Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES - 05121998 - D10
..... Contra •rte-✓"' ' • Cysts TQ: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS , _- County FROM. DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR >e r DATE: May 12 , 1998 SUBJECT: Proposed 1998 Telecommunication Policy SPECIFIC REQUES11 T(S) OR- RECO ENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION gECt MMEN 3ATIONS 1. FIND that the adaption of the Policy is exempt from the provisions of CEQA pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061 (b) (3) as there is no possibility that this activity could have a significant effect on the environment. 2 . ADOPT the proposed Policy as presented by staff. 3 . DIRECT staff to return in one year for an update to the County Planning Commission of the Policy' s implementation and recommendations on appropriate changes. MPAQT This activity was not included in the Community Development Department work program. The cast for development and implementation of the Policy results in a deficit in the Community Development Department budget of approximately $17, 000. 00. BE ME NDATIO-NS On October 21, 1997 the Board of Supervisors directed the Community Development Department to proceed with updating the 1977 Communications Tower Policy and hold study sessions before the County Planning Commission. At the time of authorization, staff stated the process for development of the policy would take approximately one year and at a cost of $20, 000. Due to the request by the Beard of Supervisors to expedite the process, the Policy was completed within 6 months. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X _ YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD Ct3MMITT E APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : S;V"4� L�E ' ACTION OF BOARD ON > 770 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER See Addendum. for Beard action. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOD. Contact:Debbie Chamberlain 335-1213 Ma l 1998 Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTEDMay cc: County Counsel PEAL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF General Services THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND CdtT YAENIST OR BY , DEPUTY 2 . An informal meeting was held with the Cities, interested agencies and individuals on December 8, 1997 to receive comments on the draft policy. Study sessions were then held before the County Planning Commission on December 9, 1997 , March 10, 1998 and April 14 , 1998 and before the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission and East County Regional Planning Commission on January 21, 1998 and March 2 , 1998 , respectively. The Policy was also discussed by the City County Relations Committee on November 7 , 1997 and April 1, 1998 . All comments received were presented to the County Planning Commission prior to their recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on April 14 , 1998 . The Policy provided with this Board order is reflective of the County Planning Commission's recommendation, including comments received by the various telecommunication providers and interested agencies. The Policy does not differ in concept from the original draft of November 12 , 1997 . The changes that have been made are in response to comments received and the need to retain flexibility in siting the facilities. The most substantial change is the deletion of Section IV. Review and Approval . Staff had envisioned developing an administrative process for reviewing and approving telecommunication facilities that would have little or no effect on the environment. However, there is no provision in State Law (Government Code §65905) to allow for an administrative process to approve land use permits. The findings that are required under §26-2 . 2026 to be made in approving land use permits, require discretionary judgment and cannot be made outside a noticed public hearing. To that end, staff is proposing that the Community Development Department over a one year period categorize the type of commercial wireless telecommunication facility applications that are submitted and determine if the following conditions apply: 1. Can the proposed use qualify for an exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act; and 2 . Is the proposed facility located in a non-residential district; and 3 . Is the proposed facility a roof mounted or building mounted installation largely concealed or disguised from view to adjacent properties? 4 . Including #1 and #2 above, is the proposed facility mounted on a public utility structure that will not greatly increase the visibility of the public utility structure to the surrounding area? If a significant number of applications are submitted, it may be appropriate to consider development of an administrative process for these type commercial wireless telecommunication facilities. Staff will hold a study session before the County Planning Commission within one year to discuss the type and quantity of applications that have been considered under the Policy and provide recommendation if further amendments to the Policy are necessary. Staff has included as information, the list of County owned and leased communication sites, along with a schedule of rates. This list of sites will be used to determine if a prpoosed wireless communication facility could be located on County-owned or controlled property. The applicant will have the burden of proof to demonstrate why a County-owned or controlled facility is not possible as a reasonable alternative. DJC/aa BO/TPolicy.DJC ADDENDUM TO ITEM D. 10 MAY 12, 1998 On this date, the Board of Supervisors considered the adoption of the 1998 Telecommunications Tower Policy'.. Debbie Chamberlin, Community Development Department, presented the staff report and recommendations on the matter. The Board discussed issues including installation and landscaping, comments received from Save Mt . Diablo, the length of contracts, the number of applications processed, and legal issues . The following persons presented testimony. John Knox, 229 Bishop, Richmond, representing Knox LaRue; Lou Rosas, 1600 S. Main Street Room 202 , Walnut Creek, representing Pacific Bell; Harry Styron, 1700 N. Broadway Ste. 206, Walnut Creek, representing Mt . Diablo Amateur Radio Club; and Seth Adams, P.O. Box 5376, Walnut Creek, representing Save Mt . Diablo. After further discussion, the Board took the following action: 1 . CONTINUED to June 16, 1998, at 3 p.m. in the Board Chambers, consideration of the proposed 1998 Telecommunication Tower Policy; 2 . APPOINTED Supervisor Gerber and Supervisor DeSaulnier to a sub-committee to meet with staff and report to the', Board of Supervisors on the above date; 3 . AUTHORIZED acceptance by the Clerk of the Board of written comments from interested parties until 5 p.m. on Friday, May 15, 1998, with said written comments to be provided to Community Development Department staff for response at the sub- committee meeting. CommunitylJl.G.t Dennis M.Barry,AICD Community Development Director " Development Costa Department County Administration Building Count 651 Pine Street £�j_.. 4th Floor, North Wing _ Martinez, California 94553-0095 Phony.5-1210 >7 April 29, 1998 INTERESTED JURISDICTIONS/AGENCIES RE: Draft 1998 Telecommunications Tower Policy Enclosed is a Final Draft of the Contra Costa County 1998 Telecommunications Tower Policy. The draft policy will be considered by the Board of Supervisors on May 12, 1998 at 2:00 P.M. Should you have any questions, please contact Debbie Chamberlain at(925) 335-1213. Sincerely, DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP' Community Development Director Office Hours Monday- Friday:8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. Office is closed the 1 st, 3rd&5th Fridays of each month City of Antioch City of Brentwood City of Clayton P. ?box 230 708 Third Street P. U. Box 280 Antioch, CA 94509 Brentwood, CA 94523 Clayton, CA 94517 City of Concord City of E1 Cerrito City of Hercules 1950 Parkside Drive 10890 San Pablo Ave. P. d Box 156 Concord, CA 94.519 El Cerrito, CA 94530 Hercules, CA 94547 City of Lafayette City of Martinez City of Orinda P. U. Box 1968 525 Henrietta Street 26 orinda Way Lafayette, CA 94549 Martinez, CA 94553 Orinda, CA 94563 City of Pinole City of Pittsburg City of Pleasant Hill 2131 Pear Street P. 0. Box 1518 100 Gregory Lane Pinole, CA 94564 Pittsburg, CA 94565 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 City of Richmond City of San Pablo City of San Ramon P. 4. Box 4046 one Alvarado Square 2222 Camino Ramon Richmond., CA 94804 San Pablo, CA 94806 San Ramon, CA 94583 Cityo f Walnut Creek GENERAL SERVICES COUNTY COUNSEL 1666 N. Main Street Walnut Creek, CA 94596 IN ER-OFF1. 1yT.F,R-QFF10E Caltrans SHERIFF AIA 1120 N Street, Room 1100 P. 0. Box 271 Sacramento, CA 95814IRM-OF-fl: Alamo, CA 94507 Bay Paint MAC Bethel Island MAC Byron MAC P. 0. Box 5148 P. 0. Box 1388 P. D. Box 268 Bay Point, CA 94565 Bethel Island, CA 94511 Byron, CA 94514 Diablo MAC Discovery Bay MAC El Sobrante MAC P. o.Box 35 P. 0. Box 272 3817 San Pablo Dam Road Diablo, CA 94528 Discovery Bay, CA 94514 E1 Sobrante, CA 94803 Steve. Farneth Marianne Loring John R. Grosvenor Kensington MAC Kensington MAC Kensington MAC 45 Beverly Road 274 Willamette Ave. 4 Franciscan Way Kensington, CA 94707 Kensington, CA 94707 Kensington, CA 94707 James Carmen Michael Abraham Knghtsen Town Advisory Keri�;ington MAC Kensington MAC Council 118 Windsor Ave. 125 York Ave. P. 0. Box 170 Kensington, CA 94707 Kensington, CA 94707 Knightsen, CA 94548 North Richmond MAC Oakley MAC Pacheco MAC P. 0. Box 471 P. O.Box 212 1237 Temple Drive Richmond, CA 94808 Oakley, CA 94561 Pacheco, CA 94553 Rodeo MAC East Bay Regional Park Save Mt. Diablo District P. '0. Box 5376 P. 0. Box 5381 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 c/o Supervisor Uilkema Oakland, CA 94605-0381 Dan Burke Karen Vernetti American Tower Systems Sprint Spectrum 2906 Bayview Dr. Bill Nevin, Director of 651 Gateway Blvd. , #1.500 Alameda, CA 94501 operations so. San Francisco, CA 1220 Brickyard cave Rd., #200 Pt. Richmond, CA 94801-4134 94080 Kevin Allison, Supervisor Dennis Elwell Naval Facilities Engineering AT&T Contract Management Telecommunications Division Command 1200 Peachtree street, NE, Dept. of General Services P. 0. Box 727 Rm. 15W10 601 sequoia Pacific Blvd. San Bruno, CA 94066 Atlanta, GA 30309 Sacramento, CA 95814--0282 Peter W. Maushardt Karry L. Styron Lawrence E. Ferri 121 Madrid Way 1700 N. Broadway, #206 Park Superintendent Sonoma, CA 95476 Walnut Creek, CA 94596--4134 Dept. of Parks & Recreation 96 Mitchel Canyon Road Clayton, CA 94517 Paul R. Dickey Richard S. Brown Knox LaRue 307 Draeger Drive 4125 Sacramento St. 2171 Ralph Avenue Moraga, CA 94556 Concord, CA 94521 Stockton, CA 95206 Chevron Steve Slavin Molly Keles Stan Wood 6001 Bollinger Canyon Rd, Rm 4683 Chabot Drive, Suite 100 Kukulica & Associates 2160 Pleasanton, Ca 94588 1175 Dublin Blvd. , #106A San Ramon, CA 94583-0954 Dublin, CA 94583 Town of Danville Town of Moraga Dona Burke 510 La Gonda Way P. 0. Box 188 Pacific Bell Danville, CA 94526 Moraga, CA 94556 1600 South Main, #202 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Lou Rosas Pacific Bell 1600 S. Main St. , #202 Walnut Creek,CA9 4596 ,417bj28 . .. .................................................................... CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 1998 TELECOMMUNICATIONS POLICY Prepared by: Community Development Department May 129 1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1. Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 11. Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 HI. Definitions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 IV. Development Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 A. General Development Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 B. Building Mounted Antennas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 C. Roof Mounted Antennas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 D. Ground Mounted'Telecommunication Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 E. Freestanding Telecommunication Towers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 F. Radio and Television Towers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 G. Major Ridge/Open Space Areas[Non-Open Space Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . 11 H. Mt.Diablo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I1 VI. Length.of Permit/Discontinuance of Use/Financial Guarantee . . . . . . . . . . . 12 VII Testing of Commercial Wireless Communication Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 VIII. Submittal Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 A. General. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 B. Telecommunication Towers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 ry CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 1998 TELECOMMUNICATION POLICY L j'URPOSE The purpose and intent of this policy is to establish development guidelines to regulate the placement and design of+commercial wireless communication facilities that preserve the unique visual character of the County and are consistent with federaland state law related to the development of commercial wireless communication transmission facilities. This policy acknowledges the community benefit associated with the provision of wireless communication services within the County and encourages the lease of publicly owned properties for the development of commercial wireless telecommunication facilities. This policy also provides administrative direction to staff by indicating the factors, in addition to those required by§26-2.2006 06 of the County Code,the Beard of Supervisors may consider in reviewing a land use permit and/or development plan application for a commercial wireless communications facility. II. OB CTIVES Meet the present and future communications needs within Contra Costa County while minimizing the visual and environmental impacts on the landscape. Employ disguising techniques of design so that a tower is aesthetically and architecturally compatible with the environment. General Plan Policy 9-18, 9-19, 9-22. Ensure a broad range of telecommunications services and high quality telecommunications infrastructure to serve the community. Encourage "stealth" design of wireless communications facilities if located at visually prominent sites. General Plan Policy 9-18, 9-19, 9-21, 9-22 Pursue additional public benefit by encouraging the leasing of publicly owned properties, where appropriate,for the development of wireless communications facilities. III. DEMOTIONS A. "Antenna! means any system ofpanels,rods,wires,drums,reflecting discs or similar devices used for the transmission or reception of radio(electromagnetic)signals. B. "Antenna Support Structure"means any system of towers poles or other structures used to support an antenna. 2 C. "Applicant" means owner(s) of property (and, where applicable, easements) upon which wireless communications facilities are to be located. D. "Building Mounted Antenna"means an antenna whose support structure is mounted to a building or rooftop equipment screen,that transmits or receives electromagnetic signals. E. "Co-location"means the location of two or more wireless communications facilities on a single support structure,or otherwise sharing a common location. Co-location shall also include the location of wireless communications facilities with other utility facilities and structures such as,but not limited to,water tanks,transmission towers and:light standards. F. "Commercial Wireless Communications Facility" means a facility that transmits and/or receives electromagnetic signals, including, but not limited to towers, antennas,monopole and/or accessory structures and related equipment. G. "Equipment Enclosure e"means a cabinet or other structure used to house equipment associated with a wireless communications facility. H. "Ground-Mounted Antenna" means an antenna with its support structure placed directly on the ground,the total height of which does not exceed 15-feet including the height of the antenna. 1. "Monopole"means a single free-standing pole,post,or similar structure over 18-feet in height from finished grade used to support equipment associated with a commercial wireless communications facility. I "Mount Diablo Area" is defined to be the Mt. Diablo State Park. Boundary as depicted on Figure 9-3 of the Open Space Element of the County General Plan and those areas depicted on Figure 1 attached to this Policy. K. "Non-Open Space Area"means those areas designated in the County General Plan as"Agriculture","Public and Semi-Public","Watershed",or"Parks and Recreation". L. "Related Equipment" means all equipment ancillary to the transmission and reception of voice and data via radio frequencies. Such equipment may include,but is not limited to,cable,conduit and connectors. M. "Roof-Mounted Antenna"means an antenna directly attached or affixed to the roof of an existing structure which transmits or receive electromagnetic signals. N. "Open Space"means those General Plan designations that include publicly owned, i 3 open space lands which are not designated as "Publicand Semi-Public", "Watershed",or"Parks and Recreation". Lands designated"Open Space"included, without limitation,wetlands and tidelands and other areas of significant ecological resources or geologic hazards. D. "Radio or Television Tower": A structure that transmits and/or receives electromagnetic signals for radio or television communications. P. "Scenic Ridges"means those areas identified as such in the Open Space Element and as depicted on Figure 9-1 of the County General Plan. Q "Service Provider" means any authorized provider of commercial wireless communications services. R. "Stealth Facility"means any commercial wireless communications facility which is designated to blend into the surrounding environment by means of screening, concealment, or camouflage. The antenna and supporting antenna equipment are either not readily visible beyond the property on which it is located, or, if visible, appear to be part of the existing landscape or environment rather than the wireless communications facility. Q "Telecommunication Tower"means a free-standing tower(other than a monopole) that is over 18-feet in height from finished grade and is designated to support antennas. A lattice tower facility is an example of a telecommunications tower. R. "Third Party Review"means an independent review,paid for by the applicant by an independent expert in radio frequency and/or wireless communications. IV. VEAL GUIDELINES In consideration of an application for a land use permit and/or development plan, all new commercial wireless communication facilities shall be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator for compliance with the following General Development Guidelines: A. general Dff&jjment Guidelines: The following development guidelines shall be met by all new commercial wireless communication facilities:' 1. All proposed commercial wireless telecommunication facilities shall be located so as to minimize their visibility. 2. In order to use any telecommunications facility type and placement(such as ground-mounted,facade-mounted,roof-mounted or towers),the applicant 4 will be required to demonstrate why a telecommunication type with a lesser adverse visual impact cannot be used. 3. In addition to the photo simulations showing before and after.scenarios, applicants may be required to submit ftuther visual analysis(such as line of sight analysis). 4. If the Zoning Administrator deems it necessary, applicants may be required to construct a fiall scale"mock-up"of a proposed Facility,using materials and colors that resemble the actual facility for proposed ground-mounted facilities and roof mounted facilities. The mock-up shall be installed 10 days prior to the scheduled public hearing date, and left in place for,a period of 10 days from the date of any final administrative action taken on the project application. The notice of public hearing shall contain information about the location and placement of the"mock" structure. Additionally, all "mock" structures shall be removed by the applicant withinn one month from the date of final administrative action on the project application,and the site shall be restored to its original condition,if the application is denied. 5. All commercial wireless communications facilities shall)comply at all times with all Federal Communications Commission(FCC)rules,regulations, and standards,and any other applicable Federal,state or County law or regulation. 6. Sufficient anti-climbing measures shall be incorporated into the facility, as needed,to reduce the potential for trespass and injury. 7. Building mounted antennas are preferred over free-standing antenna structures,provided that each facility adheres to applicable County zoning ordinance height restrictions. 8. To minimize overall visual impact,new commercial wireless communication facilities shall be co-located with existing facilities and with other planned new facilities, whenever feasible. In addition, whenever feasible, service providers are encouraged to co-locate antennas with other facilities such as water tanks,light standards,and other utility structures where the co-location is found to minimize the overall visual impact. To facilitate co-location in appropriate cases,conditions of approval for land use permits shall require all applicants to cooperate in the siting of equipment and antennas to accommodate the maximum number of operators at a given site. Whenever possible, the applicant shall agree to allow future co-location of additional antennas and not to enter into a lease for the exclusive use of the site. 9. All related equipment,equipment enclosures,antennas,pales or towers shall 4 5 have a non-reflective finish and shall be painted or otherwise treated to minimize visual impacts. Antennas which will be viewed primarily against the skyline(such as"whip"or"stick"antennas)shall be painted light gray or other approved color,with a reflectivity less than 55%except;where the license is required by FCC rules or a condition of the FCC license to be marked or lighted otherwise. 10. The applicant shall demonstrate through manufacturer and industry information that the latest technology relating to the design of the commercial wireless telecommunications facility is being used. 11. Commercial wireless communication facilities shall avoid any unreasonable interference with views from neighboring properties,whenever feasible. 12. Development of commercial wireless communication facilities on vacant sites shall be temporary. Whenever feasible,when the site is developed,such facilities will be removed and replaced with building mounted antennas. 13. All commercial wireless communication facilities which are not mounted on existing structures shall be (1) screened from the view of surrounding properties as much as possible and the public view or co located with existing facilities or structures so as not to create substantial visual,noise or thermal impacts; or (2) sited within areas with substantial> screening by existing vegetation;or(3)designed to appear as natural features found in the immediate area, such as trees or rocks,so as to be effectively unnoticeable; or(4) screened with additional trees and other native or adapted vegetation which shall be planted and maintained around the facility,in the vicinity of the project site,and along access roads in appropriate situations,where such vegetation is deemed necessary to screen telecommunications facilities.Such landscaping,including irrigation,shall be maintained, if deemed necessary, as long as the permit is in effect.This may require installing an automated, mechanical irrigation system. 14. Landscaping may be required in informal natural looking clusters in the vicinity of any proposed commercial wireless telecommunication facility,in addition to screening of the facility. 15. Applicants proposing to irrigate landscaping used for screening commercial wireless telecommunication facilities shall provide written proof of the availability of the necessary water supply to sustain any landscaping required for visual screening prior to permit issuance. This may be in the form of a letter from the owner of the land allowing the applicant the use of required water facilities for landscaping installed improvements in the area. 6 16. Proposed equipment cabinets/structures and accessory structures shall be maintained in good condition over the term of the permit. This shall include keeping equipment cabinets and structures graffiti free and maintaining security fences in good condition. 17. Antennas,towers,dishes or mountings shall not be used:for advertising. 18. Lighting shall not be allowed on commercial wireless telecommunication facilities unless required by the Federal Aviation Administration(FAA) as a public safety measure and,if necessary,approved by the FAA. 19. The applicant shall be required to provide evidence in the Form of a license or construction permit from the FCC that the FCC has accepted the applicant's certification that the facility meets the FCC standard or provide evidence that the FCC has categorically exempted the applicant from demonstrating compliance with the FCC standard.If a license or construction permit has not yet been obtained by the applicant,the furnishing of such FCC license or construction permit shall become a condition of approval for the land use permit and/or development plan. 20. Where three (3) or more commercial wireless communications facilities operate in the same location, the carriers operating these facilities shall provide documentation of testing done by an electromagnetic field (EMF) expert to verify that the cumulative EMF levels conform to standards adopted by the FCC. 21. Free standing telecommunications towers shall not be located within the required front yard setback of any property. 22. All freestanding telecommunications towers shall be designed at the minimum functional height required for the coverage area unless related to a County approved plan to reduce the impact(s)of future installations. 23. A technical review to determine if the proposed installation will have electromagnetic interference with other facilities or uses in the area, by the County Communications Officer of the General Services Department may be required.If it is recommended by the County Communications Officer,and determined necessary by the Community Development Department(CDD), the CDL) may employ outside consultants with expertise in this area to provide recommendations to the Community Development Department. The applicant may be asked to describe the electromagnetic frequency needs of the wireless provider and to identify alternative sites which meet the applicant's telecommunications needs and can be readily or reasonably 7 leased. The wireless provider will present its data and offer straightforward information to Community Development Department staff' regarding its electromagnetic frequency needs. The wireless provider will also make staff aware of those alternative sites where leases can be secured that are suitable for its system. When deemed necessary by Community Development Department staff, the wireless provider will also host information sessions for County staff'and Board of Supervisors and County Planning Commission. The cost of such reviews shall be paid by the applicant and deposited with the County as part of the application fee. 24. In appropriate cases,the proposed wireless communication facilities can be located on County-owned or controlled property or County rights-of-way. B. Develynmen '' i elfin .fir Building Mounted Antennas:In additionto all other applicable development guidelines, Section W.A., commercial wireless communication facilities proposed to be mounted or attached onto existing buildings shall be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator for compliance with the following: 1. Building mounted antennas and any ancillary equipment should be in scale and architecturally integrated with the building design in such a manner as to be visually unobtrusive. Screening designs may include locating the facility within attics, steeples, towers, behind and ;below parapets, or concealed with an architecturally compatible addition to a building. 2. When viewed directly against a building wall, colors and materials of the antennas should match the existing building. 3. Building mounted antennas and any ancillary equipment should avoid any unreasonable interference with views from neighboring properties. 4. The equipment cabinets and structures shall be located to minimize visibility from public places,and to have minimal visual impacts.Any visible portion of the equipment cabinet shall be painted or treated in order to be architecturally compatible with the surrounding buildings and/or it shall be screened,using appropriate techniques,to camouflage,disguise and/or blend into the surrounding environment, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. 5. The applicant shall make every attempt to flush-mount and locate antennas below the roof line of the building. Antennas and the associated mounting generally shall not project beyond a maximum of 18-inches from the face of the building. 8 C. Dcycl`opmentGuiddlmcs fQr. Ito,MMW Aninnas: In addition to all other applicable development guidelines in Section W.A., commercial wireless communication facilities proposed to be mounted or attached to the roof of existing buildings shall be reviewed for compliance with the following- I. Roof mounted equipment and antennas,other than facade antennas,shall be aesthetically compatible with and located as far away from the edge of the building as technically feasible as determined by the Zoning Administrator. Antennas attached to the building shall be painted or otherwise treated to match the exterior of the building or the antennas' background color. 2. Roof-mounted antennas shall not be allowed when they are to be placed in direct line of sight of scenic corridors or where they will significantly affect scenic vistas, unless the facilities incorporate appropriate techniques to camouflage,disguise and/or blend them into the surrounding environment, as approved by the Zoning Administrator. 3. The height of roof-mounted antennas, including the support structure, generally shall not exceed 15-feet above the roof plate of the existing building on which they are placed. 4. The equipment cabinet or structure, if located on the rooftop of buildings, shall be located so as to be minimally visible from public places. If any portion of the equipment cabinet is visible, it shall be camouflaged or screened from view,to the fullest extent possible. D. Development Gui tunes torrQUndw : u Tgkcommnnic tt#tion Facilities: In addition to all other applicable development guidelines in Section W.A., ground- mounted telecommunications facilities proposed in any allowed zoning district shall comply with the following: I. Commercial wireless communication facilities visible on or above the ridgeline shall be prohibited unless,prior to approving the application,the Zoning Administrator determines that the applicant has shown that there is no feasible alternative. 2. Ground mounted facilities by different carriers generally shall not be allowed within 1,000 feet of one another,unless the Zoning Administrator determines that the cumulative visual or other physical environmental impacts can be reduced by allowing such facilities within 1,000 feet of one another. 9 The Zoning Administrator shall determine the number of antennas allowed per site on a case by case basis, with the goal of minimizing the visual impacts of the antennas from public viewpoints. 3. Ground .mounted antennas should be the minimum feasible height, but no taller than 15 feet in total height. In addition, for any ground mounted antennas over 10 feet in height, the applicant shall demonstrate that the additional height,up to a maximum of 15-feet total,is structurally required to meet the applicant's objectives and that visual impacts,if any,have been mitigated by specified means, satisfactory to the County Zoning Administrator. 4. All proposed facilities should be located within easy reach of existing access roads, whenever possible. Unless visual impacts can be. adequately mitigated, no new access roads on the ridgeline shall be allowed with any proposed telecommunication facility. 5. All facilities shall incorporate appropriatetechniques to camouflage,disguise and/or blend there into the surrounding environment(stealth techniques)to minimize visual impacts. A sample list of such techniques is set forth in Subsection E. below (Design Guidelines for Free-standing Telecommunication Towers). 6. All associated equipment cabinets or structures for ground mounted facilities shall be designed and located so as to minimize visual impacts and/or be screened from public view. Screening techniques may include landscaping and/or architectural treatment to make them compatible with existing buildings and/or partial burial of the cabinets or structures. E. In addition to all other development guidelines in Section IV. A., free-standing telecommunications towers proposed in any allowed zoning district shall comply with the following; 1. Free-standing telecommunications towers shall be located and designed to minimize visual impacts. When appropriate, monopoles in areas where adverse visual impacts cannot be avoided (as in some commercial areas), shall be camouflaged, disguised and/or blended into the surrounding environment, or disguised as pieces of art/sculpture, flag poles, telephone poles, light standards, or other visual forms to avoid an adverse visual impact. 2. Freestanding telecommunications towers shall generally not be allowed 10 within 1,000 feet of each other,unless the Zoning Administrator determines that the cumulative visual impacts will be reduced by allowing facilities within 1,000 feet of one another. 3. All applicants for telecommunications towers shall provide to the Zoning Administrator a written commitment to allow ether wireless carriers,using compatible technology,to co-locate antennas on the proposed towers. 4. The smallest available and least visible antennas that provide the coverage objective shall be mounted on towers. 5. Lightning arrestor rods and beacon lights shall not be included as part of the tower design,unless the applicant can demonstrate that such are necessary for safety reasons. _ Minor modifications to the communications equipment design, location, elevations, and other elements of the approved tower may be allowed by the Zoning Administrator, if such modifications are in keeping with the architectural statement and layout design of the original approval. F. DmIagmentGuiddines for RadiQ and lAtybion : In addition to all other applicable development guidelines, in Section W.A. above, commercial wireless communication facilities proposed in any allowable zoning district shall comply with the following: 1. Radio and television towers shall be the minimal functional size. Any proposed towers of 250 feet in height or more may be approved by the Zoning Administrator only if the applicant can demonstrate that there is no feasible alternative. 2. Radio and television towers shall be set back 110 percent of their height from adjacent residential buildings or building envelopes. 3. Radio and television towers shall not be placed on or above the ridgeline unless approved by the Zoning Administrator and upon the applicant's showing that there is no feasible alternative. ` 4. The applicant shall ensure that the tower does not cause interference with reception of television,radio or other systems. If,on submittal of evidence, the Zoning Administrator finds that the tower interferes with such reception, the Zoning Administrator may revoke or modify the land use permit pursuant to the revocation procedures established by the County Ordinance Code (C.C.C. Ord. Code §§26-2.2020-26.2.2030) 11 G. Areas: In addition to all other applicable development guidelines in Section W.A. above,commercial wireless communication facilities proposed to be located within an area identified in the County General Plan as Scenic Ridge,Open SpAce or Non- Open Space areas,shall be subject to the following: 1. Compliance with Section IV.E,, "Design Guidelines for Free-standing Telecommunications Towers"and Section W.F.,"Development Guidelines for Radio and Television Towers." 2. No commercial wireless communication facility shall be located within 54 vertical feet of a County General Plan identified Major Ridge,as measured from the base of the facility, unless an exception is granted by the Zoning Administrator. An exception may be granted by the Zoning Administrator only if any of the following findings can be made: a. Due to the specific location and design of the proposed facility,the facility will not be visible from surrounding properties or public view;or b. Due to existing development or existing vegetation at the site, the proposed facility will be substantially screened from the view of surrounding properties and public view and will not result in an adverse visual impact,or C. The applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator that there is no feasible alternative. 3. Special design considerations, including designs which simulate natural features found in the immediate area,i.e. trees or rocks, may be taken into account by the Zoning Administrator when facilities within the County General Plan identified major ridge line areas are proposed. 4. Development of a commercial wireless communication facility shall conform generally with the natural contours to avoid excessive grading. H. Development Guidelines for t 'abler Q,area: In addition to all other applicable development guidelines, in Section W.A. above, commercial wireless communication facilities proposed to be located in the Mt. Diablo Area(as defined in this policy)shall be subject to the following: 1. Compliance with Section IV.E.,"Development Guidelines for Radio and Television Towers",and Section W.F.,"Design Guidelines for Free-Standing 12 Telecommunications Towers". 2. No commercial wireless communication facility shall be located within 50 vertical feet of any peak within the Mt.Diablo Area,which as meured from the base of the facility,unless an exception is granted. An exception may be granted by the Zoning Administrator only if any ofthe following findings can: be made: a. Due to the specific location and design of the proposed facility,the facility will not be visible from surrounding properties or public view: or b. Due to existing development or existing vegetation at the site, the proposed facility will be substantially screened from the view of surrounding properties and public view and will not result in an adverse visual impact;or C. The applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator that there is no feasible alternative. 3. Special design considerations, including designs which simulate natural features found in the immediate area, i.e. trees or rocks, shall be taken into account by the Zoning Administrator when approving facilities. VI. All permit approvals for commercial wireless communication facilities may be valid for up to ten (10) years, with administrative or public hearing reviews every three years to demonstrate continuing compliance with the Conditions of Approval. If allowed by the conditions of approval, the permit may be extended administratively by the Zoning .Administrator for up to a maximum of two(2)additional 5 year terms upon verification of continued compliance with the findings and conditions of approval for the Land Use Permit or Development Plan and compliance with all other applicable provisions in the County Ordinance Code in effect at the time of permit renewal. At the time of a three year review or request for a five year extension,modifications may be required to the approved land use permit and/or final development plan, if technology has advanced to the point where commercial wireless telecommunication facilities can be made safer or less visually obtrusive. All land use permit and/or development plan applications shall include conditions of approval that require modifications to the approved site plan if technology has advanced to the point where commercial wireless telecommunication facilities can be made safer or less 13 visually obtrusive. All structures and equipment associated with a commercial wireless communications facility shall be removed within thirty(30)days of the discontinuation of the use and the site shall be restored by the permittee to its original predevelopment condition. In addition, the permittee small provide the Community Development Department with a notice of intent to vacate the site a minimum of thirty (30) days prior to vacation. For facilities located on County owned or leased property, this removal requirement shall be included within the terms of the lease. Prior to constructing a telecommunications tower,or prier to renewing a use permit for an existing tower,the applicant or permittee shall provide a financial guarantee,which shall be indexed annually for inflation,satisfactory to the Zoning Administrator, for the removal of the facility in the event that the use is abandoned or the use permit expires,or is revoked, or otherwise terminated. The amount of the guarantee per free-standing tower may be reduced or eliminated (a) if the applicant has more than one free-standing tower in the County. If the Owner or lessee does not remove any obsolete or unused facilities, as described above,the financial guarantee shall be used by the County to remove any obsolete or unused facilities and to return the site to its predevelopment conditions. Any unused financial guarantee shall be relinquished to the applicant upon termination of the use and removal of facility or transfer of the lease accompanied by a financial guarantee by the new lessee or owner in compliance with County ming requirements in effect at that time. VII. All requests for testing of commercial wireless telecommunication; facilities may be submitted to the Community Development Department for consideration, in any zoning district which permits commercial wireless telecommunication facilities following the issuance of a land use permit and/or development plan. The height of the proposed facility shall not exceed the maximum height allowed for structures in the zoning district in which it is proposed,and the facility shall be removed within six(6)months. A bond sufficient to cover the cost of removal shall also be provided to the Community Development Department and shall be provided by the applicant. VIII. SIMM111AL REQUIUMENTS A. GeneI_:In addition to the general requirements for a Land Use Permit application, an application for a commercial wireless communication facility shall include the following information: 1. Site and landscape plans drawn to scale, 2. Statement of ownership of the proposed site or authorization to use it; 14 3. Reference to any necessary easements; 4. A USES Topographic map or survey with existing topographic contours showing the proposed antennas, accessory structures, new roads and the surrounding area extending at lease one hundred fifty(150)feet beyond any proposed towers and at least fifty (50) feet beyond other proposed telecommunications facilities; 5. The number,type and dimensions of antennas and equipment cabinets and structures proposed for use by the applicant and a map identifying all existing telecommunication facilities within. a 3,000 foot radius of the proposed facility; 6. A description indicating whether the proposed telecommunications facility is intended to increase capacity within an existing covered area,or extend service to an unserved area,describing the extent or degree of each proposed increased or extended service; 7. For applications to extend service to an unserved area,aj map based on either radio frequency propagation maps(or similar engineering data)or drive tests at the proposed site and its vicinity showing the estimated coverage area of the proposed telecommunications facility; S. A map showing how the proposed antennas fit within the network of the applicant's existing and proposed antenna sites within 3,000 feet of the project vicinity; 9. A statement of intent to design the facility to allow for co-location; 10. A description of the site selection process, including information about at least two other sites in the same search ring that were considered and the reasons for their rejection; 11. A statement to the Zoning Administrator,including. a)The power rating for all antennas and back-up equipment proposed with the first application; and b)A description of the system,including the antennas,and associated equipment cabinets and structures which conforms to the radio- Frequency radiation emission standards adopted by the FCC,and will operate within the frequency assigned by the FCC;and 15 c) Assurance that operation of the facility, in addition to ambient radio frequency emission levels, will not exceed adopted FCC standards with regard to human exposure in"uncontrolled areas"(i.e., areas subject to general public exposure,as defined by the National Council on Radiation Exposure Prevention or the then applicable FCC standard. 12. The applicant's proposal to establish and maintain maximum visual screening of unsightly public views of the facilities,including landscape and irrigation plans,sample exterior materials and colors of towers,antennas,and accessory structures,including equipment structures and cabinets and security fences; and 13. Visual impact demonstrations, including before and after photo-simulation, showing height and location of the proposed facility as viewed from public places. B. Vicom +fin Tow-era: Applications for telecommunication towers, in addition to the above requirements,shall include the following: 1. A description of the tower,with technical reasons for its design and size; 2. A report from a civil engineer regarding the number and type of antennas the structure is designed to support; 3. A statement to the Zoning Administrator indicating how the facilities have been designed to allow co-location of other carriers, wherever technically feasible; 4. A statement of the reasons for not co-locating on any of the existing monopoles and lattice towers identified in the area survey.This may include a statement from the telecommunications cagier for the existing facility giving reasons for not permitting co-location, or a statement of structural reasons, with a copy of the structural calculations to be reviewed by the County Building Inspection Department; 5. A statement indicating whether each site identified is essential for completion of the coverage objective and reasons; and b. To the extent required by the Zoning Administrator,a visual study depicting, representative locations within a maximum three mile radius frotxr which any portion of the proposed tower would have a substantial, demonstrable negative aesthetic effect, including public and privateviewpoints, streets, 16 Parks or scenic areas. The visual study shall not be required for co-locations on existing towers that do not result in an increase in height of the tourer. DJC/dc.aa 4/29/98 Ct Ir 4 11 fy f t }} ", <. } r .«�+^ f i• �skr 'r° ..._ �' Ir z✓s'�I � j, `�y �.1 �s',F�•}t �: .'�. .t['\ a v �•r• r AT 7,7 J •. r. � y ►tl ''�, .r , ; E.-+w..+ �;,/ � �,+ t..w•.i ^ to r..Y,J" � r,�.•8- � -"� ,i �`.. } i* 4 � � t• A If ". f.„�1 ... �» tas "t } � } �f, ,shy`•. f• � J f.• iN "{ � Pi"' � `''�' t 4 � � !«, � N �1_t �'. `�} • f ^ ,,Ci t tij t� 7 _{t a;�j "� j �. x , fes, "� S` ' »i , j,'�iIP) J! •'1, do f # Am i �s Tom• 1{ ✓♦ �jM�,\ �'f' J�T,y� r� ± . �l'f ya. f`R J !J� � )`t* t ��..ry„�l� �'!#E•. `:",r � { fir'/ j� Jp t !, 'i M•�MAc Yt Y� yy � ' . ��� yr t.� � �s � �• �i.. Y y F /e4. i "+s "E t < �� �r "i M t � -. fir$'• l �,,� s'} ..J""'"rid• t j / 4'�, � , -. .;;fig.. •. ;. tr • t,_d;r �''�" !; .,.;�' � ' `.t--t'',yet.,�'�'(f "., � y: Yr�•f,t 4*'` (��',�,%,,,a: • ,ONIRA COSTA �j GENERAL SERVICES ICES DEPARTMENT LEASE MANAGEMENT DIVISION 97 EIEC 11 PH3* 24 1220 Morello Avenue, Suite 100 Martinez, California 94553-4711 C01 MENT DEPT NlTY 313-7250 DATE.- December 8, 1997 TO: Dennis Barry, Interim Director, Community Development department Attention. Debbie Chamberlain, Senior Planner FROM: Barton J. Gilbert, Director of General Services By: Steven B. Van Horn, Lease Management Divis SUBJECT: County Radio/Microwave Communication Sites In reference to our phone conversation, I am sending to you answers to the questions you have regarding Contra; Costa County radio/communication sites. Your questions are: 1) Where are the sites located? 2) ghat is the rate schedule for the sites? and 3) What are sample charges for a small, medium, and large user at a site? 1) Attached is a list of radio/microwave communication sites. 2) A schedule of rates is also attached. Most of the users of the sites are public safety providers, including the sheriff, fire, police departments, emergency medical services, Public Works, and General Services. The minority of the users are"for profit" entities including cellular providers. 3) A small user with a radio, two RF antennas, and electrical power would be charged approximately $285.00 per month. A medium user for one storage rack, two RF antennas, one microwave dish, and electrical power would be assessed approximately $835.00 per month. A large user requiring space for more than the usual amount of storage racks would be charged byithe square foot for vault space. Therefore,for enough space for ten storage racks, eight RF antennas, four microwave dishes, and electrical power, it would be assessed approximately $2,910.00 per month. 1f you have other questions, please call Joe Cruz at extension 3-7087. SBV:mak cornsstm 3.wpd cc: Kathy Brown Joe Cruz -- t o N W c n W 0o N A N N N GSA Z Z Z ;P� CL or c� � o d �, v, oo �, � v, v, �, v, c5 .� � �` o•• �• � o � �, z� ro � -•+ W w .}a t.h N N C O C7 •-• � �-• W W t1ti N N C O �-' 01 O� 1 dl C7 P W C7 W J Ci0 Ch P 1 ,] to V) <T Ull N W � �,p �-' •{`► 04 « r.... W W N � •••.1 w cT C� C �" �^•' t.C1 cT o0 N w .• O N N O N �-' O O C7 C N N C7 � O O C d C7 O O O O O C'7 C C C C C7 d C7 O O C O C7 C7 G7 CJ G +-- '-- N .A .-+ W G7 C> G7 W �-- � N N C5 C:S N C J O O �-•' w ON Gti W r-• <:J 4C C+ W P Oo �a i w @ } rJ �• 4� C ra b z z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z z z Z Z z hC14 z -C z z rC z z Z Z Z Z Z z z Z a; r O O O C7 © J © 4 U 4 C1 C7 p 4 r r r r r r-°r p C6 lo o � � co rc � y to tp c> CL `•C �, o s--r � C � CD CC b ry a °� '� v C�t}_NTRA C0STA-CQUNTY GENERAL SERVICES_IYIPARTMENT RE-Antennas: installed at or above 50 foot mark - $100.00 installed below 50 foot mark - $80.00 Micro-way-e-Dishes: Height in feet above Diameter of Dish gnaund_to-center-of_di-sh 4 -6 4' to 49' $80 $80 $110 $110 $110 50' to 99' $100 $100 $130 $130 $130 100' and above $120 $130 $145 $160 $185 All new replacement antenna or microwave installations will require a'structural analysis charge to determine if the structure can accommodate the proposed load. The fees for this will be determined by the County. Vault_Spac-e: 72" or higher cabinet or rack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $420 42" or less base station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $300 Transceiver w/panel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $180 Single receiver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $60 Multiplex shelf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $30 Power (Commercial_and Emergency: Per cabinet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45 Mobile transmitter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45 Other - per outlet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45 B_aseband_Usag_e: Customer provided multiplex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $45.00 per channel County provided multiplex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1451.00 per channel Special_Us.e_Charges: Satellite Receivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20% over above charges Frequencies used in the 800 or 900 MHZ bands . . . . . . 15% over above charges Users of bulk vault space . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . as determined by County Usage-Restrictions: Antenna with ground radials cannot exceed 14 inches. All solid microwave dishes will require radomes. No new installations utilizing"mobile radios" modified to use as "base stations"will be permitted except under special circumstances, as this type of equipment is not intended for "mountaintop use" because it can contribute to site noise problems. Rev.6-95 ...................................... »ein ACIGM8-S&Ve M001 ujaDto N a!v V+u-0oW .ru w+i 4,�W ..,..... u - .. .............................. . ................................... t3ATE: Monday, may i�l, ��aa M M 0 TO: Debbie Chamberlain, CCC Community dPvalnnmpnt Enclosed 5 pages of comments of the FAX: 335-1222 draft Tower Policy. Given a number of errors, language that is unclear, and our extensive number of FROM: Seth Adams-Save Mount Diablo suggestions,ISave Mount Diablo would appreciate a coMnuance of this matter. LL ................................................................................... Seth Adams' PAGES: s Director of Land Programs rM a CONSIDER Wi i n REQ -� y � { MAY 1 2. z: Seth Adams-save Mount utwo 1W��v yk�-onus .,w;� „�, ,,. W�v Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors minty Administration Building 61 Pine St. Martinez, CA 94553 May 11, 1998 Members,Board of Supervisors, There is a tremendous proliferation of telecommunication tower construction taking place within our county. If permitting of these towers isn't regulated and conditioned appropriately,in a few years we will have reversed the progress that's been made in eliminating the visual blight of overhead wires,signs,water tanks,etc.by crowning every peak,knoll and ridgeline with antennas and microwave dishes. Save Mount Diablo appreciates the interest of the Board in updating the May 1977 Communication Tower Policy,and the work of County staff in drafting language for an updated policy. Unfortunately,the current draft provides no greater certainty of visual sensitivity than the previous policy. As it stands the policy would allow construction of telecommunication facilities almost anywhere,given conditions which can be interpreted administratively in a variety of ways. Language should be strengthened throughout the policy. Save Mount Diablo's strongest interest in regard to the policy is the gradual elimination of tower facilities within Mt.Diablo Mate Park,and the visual impacts of new towers proposed for ridgelines and on lands with open space zoning. Although Diablo is a very good telecommunication site from the standpoint of tower operators,it is an inappropriate one given the sensitivity of the park and its resources. Although other sites,or a variety of sites, may not be as economical,there are alternatives which could provide the same coverage as existing facilities. Given enough notice,tower operators can seek other sites and phase out operations within the State Park. In answer to objections certain to be raised,case law on 'takings'related to the regulation of telecommunication sites has supported regulatory agencies where a sufficient period of operation has been provided to allow an economic return on investment. We propose a moratorium on new facilities within the ML Diablo Area and a twenty-five year phase out period for existing facilities within the State Park. In the meantime, continued permitting and operation of existing towers should be dependent on progress in the decrease of visual impacts. Although staff's work,if adopted,could help decrease the visual impacts of new tower construction,the draft policy has tremendous loopholes,and doesn't clearly require improvement in existing facilities. The policy should include regulatory provisions requiring on- going decreases in visual impacts through the elimination of larger,older equipment. Technological advances now allow the use of smaller transmission and reception equipment for telecommunications. Tower operators aren't inclined to invest in the replacement of older nein Acerns-tieve mount uisolo U a t y Vk i-aovO t f r xo u w u 2 equipment simpply to decrease impacts,unless motivated by economics or regulatory 'requirements. It is in our county's best interest to preserve the area's natural beauty by seeking decreases in cumulative visual impacts even as tower facilities increase in number. For this reason,tower permits should include a cap on the numbers of transmission and reception equipment for each structure. The alternatives are tower structures which are increasingly visible as additional equipment is attached. Lists of tower equipment and clients should be updated 1)as they change,2)on an annual basis or 3)at scheded reviews,in order to best keep track of opportunities to decrease visual Macts. Tower operators may claim this information is privileged or would cause them to ear a competitive disadvantage;in fact the PCC already requires this information,which can be obtained from the FCC website. Allowance of additional equipment should be based on a cumulative decrease in visual impacts. For example,a second microwave dish could be allowed if the original dish is replaced with two dishes of cumulatively lessvisibility. The burden of proof that there would be less visual impact would be placed on the applicant. The policy should also include economic mitigations which will encourage operators to practice efficiency and to eliminate more marginal facilities. Por this reason,we'd suggest the creation of a"Visual Impact Mitigation Fund" much like landfill tipping fees,which would require an on-going payment of a percentage of gross rental fees to be used for environmental and visual enhancement. An alternative approach might include annually a flat fee for each tower structure and a smaller fee for each antenna or dish,thereby encouraging efficiency. We'd suggest consolidation of review,whereby tower proposals and reviews are conducted four times a year rather than on a case by case basis,increasing the chances that towers can be co-located. The Policy could include stronger requirements for encouraging the choice of County owned sites,so that rental fees can benefit County programs. Finally,allowance of tenear permit periods with two five year extensions allowed administratively would defeat the purposes of greater attention aimed at decreasing long term impacts. leo permit period longer than ten years should be allowed,at least within open space areas,given the rapid rate of technological change. We've included detailed comments on the draft language,below. Sincerely, Seth Adams Director of Land programs Comments: draft C.C. County 1998 Telecommunications Policy May 12,1998 Purpose There should be a clear definition within the purposes as to what range of facilities are subject to this policy. In addition,the policy actually regulates not just"the placement and the design" of these facilities,but also the review,continued permitting,and removal of new and previously permitted facilities. The first sentence refers to facilities that"...preserve the unique visual character...",and should be corrected to read"...in order to preserve..:',since the policy regulates towers in general,not just ones which preserve the County's visual character. We'd suggest additional purposes. Add "Topreserve the scenic integri of Contra Costa CountV despite the pTolfferation of communication towers." JCii}KGttiSiitl`3CIVC iYlG3f.tt}I 1Jf$G'ftii Y.7tV�Yf".GiVJ Wilt t tlstl lY A3.GG U-WW 3 Add "To seek environmental miti ation funding for visual and other!n 'acts when the County's scenic intep xity is affected." Add "To seek the consolidation and eventual elimination of telecommunication towers and Nmipmekt c xn the ks of Mt.DiabloContra Costa Coun s central landmark and most !Lmortant natural featuxe and within thesurroun;ling Mt.Diablo State Park." Objectives Add "To seek environmental mitt ation ftinqLng for visual and other inn cts when the County's scenic integrity is affected." Add "To seek the consolidation and eventual elimination of telecommunication towers and e ui merit liom the 12eaks of Mt.Diablo Contra Costa Cour 's central lanthnaxk and most ixn tent natural feature,and within the surrounding Mt.Diablo State Park." Suggested Additional/Substituted Sections Consolidation of Review "All communication facili Discretionary Mprovals,land use 2exmits and/or devel merit plan approvals shall be consolidated to four hearing date ods ver year,to facilitate anal sis of im actsto aid in site consolidation and review and to aid in re�achin li oals." Visual Impact Mitigation Fund "All commercial communication facilities located on Major Ride Space Areas/Non- ace Areas shall Oy a fee of a of gloss rental fees or a minimum of whichever is eater,to be placed in a "Visual Igipact Mittanon Pond"and,administered b the Crsun for the pgWoses of environmental mitt ations. These mi ht include the pMervation of 2M Mace areas,including rid�elires and slopes,etc." Substitution of DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES FOR MT. DIABLO AREA H. Development Guidelines for ME Diablo Area Deep initial sentences and clauses 1. Substitute the following for the remainder of the section: Pg- 11 2. "No new commercial wireless communication facility will be approved within Mt. Diablo State Park. 3. "No new communication towers shall be allowed above 1500,feet in elevation within the Mt.Diablo Area (as defined in this policy)." 4. "Existing commercial wireless communication facilities within Mt.Diablo State Park shall be phased out and eliminated within a period of twenty five years from the date of adoption.o�cy." 5. "Existing facility pern-tits will be made subject to the conditions above durin Rgggt reviews extensions or other related germit a ovals. Additional permit periods during this phase out period shall be rated only 1 where.full t condition con fiance has been established aril 2 substantial o ens has been made in decreasin the visibili of existing gerrxiitted facilities." Specific Comments IV. DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES A. General Development Guidelines ADD "A lication review and all other subsequent reviews of Pimosed or existin commercial wireless communication acilities shall include full photo documentation of e;dstin 0AUU W-QU VC r4JQV nt UJU01 t O6 J t N V."'O iVO +lean l f J.G tv t a.GG U010 ,conditions and eui ent for comparison and in order to facilitate pdliqoals related to 'bainin-d&& disturbance and visibility." ., pg.4 S. last sentence STRIKE "'Whenever possible" pg. 4-5 9. ADD"Microwave dishes shall be painted in camouflage patterns desisted to minimize visibility". pg. 5 13. All four conditions should be required,in order to minimize visibility, rather than a choice of one of the four. ADD"Where facilities are located on public land,the managing ageM must be consulted and must al2prove d screenin landsca etc." se Proposed Additional Guidelines. ADD "25. All a hcations shall include a cap on transmission rec tion and other e LA ent tially=22sed� the need for the range of e ui ent. At permit reviews these lists>and Photo documentations must be updated. Additional a ui ent will only be allowed where c'1*=lat1 evi;01mpacts are decreased..throeh x lacernent with smaller equipment or additional mitigations to decrease visite." ADD "26. Allfacilities roposed shall contribute$jnumber/fee schedule to be set by the Countyl to a Visual lin act Mitigation Fund tofund environmental enhancement protects within the Gcrunty. (These fees might be limited to areas with open space zoning)." D. Develo rnent Guidelines for Ground Mounted Telecommunication Facilities pg. 8 1. DELETE the remainder of the sentence after"prohibited". pg. 9 2. There needs to be a standard for the permissible number of antennas. G. Develo meet Guidelines for Major Rid Oen Space Areas/Non-Open Space Areas pg.1111 2. Clause "c" should be struck. If the Z.A.allows an exception by which a ffacility is permitted on a Major Ridge,it must be screened. pg. 11 ADD 5. "Additional permit periods for facilities located within Ma or Ride en Space ace Areas/Non-ppen S ace Areas shall be eranted El R:1:)where full permit condition cml2gance has been established and 2 substantial prostress has been made in decreasing the visibility of existing permitted facilities." VI. LENGTH OF PERMITJDISCONTINUANCE OF US FINANCIAL, GUARANTEE pg. 12 Second Sentence,ADD "Except in the Mt Diablo area and within Ma or Ride est Space Areas Non-Open 6 ace Area "...if allowed by the conditions o approval,the permit may be extended administratively by the Zoning Administrator for up to... VIII. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS ADD "14. _ Alll applications and reviews shall include a liss,and photo documentation of transmission rec tion and other a Ld ent Initiatly RLWosed, the need for the range of equipment. At permit reviews these lists and photo documentations must be u dated. Additional equipment will only be allowed where cumulative visual#pp acts are decreased through replacement with smaller eq2!pment or additional mitigations to decrease nisi�:" 5 Questions: Definitions why the deletion of cell sites? why the emphasis on"commercial'? Why not sites in general,where the county has regulatory authority? pg. 1 A. There appears to be some confusion as to which telecommunication facilities are subject to this policy;in this case,the definition of"antenna"refers only to radio signals. pg. 2 J. should be changed to read"'Mount Diablo Area'is defined to be the current Mt.Diablo State Park Boundary at the time of application,and those areas depicted on Figure 1 attached to this Policy. pg. 2-3 N. typo 2nd sentence,"Lands designated "Open Space"'include4, pg. 3 O. change "A structure that transmits and/or receives electromagnetic..." to "A structure supporting antennas or other equipment that transmit and/or receive electromagnetic" pg. 3 (first labeled) K 2nd sentence,strike,"'beyond the property on which it is located", since many of these sites are located on large parcels,or are located on public lands on which the public may have direct access to the areas surrounding the tower. pg. 3 the final two definitions are labeled incorrectly and repetitively,ruing Q.and R. Development Guidelines A. General Develo2ment Guidelines pg.4 8. what determines the appropriateness of co-location? There needs to be greater definition. pg. 5 11. what is`unreasonable interference with views"? pg.15 12. What is the ramification of considering facilities on vacant sites as temporary n Por y B. Development Guidelines for Building Mounted Antennas pg.7 3. what is'unreasonable interference with views"? C. Development Guidelines for Roof Mounted Antennas pg. 8 2. how are"scenic corridors" defined,and what is the definition of a condition which would"significantly affect scenic vistas"? D. Development Guidelines for Ground Mounted Telecommunication Facilities pg. 9 5. refers to "techniques is set forth in Subsection E.below Guidelines for Free-standing Telecommunications Towers)". Subsection E is titled "Developme.►nt Guidelines.." as are other sections;they should be standardized and the reference corrected. F._- _- --Design Gui defines for Radio and Television Towers pg. 10 1. height or elevation? 250 feet appears to be excessive. What are the heights of most towers currently? On Mt. Diablo most towers are 50-80 feet now. pg. 12. These is no section V.within the policy,it should be renumbered. ### END ###