01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio asked if any other jurisdictions use the same 300 foot buffer. Ms. Harryman said that while she was not aware of any and that all surrounding cities do allow facilities in residential zones, it is not the first priority location. Mayor Thorne asked whether the 300 foot buffer is based on any scientific standards, noting that the health effects of RF exposure were debunked years ago. Ms. Harryman explained that when the ordinance was last amended in 1998, a group of stakeholders and residents suggested and the Council ultimately adopted the 300 foot standard. She noted that individual beliefs on the health effects are irrelevant since federal law has said the City can only regulate aesthetics. In that sense, one can make arguments supporting buffers around residences and parks. Mayor Thorne found it odd that the City would give itself the right to grant exceptions to laws it cannot enforce. Ms. Harryman clarified that the exception relates only to applications that do not meet those locations found to be preferrable. Mr. Fialho stated that in tackling these modifications, the focused on keeping facilities out of neighborhoods, parks and school sites purely for aesthetic value, not science. Vice-Mayor Cook-Kallio said that 300 feet seems particularly arbitrary when people are holding cell phones to their ears or tablets on their lap, but she acknowledged the aesthetic perspective. She suggested that many school sites are well equipped to conceal or camouflage a facility and would likely be interested in the lease revenue. She asked whether they were contacted to determine the level of interest in exploring this as an option. Ms. Harryman said "no," the amendments are really focused on finding a balance between the former ordinance and where the City would like to go with respects to improving cellular coverage. Mr. Fialho said that the exemption process would allow for this if the applicant had addressed all the preferred locations and found a school site to be the preferred option. Mayor Thorne opened the public hearing. Brad Hirst said the current overly restrictive ordinance came about when a carrier wished to colocate on a tower at McKinley Park to better serve the Ruby Hills neighborhood, at which point the Council directed staff to make it as difficult as possible to do so. He suggested that rather focusing on what federal law says it cannot do, the City should focus on what can be done to encourage cellular and data transfer service within the City. He said the real issue is with data transfer, with is becoming increasingly important to businesses, medical facilities, government and schools. He noted that under the current ordinance, Hart Middle School could not have been constructed because it is located within 300 feet of the property line of a tower. He stressed that wireless data service is a rapidly expanding industry and encouraged the Council to not only adopt the amendment but also instruct staff to look for additional opportunities to encourage expansion of this infrastructure. Barbara Leslie, Government Affairs Director with AT&T, said her organization has a number of significant coverage gaps in Pleasanton that it would like to address. She said there is a growing need in the way communities are using smart technology and reported the following national statistics: 91% of individuals have cell phones, 61% have laptops, 26% have eBooks or readers and 34% have tablets. AT&T has seen its mobile data usage grow 30,000 percent from 2006 to 2012. Additionally, 30% of Americans now rely soley on wireless telephone communication and AT&T loses approximately 700,000 landlines per month. A survey of the business community revealed that over 98% of small City Council Minutes Page 16 of 20 December 17, 2013