Loading...
PC - Minutes - 05-04-15Minutes of the PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING May 4, 2015 The regular meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Eng at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 8838 E. Valley Boulevard. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Commissioner Herrera INVOCATION - Commissioner Lopez ROLL CALL - Commissioners Herrera, Lopez, Tang, and Chair Eng OFFICIALS PRESENT: City Attorney Murphy, Community Development Director Ramirez, City Planner Bermejo, and Commission Secretary Lockwood. 1. EXPLANATION OF HEARING PROCEDURES AND APPEAL RIGHTS City Attorney Greg Murphy presented the procedure and appeal rights of the meeting. 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE None 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. CONDITIONAL USE 14.05 - Verizon Wireless has submitted a Conditional Use Permit application requesting to install and operate an unmanned wireless telecommunications facility on an existing Southern California Edison (SCE) transmission tower located at 4545 Walnut Grove Avenue in the 0-S (Open Space) zone. PC RESOLUTION 15-06 - A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 14.05, FOR THE INSTALLATION AND OPERATION OF AN UNMANNED WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY ON AN EXISTING 122 -FOOT TALL SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON TRANSMISSION TOWER, LOCATED AT 4545 WALNUT GROVE AVENUE IN THE 0-S (OPEN SPACE) ZONE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION - Based on the analysis and fndings contained in this report, it is recommended that the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 15.06 with findings and APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 14-05 subject to the twenty-two (22) conditions. City Planner Bermejo presented the staff report and power point presentation. Chair Eng asked if there were any questions or comments for staff. Commissioner Tang asked how many Verizon Wireless facilities are located in Rosemead. City Planner Bermejo replied that question can be deferred to the Verizon Consultant. Commissioner Tang referred to the noise measurement without the mitigation and asked if it was above the 50 "DBA". City Planner Bermejo replied yes. Commissioner Tang asked what type of noise this generates. City Planner Semi replied that question can be deferred to the consultant but it may be similar to a low buzzing sound. Commissioner Tang asked currently how many wireless cell towers are located in the City of Rosemead. City Planner Bermejo replied there is a total of thirty-two (32). Commissioner Tang asked what that is in comparisons to other surrounding cities. City Planner Bermejo replied she did not conduct a comparison study with surrounding cities for this application and she is not aware if a comparison study has been conducted in the past. Commissioner Tang recommended that he would like to see a comparison study conducted. He stated he is curious if a lot of cell towers are being located in the City of Rosemead because it is centralized in comparison to other cities and would be helpful, He asked what the coverage area for this proposed facility is. City Planner Bermejo referred to the staff report, Exhibit G -Service Maps, and explained how to interpret the different colors of coverage for certain areas. Commissioner Tang asked if it is a 1 -2 mile radius. City Planner Bermejo replied yes, but there can be a follow up on the maximum reach for all their equipment. Commissioner Tang stated he is trying to get a better understanding of the benefits of having this facility at this location and what is the expanded service. City Planner Berl stated Verizon Wireless's proposal is to fill in the gap, so service is available in buildings and vehicles. Chair Eng asked if the proposed tower is the same height as the AT&T tower. City Planner Bermejo replied yes. Chair Eng asked where the antenna will be located. City Planner Bermejo replied they will be in the same general location to where the one is on the AT&T site. Chair Eng asked if this one will be at 45' ft. City Planner Berri stated she does not have height comparisons to show where exactly they will be, but generally they are in the same location on both facilities, so they will be even in the end. Chair Eng stated that in terms of aesthetics, she wanted it to have some type of conformity. She stated the AT&T tower has 12 antennas and asked if this tower has 15 antennas with 3 sectors of five. City Planner Bennejo replied yes. Chair Eng stated the block wall is 8' feet and asked what the height of the equipment for the cabinets and generator is. City Planner Bermejo referred to the plans and replied that it looks like the equipment cabinets are to be approximately 6' feet but it is not indicated on the plans. Chair Eng referred to the noise study and asked if the noise generated from the AT&T equipment had been taken into account. City Planner Bermejo replied yes. Chair Eng stated after reading the noise study and studying the table analysis she did not get the sense that it had been. City Planner Bermejo stated the consultant is present this evening to explain the report. Chair Eng referred to the future noise impact analysis based on the manufacturers data and asked if there is a difference when it is in full operation. City Planner Bermejo replied that is a question that can be deferred to the consultant. Chair Eng referred to the Staff Report, page 5 -Table 4, and stated a couple of receivers are close to the property line and asked what the set -backs are, City Planner Bermejo replied the set -backs range from 43' feet to 74' feet and anywhere from 43' feet to 200' feet. Chair Eng asked what is their current set -backs for the parcels with a residence (from the structure to their property line). City Planner Bermejo replied if it is built to the current zoning code it would be from 20' feel to 25' feet. Chair Eng asked if the antennas generate any noise. City Planner Bermejo replied no. Chair Eng referred to the time line and length of maintenance testing for the equipment and generators, and asked if that is typical. City Planner Bermejo replied yes. Chair Eng referred to the cell site map and stated within the radius of this proposed site there are fifteen (15) other cell sites in this area. She asked how many of those sites are Verizon sites. City Planner Bermejo replied that question can be deferred to the applicant. Chair Eng asked in the process of this application, did staff check with the applicant to see if they had researched alternate sites. City Planner Bermejo replied yes. Chair Eng asked why another site was not feasible City Planner Bermejo explained in working with the project proponent, staff first attempts to propose their equipment on that existing AT&T tower for a co -location. She explained the size of these towers are dependent on how much equipment they can actually support, and for this particular tower size, Edison only authorizes one user per tower, Chair Eng asked out of the fifteen (15) listed how many are Edison towers. City Planner Bermejo replied the majority in the City are on the Edison transmission lines but her list does not differentiate who the owners are. Chair Eng asked if one of the masons this is being done is because they want to take down this site. City Planner Berri replied they are not taking it down. She explained that according to their coverage report, it is showing that there is no coverage for Verizon users within that area, so by activating this site it will improve the coverage. Chair Eng referred to Condition of Approval number 17 and asked what will the remedy be or how will it be mitigated if the "post -construction NIERlmdio frequency radiation exposure test" does not meet compliance with FCC standards. City Planner Bermejo replied one has not been received that has not been in compliance, and, if that should occur, the federal government would step in and make sure it is corrected. Chair Eng asked how often is the equipment changed out. City Planner Bermejo replied that question can be deferred to the consultant. Chair Eng asked if there were any further questions for staff. None Chair Eng opened up the Public Hearing and invited the applicant to the podium. Representative Miquel Samayoa, on behalf of Verizon Wireless, stated this particular project is to satisfy the need for extra coverage as well as capacity. He stated what occurs if a site is needed or not is that the FCC has dictated a gap in coverage and there are a variety of factors that influence coverage such as topography, trees, and walls. He referred to capacity concerns and stated Verizon has other sites in the area, however a site needs to be located sufficiently away from an existing site and sufficiently close (aka "sweet spot'). He stated Verizon likes to co -locate whenever feasible but, in this case, Southern California Edison does not allow per footprint of the actual tower and if it was sufficiently large enough, then it would be a different story. He added Verizon was looking at another site located on Walnut Grove Boulevard but there was not sufficient space for the equipment and the facility was not willing to be a site. He stated that Verizon has a licensed Real Estate agent that speaks with property owners to try to locate facilities. Commissioner Lopez asked if there are "sweet spots" that overlap. Representative Samayoa replied there has to be a certain amount of ovedap, but he is not a radio frequency engineer and cannot speak specifically for that, but this location was recommended by the engineer. Chair Eng asked what the typical coverage in mileage for a site is. Representative Samayoa replied it can vary and explained topography plays a role in this and it is variable. He added it can be from a 1/2 mile to a mile. Chair Eng referred to an article she had read in regards to new technology regarding cell towers and the possibility of removing them. She asked if Verizon is considering this option. Representative Samayoa replied that he did not have information on that technology. Chair Eng asked what the typical lease term for cell sites is. Representative Samayoa replied it is about 25 years. Chair Eng stated the staff report states there are 15 cell sites located in the Rubio Wash location and asked how many are Verizon. Representative Samayoa replied he does not know, but that information can be provided. Chair Eng asked what the feasibility is of co -locating on one of the other cell sites instead. Representative Samayoa replied that Verizon does not want to deviate from that spot because there would be that coverage gap. Chair Eng asked if customer demand/complaints is a factor considered in the location of cell sites. Representative Samayoa replied yes. Chair Eng asked if Verizon has been receiving complaints. Representative Samayoa replied yes, Verizon has been receiving request for more coverage. Chair Eng referred to the noise study and asked if it had been taken in conjunction with the AT&T equipment or was it based on just the noise generated by the proposed Venzon site. Representative Samayoa replied he does not have that information because the report is conducted by a sound engineer. Chair Eng referred to the noise/impact analysis study and stated that it is based on the manufacturers data. She asked when the equipment is in full operation what the margin is. Representative Samayoa replied it is a very small margin and it is a constant sound, which does not deviate much. Chair Eng asked how often is the equipment changed. Representative Samayoa replied it vanes, it could be months or years, and with this type of technology it probably will not be modified for quite a while. Chair Eng asked what the equipment does. Representative Samayoa explained there is a receiver that is connected to a telecommunications line, which connects all the facilities together. He added there is an ampler, which amplifies that signal, and that goes up to the antennas (send & receive antennas). Commissioner Tang asked Mr. Samayoa how many Verizon facilities are in Rosemead. Representative Samayoa replied he does not have that information. Commissioner Tang asked what type of noise is generated by these facilities. Representative Samayoa replied it is a small humming noise. Commissioner Tang asked when there is not any electrical utility towers how does Verizon service communities. Representative Samayoa replied microwave antennas are used in those instances. Commissioner Tang asked if those antennas are significantly larger in size. Representative Samayoa replied it depends on the area but in a metropolitan area it will not go any further than four feet. Resident James Berry referred to the map with the circle that indicates 15 circled cell sites and commented that it left out the AT&T site, which is next door, and a site across the street. He added that if you go by the map, between San Gabriel Boulevard and Walnut Grove Avenue, it shows there will be 7 cell towers in that small area and commented he does not know how there could be a gap in coverage. He stated that this may be just a gap in coverage for Verizon only and suggested they can piggy back on other carrier lines. He stated AT&T will install wireless receivers in homes in cities that have lack of coverage. He referred to the blue areas on the coverage maps on pages 71 and 72 and expressed that the percentage of filling in the gap is minimal with the installation of this cell site. He expressed that area is wide open and the lelecommunicafon towers are an eyesore. Chair Eng asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item. None Chair Eng asked Representative Samayoa to the podium to address comments. She asked if Verizon has any other alternatives to fill in gaps other than another cell site. Representative Samayoa replied there is not any other alternative and commented this is the first he has heard of that technology being used. He also agreed that it is impossible to satisfy and fill in all the gaps and you try to mitigate as much as you can. Chair Eng asked if there was anyone else wishing to speak on this item. None Chair Eng closed the Public Hearing and asked if the Planning Commission had any further questions for staff. None Chair Eng expressed one of her concerns is that one of the receivers is close to the property line. She requested a Condition of Approval be added that Verizon notifies the City when the equipment is changed. She also requested a noise study be conducted at that time to confirm that the new equipment is in compliance with the noise ordinance. She asked staff if this was acceptable or if there were any comments. Community Development Director Ramirez replied the applicant needs to be asked if this is acceptable and if it can be done. Representative Samayoa replied when modifications are made Venzon does apply for various types of entitlements and they make sure to notify, the City when changes are made. Chair Eng confirmed that Venzon will contact the City when equipment is changed. Representative Samayoa replied yes and explained that is a standard procedure. Commissioner Tang asked if that is regulated by the federal government. Representative Samayoa replied yes, there is a specific code in the FCC 6409 that allows for smaller expansions and modifications to existing facilities as well as co -locations. Community Development Director Ramirez asked if the noise study is also acceptable. Representative Samayoa replied yes. City Attorney Murphy confirmed which equipment will be changed. Representative Samayoa replied if a condition of approval is added Venzon is agreeable to any equipment that may need to be changed. City Attorney Murphy stated it can be added into Condition of Approval number 21, 'The equipment shelter shall be surrounded by an F-0" concrete block wall and satisfy the noise attenuation design requirements. The block shall consist of tan split face. Any modification, alteration, or replacement of equipment within the shelter shall be accompanied by a new noise study to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director", Chair Eng expressed concerned that it is not clear from the noise study if it took into consideration the noise generated by the AT&T equipment. She requested if that had been done what impact would that have because there would be two sets of equipment and she would like to have that question answered. City Planner Berri replied the noise study included an existing noise evaluation of the existing environment. She added that the maximum noise that gets generated is when Venzon runs the 15 minute maintenance test and it was probably not able to be tested along with the existing AT&T equipment. She added she is not sure if the existing AT&T has a back-up generator or not. Representative Samayoa stated he is not sure if AT&T has a back-up generator at this location but it does get tested. He explained that these facilities are running 24 hours a day and ensures if there is a natural disaster these facilities will be operational and you would be able to communicate with law enforcement, loved ones, and other emergency services. He explained the emergency generator is only used in emergencies. Chair Eng stated the block wall is to mitigate noise level and goes up to 5 decibels and asked what other options are there to insulate sounds. Representative Samayoa replied he is not sure and the block wall is a standard that is used by most facilities Chair Eng asked if there is an option such as putting extra plants. Representative Samayoa replied that will not probably be allowed by Southern California Edison. City Planner Bermejo stated the City Wireless Ordinance list the maximum threshold at 50 DBA when equipment is placed close to the property line. She explained that Venzon is proposing to reduce it to 45 DBA and that is in compliant with the City Noise Ordinance. Chair Eng asked if staff feels that her question regarding the noise study has been addressed. City Planner Bermejo replied the noise measurement was taken at the existing environment, so the question is does the existing site have a generator and is it creating a noise level that is greater than allowed. She stated the original site was built in "2005" prior to the new City Wireless Telecommunications Ordinance, and Verizon has fulfilled the requirement of obtaining a noise analysis. Chair Eng stated she understands that Venzon has fulfilled the requirements for their equipment, she would like to understand the accumulative effect of adding this site at this location. City Planner Bermejo stated she understands and asked the representative if the noise that is generated and mitigated come from the testing. Audience response was not audible. City Planner Bermejo recommended that perhaps a proposed condition of approval be coordinated with the users that the testing will not occur at the same time. (Discussion from audience was not audible) Representative Samayoa was asked to the podium. Representative Samayoa stated Venzon would first have to see if AT&T has a generator. Chair Eng asked when cell sites started having generators. Representative Samayoa replied he does not have that information. Chair Eng stated AT&T would probably have a generator to provide power to run their receivers. Representative Samayoa replied they would need the generator to run the receivers in the event of a power failure. Chair Eng expressed that her concern is with the accumulative effect. Community Development Director Ramirez recommended that the consideration of a condition of approval be added that the testing of equipment and generators at both cell site camers not be done at the same time. She added Venzon would be the lead and notify AT&T so it would not be at the same time. She explained there is an Noise Ordinance and a Wireless Telecommunication Ordinance in place currently and if the DBA is not in compliance they can be asked to comply or be cited, Representative Samayoa replied notifications for Verizon is acceptable. Commissioner Lopez asked if the back-up generators are only used for testing every 6 months. Representative Samayoa replied they are tested every week for 15 minutes. Commissioner Lopez asked what time of the day is testing done Representative Samayoa replied he handles the entitlement process but it is generally the same as construction hours. Community Development Director Ramirez stated there is a condition of approval in place that states they cannot do testing during the weekends, holidays, and between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Chair Eng stated the Public Hearing has been closed and asked if the Planning Commission had any further questions or comments. None Chair Eng asked for a motion. Community Development Director Ramirez stated before the Planning Commission votes she asked the City Attorney Murphy if a condition of approval is going to be added in regards to the scheduling of testing between Verizon and AT&T. Chair Eng asked how manageable will that be for staff. Community Development Director Ramirez stated staff would only ask Venzon for proof that they coordinated with AT&T if the City was to receive complaints. City Attorney Murphy stated that it can be added to Condition of Approval number 16 to state, "If the City receives complaints about noise related to testing of such equipment the applicant may be required to change the time of their testing so as not to correspond of testing to similar equipment located elsewhere on the site'. Commissioner Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Herrera to ADOPT Resolution No. 15.06 with findings and APPROVE Conditional Use Permit 14.05 subject to the twenty-two (22) conditions. (Modifications to Conditions of Approval numbers sixteen (16) and twenty-one (21) were made by the Planning Commission 5-4-15) Vote resulted in: Yes: Herrera, Lopez, and Tang No: Eng Abstain: None Absent: None Community Development Director Ramirez explained the 10 day appeal process. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of 4-20-15 PC Minutes 4-20-15 were approved as presented. Commissioner Lopez made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Tang to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Vote resulted in: Yes: Eng, Herrera, Lopez, and Tang No: None Abstain: None Absent: None 5. MATTERS FROM STAFF Community Development Director Ramirez announced the date, time, and location of the Memonal Day Ceremony. She invited all to attend. 6. MATTERS FROM THE CHAIR & COMMISSIONERS Commissioner Tang reported there are weeds at the location of 2503 San Gabriel Boulevard that need to be addressed. Commissioner Lopez announced he would not be present at the Monday, June 1, 2015 Planning Commission meeting. Chair Eng thanked staff for all their hard work. 7. ADJOURNMENT Meeting Adjourned at 7:59 p.m. The next regular Planning Commission meeting will be^^held on Monday, May 18, 2015, at 7:00 p.m. /V Nancy Eng Chair ATT T: .AT Rachel Lockwood Commission Secretary 10