PC 092210 Special Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Stern stated that Commissioner Pearce was referring to the DSRSD facility located almost at Stoneridge, which is a bit farther north than Verizon had anticipated locating and which is within 300 feet of a City park. Mr. Lobaugh noted that it is difficult to locate towers to sites. He stated that during their searches for cell sites in California, they have seen antennas at schools and in parks. He pointed out that Pleasanton is unique in having a 300-foot requirement. He added that the Telecommunications Act was very clear in terms of health concerns and addressing what can be brought up in opposition to cell towers. th Ms. Wedge stated that when she received the notice on April 12, she canvassed the area on the other side of the freeway and found out that they had not been contacted because they were outside the 300-foot radius. She noted that those residents as well as those living up on the hill would have a view of the cell phone tower. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chair Olson stated that when he read the August 19, 2010 letter from Complete Wireless Consulting, he got the impression that this was a moving target from their point of view. He added that they probably interpreted “complete” as meaning that this was approved. He acknowledged that a lot of time was spent on the matter and a lease was signed apparently prior to any knowledge that the neighborhood would be concerned. Commissioner Pearce inquired if, given what has been heard at the meeting, the additional visual presentation she has seen, and the discussion regarding alternative site locations, it was staff’s opinion that Sections 18.110.040 and 18.110.070 of the Municipal Code had been satisfied. Ms. Stern stated that in terms of the coverage, she had anticipated getting something in writing and as well as some graphic showing coverage from the pump station versus from the other location in terms of how much coverage would be lost. She added that the Commission could evaluate this further if it feels not enough information had been presented. Chair Olson noted that Verizon had indicated that they provided a detailed study. Ms. Stern clarified that what they provided was a listing of locations north of this location, all of which were in residential areas and, therefore, not viable. She noted that the response staff has received when they asked specifically about this particular building was that it was not viable because it reduced the amount of coverage; it was presented in a sentence or two and was not backed up or signed by the RF Engineer. She added that in connection with the lease signing, the City is changing its procedure so that no lease would be signed until after the proposal has been approved. Commissioner Narum stated that there are three buildings between the proposed site and the T-Mobile site. She inquired if these would be options to locate a tower. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 22, 2010 Page 9 of 23