HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 9 - Presentation Verizon Prospect Appeals - Prospect CenterAppeal of PDR 15-0004
8/19/15
Background
•On May 13, 2015, the Planning Commission unanimously
approved a Design Review application for three antenna
installations
•On May 26, 2015, Mr. Gao and Mr. Ding appealed each
application based on the following:
•Should be treated as “substantial change” per Section 6409 of the
U.S. Code.
•Application violates 15-29.010(f) of City Code
•Applicant did not demonstrate gap in coverage or alternative sites
•Project will have negative aesthetic impacts
•Project inconsistent with Prospect Road Beautification Project
•Project poses threats to public safety
Applicable Federal Law
•Telecommunications Act of 1996
-preserves local zoning authority, but clarifies when local
authority may be preempted by the FCC.
-prohibits any action that discriminates between different
personal wireless service providers
-prohibits any action that would ban altogether the
construction, modification or placement in a particular area.
-specifies procedures for judicial review or the FCC review of
local zoning actions to deny location
Applicable Federal Law
•Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Cont.)
Regulations Based On Environmental Effects of RF Emissions
Preempted
Section 704(a)of the 1996 Act expressly preempts state and local
government regulation of the placement,construction,and
modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the
environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that
such facilities comply with the FCC's regulations concerning such
emissions.47 U.S.C.§332(c)(7)(B)(iv).
City’s Review
•Saratoga’s Wireless Telecommunication Facilities
Ordinance (City Code Section 15-44)
-requires PC Design Review Approval
-requires specific Design Review Findings
City’s Review
•Required Design Review Findings
(a) That the Wireless Telecommunications Facility is or can be co-
located with another Wireless Telecommunications Facility
located on a structure or an existing utility pole/tower in the
public right-of-way unless the applicant has demonstrated that
such location is not technically or operationally feasible.
City’s Review
•Required Design Review Findings
(b) That the Wireless Telecommunications Facility and related
structures incorporate architectural treatments and screening to
substantially include:
(1) Appropriate and innovative stealth design solutions
(2) Techniques to blend with the surrounding environment
and predominant background
(3) Colors and materials that are non-reflective
(4) Exterior textures to match the existing support structure or
building
(5) Reasonably compatible height with the existing surrounding
environment.
City’s Review
•Required Design Review Findings
(c) That landscaping and fencing provide visual screening of
the Wireless Communication Facility's ground-mounted
equipment, related structures, and that fencing material is
compatible with the image and aesthetics of the surrounding
area.
Applicant’s Submittal –Near Prospect Center
Existing Proposed
Applicant’s Submittal –Near Prospect Center
2’ Antenna1’ bracketry
6’ power safety zone extender (GO 95)
44’ 9.5”utility pole
3’ 3”foot small
cell cabinet
Recommended Action
•Deny Appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s decision, subject
to conditions of approval