14 - Laserfiche WebLink

government level and "with the goal of reducing, where appropriate, the cost and delay associated with the deployment of such infrastructure." The potential impact of the Middle Class Tax Relief Act is further discussed under the "Water Tank Sites" section of the staff report below. Consequences of Current Ordinance The City's current wireless ordinance creates large areas where wireless facilities are prohibited. For example, without regard to aesthetics, the current ordinance prohibits facilities in or within 300 feet of all of the following: the property lines of undeveloped, approved, or existing residences in residential or agricultural or PUD zoning districts with a residential or agricultural zoning designation; existing or approved public or private schools and childcare centers; existing or approved senior care/assisted living facilities and nursing homes; and neighborhood parks, community parks, or regional parks, as designated in the general plan. In other words, even if a carrier proposes a facility that is totally concealed, it would still be prohibited to be located within 300 feet of the property lines of all of the uses listed above. Because the current restrictions are so broad, there are sectors of the city where there are few (if any) locations that a carrier can locate which results in gaps in coverage and poor service. Staff also sees two other unintended consequence of the current ordinance. With the current 300' "buffer zones" surrounding many uses, carriers often have few choices as to where to locate a facility. Since carriers cannot simply place sites in logical locations to meet coverage needs, carriers are faced with having to place more facilities throughout the City to try and close those gaps. As a result, the current ordinance may have resulted in more facilities having to be located in the City than would be the case if the ordinance had less restrictive locational requirements. Moreover, staff has seen numerous situations where---due to the buffer zone requirements---a carrier is limited to one building or just a small corner of a building in a permitted zone, and the only way to conceal the facility requires changing the architecture of a building in an unusual or unattractive way. The current ordinance also exposes the City to lawsuits from carriers that may be precluded from being able to close a significant gap in coverage. Finally, the restrictions in the ordinance increase the possibility that a carrier will seek to place Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS) throughout the community on City utility poles. Unlike cellular towers and equipment, DAS providers hold a Certificate of Public Necessity from the California Public Utilities Commission as telephone corporations, not as wireless carriers. Because they hold no FCC licenses, they have the right to use City right of way, often by attaching antenna and equipment to city light poles. Staff believes that it is preferable to have carriers rely upon cellular facilities that can serve a greater area rather than having hundreds (perhaps thousands) of DAS facilities placed throughout the City, e.g., on city light poles throughout residential neighborhoods and elsewhere. Page 4 of 10