The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 08122014 - D.6RECOMMENDATION(S): ACCEPT public testimony and CLOSE the appeal hearings on the permit for 801 Coventry Road and the permit for 110 Ardmore Road. OPTION A, to approve the permit for Coventry Road: 1. FIND that the proposed project, to install a wireless telecommunications facility at 801 Coventry Road in Kensington, is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act - Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines section 15303(d)). 2. DENY the appeal of Chris Hall. 3. SUSTAIN the decision of the County Planning Commission to approve the land use permit to install a wireless telecommunications facility at 801 Coventry Road in Kensington (Permit No. LP14-2014). 4. ADOPT the findings contained in County Planning Commission Resolution No. 8-2014. 5. DIRECT staff to file a California Environmental Quality Act Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk and pay the statutory filing fee. 6. ACCEPT the withdrawal by AT&T of its permit application for 110 Ardmore Road. APPROVE OTHER RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE Action of Board On: 08/12/2014 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER Clerks Notes:ADOPTED Option B as presented VOTE OF SUPERVISORS AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor Candace Andersen, District II Supervisor Mary N. Piepho, District III Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, District IV Supervisor Federal D. Glover, District V Supervisor Contact: Francisco Avila, (925) 674-7801 I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: August 12, 2014 David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors By: June McHuen, Deputy cc: D. 6 To:Board of Supervisors From:John Kopchik, Interim Director, Conservation & Development Department Date:August 12, 2014 Contra Costa County Subject:Appeal of the County Planning Commission's Approval of LP14-2014, for a Wireless Cell Site in the Kensington Area (801 Coventry Road). RECOMMENDATION(S): (CONT'D) > OPTION B, to approve the permit for Ardmore Road: 1. FIND that the proposed project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act - Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines section 15303(d)). 2. DENY the appeals of Kevin and Michelle Ferguson, and Laura Owen, Kellin Cooper, Krista Bessinger, John Sarlin, and David Kwett. 3. SUSTAIN the decision of the County Planning Commission to approve the land use permit to install a wireless telecommunications facility at 110 Ardmore Road in Kensington (Permit No. LP13-2020). 4. ADOPT the findings contained in County Planning Commission Resolution No. 15-2013. 5. DIRECT staff to file a California Environmental Quality Act Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk and pay the statutory filing fee. 6. ACCEPT the withdrawal by AT&T of its permit application for 801 Coventry Road. FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant has paid the initial application deposit and is obligated to pay supplemental fees to cover any and all additional staff time and material costs associated with the processing of this application. BACKGROUND: This is a continued public hearing item on the appeal of Chris Hall et. al. of the County Planning Commission's decision to approve a proposal by New Cingular Wireless (AT&T) to attach a wireless telecommunications facility to an existing utility pole in the Coventry Road public right-of-way in Kensington. AT&T originally proposed to install a new wireless facility on an existing utility pole near 110 Ardmore Road (County File #LP13-2020). However, the Board has indicated that visual intrusiveness is a concern at the 110 Ardmore Road site and gave the applicant specific direction to pursue County approval of an alternative site located near 801 Coventry Road. In response, AT&T submitted County File #LP14-2014 on March 17, 2014. That application was unanimously approved by the County Planning Commission on May 13, 2014. An appeal of that decision was received on May 23, 2014. As County File #'s LP13-2020 and LP14-2014 are related, both appeals were heard simultaneously by the Board at the July 8, 2014, hearing. After opening the public hearing, receiving public testimony and a brief discussion by the Board, both items were continued to August 12, 2014. The continuance was in order to allow staff sufficient time to have AT&T's claimed coverage gap verified by an independent consultant. Since the July 8, 2014, Board hearing, staff was able to procure the services of RCC Consultants, Inc. (consultant). This consultant was chosen primarily due to their recent work in the cities of El Cerrito, Berkeley, and Albany and the fact that they were able to complete the review in an expedited manner. In this case, AT&T has claimed that the subject area currently does not have sufficient indoor 3G/4G cellular and Long-Term Evolution (LTE) service (coverage gap). In short, AT&T's 3G service includes basic cellular calling and limited internet access. AT&T's 4G LTE service includes a faster and higher level of internet access, as well as, increased compatibility to today's technological demands. To support their claim of a coverage gap, AT&T provided two coverage maps. Those maps double as justification for the placement of the subject wireless facility (Node). The first map titled "Proposed RSCP of DAS Nodes excluding Node 14" shows the predicted indoor 3G and 4G cellular/LTE coverage (green color) provided by the Nodes recently approved by the Board. The remaining blank (white) area is the coverage gap as identified by AT&T. The second map (Node 14D - SIMULATED 850 RXLEV) presents the results of an actual radio signal test. The radio signal test was conducted by powering a portable antenna at the subject site and measuring the output signal in the area. The green area at the center of the map represents in-building coverage within the coverage gap area. Actual drive-test data was reported to be used as part of the preparation of those maps. To verify AT&T's coverage gap claim, the consultant: 1) observed an actual AT&T drive test, and 2) cross-referenced the drive test data with the coverage maps that were submitted to the County. The drive test consisted of a two person team utilizing two methods of data collection. First, while traveling along a predetermined route, a technician used a scanner to search for AT&T's listed channels and frequencies. That data was logged via industry related software and a laptop computer. Secondly, data was collected by establishing a 2-way call between a mobile phone and AT&T's network. The call's uplink and downlink data was downloaded and logged. No LTE connectivity was established as AT&T has yet to deploy that technology in the Kensington area. The consultant's report (attached) concludes that: 1) "Based on the drive test scan data collected and propagation modeling, the existing AT&T network has a significant gap in wireless in-building coverage in the residential communities in the Kensington area. The drive test data validates AT&T's request for proposed DAS Node 14 to improve wireless in-building services in the area", and 2) "The drive test procedure was done using the proper methodology, correct test set-up and with driving safety taken into consideration". Therefore, based on this independent review AT&T has demonstrated a significant gap in coverage within the subject area. CONCLUSION The project is consistent with other wireless telecommunication projects that have been granted in the Kensington area and throughout the County. No views will be blocked by the proposal and AT&T's justification for the project's placement has been verified by an independent peer reviewer. The County Planning Commission unanimously approved the project based on the findings contained within Resolution Number 8-2014 (attached). Numerous conditions of approval (attached) have been adopted which address concerns raised by the public. The project as proposed complies with the development standards as outlined in the 1998 Telecommunications Policy and the General Plan policies for the Kensington area. Considering these facts, staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors deny the appeal of Chris Hall et. al., and sustain the County Planning Commission's approval of County File #LP14-2014. Alternatively, if the Board of Supervisors determines that the proposed Node location at 110 Ardmore Road is a more appropriate location for AT&T's equipment, approve that application, County File #LP13-2020 and accept AT&T's withdrawal of this application. CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION: If the Board of Supervisors grants the appeal, the County Planning Commission's approval will be overturned and AT&T will not have the authority to construct their proposed project at 801 Coventry Road. CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT: None. CLERK'S ADDENDUM FOUND that the proposed project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act - Class 3 (CEQA Guidelines section 15303(d)).; DENIED the appeals of Kevin and Michelle Ferguson, and Laura Owen, Kellin Cooper, Krista Bessinger, John Sarlin, and David Kwett; SUSTAINED the decision of the County Planning Commission to approve the land use permit to install a wireless telecommunications facility at 110 Ardmore Road in Kensington (Permit No. LP13-2020); ADOPTED the findings contained in County Planning Commission Resolution No. 15-2013; DIRECTED staff to file a California Environmental Quality Act Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk and pay the statutory filing fee; ACCEPTED the withdrawal by AT&T of its permit application for 801 Coventry Road. ATTACHMENTS Planning Commission Resolution Conditions of Approval CPC Approved Plans Photosim #1 Photosim #2 Coverage Map #1 Coverage Map #2 Coverage Map Peer Review