character of the community. All proposals to
install telecommunication infrastructure are subject to the City’s
Telecommunication Siting and Submittal Requirements, and require discretionary
land use permit approval.
B. The proposed revisions to Title 16 will not adversely affect the public health,
safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern.
The proposed Development Code Amendment will not adversely affect the public
health, safety, and welfare or result in an illogical land use pattern because the
City’s Telecommunication Siting and Submittal Requirements provide stipulations
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.
C. The proposed revisions to Title 16 are consistent with the purpose and intent of
Title 16.
The proposed Development Code Amendment is consistent with the purpose
and intent of Title 16 because the revisions being made assist the City with
meeting the future growth and demand for telecommunication services which
provides social and economic advantages, and provide regulations to protect the
aesthetic character of the community. The revisions also protect the health and
safety of residents by requiring a radio frequency emissions report certified by a
qualified radio frequency professional demonstrating compliance with Federal
Communications Commission guidelines.
D. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed revisions to Title 16 are
insignificant, or there are overriding considerations that outweigh the potential
impacts.
The proposed Development Code Amendment is categorically exempt from
environmental review by Section 15311 of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Guidelines regarding construction or placement of minor structures
accessory to existing facilities.
Item 10.a. - Page 9
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande as follows:
SECTION 1. The above recitals and findings are true and correct and are incorporated
herein by this reference.
SECTION 2. Section 16.04.070(C) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby
amended to add the following definitions:
16.04.070 - Definitions.
“Small cell telecommunication facility” means an unmanned facility, excluding a
satellite television dish antenna, established for the purpose of providing wireless voice,
data and/or image transmission within a designated service area. A small cell
telecommunications facility and may consist of one or more radio receivers, antennas,
interconnecting cables, power supply, other associated electronics, and accessory
equipment. Small cell telecommunication antennas may be installed on existing
rooftops, buildings, utility poles, light standards, or support structures where permitted in
accordance with the City’s Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal
Requirements, as adopted by resolution of the City Council. Related
telecommunication equipment may be located within a building, an equipment cabinet
outside a building, or an equipment room within a building. Small cell antennas shall
have a maximum length of two (2) feet and a maximum volume of six (6) cubic feet. All
related small cell telecommunication equipment shall be concealed from public view.
“Wireless Telecommunication facility” means any unmanned exterior facility,
including an antenna, antenna array or other communications equipment, excluding a
satellite television dish antenna, established for the purpose of providing wireless voice,
data and image transmission within a designated service area and which includes
equipment consisting of personal wireless services, as defined in the Federal
Telecommunications Act of 1996. Wireless telecommunication equipment and network
components may include towers, utility poles, transmitters, base stations and
emergency power systems. Antennas may be mounted to a building, a building rooftop
or a freestanding pole in accordance with the City’s Telecommunication Facilities Siting
and Permit Submittal Requirements, as adopted by resolution of the City Council.
Equipment may be located within a building, an equipment cabinet, or an equipment
room within a building. Small cell telecommunication facilities are defined separately.
SECTION 3. Table 16.36.030(A) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby
amended to add the following to Section B. (Services General):
Item 10.a. - Page 10
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 4
Development Code Table 16.36.030(A)
Uses Permitted Within Mixed Use and Commercial Districts
Allowed Land
Uses and
Permit
Requirements
– LAND USE
IMU TMU
D-2.11
VCD
HCO
D-2.4
VMU
D-
2.11
HCO
D-2.4
GMU FOMU HMU OMU
D-
2.20
RC Specific Use
Standards and
other references
Small Cell
Tele-
communication
facilities
(commercial)
MUP MUP CUP4 CUP MUP MUP MUP MUP MUP Subject to the
Telecommunicatio
n Facilities Siting
and Permit
Submittal
Requirements as
adopted by City
Council Resolution
Tele-
communication
facilities
(commercial)
CUP MUP NP CUP CUP CUP MUP CUP CUP Subject to the
Telecommunicatio
n Facilities Siting
and Permit
Submittal
Requirements as
adopted by City
Council Resolution
4 The Historic Resources Committee shall review applications for small cell telecommunication facilities that are
proposed in the Village Core Downtown district and are publically visible.
SECTION 4. Table 16.44.040(A) of the Arroyo Grande Municipal Code is hereby
amended to add the following permitted uses within the Public/Quasi-Public District:
Development Code Table 16.44.040-A
Uses Permitted Within Public/Quasi-Public District
Use PF
A. Public/Quasi-Public Uses
15. Small Cell Telecommunication facilities (commercial)
MUP
(subject to the Telecommunication
Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal
Requirements as adopted by City Council
Resolution)
16. Telecommunication facilities (commercial)
CUP
(subject to the Telecommunication
Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal
Requirements as adopted by City Council
Resolution)
Item 10.a. - Page 11
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 5
SECTION 5. This ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
section 15311 regarding construction or placement of minor structures accessory to
existing facilities.
SECTION 6. A summary of this Ordinance shall be published in a newspaper published
and circulated in the City of Arroyo Grande at least five (5) days prior to the City Council
meeting at which the proposed Ordinance is to be adopted. A certified copy of the full
text of the proposed Ordinance shall be posted in the office of the City Clerk. Within
fifteen (15) days after adoption of the Ordinance, the summary with the names of those
City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance shall be published again,
and the City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of such adopted Ordinance.
This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its
passage.
SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force and effect thirty (30)
days after its passage.
SECTION 8. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance
is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed
this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the
ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.
On motion by Council Member ______, seconded by Council Member _______, and by
the following roll call vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Ordinance was adopted this ____ day of _______, 2017.
Item 10.a. - Page 12
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 6
___________________________________
JIM HILL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________________
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
________________________________
CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
HEATHER K. WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY
Item 10.a. - Page 13
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE
CITY’S TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES SITING AND
PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
WHEREAS, on November 27, 2001 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 3569
approving Telecommunication Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements (the
“Requirements”); and
WHEREAS, telecommunication technology has changed rapidly since adoption of
Resolution No. 3569, including the advent of small cell telecommunication facilities that
allow for capacity building for telecommunication carriers using smaller scale
infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the revised Requirements at a duly
noticed public hearing on December 20, 2016 and adopted a Resolution recommending
that the City Council approve the revised Requirements; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the revised Requirements at a duly noticed public
hearing on April 25, 2017.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Arroyo
Grande hereby adopts the amended “Telecommunication Siting and Submittal
Requirements” as set forth in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
On motion by Council Member __________, seconded by Council Member __________,
and by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
the foregoing Resolution was adopted this ___ day of ________, 2017.
Item 10.a. - Page 14
RESOLUTION NO.
PAGE 2
___________________________________
JIM HILL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
___________________________________
KELLY WETMORE, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
________________________________
ROBERT MCFALL, INTERIM CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
HEATHER K. WHITHAM, CITY ATTORNEY
Item 10.a. - Page 15
2017 Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklist
Page 1
ADOPTED BY CITY COUNCIL
________ 2017
______________________________________________________________________
T ELECOMMUNICATION F ACILITIES
S ITING and PERMIT S UBMITTAL
R EQUIREMENTS
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 Requirements:
1. Telecommunication facilities shall avoid any unreasonable interference
with views from neighboring properties.
2. Telecommunication facilities shall not cause any interference with City
communication systems.
3. No monopoles or towers shall be installed on top of an exposed
ridgeline or prominent slope when alternative sites are available.
4. Telecommunication facilities shall be painted color(s) that are most
compatible with their surroundings.
5. Innovative 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.
EXHIBIT A
Item 10.a. - Page 16
2017 Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklist
Page 2
6. Telecommunication facilities are allowed in all Mixed-Use and Public
Facility zoning designations with either an approved Minor Use Permit
or Conditional Use Permit. Telecommunication facilities are not
allowed on any property with a Residential land use designation. An
exception is to place concealed facilities on non-residential structures
that are allowable in residential districts (such as within church
steeples).
6. The City lists the placement of facilities in the following preferential
order:
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, and with a magnetic attachment system where
appropriate to reduce damage to existing structures;
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-location of telecommunication facilities, but
only if it results in a lesser visual impact.
8. Small Cell facilities shall be considered an accessory use in all zoning
districts.
B. Requirements for Building 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.
Item 10.a. - Page 17
2017 Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklist
Page 3
4. Building mounted antennas and all other equipment shall avoid any
unreasonable interference with views from neighboring properties.
C. Definition and Requirements for Small Cell Facilities:
1. A Small Cell Facility means a wireless telecommunication facility that
may consist of one or more radio receivers, antennas, interconnecting
cables, power supply, other associated electronics and accessory
equipment, which are attached to a structure (see Section E below for
requirements of small cell facilities located within the Public Right-of-
Way).
2. Antennas shall not exceed an overall length of two feet (2’) and shall
be screened from view so as to not be visible to passerby on any
public street.
3. Equipment cabinets shall be located as follows so as to not be visible
to passerby on any public street:
a. within interior building space;
b. behind parapet walls;
c. within an underground vault; or
d. fully screened within a landscaped area.
4. Facilities shall not pose a safety hazard by its placement adjacent to
sensitive land uses.
5. Small Cell Facilities proposed in the Village Core Downtown zoning
district shall be reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee and
the Historic Resources Committee.
D. Requirements for Monopoles and Towers:
1. Standalone monopoles and towers may be considered only when the
applicant reasonably demonstrates that the proposed facility cannot be
placed on an existing building or structure.
2. Monopoles and towers shall be encouraged on properties zoned Public
Facility over other zoning districts.
3. Substantial landscaping or other screening should be provided to
visually buffer any adjoining residential uses from the potential visual
impacts of the facility. Landscape screening should be designed to
achieve its desired appearance in a reasonable period of time.
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.
Item 10.a. - Page 18
2017 Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklist
Page 4
E. Requirements for Small Cell Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way:
1. Facilities shall be designed and installed in compliance with all
requirements of California Public Utilities Commission General Order
95, including all separation and climbing space requirements.
2. Facilities shall be installed and maintained in a manner that does not
unreasonably impede public access and use of the right-of-way.
3. The design and location of ground-mounted facilities shall reasonably
mitigate aesthetic impacts when feasible. Ground-mounted cabinets
shall be painted a neutral color to match the surrounding environment
or as directed by the Community Development Director. Drought-
resistant landscaping, screening or undergrounding of facilities may be
required when necessary to match similar existing treatments
implemented for all other entities with facilities in the right-of-way.
II. PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS
Any new telecommunication facility proposed within a zoning 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
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
your application for completeness after it is submitted. If your application is not
complete, a copy of this list, and/or the CUP checklist, will be returned to you 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. Technology Information:
1. A general 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
alternative sites).
3. Dimensioned plans showing the proposed height, direction and type of
antenna proposed (i.e., panel, whip, dish) and all accessory
structures/equipment requested as a part of the proposed antenna facility.
4. Detailed engineering calculations for foundation wind loads.
Item 10.a. - Page 19
2017 Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklist
Page 5
C. RF Exposure Information:
An RF emissions statement certified by a qualified radio frequency professional
demonstrating compliance with Federal Communications Commission guidelines.
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 antenna-mounting structures.
1. If not co-located, provide information pertaining to the feasibility of joint-
use antenna facilities, and discuss the reasons why such joint use is not a
viable option or alternative to a new facility site. This includes written
notification of refusal of the existing antenna-mounting 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 Impact 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
and/or 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 ½ 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.
Item 10.a. - Page 20
2017 Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklist
Page 6
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
equipment shall be reviewed for consistency with changes that could
substantially lessen visual impacts. If the Community Development
Director determines that a change would substantially lessen the visual
impacts of the facility, or if they would result in a substantial benefit to the
public, the permitee may be required to make those changes.
9. If there is a change of lessee, information regarding the type of facility that
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 current stealthing techniques available
if it would substantially lessen visual impacts of the site, and if it would
result in a substantial benefit to the public.
10. Describe if the proposed facility is intended to be a “Coverage” and/or
“Capacity” site.
F. Antenna/Site Capacity Information:
1. Submit information on the total available mounting heights for antennas
for the proposed antenna tower and any other structures for the proposed
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.
Item 10.a. - Page 21
2017 Telecommunication Facilities Siting Requirements and Checklist
Page 7
III. PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR FACILITIES IN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT-OF-WAY
California Public Utilities Code §7901 grants telephone corporations the right to
place facilities in the public rights-of-way subject only to reasonable time, place
and manner restrictions as provided under California Public Utilities Code
§7901.1. Under CPUC §7901.1(b), to be reasonable, time, place and manner
restrictions must be applied to all entities in an equivalent manner. Height,
spacing, structural and safety requirements for wireless facilities on utility poles in
the right-of-way are regulated by California Public Utilities Commission General
Order 95.
Any new telecommunication facility proposed within the public right-of-way of the
City of Arroyo Grande is subject to review and approval through the
encroachment permit process. The applicant shall submit the following additional
items and information (unless waived by the Director of Public Works based on
written justification provided by the applicant) along with the standard
encroachment permit application materials:
A. Items B1, B2, B3, C and E2 of Section II above.
B. A brief description of how the placement of equipment on a utility pole has been
designed to comply with California Public Utilities Commission General Order 95
and to minimize visual impacts.
C. A brief description of how any ground-mounted equipment has been located in a
manner to prevent vehicle and pedestrian obstruction of the right-of-way and to
minimize aesthetic impacts.
Item 10.a. - Page 22
ATTACHMENT 1
Item 10.a. - Page 23
Item 10.a. - Page 24
Item 10.a. - Page 25
Item 10.a. - Page 26
Item 10.a. - Page 27
Item 10.a. - Page 28
Item 10.a. - Page 29
Item 10.a. - Page 30
ARROYO GRANDE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES – SUMMARY TABLE 2017
Use Permit
No.
Carrier Location Date
Approved/
Status
Project
Details
Lease
Agreement
CUP 00-016 Cellular One Reservoir 4
(Huebner Lane)
12/5/00
NO LONGER IN
SERVICE
2 antennas
mounted on top
of tank (8.5’ tall)
Approved
6/16/00
($1,792/mo)
CUP 00-017 Nextel Reservoir 2
(200 Hillcrest)
10/1/02
NO LONGER IN
SERVICE
80’ tall
monopine with
12 antennas
Approved
5/23/00
($1,000/mo -
several
amendments)
CUP 00-021 Alpine PCS Trader Joe’s
Building
6/26/01
NO LONGER IN
SERVICE
6 antennas 6’ in
height on
building
n/a
CUP 01-003 Sprint PCS Reservoir 4
(Huebner Lane)
4/3/01
IN OPERATION
6 antennas 7.5’
tall mounted on
top of tank
Approved
5/23/01
($1,500/mo)
CUP 01-007 Sprint PCS Reservoir 2
(200 Hillcrest)
1/15/02
NOT
CONSTRUCTED
75’ tall
monopine with 6
antennas
Approved
5/23/01
($1,500/mo)
CUP 01-011 Verizon/Crown
Castle
Soto Sports
Complex
8/6/02
IN OPERATION
70’ tall light
standard; 6
antennas
Approved
8/27/02
($1,500/mo)
CUP 03-004 T-Mobile Reservoir 4
(Huebner Lane)
12/16/03
IN OPERATION
8 panel
antennas, 8’ tall
Approved
1/14/04
($1,500/mo)
CUP 04-001 Sprint PCS Reservoir 2
(200 Hillcrest)
3/16/04
IN OPERATION
Co-location on
Nextel’s
monopine; 6
antennas
ATTACHMENT 2
Item 10.a. - Page 31
Use Permit
No.
Carrier Location Date
Approved/
Status
Project
Details
Lease
Agreement
CUP 05-013 Cingular
Wireless
Reservoir 1
(300 Reservoir
Rd.)
9/12/06
IN OPERATION
CINGULAR
WIRELESS IS
NOW AT&T
12 antennas on
35’ tall
monopine
Approved
9/12/06
($2,500/mo –
lease amended
for equip.
modifications)
CUP 05-014 &
MEX 05-001
Cingular
Wireless
301 Trinity Ave. 1/3/06
IN OPERATION
CINGULAR
WIRELESS IS
NOT AT&T
54’ tall bell
tower
n/a
CUP 05-016 Cingular
Wireless
Soto Sports
Complex
5/2/06
IN OPERATION
CINGULAR
WIRELESS IS
NOW AT&T
70’ tall light
standard, 6
antennas
5/23/06
($2,500/mo)
CUP 07-001 Clearwire
Technologies
Soto Sports
Complex
8/21/07
IN OPERATION
CLEARWIRE IS
NOW AT&T
6 antennas on
an existing light
standard
Approved
8/14/07
($2,000/mo)
CUP 07-002 Clearwire
Technologies
Reservoir 2
(200 Hillcrest)
8/21/07
NOT
CONSTRUCTED
75’ tall
monopine with 3
panel antennas,
3 microwave
antennas and 1
GPS antenna
Approved
8/28/07
($2,000/ mo)
Item 10.a. - Page 32
Use Permit
No.
Carrier Location Date
Approved/
Status
Project
Details
Lease
Agreement
CUP 12-003 Verizon
Wireless
Reservoir 1
(300 Reservoir
Rd.)
9/18/12
IN OPERATION
38.5’ tall
monopine with
12 panel
antennas
Approved
1/21/14
($1,200/mo)
(lesser rent
negotiated for
City equip on
monopine)
CUP 14-008 Verizon
Wireless
Valley Road 3/3/15
IN OPERATION
Small cell
antennas on
existing wood
utility pole
n/a
ACUP 13-001 AT&T Mobility
(was Cingular
Wireless)
Soto Sports
Complex
5/21/13
IN OPERATION
Update
equipment on
light standard
No changes
ACUP 13-002 AT&T Mobility
(was Cingular
Wireless)
Reservoir 1
(300 Reservoir
Rd.)
6/11/13
IN OPERATION
Update
equipment on
existing
monopine
No changes
DRC2014-00108
ARCH 14-003
Verizon Reservoir 3
(Stagecoach)
County approved
11/13/15
NOT
CONSTRUCTED
Antennas on
water tank
Pending
CUP 15-002 Verizon Reservoir 4
(Huebner)
1/19/16
NOT
CONSTRUCTED
Antennas on
water tank
Pending
CUP 15-008 Verizon Reservoir 5
(Puesta del Sol)
7/5/16
NOT
CONSTRUCTED
Antennas on
water tank
Pending
Item 10.a. - Page 33
Use Permit
No.
Carrier Location Date
Approved/
Status
Project
Details
Lease
Agreement
CUP 16-004 Verizon 135 N. Halcyon
Rd.
PENDING Monoeucalyptus
on private
property
n/a
CUP 17-001 Mobilitie, LLC E. Grand Ave.
and Juniper St.,
Fair Oaks Ave.
and S. Halcyon
Rd., and Fair
Oaks Ave. and
S. Elm St.
PENDING 3 separate utility
poles located in
the public right-
of-way
n/a
Item 10.a. - Page 34
Notes:
•Cellular One was purchased by AT&T
•Cingular Wireless bought out AT&T, but later renamed the company AT&T Mobility, Therefore, Cellular One, Cingular
Wireless and AT&T are all AT&T Mobility
•T-Mobile is also on Reservoir 4
Item 10.a. - Page 35
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 20, 2016
ATIACHMENT3
anning Manager Downing presented the staff report recommending the Planning Commission
. ad t a -Resolution approvirtg Conditia·n Use Permit 16-003 and responded to Commission
ques · ns regarding the reduction of parking in order to keep trees; relocation of street trees;
location. of windows; location of overhead utilities; if there is an open space requirement; iJ
.Traffic C mission reviewed the project; alignment of driveway and apron; parking stall
requiremen ·ADA parking space; and the ·number of street trees required.
, ' -'
Matt Cebulla, r resentative, responded to Commission questions regarding the driveway
width; saving the street trees; number of bathrooms;· w·ater meters; approach/alignment oi
driveway; relocation of tree; length of on-site parking spaces; area wall; trash location;
reduction of parking sp e to accommodate trash; party responsible-for trash bill; impact of drip
line for trees; and water ter/tier rates.
Vice-Chair Keen opened the p blic hearing.
, '
Keith Spierling stated he wants tti trees to remain and asked that the driveway be left in its
current configuration.
Upon hearing no further comments, Vice-hair Keen closed the public hearing.
The Commission provided comments on the p posed project.
Action: Commissioner Martin moved to adopt a r solution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY ARROYO GRANDE APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 16-003; LOCATED T 227 .SOUTH HALCYON ROAD;
APPLIED FOR BY MATT CEBULLA ", with the following edifications: adjust the ADA parking
spaces to be compliant with standards; reduce on-site par ·ng by one space to protect one or
more site trees and improve vehicle turnaround and parking s ce size; increase the size of the
trash enclosure to accommodate one to two additional cans; mo ify the design of the driveway
and approach to be as straight as possible while complying "th Engineering Standards.
Commissioner Keen seconded the motion.
The Commission discussion included if findings need to be made; nu · er of trash cans for
tenants; and removal of parking space. ·
The motion passed on the following roll call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Martin, Keen, Fowler-Payne, Mack
None
George
Vice-Chair Keen called for a break at 7: 13 pm and reconvened at 7: 18 pm.
8.a. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 15-
001; ORDINANCE RELATING TO SMALL CELL TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES;
LOCATION -CITYWIDE; APPLICANT-VERIZON WIREI:-ESS
Item 10.a. - Page 36
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
DECEMBER 20, 2016
PAGE3
Planning Manager Downing presented the staff report and recommended the Commission ·
adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt an Ordinance amending the
Municipal Code Sections 16.04.0?0(C), 16.36.030(A) and 16.44.040-A relating to small cell
telecommunication facilities, and a Resolution amending the. City's Telecommunication
Facilities Siting and Permit Submittal Requirements. Mr: Downing responded to questions
regarding the prop9sed project clarifying locations requiring a Minor Use Permit versus a
Conditional Use Permit; revenue fqf the City; if facilities are allowed on buildings; Planning
Commission approval for locations of small cell sites in the Village; maximum size; space rental
from the City; and duration of agreement. ·
'commissioner Fowler-Payne suggested putt_ing a restriction on installation of small cells on
street lights in the Village.
Tricia Knight, representative, Verizon, presented the proposed project and provided the
following comments; there will be only one carrier per pole; _the small cells should be invisible in
the core of the Village and a CUP is required to ensure that; after site is built, emergency
services will be contacted regarding interference; envisions installing small cells on buildings in
the core of the Village; and responded to questions from the Commission. Ms. Knight--
presented pictures of samples of how small cell telecommunication facilities look in other Cities.
Vice-Chair Keen opeQed the public hearing. Upon hearing no comment, Vice Chair Keen
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Fowler-Payne stated she does not support installing the small cell antennas on
the light poles in· the Village now or in the future due to the Village being vintage and is in
support of installing the antennas on top of the roof of buildings.
Commissioner Martin spoke in support of the Resolution and Ordinance supporting the use of -
CUPs to evaluate future proposals in the Village. '
Commissioner Mack expressed concern with the location of the small cell antennas on the
· poles in the Village core; _stated the Village is vintage; suggested to install antenna on the roof
of buildings; and would like to see the interference report to check if businesses are being
affected.
Vice-Chair Keen supported installing the small cell antennas on signal light poles in the Village
and spoke in support of the resolution and ordinance.
Action: Commissioner Keen moved to adopt a resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT
THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT_ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 16.04.070(C},
16.36.030(A) AND 16.44.040-A OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO SMALL CELL TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES, AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION
AMENDING THE, TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES SITING AND PERMIT SUBMITTAL
REQUIREMENTS; DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 15-001; LOCATION-
CITYWIDE; APPLICANT -VERIZON WIRELESS". Commissioner Martin seconded.
Item 10.a. - Page 37
PLANNING COMMISSION
MINUTES
i;>ECEMBER 20, 2016
PAGE4
In response to Commissioner_ Mack, Planning Manager Downing sa·id the small cell antennas
would not automatically go to the Historical Resources Committee (HRC) for review, but
proposals would be required to meet the Design Guidelines for the Village.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Motion died.
Keen, Martin
Fowler-Payne, Mack
George
Action: Commissioner Mack moved to amend the previous motion to include HRC review for
·proposals that are visibly seen within the Village Core· Downtown. Commissioner Keen
seconaed the motion.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mack, Keen, Martin
Fowler-Payne
Geo.rge
Action: Commissioner Keen moved to' adopt a resolution entitled "A RESOLUTION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ARROYO GRANDE RECOMMENDING THAT
THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN. ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 16.04.070(C),
16.36.030(A) AND 16.44.040-A OF THE ARROYO GRANDE MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO SMALL CELL TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES, AND ADO,PT A RESOLUTION .
AMENDING THE TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES SITING AND PERMIT SUBMITTAL
REQUIREMENTS; DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO. 15-001; LOCATION-
CITYWIDE; APPLICANT -VERIZON WIRELESS", including the amendment made by the
previous motion to recommend review by the HRC of small cell proposals that can be visually
seen in the Village Core Downtown District. · Commissioner Martin seconded the motion. The
motion passed on the following roll call vot~:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Keen, Martin, Mack
Fowler-Payne
George
ISTRATIVE DECISIONS SINCE DECEMBER 6 2016
This is a notice of admirn ive decision for Minor Use Permits, including any approvals,
denials or referrals by the Comm Development Director. An administrative decision must
· be a ealed or called up for review b the nning Commission b a ma·orit vote.
Case No. Applicant Address Description Actio Planner
ARCH 16-006 Elizabeth Luis
MEX 16-007
107 McKinley
Street
Construe ·SQ._£f a new
secondary dweltin.
unit and reduction of
parking space
n
A S.
Anderso
Item 10.a. - Page 38