PC 092210 Special Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Mr. Iachella stated that the coverage maps they provide use a prediction tool which does not have the granularity to show a difference from 65 feet to 30 feet or it does not take the trees into account. He noted that it is not intended for this type of use but to help them design a site in conjunction with a site visit and seeing what the surrounding buildings are. He indicated that plugging in values at different heights will not show much difference. He noted that, as an engineer, he visits sites and makes determinations on what he will get from a site, given trees, terrain, buildings, etc. He added that the reason they like this location is because of its low buildings with trees around them. Commissioner Narum said she envisioned that whatever its configuration or disguise, the tower would go on the top of a building. Mr. Lobaugh explained that the antennas would not be on top of the building but would be mounted to the fascia of the building or three- to four-foot tall tripods so that it will be seen just above the roof parapet. He indicated that even at that height, it would still be significantly lower than their 60-foot tall antenna. He stated that he believed the building was two stories, about 35 feet tall, and the antenna would stick up above the parapet on tripods, and viewing into it is a gigantic canopy of redwood trees that would block the signal. He added that there is also no room for ground equipment which is another significant issue. He indicated that he has verbally informed staff about this and has a letter to this effect which he could provide to staff. Chair Olson asked Mr. Lobaugh if the environment was such that T-Mobile would not talk to them about coverage data from that site. Mr. Iachella said yes. Mr. Lobaugh added that the fact that it may work for T-Mobile is irrelevant to whether or not it would work for Verizon. Chair Olson stated that his sense is that the packet was not complete. He indicated that the Commission learned things via photographs and other items which were not included in the packet. He added that he is in favor of continuance and asked staff to specify again what the applicant is expected to produce. Ms. Stern stated that it is apparently not within the capability of any software or predicting tool to provide what staff is requiring. She added that she was not sure how decisions are made and guessed that it was based on the RF Engineer’s signed letter, which the Commission may accept. She noted, however, that no information was provided regarding possible alternative locations or buildings, and she was not sure whether an independent RF Engineer can be used to evaluate these things. Chair Olson stated that it is clear that based upon height, the T-Mobile location will not work as it will be too low and no trees will be cut down. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 22, 2010 Page 11 of 23