Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-12-16; City Council; Resolution 2003-3341 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2003-334 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA ADOPTING MINOR REVISIONS TO COM M U N I CAT10 N FAC I LIT1 ES WHEREAS, wireless communication facilities, or WCFs, refer to the many CITY COUNCIL POLICY NO. 64 - WIRELESS antenna installations, commonly known as “cell sites,” that transmit and receive signals to enable mobile phone, wireless Internet, and other “wire-free” communication and information services; and WHEREAS, on October 2, 2001, the City Council adopted Policy No. 64 which establishes guidelines for the review of wireless communication facilities; and WHEREAS, on October 7, 2003, the City Council approved an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to incorporate by reference Policy No. 64 into the review of conditional use permits for wireless communication facilities; and WHEREAS, Staff has proposed certain minor revisions to Policy No. 64 which the City Council believes are necessary to clarify certain portions of the Policy. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does hereby resolve as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct; and . . .. . . .. . . .. .... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2. That City Council Policy Statement No. 64, as revised, attached hereto PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of and incorporated, is hereby adopted. Carlsbad on the 16th day of DECEMBER , 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard NOES: None ATTEST: (SEAL) Page 2 of 2 of Resolution No. 2003-334 -2- 3 I CITY OF CARLSBAD COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT DATED: September 21,2001 Page 1 of 9 I Policy No. 64 Date Issued Decenber 16, 2003 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES I 1 Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File I I PURPOSE AND GOAL: Wireless communication facilities, or WCFs, refer to the many facilities with antennas and supporting equipment that receive and transmit signals and together enable mobile or other “wire-free” communication and information services. Unlike ground-wired telecommunications, such as the land- based telephone system, wireless communication technologies, by their operational nature, require a network of antennas mounted at various heights and attached typically to buildings, structures and poles. A common name for a WCF is “cell site.” WCF proposals to the city became commonplace in the mid-1990s. Since then, Carlsbad has processed dozens of new WCF applications and numerous permit renewals for existing facilities, all without benefit of specific review criteria. As the City’s population and the popularity and variety of wireless services grow, providers are expected to install more facilities to improve coverage and gain user capacity. This policy’s purpose is to guide the public, applicants, boards and commissions, and staff in reviewing 1 the placement, construction, and modification of WCFs. The goal is to assure WCFs in Carlsbad: 0 Are reviewed and provided within the parameters of law. a Are encouraged to locate away from residential and other sensitive areas, except in limited circumstances. 0 Represent the fewest possible facilities necessary to complete a network without discriminating against providers of functionally equivalent services or prohibiting the provision of wireless services. 0 0 Use, as much as possible, “stealth” techniques so they are not seen or easily noticed. Operate consistent with Carlsbad’s quality of life. This policy applies to all commercial providers of wireless communication services. It does not apply to amateur (HAM) radio antennas and dish and other antennas installed on a residence for an individual’s private use. 1 BACKGROUND: To secure the right to provide wireless services to a region, companies obtain airwave licenses that are 1 auctioned by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the federal agency that regulates the telecommunications industry. The FCC mandates the licensees establish their service networks as quickly as possible. In Carlsbad, there are three common types of wireless communication systems: Cellular, PCS (Personal Communications Services), and ESMR (Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio). The table below provides the relevant similarities and differences between the three. Page 2 of 9 CITY OF CARLSBAD Policy No. 64 COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT Date Issued December 16, 2003 DATED: September 21,2001 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date SupersedesNo. 64, dated Oct. 3, 2001 General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File SYSTEM I AlTRlBUTES I . . . - - - - - - - - I Cellular I ESMR I PCS I Technology Analog, converting to digital Digital Developing Analog: Established Digital: Developing Network ‘Overage 1 1900 MHz Frequency 800 MHz Features Telephone, call waiting, voice mail, caller ID, paging, e-mail, and Internet access (Notes: Analog cellular does not provide all of these features. ESMR also offers dispatching and two-way radio. PCS also has video transmission ability.) ~ ~- A network of interconnected WCFs carries signals across a city and beyond. Each WCF contains antennas that transmit and receive signals over a small geographic area known as a “cell.“ As the user travels from one cell to another, the signal is passed from one WCF to another in the next cell. Transmission Cell Size Radius Average 5 miles 0 - 1 mile Antenna Types Antenna SUPPO~~ Dish, Panel (or sector), and Whip Lattice towers, Monopoles, Building or Structure-Attached In cabinets about the size of vending machines In buildings generally under 500 square feet Supporting Equipment Nextel Sprint PCS Verizon, AT&T, Cingular Wireless Provider Table Notes w More facilities may be needed to complete a PCS network since its higher operating frequency limits the range of its antennas and consequently the size of its cells. placed at specific heights in relation to one another in order to transmit and receive signals. As a result, height is a determining factor in the design and location of WCFs. The antennas for all three systems function on a line of sight transmission. Antennas need to be w w Monopole antenna supports may be installed on buildings or on the ground. A single wireless communication facility may consist of two or more antennas and antennas of different types. A facility may also include the antennas and supporting equipment of more than one provider. This is known as “collocation.” Collocation also refers to a WCF placed together with utility structures such as water tanks, light standards, and transmission towers. WCFs are usually unmanned and require maintenance visits once or twice each month. This table is based on current information that is subject to change. w w CITY OF CARLSBAD COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT DATED: September 21 , 2001 General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FAClLlT Page 3 of 9 Policy No. 64 Date Issued December 16, 2003 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date Supersedes No. 64, dated Oct. 3, 200 is Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File R EVl EW RESTRICTIONS: The Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA) preserves the City’s ability to regulate the placement, construction, and modification of wireless communication facilities subject to the following restrictions, as contained in TCA Section 704. 0 The City may not favor any carrier. Regulations may not unreasonably discriminate among competitive providers. Regulations may not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless communication services. A city must act on an application for WCFs within a “reasonable” amount of time, roughly the same time as for any similar application. hazards. If federal standards are met, cities may not deny permits or leases on the grounds that radio frequency emissions are harmful to the environment or to the health of residents. However, local governments may require wireless carriers to prove compliance with the standards. The FCC has established procedures to enforce compliance with its rules. A decision to deny a WCF application must be in writing and supported by substantial evidence contained in a written record. 0 The City may not prevent completion of a network. Applications are to be processed in a reasonable time. The City cannot deny an application because of perceived radio frequency health 0 0 0 A decision to deny an application must be supported by substantial evidence. In Airtouch Cellular v. Citv of El Caion (gth Cir. 2000) 83 F. Supp. 2d 1158, 1166, the court ruled that a city may consider factors such as community aesthetics and noise in regulating the placement, construction, 3r modification of WCFs. HEALTH CONCERNS & SAFEGUARDS: possible health risks from exposure to the radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic fields generated by NCFs are a significant community concern. Accordingly, the FCC requires facilities to comply with RF 2xposure guidelines published in the Code of Federal Regulations (see 47 CFR 51.1307 and 47 CFR $1 .I 310). The limits of exposure established by the guidelines are designed to protect the public health Nith a very large margin of safety as they are many times below the levels that generally are accepted as laving the potential to cause adverse health effects. Both the Environmental Protection Agency and Food md Drug Administration have endorsed the FCC’s exposure limits, and courts have upheld the FCC rules *equiring compliance with the limits. CITY OF CARLSBAD COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT DATED: September 21 , 2001 General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNlCATlON FAClLlT Page 4 of 9 Policy No. 64 Date Issued December 16, 2003 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date Supersedes No. 64, dated Oct. 3, 2001 is Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File Most WCFs create maximum exposures that are only a small fraction of the limits. Furthermore, because the antennas in a PCS, cellular, or other wireless network must be in a line of sight arrangement to effectively transmit, their power is focused on the horizon instead of toward the sky or ground. Generally, unless a person is physically next to and at the same height as an antenna, it is not possible to be exposed to the established limits for RF exposure. The FCC requires providers, upon license application, renewal, or modification, to demonstrate compliance with RF exposure guidelines. Where two or more wireless operators have located their antennas at a common location (called “collocation”), the total exposure from all antennas taken together must be within FCC guidelines. Many facilities are exempt from having to demonstrate compliance with FCC guidelines, however, because their low power generation or height above ground level is highly unlikely to cause exposures that exceed the guidelines. REVIEW AND APPROVAL GUIDELINES: Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.42.010(16) allows WCFs in all zones with the approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) and subject to this policy. These guidelines should be followed in the review of conditional use permits for new wireless facilities as well as extensions and amendments to CUPS for existing installations. A. Location Guidelines 1. Preferred Locations - WCFs should locate on buildings and structures, not on vacant land. In addition, WCFs should locate in the following zones and areas, which are listed in order of descending preference: a. b. Commercial zones. C. d. e. f. Industrial and public utility zones. Public property (e.g., city facilities) not in residential areas. Other non-residential zones, except open space. Major power transmission towers in non-residential zones or areas. Public and private utility installations (not publicly accessible) in residential and open space zones (e.g., water tanks, reservoirs, or the existing communication towers near Maerkle Reservoir). Parks and community facilities (e.g., places of worship, community centers) in residential zones or areas. g. 2. Discouraged Locations - WCFs should not locate in any of the following zones or areas unless the applicant demonstrates no feasible alternative exists as required by Application and Review Guideline D.2. a. Open space zones and lots (except as noted in Location Guideline A.l.). 7 CITY OF CARLSBAD COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT DATED: September 21 , 2001 General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACIL17 Page 5 of 9 Policy No. 64 Date Issued December 16, 2003 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date Supersedes No. 64, dated Oct. 3,2001 is 1 Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Emp1,oyee Bulletin Boards, Press, File b. c. d. Environmentally sensitive habitat. e. Residential zones or areas (except as noted in location guideline A.l). Major power transmission towers in corridors located in/or next to a residential zone or area. On vacant land in any zone. 3. Visibility to the Public - In all areas, WCFs should locate where least visible to the public and where least disruptive to the appearance of the host property. Furthermore, no WCF should be installed on an exposed ridgeline or in a location readily visible from a public place, recreation area, scenic area or corridor, or residential area unless it is satisfactorily located and/or screened so it is hidden or disguised. 4. Collocation - Collocating with existing or other planned wireless communication facilities is recommended whenever feasible. Service providers are also encouraged to collocate with water tanks, major power transmission and distribution towers, and other utility structures when in compliance with these guidelines. Monopoles - No new ground-mounted monopoles should be permitted unless the applicant demonstrates no existing monopole, building, or structure can accommodate the applicant’s proposed antenna as required by Application and Review Guideline D.3. 5. 3. Design Guidelines 1. Stealth Design - All aspects of a WCF, including the supports, antennas, screening methods, and equipment should exhibit “stealth” design techniques so they visually blend into the background or the surface on which they are mounted. Subject to City approval, developers should use false architectural elements (e.g., cupolas, bell towers, dormers, and chimneys), architectural treatments (e.g., colors and materials), elements replicating natural features (e.g., trees and rocks), landscaping, and other creative means to hide or disguise WCFs. Stealth can also refer to facilities completely hidden by existing improvements, such as parapet walls. 2. Equipment - Equipment should be located within existing buildings to the extent feasible. if equipment must be located outside, it should be screened with walls and plants. If small outbuildings are constructed specifically to house equipment, they should be designed and treated to match nearby architecture or the surrounding landscape. 3. Collocation - Whenever feasible and appropriate, WCF design and placement should promote and enable collocation. 8 CITY OF CARLSBAD Page 6 of 9 Policy No, 64 COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT Date Issued December 16, 2003 DATED: September 21,2001 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date Supersedes No. 64, dated Oct. 3,2001 General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File 4. Height - WCFs should adhere to the existing height limitations of the zone in which they are located. 5. Setbacks - WCFs, including all equipment, should adhere to the building setback requirements of the zone in which they are located, with the following clarifications: a. If on a site next to a residential zone, the WCF should be set back from the residential zone boundary a minimum distance equal to the above-ground height of the antenna. If in a residential zone and in a public utility installation, park, or community facility, the WCF should be set back from the property boundaries of the utility installation, park, or community facility a minimum distance equal to the above-ground height of the antenna. The Planning Commission may decrease or increase these setbacks if it finds such changes would improve the overall compatibility of the WCF based on the factors contained in Application and Review Guideline D.4. b. c. 6. Building or Structure-Mounted WCFs: a. b. C. Antennas and their associated mountings should generally not project outward more than 18 inches from the face of the building. Roof-mounted antennas should be located as far away as possible from the outer edge of a building or structure and should not be placed on roof peaks. If permitted, WCFs on residential buildings should only be allowed if disguised as a typical residential feature (e.g., a chimney, a dormer) and if all equipment is located inside, not outside, the building. 7. Ground-mounted Monopoles: a. All antennas should be mounted as close as possible to the monopole to improve facility appearance. b. The placement, screening, and disguise of the monopole should fit with the surrounding site design, architecture, and landscaping. Tree disguises, such as a “mono-palm,” may be acceptable depending on their quality and compatibility with landscaping nearby. Landscaping should be provided as necessary to screen, complement, or add realism to a monopole. Landscaping should include mature shrubs and trees. Some of the trees should be tall enough to screen at least three-quarters of the height of the monopole at the time of planting. Sometimes, landscaping may not be needed because of the monopole’s location or vegetation already nearby. When possible. and in compliance with these guidelines, monopoles should be placed next to tall buildings, structures, or tall trees. C. d. 9 CITY OF CARLSBAD COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT DATED: September 21,2001 Page 7 of 9 Policy No. 64 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date Date Issued - I Supersedes NO. 64, dated Oct. 3. 3.001 General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES I Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File C. 8. Lattice Towers a. b. New lattice towers should not be permitted in the City. On existing lattice towers, all antennas should be mounted as close as possible to the tower so they are less noticeable. 9. Undergrounding - All utilities should be placed underground. 10. Regulatory Compliance - WCFs should comply with all FCC, FAA (Federal Aviation Administration), and local zoning and building code requirements. Performance Guidelines 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Noise - All equipment, such as emergency generators and air conditioners, should be designed and operated consistent with the City noise standards. Maintenance - All facilities, related equipment, and landscaping should be maintained in good condition and free from trash, debris, graffiti, and any form of vandalism. All required landscaping should be automatically irrigated. Damaged equipment and damaged, dead, or decaying landscaping should be replaced promptly. Replacement of landscaping that provides facility screening should be, as much as possible, of similar size (including height), type, and screening capability at the time of planting as the plant(s) being replaced. Maintenance Hours - Except in an emergency posing an immediate public health and safety threat, maintenance activities in or within 100 feet of a residential zone should only occur between 7 AM (8 AM on Saturdays) and sunset. Maintenance should not take place on Sundays or holidays. Lighting - Security lighting should be kept to a minimum and should only be triggered by a motion detector where practical. Compliance with FCC RF Exposure Guidelines - Within six (6) months after the issuance of occupancy, and with each time extension or amendment request, the developer/operator should submit to the Planning Director either verification that the WCF is categorically excluded from having to determine compliance with the guidelines per 47 CFR §1.1307(b)(l) or a project implementation report that provides cumulative field measurements of radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic fields of all antennas installed at the subject site. The report should quantify the RF emissions and compare the results with currently accepted ANSVIEEE standards as specified by the FCC. The Planning Director should review the report for consistency with the project’s preliminary proposal report submitted with the initial project application and the accepted ANSVIEEE standards. If, on CITY OF CARLSBAD I Page 8 of 9 I Policy No. 64 COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT Date Issued December 16, 2003 DATED: September 21,2001 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date Supersedes No. 64, dated Oct. 3, 2001 General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File D. review, the Planning Director finds the project does not meet ANSVIEEE standards] the City may revoke or modify the conditional use permit. 6. Abandonment - Any WCF that is not operated for a continuous period of 180 days will be considered abandoned. Within 90 days of receipt of notice from the City notifying the owner of such abandonment] the WCF owner must remove the facility and restore the site, as much as is reasonable and practical] to its prior condition. If such WCF is not removed within the 90 days, the WCF will be considered a nuisance and in addition to any other available remedy, will be subject to abatement under Chapter 6.1 6 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. If there are two or more users of a single WCF, then this provision will not become effective until all users stop using the WCF. The provider or owner must give notice to the City of the intent to discontinue use of any facility before discontinuing the use. Application and Review Guidelines 1. Besides the typical submittal requirements for a conditional use permit (including plans, landscape details, and color and material samples, as appropriate), all WCF applications should include the following items: a. A description of the site selection process undertaken for the WCF proposed. Coverage objectives and the reasons for selecting the proposed site and rejecting other sites should be provided. A description or map of the applicant’s existing and other proposed sites. A description of the wireless system proposed (e.g., cellular, PCS, etc.) and its consumer features (e.g., voice, video, and data transmissions). Verification that the proposed WCF will either comply with the FCCs guidelines for human exposure to radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic fields or will be categorically excluded from having to determine compliance with the guidelines per 47 CFR §1.1307(b)(l). If WCFs are proposed for collocation, the verification must show the total exposure from all facilities taken together meets the FCC guidelines Color photo-simulation exhibits, prepared to scale, of the proposed WCF to show what the project would look like at its proposed location and from surrounding viewpoints. The Planning Director may waive the requirement to provide the exhibits if he determines they are unnecessary. b. c. d. e. 2. For WCFs proposed in a zone or area that is a discouraged WCF location as listed in Location Guideline A.2., the applicant should provide evidence that no location in a preferred zone or area as listed in Location Guideline A.l. can accommodate the applicant’s proposed facility. Evidence should document that preferred zone or area CITY OF CARLSBAD COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT DATED: September 21,2001 General Subject: WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FAClLlT Page 9 of 9 Policy No. 64 Date Issued December 16. 2003 Effective Date December 16, 2003 Cancellation Date Supersedes No. 64, dated Oct. 3, 2001 ’I ES Specific Subject: Review and operation guidelines for wireless communication facilities Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department Heads and Division Heads, Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File locations do not meet engineering, coverage, location, or height requirements, or have other unsuitable limitations. 3. For proposed new ground-mounted monopoles, the applicant should also provide evidence to the City’s satisfaction ‘that no existing monopole, building, structure, or WCF site (“existing facility”) could accommodate the proposal. Evidence should demonstrate any of the following: a. No existing facility is located within the geographic area or provides the height or structural strength needed to meet the applicant’s engineering requirements. . b. The applicant’s proposed WCF would cause electromagnetic interference with the existing antennae array or vice versa. C. The fees, costs, or contractual provisions required by the owner to locate on an existing facility or to modify the same to enable location are unreasonable. Costs exceeding new monopole development are presumed to be unreasonable. The applicant demonstrates to the Planning Commission’s satisfaction that there are other limiting factors that render an existing facility unsuitable. d. 4. In considering a Conditional Use Permit for a WCF, the Planning Commission should consider the following factors: a. Compliance with these guidelines. b. Height and setbacks. C. Proximity to residential uses. d. e. Surrounding topography and landscaping. f. 9. h. The nature of uses on adjacent and nearby properties. Quality and compatibility of design and screening. Impacts on public views and the visual quality of the surrounding area. Availability of other facilities and buildings for collocation. 5. Conditional Use Permits for WCFs should be granted for a period not to exceed five years. Upon a request for either an extension or an amendment of a CUP, the WCF should be reevaluated to assess the impact of the facility on adjacent properties, the record of maintenance and performance with reference to the conditions of approval, and consistency with these guidelines. Additionally, the City should review the appropriateness of the existing facility’s technology, and the applicant should be required to document that the WCF maintains the technology that is the smallest, most efficient, and least visible and that there are not now more appropriate and available locations for the facility, such as the opportunity to collocate or relocate to an existing building.