HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-13-2011 Planning Commission PacketTable of Contents
Agenda 2
June 22, 2011
Draft Minutes 4
Application PDR11-0004 (T-Mobile); 19700 Allendale Avenue
(397-30-053)
Staff Report 6
Resolution 13
Notice 21
Opposing Comments 22
Supporting Comments 107
Arborist Report 145
Exhibit A1 151
Exhibit A2 158
Exhibit A3 159
Exhibit A4 160
Exhibit A5 161
Exhibit A6 162
Exhibit A7 163
Exhibit A8 164
Exhibit B1 165
Exhibit B2 172
Exhibit B3 173
Exhibit B4 174
Exhibit B5 175
Exhibit B6 176
Exhibit B7 177
Exhibit B8 178
Exhibit C 179
Exhibit D 182
Exhibit E 185
Exhibit F 189
Exhibit G 195
Exhibit H 196
Exhibit I 197
Exhibit J 198
Exhibit K 199
1
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
DATE: Wednesday, July 13, 2011 - 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
ROLL CALL
Commissioners – Chair Douglas Robertson, Vice-Chair Tina K. Walia, Mary-Lynne Bernald, Pragati Grover, Joyce
Hlava, David Reis and Yan Zhao
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
MINUTES
Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of June 22, 2011
ORAL COMMUNICATION
Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not
on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items.
However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning
Commission direction to Staff.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTION TO STAFF
REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on July 7, 2011
REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS
If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an “Appeal Application” with the City Clerk
within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b).
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants/Appellants and
their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public
may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a
total of five minutes maximum for closing statements.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. Application PDR11-0004 (T-Mobile); 19700 Allendale Avenue (397-30-053) - The applicant is
requesting Design Review approval for a wireless telecommunication facility. T-Mobile is proposing two
options: Option A is a new 87 foot tall mono-pole installation with three (3) antennas in a flush mount
configuration. Option B is a new 92 foot tall mono-pine stealth installation (designed to camouflage the
pole by resembling a tree with branches) with six (6) antennas. The applicant is also proposing a ten (10)
foot whip antenna at the top of the pole for a total height of 97 feet. The equipment would be located in a
360 square foot enclosure at the base of the pole that would be screened by a slatted fence. The maximum
radio-frequency exposure level was calculated at .026% of the public exposure limit set by the Federal
Communications Commission. The installation could be a co-location for additional antennas and
equipment that would require a separate design review application. (Cynthia McCormick, AICP)
2
DIRECTORS ITEM
COMMISSION ITEMS
COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING
- Wednesday, August 24, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater
13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to
the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR
35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).
POSTING
Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist for the City of Saratoga, declare that the
foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on July 7, 2011,
at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public
review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us
If you would like to receive the Agenda’s via e-mail, please send your e-mail address to planning@saratoga.ca.us
NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at
www.saratoga.ca.us
3
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
ACTION AGENDA
DATE: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 - 7:00 p.m.
PLACE: Council Chambers/Civic Theater, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
TYPE: Regular Meeting
ROLL CALL
Commissioners – Chair Douglas Robertson, Vice-Chair Tina K. Walia, Mary-Lynne Bernald, Pragati Grover, Joyce
Hlava, David Reis and Yan Zhao
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
MINUTES
Action Minutes from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of June 8, 2011 (Approved 6:0:1) (Grover))
ORAL COMMUNICATION
Any member of the Public will be allowed to address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes on matters not
on this agenda. The law generally prohibits the Planning Commission from discussing or taking action on such items.
However, the Planning Commission may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Communications under Planning
Commission direction to Staff.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS- PLANNING COMMISSION DIRECTION TO STAFF
REPORT OF POSTING AGENDA
Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on June 16, 2011
REPORT OF APPEAL RIGHTS
If you wish to appeal any decision on this Agenda, you may file an “Appeal Application” with the City Clerk
within fifteen (15) calendar days of the date of the decision, pursuant to Municipal Code 15-90.050 (b).
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. Applicants/Appellants and
their representatives have a total of ten minutes maximum for opening statements. Members of the Public
may comment on any item for up to three minutes. Applicant/Appellants and their representatives have a
total of five minutes maximum for closing statements.
PUBLIC HEARING
1. APPLICATION PDR10-0025 (517-20-034) Chapman Design Associates / Kevin & Lori Timmons,
20200 Mendelsohn Lane - The applicant is requesting approval of a Design Review application to remodel
an existing 2,726 square foot one story single-family home. The project would include a 991 square foot
lower floor addition, a 1,842 square foot addition to the main floor, and 576 square foot upper floor
addition to be used as a second dwelling unit. The existing guest house, garage, and shed would be
removed. The proposed height would be 24 feet. The site is located in the R-1-20,000 zone district.
(Christopher Riordan, AICP) (Approved, 6:1 (Bernald))
2. APPLICATION PDR11-0011 (386-44-040) PG&E / AT&T, 20013 Cox Avenue - The applicant is
requesting Design Review approval to install three new Long Term Evolution (LTE) panel antennas, six
new Remote Radio Units (RRU), one hidden fiber distribution unit and surge protector, and associated
cellular equipment. The project also includes the installation of a RBS 6601 repeater within the AT&T
equipment shelter. The new antennas and associated cellular equipment would be installed 60 feet above
grade onto an existing 143 foot lattice utility tower. There is no proposed increase of height to the existing
4
tower or shelter to accommodate this project. The gross lot size is approximately 77,250 sq. ft. and is
located in the R1-12,500 zoning district. (Michael Fossati) (Approved, 7:0)
DIRECTORS ITEM
COMMISSION ITEMS
COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT TO NEXT MEETING
- Wednesday, July 13, 2011 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater
13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Clerk at (408) 868-1269 or ctclerk@saratoga.ca.us. Notification 48 hours prior to
the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting (28 CFR
35.102-35.104 ADA Title II).
POSTING
Certificate of Posting of Agenda: I, Abby Ayende, Office Specialist for the City of Saratoga, declare that the
foregoing agenda for the meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Saratoga was posted on June 16, 2011,
at the office of the City of Saratoga, 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, CA 95070 and was available for public
review at that location. The agenda is also available on the City’s website at www.saratoga.ca.us
If you would like to receive the Agenda’s via e-mail, please send your e-mail address to planning@saratoga.ca.us
NOTE: To view previous Planning Commission meetings anytime, go the City Video Archives at
www.saratoga.ca.us
5
REPORT TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION
Meeting Date: July 13, 2011
Application Type / No: Design Review / PDR11-0004
Location/APN: 19700 Allendale Avenue (397-30-053)
Applicant: T-Mobile
Staff Planner: Cynthia McCormick, AICP
Department Head: Chris Riordan, AICP
19700 Allendale Avenue
6
Application PDR11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
CASE HISTORY
Application filed: 02/08/11
Hearing (Continued): 03/09/11
Hearing (Continued): 04/27/11
Study Session: 06/21/11
Application complete: 06/22/11
Notice published: 06/28/11
Mailing completed: 06/28/11
Posting completed: 07/07/11
ZONING: R1-20,000
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Community Facilities
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The Project is categorically exempt from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. Section 15332). This
exemption allows for In-Fill Development Projects. The proposed telecommunications tower can be
characterized as in-fill development and meets the following conditions: (a) The project is consistent
with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with
applicable zoning designation and regulations; (b) The proposed development occurs within city limits
on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; (c) The project site
has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; (d) Approval of the project would not
result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and (e) The site can
be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
FCC REQUIREMENTS: Under the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) has exclusive jurisdiction over RF emissions from the type of wireless antenna facilities
which are included in this Project. Any concerns regarding health or safety aspects of the RF emissions or
electromagnetic fields from wireless sites are not within the purview of the Planning Commission and
hence any concerns related to health hazards from radio waves or electromagnetic fields from the Project
cannot be considered by the Planning Commission, as mandated by Federal Law. Pursuant to its authority
under Federal Law, the FCC has established rules to regulate the safety of emissions from these facilities.
The applicant must meet all requirements established by the FCC.
The applicant has provided a Radio Frequency (RF) Analysis which concludes that the proposed
telecommunications facility will comply with the FCC’s current prevailing standard for limiting human
exposure to RF energy, and no significant impact on the general public is expected. The maximum
radio-frequency exposure level was calculated at .026% of the public exposure limit set by the Federal
Communications Commission. A condition has been included in the attached resolution that the
applicant must meet all requirements established by the FCC.
7
Application PDR11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
PROJECT HISTORY:
On March 8, 2011 the Planning Commission held a publicly noticed site visit at the project site. The site
visit was open to the public. The Planning Commission, staff, the applicant and their representatives,
and members of the public discussed the project including the proposed facility’s location, height, and
overall design, including both the tower and the equipment enclosure. At that time, the Planning
Commission felt that more detailed and accurate information was needed. Therefore, the Public Hearing
scheduled for March 9, 2011 was continued to April 27, 2011. Several members of the audience
requested to speak on the item even though it was being continued. A video recording of the March 9th
meeting and public testimony is available on the City’s website.
On April 26, 2011 the Planning Commission held a second publicly noticed site visit at the project site
where the Planning Commission, staff, the applicant and their representatives, and members of the
public discussed the overall project. On April 27, 2011 at a noticed Public Hearing, T-Mobile proposed
a 97 foot tall “monopine” with six (6) antennas near the top of the pole and a 10.5 foot x 49 foot
equipment enclosure (515 sq. ft.) at the base of the pole. The facility would displace six (6) parking
spaces, including one handicapped space. Following the staff report and T-Mobile’s presentation,
several members of the public spoke in opposition to the project, a few spoke in support of the project,
and several others raised their hands in support of the project. During discussion of the project, some
members of the Planning Commission asked the applicant to reconsider the location of the proposed
“monopine” facility to be closer to the tree line, where it would be more likely to “blend in” with the
existing tall trees in the area. The Hearing was continued to a Study Session on June 21, 2011 to allow
T-Mobile to make the recommended changes to the proposed location. A video recording of the April
27th meeting and public testimony is available on the City’s website.
On June 21, 2011 the Planning Commission held a Study Session where the Planning Commission, staff,
the applicant and their representatives, and members of the public discussed the overall project. In
response to feedback from the public and the Planning Commission, T-Mobile modified its proposal by
reducing the height of the structure, moving the proposed facility 115 feet to the east, reducing the size
of the equipment area, and reducing the number of parking spaces that would be displaced. The new
location was chosen because it would be more likely to blend in with the existing tree line while still
outside the drip line of protected trees, and would address some of the concerns regarding access to the
Corporation yard side gate. The new location would also avoid eliminating a handicapped parking space
as well. T-Mobile presented two options for consideration. Following the staff report, T-Mobile’s
presentation, and comments from the public, the Planning Commission asked the applicant to return for
a July 13, 2011 Public Hearing with additional photo simulations of the two options and a
reconfiguration of the equipment area so that it would take up one fewer parking space.
8
Application PDR11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
PROJECT DISCUSSION
General Plan and Zoning Designations: The General Plan designation for the site is Community
Facilities. The Community Facilities designation includes all institutional, public and quasi-public uses
including schools and churches. The General Plan is implemented through a variety of methods,
including the Saratoga Zoning Ordinance. The site is zoned R-1-20,000 which permits
telecommunication facilities, subject to design review under Article 15-46.
Project Description: The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a wireless
telecommunication antenna facility. The applicant is presenting two options (A & B) in response to
comments received by staff, the Planning Commission, and members of the public during the April and
June meetings. The project is further described by the applicant in the Cover Letter (Exhibit C) and the
Project Description (Exhibit D).
• Option A would be an 87 foot tall monopole with a 10 foot tall whip antenna for a total height of 97
feet. The monopole is 24 inches in diameter and would support three (3) antennas which would be flush
mounted at the top of the pole and painted a medium green or brown color.
The applicant has presented the following documents in support of their preferred Option A:
Exhibit “A1” is a copy of the Site Plan and Elevations. Exhibits “A2 through A8” are photo
simulations of what the proposed monopole facility would look like from Saratoga Avenue,
Redwood Middle School, and various points along Allendale Avenue.
• Option B would also include an 87 foot tall monopole and 10 foot tall whip antenna. In this option, the
pole would be designed as a “monopine tree pole” with faux bark and branches to camouflage the pole.
The monopine tree pole would be 36 inches in diameter to support the faux branches and could contain
six (6) antennas. The monopine tree pole could include a five foot extension of additional faux branches
above the pole to achieve a more “realistic” tree branch look. The additional faux branches would be
above the pole but below the top of the whip antenna, so that the overall height would still be 97 feet.
The height of the additional branches could be more or less than five feet per the Planning
Commission’s direction.
Exhibits “B1” through B8” include a copy of the Site Plan and Elevations and photo simulations of
what the proposed monopine tree pole facility would look like from Saratoga Avenue, Redwood
Middle School, and various points along Allendale Avenue.
Height: Per the applicant, the 87 foot pole height is necessary to provide adequate “in building”, “in
car” and “outdoor” coverage along the Saratoga Avenue corridor including near the Fruitvale Avenue
intersection, within residential areas north and northwest, and in the Civic Center area. The applicant
states that the height is also necessary to clear existing trees surrounding the proposed facility and allow
for antenna tilt which is necessary to control signal direction. The height would also allow future carriers
to co-locate additional antennas below the applicant antennas. The applicant and any future carriers
would require design review approval prior to installing any additional antennas.
Equipment Enclosure: The applicant proposes three (3) equipment cabinets and utility panels. The
equipment cabinets would be located near the base of the pole and enclosed in an 18 foot x 20 foot (360
9
Application PDR11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
SF) area surrounded by a six foot tall chain link fence with green plastic slats. The enclosure would
match the fence surrounding the corporation maintenance yard to the west. The enclosure would
displace two parking spaces. As a condition of approval, the applicant will be required to re-stripe the
parking lot to replace the loss of the parking spaces, if such replacement of one or more spaces is
feasible. Future carriers could co-locate additional equipment within the enclosure area. The applicant
and any future carriers would require design review approval prior to installing any additional
equipment. Exhibit K includes a statement regarding the equipment.
Surrounding Land Uses
Surrounding uses include residences, a church, a school, portable classrooms, a post-office, public
library, City Hall, Recreation Center, Senior Center, Civic Theater, and other public uses. The Site Plan
shows a distance of ±350 feet to the nearest building at Redwood Middle School and a distance of ±275
feet to the nearest building at Sacred Heart. The site plan also indicates that the nearest residential
property lines are ±425 feet to the west, ±775 feet to the east, ±725 feet to the south, and ±875 feet to the
north.
Proposed Location and Alternative Sites
The applicant developed a 3,000 foot search ring to define the area within T-Mobile’s existing network
that is experiencing a gap in coverage (see Exhibit H).
• Proposed Site: (19700 Allendale Avenue). The proposed location for the telecommunications
facility is on public property. The parcel contains City Hall, the Civic Theater, the Saratoga
Recreation Department, the Saratoga Senior Center, the Saratoga Corporation Maintenance Yard,
and three portable buildings including one used for storage and two used for educational classrooms.
The parcel also contains the Saratoga Library, Heritage Orchard, and the Warner Hutton House
which is used for meetings and other events reserved by the general public. Two of the 42 parking
spaces in the immediate vicinity of the proposed facility would be displaced by the project. The site
is also surrounded by mature trees and is located at least 400 feet from residential properties, as
described above. In addition to meeting T-Mobile’s gap coverage needs, the location was chosen as
a feasible site because the adjacent Corporation Yard had previously housed a telecommunications
facility and currently contains a radio antenna on a 59 foot tall pole.
The proposed location is a replacement site for a facility that was previously approved at St.
Andrews Parish.
• Alternative Site 1: St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church (13601 Saratoga Avenue). While this site was
originally chosen to meet T-Mobile’s coverage needs, the applicant states that it is not feasible
because the property owner has since rejected the applicant’s use of the site.
In response to feedback from staff, the Planning Commission, and the public, the applicant also
considered six other alternatives which are further described in Exhibit E:
10
Application PDR11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
• Alternative Site 2: Saratoga Community Library (13650 Saratoga Avenue). While this site is
located at the center of T-Mobile’s search ring, the applicant states that it is not feasible because the
current flag pole height of 48 feet would not meet T-Mobile’s coverage objectives.
• Alternative Site 3: Sacred Heart Church (13716 Saratoga Avenue). While this site is located at
the center of T-Mobile’s search ring, the applicant states that it is not feasible because the current
height of the Church’s cross structure is not sufficient to meet T-Mobile’s coverage objectives.
• Alternative Site 4: PG&E Wood Pole Micro-Sites. This alternative included three micro-sites:
1) Glen Brae Drive @ Scotland Drive; 2) Crestbrook Drive @ Saratoga Avenue; and 3) Douglass
Lane @ Saratoga Avenue. The applicant states that micro-sites mounted on PG&E wood poles are
designed to supplement macro site coverage in hard to reach areas and in-fill areas. The applicant
states that micro-sites are not a feasible alternative because micro-sites have “less ability to
accommodate increasing technological advances” provided by a macro-site. T-Mobile would also
like to reserve these types of sites for “subsequent equipment additions for achievement of higher
speeds and enhanced services.”
• Alternative Site 5: Immanuel Lutheran Church (14103 Saratoga Avenue). The applicant states
that this site is not a feasible alternative because it will not address T-Mobile’s current coverage
objectives.
• Alternative Site 6: Congress Springs Park (12970 Glen Brae Drive). The applicant states that this
site is not a feasible alternative because it will not address T-Mobile’s current coverage objectives
and cannot be modified to meet T-Mobile’s coverage objective.
• Alternative 7: Distributed Antenna System (DAS). DAS is a series of antennas mounted to poles
located in the public right-of-way that are connected by fiber to a hub or base station. Like micro-
sites, DAS are designed to supplement macro-cell sites. The applicant states that this alternative is
not feasible because it does not meet T-Mobile’s design objectives within their search ring.
Santa Clara Valley Water District Review
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) has reviewed the proposal and has indicated that the
proposed improvements are not located within the District’s Easement or Fee Title Right-of-Way and
therefore does not require District review or a permit. While the District does not have jurisdiction, the
Conditions of Approval will require that the facility maintain at least a 20 foot distance from the top of
the creek bank, or, a 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical line) structural slope stability distance from the toe of
the bank to the point where it intersects the ground (whichever is greater).
Correspondence and Neighbor Review
The public hearing notice was mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property
(Attachment 2). The applicant also distributed information to adjacent property owners, set up an
informational website, and held an informational meeting on April 5, 2011 at the Saratoga Recreation
Center which is adjacent to the proposed facility location. The City has received several petitions,
letters, and comments in opposition to the project (Attachment 3). Comments in support of the project
11
Application PDR11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
were also received (Attachment 4). The comments in opposition were regarding health, aesthetics, and
location. The applicant indicated they had attempted to contact everyone who submitted a comment, but
did not receive a response back from most. Any additional correspondence received after the writing of
this Staff Report will be presented at the Public Hearing and made available to the public.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approve the Design Review application “Option B” by adopting the attached Resolution.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution of Approval
2. Public Hearing Notice
3. Petitions and Comments in Opposition to the Project
4. Comments in Support of the Project
5. Arborist Report
6. Exhibit "A1": Reduced Plans
7. Exhibit "A2": Photo simulation from Redwood Middle School looking North at Site
8. Exhibit "A3": Photo simulation from Saratoga Avenue looking South at Site
9. Exhibit "A4": Photo simulation from Allendale Avenue looking West at Site
10. Exhibit "A5": Photo simulation from Allendale Avenue at Fruitvale Avenue looking West at Site
11. Exhibit "A6": Photo simulation from Post Office looking Northwest at Site
12. Exhibit "A7": Photo simulation from Allendale Avenue looking North at Site
13. Exhibit "A8": Photo simulation from School Baseball Field looking North at Site
14. Exhibit "B1": Reduced Plans
15. Exhibit "B2": Photo simulation from Redwood Middle School looking North at Site
16. Exhibit "B3": Photo simulation from Saratoga Avenue looking South at Site
17. Exhibit "B4": Photo simulation from Allendale Avenue looking West at Site
18. Exhibit "B5": Photo simulation from Allendale Avenue at Fruitvale Avenue looking West at Site
19. Exhibit "B6": Photo simulation from Post Office looking Northwest at Site
20. Exhibit "B7": Photo simulation from Allendale Avenue looking North at Site
21. Exhibit "B8": Photo simulation from School Baseball Field looking North at Site
22. Exhibit C: Cover Letter
23. Exhibit D: Project Description
24. Exhibit E: Alternative Sites Analysis
25. Exhibit F: Radio Frequency Analysis
26. Exhibit G: Existing Coverage Map
27. Exhibit H: Existing Coverage Map and two approved T-Mobile facilities (yet to be built)
28. Exhibit I: Coverage Map including two approved plus proposed facility (yet to be built)
29. Exhibit J: Structural Letter
30. Exhibit K: Statement Regarding Undergrounding of Equipment
12
CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION NO. FOR APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW
Application # PDR 11-0004
T-Mobile / 19700 Allendale Avenue (City of Saratoga)
The City of Saratoga Planning Commission finds and determines as follows with respect to the
above-described application:
I. Project Summary
The City of Saratoga Planning Commission has received an application for Design Review
Approval for the Project shown in Exhibit "B1" including photo simulations denominated Exhibit
“B2 through B8” date stamped July 5, 2011, incorporated by this reference. The proposed project is
a wireless telecommunication antenna facility on a new 87 foot tall pole with a 10 foot tall whip
antenna for a total height of 97 feet. The pole would be designed to look like a pine tree, otherwise
known as a “monopine tree pole” stealth installation. The equipment would be enclosed in a 18 foot
x 20 foot area (360 SF) surrounded by a green plastic slatted fence. The maximum radio-frequency
exposure level was calculated at .026% of the public exposure limit set by the Federal
Communications Commission. The site General Plan designation is Community Facilities and the
site is zoned R1-20,000. The foregoing use will be described as the “Project” in this Resolution.
II. Planning Commission Review
On July 13 2011, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed Public Hearing on the Project at
which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heard and to present evidence
and argument. The Planning Commission considered the Project, the staff report on the Project,
CEQA documentation, correspondence, presentation from the Applicant and the public, and all
testimony and other evidence presented at the Public Hearing.
Under the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) has exclusive jurisdiction over RF emissions from the type of wireless antenna facilities
which are included in this Project. Any concerns regarding health or safety aspects of the RF
emissions or electromagnetic fields from wireless sites are not within the purview of the
Planning Commission and hence any concerns related to health hazards from radio waves or
electromagnetic fields from the Project cannot be considered, and were not considered by the
Planning Commission, as mandated by Federal Law. Pursuant to its authority under Federal Law,
the FCC has established rules to regulate the safety of emissions from these facilities. The
applicant must meet all requirements established by the FCC.
III. Environmental Review
The Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines (14 C.C.R. Section 15332). This exemption allows for in-fill
development projects. The proposed telecommunications tower can be characterized as in-fill
development and meets the following conditions: (a) The project is consistent with the applicable
general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning
designation and regulations; (b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project
site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses; (c) The project site has no
13
2
Application No. PDR 11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species; (d) Approval of the project would not
result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and (e) The site
can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services.
IV. Design Review Requirement
City Code Section 15-12.020(i) requires Design Review Approval for any new antenna facility
operated by a public utility for transmitting and receiving cellular telephone and wireless
communication. This Design Review Approval requirement implements the Saratoga General Plan,
including but not limited to: Land Use Goal 13 which provides that the City shall use the Design
Review process to assure that new construction and major additions thereto are compatible with the
site and the adjacent surrounding.
V. Design Review Findings
The findings required for issuance of a Design Review Approval pursuant to City Code Section 15-
46.040 are set forth below and the Applicant has met the burden of proof to support making all of
those required findings:
(a) Where more than one building or structure will be constructed, the architectural features and
landscaping thereof shall be harmonious. Such features include height, elevations, roofs,
material, color, and appurtenances. The project includes construction of a wireless
telecommunications facility and the aesthetics of the facility has been designed to be as
harmonious as reasonably possible. The facility includes construction of a monopine tree pole
and ground mounted equipment. The base of the pole and three equipment cabinets would be
enclosed within a 360 square foot area with a six foot tall fence with green slats to match the
fence surrounding the adjacent maintenance yard. The pole would be designed to resemble a
pine tree. The 87 foot tall monopine tree pole would be 36 inches in diameter and would be
covered by faux bark. The faux braches of the tree would extend above and beyond the fence
enclosure and would be approximately 25 feet and four (4) inches at its widest point which
would be approximately 20 feet above the ground. There would also be a 10 foot tall whip
antenna extension at the top of the pole for a total height of 97 feet. The faux branches of the
monopine tree pole would extend an additional five (5) feet above the pole to provide a more
“realistic” tree look and cover a portion of the whip antenna. The monopine tree pole would be
located so that it will blend in with existing trees that are approximately 68 to 75 feet in height.
This finding can be made in the affirmative. Findings related to compatibility with the area are
discussed below.
(b) Where more than one sign will be erected or displayed on the site, the sign shall have a
common or compatible design theme and locational positions and shall be harmonious in
appearance. This project does not propose signage. Therefore, this finding does not apply.
14
3
Application No. PDR 11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
(c) Landscaping shall integrate and accommodate existing trees and vegetation to be preserved;
it shall make use of water-conserving plants, materials and irrigation systems to the
maximum extent feasible; and, to the maximum extent feasible, it shall be clustered in
natural appearing groups, as opposed to being placed in rows or regularly spaced. This
project is located in a parking lot and does not propose landscaping. Therefore, this finding does
not apply.
(d) Colors of wall and roofing materials shall blend with the natural landscape and be
nonreflective. This project does not propose a wall or roofing materials. Therefore, this finding
does not apply.
(e) Roofing materials shall be wood shingles, wood shakes, tile, or other materials such as
composition as approved by the Planning Commission. No mechanical equipment shall be
located upon a roof unless it is appropriately screened. This project does not propose a roof,
nor will any mechanical equipment be located on a roof. Therefore, this finding does not apply.
(f) The proposed development shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk, and design with other
structures in the immediate area. The project would be located adjacent to an industrialized
City-owned maintenance yard. The General Plan Designation for the property is Community
Facilities. The Community Facilities designation specifically includes public facilities such as
the Civic Center, Community Library, and public schools and institutions. The facility is in
the nature of a public utility and will be located on public property and would be located
approximately 350 feet from the nearest building at the adjacent middle school and
approximately 275 feet from the nearest building at the adjacent Church. The nearest residential
properties are approximately 425 feet to the west, 775 feet to the east, 725 feet to the south, and
875 feet to the north. The area is surrounded by tall utility poles including a 59 foot tall pole
with radio antenna approximately 210 feet from the proposed pole. While the pole will be
higher than any surrounding uses, it will be designed to look like a pine tree. The monopine tree
pole would be located nearby existing trees that are approximately 68 to 75 feet in height to help
provide a backdrop to camouflage the tree from a distance. All associated equipment will be
placed on the ground in an enclosed fence with slats to screen the equipment. This finding can
be made in the affirmative.
VI. Project Approval
After careful consideration of the application, site plan, architectural drawings, and other materials
and exhibits and evidence submitted to the City in connection with this matter, Application No.
PDR 11-0004 (Planning Commission Design Review) for a wireless telecommunications facility is
approved subject to the conditions set forth below.
15
4
Application No. PDR 11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. GENERAL
1. The Planning Commission shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Design Review and
may, at any time, modify, delete, or impose any new conditions of the permit to preserve the
public health, safety, and/or welfare.
2. Conditions may be modified only by the Planning Commission unless modification is expressly
otherwise allowed by the City Code including but not limited to section 16-05.035, as
applicable.
3. A Building Permit must be issued and construction commenced within 24 months from the date
of adoption of this Resolution and the Design Review will expire unless extended in accordance
with the City Code.
4. The facility shall at all times operate in compliance with all applicable regulations of the
State, County, City and/or other governmental agencies having jurisdictional authority over
the facility pertaining to, but not limited to, health, sanitation, safety, and water quality
issues. The Project shall maintain compliance with all applicable requirements of the State,
County, City and other governmental entities having jurisdiction.
5. Prior to issuance of any demolition, grading, or building permit to implement this Design
Review approval the Applicant shall obtain a “Zoning Clearance” from the Community
Development Department by submitting final plans for the requested permit to the Community
Development Department for review to ascertain compliance with the requirements of this
Resolution.
6. Agreement to Indemnify, Hold Harmless and Defend City as to Action Challenging
Approval of Application and as to Damage from Performance of Work Authorized by
Design Review Approval. As a condition of this Approval, the Applicant (and future carriers)
hereby agree to defend, indemnify and hold the City and its officers, officials, boards,
commissions, employees, agents and volunteers harmless from and against:
a. any and all claims, actions or proceedings to attack, set aside, void or annul any
action on the subject application (including but not limited to environmental review),
or any of the proceedings, acts or determinations taken, done or made prior to said
action; and
b. any and all claims, demands, actions, expenses or liabilities arising from or in any
manner relating to the performance of such construction, installation, alteration or
grading work by the Owner and/or Applicant, their successors, or by any person
acting on their behalf.
16
5
Application No. PDR 11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
In addition, prior to any Zoning Clearance from the Community Development Department,
Applicant shall execute a separate agreement containing the details of this required
Agreement to Indemnify, Hold harmless and Defend, which shall be subject to prior approval
as to form and content by the Community Development Director.
B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
7. Monitoring. THIS CONDITION IS PERMANENT. At all times, the applicant shall ensure that
its wireless telecommunications facilities comply with the most current regulatory and
operational standards including but not limited to radio frequency and electromagnetic field
emissions standards adopted by the FCC or otherwise made applicable as a result of future
legislation. The applicant shall obtain and maintain the most current information from the FCC
regarding allowable radio frequency and electromagnetic field emissions and all other
applicable regulations and standards and, shall file a report with the Community Development
Department indicating whether the facility is in compliance with such standards, advising the
Community Development Department of any regulatory changes that require modifications to
the wireless telecommunications facilities, and advising the Community Development
Department of the measures taken by the applicant to comply with such regulatory changes as
follows: (1) prior to the commencement of the installation of the wireless telecommunications
facility, (2) every two years, on the anniversary of the required submittal of the initial
compliance report, and (3) upon any proposed increase of at least ten percent (10%) in the
effective radiated power or any proposed change in frequency use. Both the initial and update
certifications shall be subject to review and approval by the City. At the Community
Development Director’s discretion, a qualified independent radio frequency engineer, selected
by and under contract to the City, may be retained to review said certifications for compliance
with FCC regulations. All costs associated with the City's review of these certifications shall be
the responsibility of the applicant, which shall promptly reimburse City for the cost of the
review.
8. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Verification. The Applicant shall submit to the
Community Development Department documentation from the FCC showing proof of
compliance of the Project with the FCC's requirements, prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance
for any proposed equipment installations.
9. Testing Within 15 Days: The applicant shall test the wireless telecommunications facility
within 15 days of operating the tower. The test shall confirm that any Emergency 911 wireless
call made through the wireless telecommunications facility shall provide Enhanced 911
capability, ensuring adequate information is transferred to the appropriate dispatch center. This
capability shall be routinely tested at least annually to ensure compliance as long as the
approved wireless telecommunications facility is in service.
17
6
Application No. PDR 11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
10. No Threat to Public Health: The facility shall not be sited or operated in such a manner that it
poses, either by itself or in combination with other such facilities, a potential threat to public
health. To that end, the subject facility and the combination of on-site facilities shall not produce
at any time power densities in any inhabited area that exceed the FCC’s Maximum Permissible
Exposure (MPE) limits for electric and magnetic field strength and power density for
transmitters or any more restrictive standard subsequently adopted or promulgated by the
Federal government.
11. Safety. The facility shall be designed to remain in operation during a disaster. All possible
measures to protect against fire, flood, earthquake, or other natural disaster shall be made.
12. Emergency Access. The applicant shall provide to the City and all other parties requesting it in
writing a 24-hour phone number to which interference problems may be reported, and will
resolve all interference complaints within 24 hours from the time the interference was reported.
13. Interference. The facility shall be operated in a manner which complies with the Federal
Communications Commission regulations for signal interference, including but not limited to
interference with other telecommunications facilities and household electronics. The
applicant shall be strictly liable for interference caused by the facility with City communication
systems. The applicant shall be responsible for all labor and equipment costs for determining the
source of the interference, all costs associated with eliminating the interference, (including but
not limited to filtering, installing cavities, installing directional antennas, powering down
systems, and engineering analysis), and all costs arising from third party claims against the City
attributable to the interference.
14. Lease Agreement. Prior to issuance of a building permit or zoning clearance, the
owner/applicant shall submit a copy of a signed lease agreement in a form satisfactory to the
City.
15. Maintenance. All facilities and related equipment, including fences, cabinets, poles, and
camouflage materials shall be maintained in good repair, free from trash, debris, litter and
graffiti and other forms of vandalism, and any damage from any cause shall be repaired as soon
as reasonably possible so as to minimize occurrences of dangerous conditions or visual blight.
Graffiti shall be removed from any facility or equipment as soon as practicable, and in no
instance more than forty-eight (48) hours from the time of notification by the City.
16. Compliance with Plans. The facility shall be operated, located and constructed to include those
features, and only those features, as shown on the Approved Plans denominated Exhibit "B1"
and Photo Simulations denominated Exhibit “B2 through B8”, date stamped July 5, 2011,
incorporated by this reference. All proposed changes to the Approved Plans must be submitted
in writing with plans showing the changes, including a clouded set of plans highlighting the
changes. Such changes shall be subject to the requisite prior City approval.
18
7
Application No. PDR 11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
17. Creek Bank Protection. The facility and all related construction shall maintain at least a 20
foot distance from the top of the creek bank, or, a 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical line) structural
slope stability distance from the toe of the bank to the point where it intersects the ground
(whichever is greater).
18. Safety Fencing During Construction. During all phases of construction, the Applicant shall
install and maintain temporary safety fencing to restrict or prevent public access to active on-site
construction activities, materials, or chemicals.
19. Parking Spaces. The applicant shall re-configure or re-stripe the parking lot to replace any
parking spaces displaced by the facility.
20. Noise Limitations. The applicant shall comply with Article 7-30 of the City Code governing
Noise Control.
21. Decommission. If the subject site is decommissioned in the future, all cellular antennas and
related equipment shall be removed within 30 days of cessation of operation.
C. OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND OUTSIDE AGENCIES
22. Governmental entities. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other
Governmental entities, including the California Public Utilities Commission, must be met.
23. Fire Agency Conditions. The Applicant shall comply with all Fire Agency Conditions.
24. Building Department. The Applicant shall comply with all building standards including any
improvements necessary to comply with the Building Code.
25. Public Works/Facilities Department. The Applicant shall comply with all City Public Works
Department requirements for public works and/or facilities including any encroachment permit,
as necessary.
19
8
Application No. PDR 11-0004; 19700 Allendale Avenue
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission this 13th day of July 2011 by
the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Douglas R. Robertson
Chair, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Christopher A. Riordan, AICP
Secretary to the Planning Commission
ACCEPTANCE BY APPLICANT AND LEASEHOLDER
This permit is hereby accepted upon the express terms and conditions hereof, and shall have no
force or effect unless and until agreed to, in writing, by the Applicant and Leaseholder or
Authorized Agent. The undersigned hereby acknowledges the approved terms and conditions and
agrees to fully conform to and comply with said terms and conditions within the time required in
this Resolution by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission.
__________________________________ ____________________________
Applicant Date
__________________________________ ____________________________
Leaseholderor Authorized Agent Date
20
CITY OF SARATOGA
Community Development Department
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
(408) 868-1222
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
The City of Saratoga’s Planning Commission announces the following public hearing on:
Wednesday, July 13, 2011 at 7:00 p.m.
The public hearing will be held in the City Hall Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue. A
site visit will also be held by the Planning Commission at the subject property. Please contact the
Planning Department for the date and time of the site visit. The public hearing agenda item is
stated below. Details of this item are available at the Saratoga Community Development
Department, Monday through Friday 7:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Please consult the City website at
www.saratoga.ca.us regarding Friday office closures.
APPLICATION #: PDR11-0004
APPLICANT: T-Mobile
ADDRESS: 19700 Allendale Avenue (City Hall Corporation Yard)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Design Review approval for a
wireless telecommunication facility. T-Mobile is proposing two options: Option A is a new 87
foot tall mono-pole installation with three (3) antennas in a flush mount configuration. Option B
is a new 92 foot tall mono-pine stealth installation (designed to camouflage the pole by
resembling a tree with branches) with six (6) antennas. The applicant is also proposing an eight
(8) foot whip antenna at the top of the pole for a total height of 95 feet. The equipment would be
located in a 476 square foot enclosure at the base of the pole that would be screened by a slatted
fence. The maximum radio-frequency exposure level was calculated at .026% of the public
exposure limit set by the Federal Communications Commission. The installation could be a co-
location for additional antennas and equipment that would require a separate design review
application.
All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge a
decision of the Planning Commission, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the Public Hearing.
This notice has been sent to all owners of property within 500 feet of the project that is the subject
of this notice. The City uses the official roll produced by the County Assessor’s office annually, in
preparing its notice mailing lists. In some cases, out-of-date information or difficulties with the U.S.
Postal Service may result in notices not being delivered to all residents potentially affected by a
project. If you believe that your neighbors would be interested in the project described in this
notice, we encourage you to provide them with a copy of this notice. This will ensure that everyone
in your Community has as much information as possible concerning this project.
Cynthia McCormick
Assistant Planner
(408) 868-1230
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
From:Bill
To:Planning
Cc:Cynthia McCormick; Christopher Riordan; Jonathan Wittwer ; Dave Anderson 2
Subject:T-Mobile Corp Yard Tower
Date:Wednesday, July 06, 2011 1:57:23 PM
Attachments:Dear Honorable Chair and Members of the Planning Commission.doc
Dear Honorable Chair and Members of the Planning Commission:
I have written and spoken to you before in support of T-Mobile’s application to install a cell
phone tower in the City’s Corp Yard. Rather than repeat my prior comments, I would refer you to
my earlier letter submitted in advance of the April 27 hearing, a copy of which is attached. I will
not be able to appear on July 13 to speak in favor again as I am on vacation, but want you to know
that my support for this application continues. The willingness of T-Mobile to place the SARA
repeater’s antenna on its tower will significantly improve the transmission and reception for
Saratoga’s Ham Radio community on which the City may well have to rely following a catastrophic
earthquake. All of Saratoga CERT’s communications with the City’s Emergency Operations Center
at the Fire House will rely on Ham radios. By doubling or more the height of SARA’s antenna, those
transmissions will be stronger and clearer. This is a benefit that T-Mobile is willing to provide the
City in addition to the improved cell phone reception for its subscribers in the area surrounding
City Hall and toward Highway 85.
There have been many arguments raised in opposition to this application. None of them
withstand scrutiny. The FCC has preempted the field with respect to the impact (essentially non-
existent in this case) of the electro magnetic emissions from the tower’s cell phone antennae. The
FCC has also made it clear that cell phone operators have a right to fair competition in all cities, so
simply making the statement that one can change carriers and therefore the City doesn’t need to
grant another permit is inappropriate. Claims that property values may be adversely affected are
frequently made, but have never been supported by any substantial evidence. They constitute
speculation without any factual foundation that you are able to evaluate. Claims have been made
that this should be stalled to see what comes of the proposed AT&T-T-Mobile merger discussions.
A project of that sort, which is subject to Federal oversight and significant opposition from Sprint-
Nextel, may take years to conclude. While that kind of stall might be a satisfactory outcome for
some, it is clearly not a fair tactic for the City to take. The permit is before the City now, meets the
City’s requirements, provides significant benefits to Saratoga, and should be approved.
The only finding proposed by Staff which really is relevant to this application, really the
only one that has any direct application, is that that you find that: “The proposed development
shall be compatible in terms of height, bulk, and design with other structures in the immediate
area.” Since the immediate area is a corp yard, the Senior Center, City Hall, Redwood School and
Sacred Heart, and any structures for Redwood and Sacred Heart are hundreds of feet away, the
immediate area would appear to be the corp yard. The point has been made, by both participants
in the meetings and study sessions and by commissioners, that once this tower is built, it will fade
from our consciousness, just as the power poles along the streets in front of City Hall, Sacred
Heart, and Redwood have even though they are in much more visible locations and much closer to
Redwood, City Hall and Sacred Heart than the T-Mobile tower will be. If a cell phone tower is not
142
compatible with the City’s Corp Yard, it could not be deemed compatible with anything in the City.
I ask your support for this application and T-Mobile’s effort.
Respectfully
submitted, William T. Brooks
143
Dear Honorable Chair and Members of the Planning Commission:
I am a 35 year resident of Saratoga and write in support of the application of T-
Mobile to install cell phone equipment at the City Corp Yard at 19700 Allandale Ave. I
am also a member of Saratoga’s CERT, and although I do not write on behalf of CERT, it
is that involvement which causes me to write. When I learned of this application, it
occurred to me that the installation of the proposed cell phone tower in the Corp Yard
might present an opportunity for increasing range and clarity of reception and
transmission for the K6SA repeater antenna that is currently located on a city pole near
the gate into the Corp Yard at an elevation of somewhere around 35 or 40 feet. A
conversation with a member of the Saratoga Amateur Radio Association confirmed that
an increase in the elevation of the K6SA repeater’s antenna would provide some increase
in range, and importantly should provide an increase in the clarity of the transmissions
and receptions. Conversations with City Staff and T-Mobile reflected an interest from
both to accommodate this transfer and the resulting improvement in the City’s emergency
communications capabilities. Conversations between members of SARA’s board and T-
Mobile confirm that the placement of the K6SA repeater antenna on T-Mobile’s proposed
tower in the Corp Yard is feasible, will not conflict with the other equipment placed on it,
and is acceptable to T-Mobile. Reducing the frequency with which the HAM operators at
the City EOC will be having to reply, “Say again, please”, when receiving emergency
transmissions from CERT volunteers all over the City who are responding to the
catastrophic earthquake that one day will
strike Saratoga is reason enough to support this
application. T-Mobile’s willingness to cooperate in providing this enhancement to
Saratoga’s emergency communications system has prompted me to write this letter in
support of their application.
Understanding that this application may have its opponents who have health
related concerns caused me to review the reports on EMF issues related to the
application. I noted that the highest measurements anticipated at any ground level
location from the Corp Yard tower antennae would be 0.026 of 1% (i.e., less than
1/4000th) of the FCC’s allowable exposure limit and less than 1/3800th of that limit at any
second story location. Since the EMF exposure limit is vastly greater than will be
generated by this installation, I encourage the Commission to accept the generous
willingness of T-Mobile to work with the City and SARA to improve of our emergency
communications and approve this application.
Respectfully submitted,
William T. Brooks
144
Page 1 of 4
Community Development Department
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, California 95070
ARBORIST REPORT
It is the responsibility of the contractor to be familiar with the information in this
report and implement the required conditions.
Application #:ARB11-0010
Prepared by Kate Bear, City Arborist 19700 Allendale Avenue
Phone: (408) 868-1276 Owner: City of Saratoga
Email: kbear@saratoga.ca.us APN 397-15-017
Report History: #1 Date: June 17, 2011
#2 This report replaces report #1 June 29, 2011
INTRODUCTION
T-Mobile Corporation has applied to for a permit to install a wireless antenna in the parking lot of
the City of Saratoga Corporation Yard. The attached map shows the location of the proposed
antenna. Based on a study session and meetings with T-Mobile, the enclosure for the antenna and
cabinets will be oriented at 90 degrees to the way it is drawn on the submitted plan. This will allow
better access to the cabinets with less of an impact on cars parked next to it.
No trees are requested or approved for removal to construct this project.
This project has clearance from the arborist to proceed, with the conditions noted below under the
Requirements section.
PLAN REVIEW AND TECHNICAL DISCUSSION
Plans reviewed:
T-Mobile Corporation has submitted a site plan with the approximate location for a wireless antenna.
The antenna would be installed in a parking lot on City of Saratoga property at 19700 Allendale
Avenue. Based on information presented at a study session on June 21, 2011, the cabinets and
antenna will be rotated 90 degrees from how they are shown on the attached map. A plan with the
correct orientation was not available at the time this report was prepared.
The pad for the cabinets and mono-pine must be located at least 20 feet from the trunk of oak tree #1
in order to avoid impacting the canopy of this tree. The mono-pine should be installed on the side of
the pad that is farthest from tree #1, rather than as shown on the attached map. In the location where
it is shown, the branches of the mono-pine will shade the oak tree and if it is placed on the other side
of the cabinets, it can provide shade for parked cars.
Tree Inventory:
Three trees protected by City Code were inventoried for this report. They include one coast live oak
(#1) and two Canary Island pines (#2 and 3).
145
19700 Allendale Avenue
Page 2 of 4
Oak tree #1 is a young oak in good condition. It will soon become a focal point for this area as it
matures, and the pines next to it decline. No work should be done within 20 feet of this tree to best
protect it.
Canary Island pines #2 and 3 are in decline. Tree #2 is still in fair condition, but is beginning to
show yellowing of the needles, which can be an indication of a beetle infestation. It may live another
several years, but probably will not survive more than five years. Tree #3 is in poor condition and
exhibits signs associated with a beetle infestation. This condition is not treatable with insecticides
because the larvae of the beetles which cause the damage are sheltered under the bark of the tree,
where insecticides cannot reach. This tree is probably not going to survive more than one more year.
Security Deposit for the Projection of Trees:
Per City Ordinance 15-50.080(d), a Tree Protection security deposit in the amount of $11,040, which
is equal to 100% of the appraised value of trees #1 and 2, is required. Owner shall obtain, and file
with the Community Development Director, the required security deposit prior to the receipt of
building permits. The security deposit may be in the form of a savings account, a certificate of
deposit account or a bond. The security deposit will be retained by the City until the project has been
completed and accepted by the City.
Appraised values were calculated using the Trunk Formula Method and according to the Guide for
Plant Appraisal, 9th Edition, published by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA), 2000.
This was used in conjunction with the Species Classification and Group Assignment, published by
the Western Chapter of the ISA, 2004.
FINDINGS
Tree Removal
No trees are requested or approved for removal to construct this project.
New Construction
Based on a review of information provided, the project complies with the requirements for the
setback of new construction from existing trees under Section 15-50.120.
REQUIREMENTS
1. This entire report, including the Tree Inventory Table and map showing locations of trees
and protective fencing, shall be incorporated into the final set of plans and titled “Tree
Preservation”.
2. No protected tree authorized for pruning or encroachment pursuant to this project may be
pruned or encroached upon, until the issuance of the applicable permit from the building
division for the approved project.
3. Applicant is responsible for protecting trees per City Code Article 15-50 on all construction
work. Receipt of a Planning or Building permit does not relieve applicant of his
responsibilities under this Code.
146
19700 Allendale Avenue
Page 3 of 4
4. Tree protective fencing shall be installed as shown on the attached map and established prior
to the arrival of construction equipment or materials on site. It shall be comprised of six-foot
high chain link fencing mounted on eight-foot tall, 1 7/8-inch diameter galvanized posts,
driven 24 inches into the ground and spaced no more than 10 feet apart.
5. Signs shall be posted on tree protection fencing. Signs shall say “TREE PROTECTION
FENCE - DO NOT REMOVE WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL FROM CITY ARBORIST”.
6. Call City Arborist, Kate Bear at (408) 868-1276 for an inspection of tree protection fencing
once it has been installed. This is required prior to obtaining building division permits.
7. Tree protection fencing shall remain undisturbed throughout the construction until final
inspection. If contractor feels that work must be done inside the fenced area, call City
Arborist to arrange a field meeting. Failure to do so may lead to a hold on the Tree Protection
Security Deposit for a period of up to five years after the completion of construction.
8. Applicant shall obtain, and file with the Community Development Director, a Tree Protection
security deposit in the amount of $11,040 (for trees #1 and 2), prior to obtaining building
division permits. The security deposit shall remain in place for the duration of construction of
the project to ensure the protection of the trees. Once the project has been completed,
inspected and approved by the City, the bond will be released.
9. No trees are requested or approved for removal as part of this project.
10. The pad for the wireless antenna and cabinets shall be at least 20 feet from the trunk of oak
tree #1.
11. Branches of the mono-pine antenna shall not extend over the canopy of the oak tree (#1).
12. Excavation for new utilities is not permitted under tree canopies for this project. Pits, boxes
or connections shall be placed so that no roots require cutting. Utilities include, but are not
limited to, electrical, drainage, water, sewer, gas and irrigation for landscaping.
13. Unless otherwise approved by the City Arborist, all construction activities must be conducted
outside the designated fenced area (even after fencing is removed). These activities include,
but are not necessarily limited to, the following: demolition, grading, trenching, equipment
cleaning, stockpiling and dumping materials (including soil fill), and equipment/vehicle
operation and parking.
14. Any permitted pruning or root pruning of trees on site must be performed by a state licensed
tree contractor under the supervision of an ISA Certified Arborist and according to ISA
standards.
15. The disposal of harmful products (such as chemicals, oil and gasoline) is prohibited under
tree canopies or anywhere on site that allows drainage to areas under tree canopies.
Herbicides shall not be applied under tree canopies.
147
19700 Allendale Avenue
Page 4 of 4
16. At the end of the project, when the contractor wants to remove tree protection fencing, call
City Arborist for a final inspection.
Attachments:
Tree Inventory
Map showing proposed location of wireless antenna
148
TREE INVENTORY TABLE
TREE
NO. TREE NAME Trunk Diameter (in,) - per Guide for Plant AppraisalEstimated Canopy Spread (ft.)Health Condition (100% = best, 0% = worst)Structural Integrity (100% = best, 0% = worst)Overall ConditionSuitability for Preservation (High/Moderate/Low)Intensity of Impacts (1 = Highest, 5 = Lowest)In Conflict with Proposed DesignNot Shown on PlansOn Adjacent ProprtyAppraised ValueCoast live oak
1 Quercus agrifolia 12.8 30 90 80 Good High 2 $3,540
Canary Island pine
2 Pinus canariensis 27.8 30 60 40 Fair Moderate 2 $7,500
Canary Island pine
3 Pinus canariensis 25.3 30 30 40 Poor Low 4 $4,800
Total appraised value $15,840
Should any tree listed above be removed owner will be required to replace that tree with trees equal to its appraised value.
Replacement Tree Values 15 gallon = $150 24 inch box = $500 36 inch box = $1,500
48 inch box = $5,000 52 inch box = 7,000 72 inch box = $15,000
19700 Allendale Avenue June 29, 2011
149
19700 Allendale
City of Saratoga Corp Yard
Legend
Tree Protective Fencing
Tree Canopy
1
2
3
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
1
1855 Gateway Blvd., Suite 900
Concord, CA 94520
July 1, 2011
Cynthia McCormick, Assistant Planner
Community Development Department, Planning Division
City of Saratoga
13777 Fruitvale Avenue
Saratoga, CA 95070
cmccormick@saratoga.ca.us
RE: Saratoga Planning Commission Public Hearing
Application PDR11-0004: T-Mobile Wireless Upgrade
Proposed Saratoga Corporation Yard Antenna Facility
19700 Allendale Avenue (A.P.N. 397-30-053)
Ms. McCormick,
Per direction from the Saratoga Planning Commission and City of Saratoga Planning
Division staff following the Planning Commission’s June 21 Study Session, T-Mobile provides
the following documents in support of its proposed antenna facility at 19700 Allendale Avenue
(“Corporation Yard Site”):
I. Project Description
T-Mobile provides a detailed project description for an eighty-seven (87) foot slimline
monopole to be located near the tree line at the Corporation Yard Site, as presented at the June
21 Study Session. T-Mobile’s project description also includes an alternate monopine design
option, which camouflages a similar eighty-seven (87) foot antenna support structure in a faux
tree. Per direction from the City, the project lease area has been reduced to two parking spaces
from three and does not contemplate removal of the existing emergency services wooden pole.
T-Mobile’s proposal still includes plans to relocate the ten (10) foot Saratoga Amateur Radio
Association (“SARA”) antenna.1
II. Revised and New Photo Simulations
o Revisions.
T-Mobile modified the three slimline monopole photo simulations that were provided
at the June 21 Planning Commission Study Session. Per City direction, these revised
photo simulations no longer reference removal of the existing fifty-nine foot (59’-4’’)
1 T-Mobile’s previous submittals indicated that the SARA antenna was eight (8) feet. Additional investigation has
determined that the SARA antenna is in fact ten (10) feet. As currently proposed, the ten (10) foot SARA antenna
will be mounted atop T-Mobile’s proposed eighty-seven (87) foot antenna facility.
179
2
1855 Gateway Blvd., Suite 900
Concord, CA 94520
emergency services wooden pole. Identical revisions were made to the three
monopine photo simulations that were also provided at the June 21 Study Session.
o New Photo Simulations.
T-Mobile provides four new photo simulation views per Planning Commission
request: (1) From Redwood Middle School’s drop off area on Allendale Avenue; (2)
From the United States Post Office parking lot on Allendale Avenue; (3) From
Fruitvale Avenue turning on to Allendale Avenue; and (4) From the Redwood Middle
School baseball field. These are four unique, new views that were not previously
presented at the June 21 Study Session.
III. Coverage Maps
T-Mobile has eight (8) existing sites in the City of Saratoga. In addition, Saratoga
recently secured approval for two (2) additional sites (the “Prune Blossom Joint Pole Site” and
“Beaumont Joint Pole Site”). The Corporation Yard Site is the only T-Mobile application that is
currently pending.
T-Mobile presented the following two (2) coverage maps at the June 21 Study Session
and reattaches those coverage maps here:
o Coverage Map - Existing Coverage.
Illustrates gaps in existing coverage along the Saratoga Avenue corridor, including at
the Fruitvale Ave intersection, the residential area north and northwest, and the Civic
Center area.
o Coverage Map – Existing Sites with the Corporation Yard Site.
Illustrates that the Corporation Yard Site will improve “in building,” coverage along
the Saratoga Avenue corridor, including near the Fruitvale Ave intersection, within
the residential areas north and northwest, and in the Civic Center area and expands
“in car” and “outdoor” coverage.
In addition to the Coverage Maps presented at the June 21 Study Session, T-Mobile
presents the following documents related to its network in the City of Saratoga:
o Coverage Map – Existing Sites with the Corporation Yard Site and Two Approved
Sites. Illustrates service area and improvements in coverage from T-Mobile’s recently
approved Prune Blossom Joint Pole Site, Beaumont Joint Pole Site, and the
Corporation Yard Site.
o Saratoga T-Mobile Facility Summary. Includes latitude and longitude; street address;
number of antennas; equipment type; number of cabinets; height of antenna; and type
of support structure for each of the existing and proposed T-Mobile sites located
within the City of Saratoga.
180
3
1855 Gateway Blvd., Suite 900
Concord, CA 94520
IV. Alternative Sites
T-Mobile considered a series of locations in Saratoga as potential alternatives to the
Corporation Yard Site, including Immanuel Lutheran Church, the Saratoga Library, Congress
Springs Park, PG&E Wood Pole Micro-Sites, and the St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church. T-Mobile
provides a written narrative explaining why each alternative site does not meet T-Mobile’s
design criteria or coverage objectives.
V. Radio Frequency Emission Report
T-Mobile previously presented the April 14, 2011 Statement of Hammett & Edison (the
“RF Statement”), evaluating the proposed site’s compliance with Radio Frequency (RF)
electromagnetic fields. A copy of the April 14 RF Statement is reattached here. William F.
Hammett, registered Professional Engineer and author of the RF Statement, is scheduled to
attend the Planning Commission Hearing on July 13, 2011 and will be available to answer any
questions regarding his evaluation. If requested, T-Mobile will be happy to provide a report to
confirm compliance when the site is built and operating.
VI. Plan Sets
T-Mobile provides two complete sets of plans based on the two design options presented
at the June 21 Study Session: the slimline monopole and the alternative monopine design. T-
Mobile provides two (2) sets of 24 x 36 drawings and fifteen (15) sets of 11 x 17 drawings for
the slimline monopole and alternate monopine design. Both sets of plans are otherwise identical
with respect to facility location within the Corporation Yard Site, lease area, and ground
equipment. Only the visual impact of the antenna support structure is different, as graphically
represented by the photo simulations.
VII. Examples of Schools and Churches with Antenna Facilities
T-Mobile provides a list of a local Schools and Churches in neighboring cities with
existing wireless carriers.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any additional questions in advance
of the July 13th Planning Commission Public Hearing.
Sincerely,
__________/s/_____________
Randall Schwabacher
Project Manager
T-Mobile West Corporation
(650) 851-3650
181
1
T-MOBILE
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Application PDR11-0004: T-Mobile Wireless Upgrade
Proposed Saratoga Corporation Yard Antenna Facility
19700 Allendale Avenue (A.P.N. 397-30-053)
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 13, 2011
Purpose
The proposed antenna facility is designed to fill a gap in T-Mobile’s existing “in building,” “in
car” and outdoor coverage in the city of Saratoga along the Saratoga Avenue corridor, including
near the Fruitvale Ave intersection, within the residential areas north and northwest, and in the
Civic Center area. Increased customer demand for in-building wireless coverage, in car
coverage, and higher data transfer speeds to accommodate voice and video services in
commercial and residential areas require additional sites to address areas that lack coverage
altogether or provide only outside coverage. The proposed antenna facility will be part of the
cellular network where each site is calibrated to interact (and slightly overlap) with surrounding
sites for an effective transfer of signal from site to site. This site will also provide reliable E-911
emergency services to the coverage area.
Location
The proposed location of the new antenna facility is in the City Corporation Yard parking lot
immediately behind an existing modular building and adjacent to a mature group of pine trees
(68-75 feet) and oak trees (12-24 feet). T-Mobile selected the Corporation Yard Site because it
is adjacent to light industrial uses at the Corporation Yard. T-Mobile and the City of Saratoga
also considered several locations within the proposed Corporation Yard site. The final location
within the Corporation Yard Site near the tree line was selected to blend the facility in with
existing trees of compatible height. In selecting the location near the tree line, T-Mobile
consulted with the City arborist to blend the facilities as close to the existing vegetation as
possible with the least risk of damage to the trees.
Design: Slimline Monopole
The antenna support structure is proposed to be a new slimline monopole that is eighty-seven
feet (87’) high and twenty-four inches (24”) in diameter. The antenna support structure holds
three (3) antennas, which are flush-mounted at the top and painted a medium green or brown
182
2
color. T-Mobile proposes to relocate the ten foot (10’) Saratoga Amateur Radio Association
(SARA) antenna to the top of its new antenna structure. The SARA antenna is currently located
on an existing fifty-nine foot (59’) wooden pole in the City’s Corporation Yard. The combined
T-Mobile slimline monopole and SARA antenna structure will be ninety-seven feet (97’).
Saratoga’s dense tree cover presents unique challenges for wireless providers seeking to provide
clear, reliable coverage to customers. T-Mobile requires that the slimline monopole at the
Corporation Yard Site be eighty-seven feet (87’) in order to clear the tall, mature trees that
neighbor the antenna facility. The eighty-seven foot (87’) height is also necessary to reach out
and provide coverage to residential areas to the north and northwest of Saratoga Avenue, along
portions of Saratoga Avenue designated as the Heritage lane and at the Fruitvale Ave.
intersection. The eight-seven foot (87’) height also enables antenna tilt, which is necessary to
control signal direction. Finally, the height provides space for a potential co-location of a second
carrier below T-Mobile’s antenna at the same facility, thereby eliminating the need for that
second carrier to erect a new tower.
Alternative Design: Monopine Treepole
If requested by the Planning Commission, the proposed antenna facility could be
designed as a monopine treepole. The monopine treepole camouflages an eighty-seven
foot (87’) antenna support structure as the trunk of the faux tree. The antenna support
structure encased within the monopine structure is thirty six inches (36”) in diameter to
support the faux tree branches. The monopine design allows six (6) antennas to be
concealed in the branches, where the slimline monopole design accommodates three (3).
Monopine branches typically extend an additional five (5) feet above the height of the
antenna support structure to achieve a more realistic branching look. Adding five (5)
additional feet of branches to the eighty-seven foot (87’) antenna support structure would
bring the total height of the branches on the monopine structure to ninety-two feet (92’).
The height of branching beyond the eighty-seven foot (87’) antenna support structure is
within the city’s discretion.
The T-Mobile proposal to relocate the ten foot (10’) SARA antenna is also part of the
monopine design. The combined height of the eighty-seven foot (87’) antenna support
structure and the ten foot (10’) SARA antenna structure will be ninety-seven feet (97’).
All facilities described below remain the same regardless of whether the slimline monopole or
monopine design is selected.
183
3
Lease Area and Equipment
The lease area for the proposed antenna facility includes the antenna support structure and
equipment cabinets. It is approximately eighteen feet (18’) by twenty feet (20’) (360 sq. ft.),
which only eliminates two parking spaces from the Corporation Yard parking lot. The lease area
will be surrounded by a six foot (6’) chain link fence with green plastic slats to match the
existing fencing in the corporation maintenance yard. A sliding gate on the drive side provides
access to the lease area without affecting adjacent parking spaces or traffic. No landscaping is
proposed due to the proximity of the existing trees and vegetation and limited visibility of the
facility behind the existing portable structure.
T-Mobile proposes to locate the antenna support structure, three (3) equipment cabinets and
utility panels within the lease area. Should a future second carrier decide to co-locate at the
antenna facility, their equipment could be fenced in on either side of the lease area with access to
the antenna support structure.
Other Facilities Associated with the Proposed Facility
T-Mobile currently operates eight (8) wireless facilities in the City of Saratoga. The City has
recently approved two (2) additional T-Mobile sites – one located on Prune Blossom Road (near
Saratoga- Sunnyvale Road and one on Beaumont Road (near Glen Brae Drive). The proposed
Corporate Yard site will help provide continuous coverage with the approved Beaumont site and
the existing West Valley College site. It will also provide better hand-off with the Quito Village
and Congress Springs Park sites.
RF Justification of Site
Frequency planning design, customer feedback, and drop call data highlight weak signal strength
and a gap in coverage along the Saratoga Avenue corridor, which includes portions of Saratoga
Avenue designated as “Heritage Lane,” the Fruitvale Avenue intersection, the surrounding
residential areas to the north and northwest of Saratoga Avenue, and Saratoga’s Civic Center
complex. After numerous alternatives were investigated, the Corporation Yard was identified as
the most suitable site for a new structure that was able to meet T-Mobile’s coverage objectives
and City requirements.
184
1
T-MOBILE
ALTERNATIVE SITE ANALYSIS
Application PDR11-0004: T-Mobile Wireless Upgrade
Proposed Saratoga Corporation Yard Antenna Facility
19700 Allendale Avenue (A.P.N. 397-30-053)
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 13, 2011
T-Mobile needs to construct new antenna facilities in order to keep pace with increased customer
demand for outdoor service in areas with no coverage, “in-building” and “in car” wireless coverage,
and higher data transfer speeds to accommodate voice and video services in commercial and residential
areas.
Selection of the Corporation Yard Site
T-Mobile identified a need for a new antenna facility in Saratoga to address a gap in coverage near the
Saratoga Avenue corridor, which includes the area near the Fruitvale Avenue intersection, the
residential areas north and northwest, and in the Civic Center area. To address this need, T-Mobile
developed a 3,000 foot “search ring,” which specifically defines the area within T-Mobile’s existing
network that is experiencing the coverage gap.
T-Mobile then worked to identify a site within its 3,000 foot search ring that satisfied the following
characteristics:
1. Technologically feasible means to meet T-Mobile’s coverage objectives;
2. Compatible with local land use regulations;
3. Available for lease from a willing landlord; and
4. Ability to be constructed safely in accordance with applicable building codes.
Once potential sites were identified, T-Mobile cooperated with City staff, Commissioners and the
community from the beginning to develop a specific site location and site design that maximizes
compatibility with existing surrounding uses and community priorities.
After initially considering and being rejected at the St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church Site, T-Mobile
selected the Corporation Yard Site because an antenna facility at this location satisfies the four
characteristics identified above: it is technologically feasible means to meet T-Mobile’s coverage
objectives, it is compatible with existing land use regulations, the City is willing to lease the property
and the antenna facility can be constructed in a safe manner.
The Corporation Yard Site was also selected because it is adjacent to industrialized uses at the
Saratoga Corporation Yard Site, the Planning Commission previously approved a Sprint application
for a wireless facility at the same parcel and the site currently hosts a Saratoga Amateur Radio
Association Antenna. The Corporation Yard Site is also over 400 feet from the nearest residence and
over 250 feet from the nearest school building.
185
2
Alternative Site Analysis
T-Mobile conducted an analysis of alternative sites in connection with its Corporation Yard Site
proposal, which included consideration of the St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church, the Saratoga
Community Library, the Sacred Heart Church, PG&E Wood Pole Micro-Sites, the Immanuel Lutheran
Church, and Congress Springs Park. T-Mobile also evaluated whether distributed antenna technology
(DAS) would serve as a feasible alternative.
None of these alternative sites or DAS technology can function as a feasible alternative to the proposed
Corporation Yard Site.
Alternative Site 1: St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church
13601 Saratoga Avenue
Although St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church sits at the center of T-Mobile’s search area and would
provide excellent coverage to residences to the north and northwest, it is not a feasible alternative to
the Corporation Yard Site because it is not available for lease from a willing landlord. The tower
above the church offers appropriate height to meet T-Mobile’s coverage objectives and was approved
by the City; however, Church ownership ultimately rejected T-Mobile’s use of the site.
Alternative Site 2: Saratoga Community Library
13650 Saratoga Avenue
Although the Saratoga Community Library Site is located at the center of T-Mobile’s search ring, it is
not a feasible alternative to the Corporation Yard Site because at its current height it would not meet T-
Mobile’s coverage objectives. In addition, it is not a preferred location for the City.
The site is located on the same parcel as the Corporation Yard, but it is on the Heritage Lane portion of
Saratoga Avenue and adjacent to Saratoga’s Heritage Orchard. The City of Saratoga previously
approved a MetroPCS antenna facility at the Saratoga Community Library, which is concealed inside a
forty-eight foot (48’) flag pole. T-Mobile considered co-location on the forty-eight foot (48’)
MetroPCS flagpole, but the existing height was not sufficient to meet T-Mobile’s coverage objectives.
T-Mobile explored increasing the height of the flagpole with the City to allow for co-location; however
this location and the need to increase flagpole height were not preferred by the City. The City directed
T-Mobile to the Corporation Yard Site instead.
Alternative Site 3: Sacred Heart Church
13716 Saratoga Avenue
Although Sacred Heart Church is near the center of T-Mobile’s search ring, it is not a feasible
alternative to the Corporation Yard Site because the height of the Church’s existing cross structure is
not sufficient to meet T-Mobile’s coverage objectives. In addition, the Church is located on the
Heritage Lane portion of Saratoga Avenue and it is also near Saratoga’s Heritage Orchard.
186
3
Alternative Site 4: PG&E Wood Pole Micro-Sites
Joint Pole: Glen Brae Dr. @ Scotland Dr.
Joint Pole: Crestbrook Dr. @ Saratoga Ave.
Joint Pole: Douglass Lane @ Saratoga Ave.
Micro-sites mounted on PG&E Wood Poles are not a feasible alternative to the Corporation Yard Site
because they serve a different purpose than the proposed “macro-cell” antenna facility at the
Corporation Yard Site. In addition, the micro-site approach would require multiple locations adjacent
to residences to approximate the same improvements in coverage provided by the Corporation Yard
Site.
The proposed Corporation Yard Site is a “macro-cell” that is designed to remedy a large gap in
coverage along Saratoga Avenue and at the Fruitvale intersection. Micro-sites are designed for a
different purpose. Micro-sites are compact facilities that offer reduced coverage and limited capacity.
They are designed for hard to reach areas and in-fill where a full, macro site does not cover. A dip in
terrain, curve in a road, a hillside or physical obstruction are the types of areas that micro sites are best
suited. They are designed to supplement macro sites like that proposed for the Corporation Yard Site,
not replace them.
Micro-sites, including those at the Douglass-Crestbrook-Greenbrae locations, are not a feasible
alternative to the Corporation Yard Site because it would require three (3) sites, antennas below the
tree canopy, in close proximity to residences, with less ability to accommodate increasing
technological advances to approximate the coverage provided by the one macro-cell Corporation Yard
Site.
Finally, placement of micro-sites on PG&E polls would require compliance with General Order 95
issued by the California Public Utilities Commission, which puts limitations on T-Mobile’s ability to
utilize these same locations for subsequent equipment additions for achievement of higher speeds and
enhanced services.
Alternative Site 5: Immanuel Lutheran Church
14103 Saratoga Avenue
The Immanuel Lutheran Church site is not a feasible alternative to the Corporation Yard Site because it
will not address T-Mobile’s current coverage objectives. Immanuel Lutheran is located over 3,000 feet
from the Corporation Yard Site. This distance is great enough to warrant a completely new “search
ring” and as such, would not meet T-Mobile’s stated coverage objectives. In addition, the Immanuel
Lutheran Site is surrounded by residential homes, is located on the Heritage Lane portion of Saratoga
Avenue, and has topography that makes it difficult to reach T-Mobile’s target area for coverage
improvements.
187
4
Alternative Site 6: Congress Springs Park
12970 Glen Brae Drive
Congress Springs Park is not a feasible alternative to the Corporation Yard Site because it will not
address T-Mobile’s current coverage objectives. Congress Springs Park is located over two search
rings away from the Corporation Yard Site and already supports an existing T-Mobile facility.
Per the City’s request, T-Mobile considered whether the Congress Springs Park location could be
modified to meet T-Mobile’s coverage objective. It cannot. Even at one-hundred feet (100’), the site
does not reach the object area, which is nearly a mile away. Furthermore, the existing Congress
Springs Park antenna facility is integrated into T-Mobile’s current cellular network and it would not be
possible to make the significant modifications to facility height that would be required without
affecting the performance of all the surrounding sites.
Alternative 7: Distributed Antenna System (DAS)
DAS is a series of antennas mounted to poles located in the public right-of-way that are connected by
fiber to a hub or base station. The system requires multiple poles and an extensive infrastructure.
DAS are typically installed by third party vendors and marketed to wireless carriers to cover hard to
reach areas that are complex and not easily reached by traditional wireless facilities. Like Micro-sites,
DAS are designed to supplement macro-cell sites like that proposed for the Corporation Yard Site, not
replace them. They are designed for hard to reach areas and in-fill where a full, macro site does not
cover. Again, like Micro-sites, a dip in terrain, curve in a road, a hillside or physical obstruction are
the types of suburban areas that DAS are best suited.
DAS does not meet T-Mobile’s design objectives for this search ring. DAS is not a feasible alternative
to the Corporation Yard Site because it would require extensive encroachment into the public right-of-
way to place antennas below the tree canopy, in close proximity to residences and the Heritage Lane
portion of Saratoga Avenue in order to approximate the coverage of the macro-cell Corporation Yard
Site.
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
T-Mobile’s Coverage - Existing195
T-Mobile’s Coverage - Existing with Approved Sites196
T-Mobile’s Coverage - Existing with Approved Sites and Corp Yard Site @ 87’197
Structural Designs
3941 Park Drive, Suite 20-150 El Dorado Hills, CA 95762
Tel 916.941.1264 Fax 866.553.1909 www.structural-designs.net
Striving to obtain the best possible solution through our
proactive and customized approach for all of your structural
engineering requirements
April 27, 2011
Attn: Mr. Rodney Barnes
1719 64th Street, Ground Floor
Emeryville, CA 94608
Subject: SF14139 Saratoga Corporate Yard
Mr. Barnes:
Monopoles are designed to the national adopted industry standard TIA-222-G (Telecommunications
Industry Association) “Structural Standards for Steel Antenna Towers and Antenna Supporting
Structures”.
The design takes into account the local wind speeds, wind exposures, and topographic characteristics
as they relate to wind accelerations. The pole design is usually governed by wind loads due to the
high exposure and surface areas.
Seismic loading is typically small due to the relatively light mass of hollow steel pole. Per the above
referenced code, a seismic analysis does not need to be considered when the wind load is more than
2x the seismic load (as is usually the case).
The foundation consists of a caisson footing which would be approximately 6 ft diameter x 35 ft
deep for a pole height of this magnitude. The foundation is also designed to currently adopted codes,
in this case the 2010 California Building Code and adopted reference codes ACI 318-08 (American
Concrete Institute).
As always, the design calculations and construction drawings would be reviewed by the Engineers
with the local Building Department for adherence to the related codes prior to construction.
Sincerely,
Jim Burrows, P.E.
Structural Designs
198
1
T-MOBILE
STATEMENT REGARDING UNDERGROUNDING OF EQUIPMENT
Application PDR11-0004: T-Mobile Wireless Upgrade
Proposed Saratoga Corporation Yard Antenna Facility
19700 Allendale Avenue (A.P.N. 397-30-053)
Planning Commission Public Hearing
July 13, 2011
Statement Regarding Undergrounding of Equipment:
Technical:
T-Mobile uses self-contained, vandal-proof, weather-proof “base station” equipment cabinets
(“BTSs”) that house highly sensitive electronic equipment similar to stereo amplifiers and
computer servers. The equipment is not similar to the typical telephone/cable/PG&E
underground cables and conduits that are placed in small vaults underground. This type of
equipment must be temperature controlled, free from moisture and water, and have a controlled
power supply to operate safely. Containing the equipment in a vault or enclosed space would
require air conditioning, filters and pumps to remove moisture and water, and a back-up
generator in case of power failure.
Access:
Although the site is not staffed, T-Mobile technicians require regular access to the site for
maintenance, repairs and upgrades. Underground vaulting would require an above-ground hatch
or door, a ladder or steps for access, a clean air supply, and OSHA certification.
Safety and Environmental Concerns:
Underground vaults pose greater risks to service technicians who may need access at night or
during storms. Excavation during construction poses risks to tree roots and existing underground
utilities. Environmental soils tests prior to construction can uncover contaminated conditions
that could prevent construction; such tests may not be required for above-ground construction.
Justification of Above-Ground Equipment:
Due to the above ground space necessary for utility panels and meters, access doors or hatches,
air vents and generators required for vaulted equipment, T-Mobile’s outdoor equipment cabinets
take up less ground space. In addition, construction poses fewer hazards, the equipment is
quieter, access and maintenance is easier and safer, and above-ground equipment provides more
considerably more reliable operation during storms, emergencies, and power outages. For these
reasons, T-Mobile does not underground its equipment cabinets.
199