20040914_m



COUNTY OF SAN MATEO Inter-Departmental Correspondence

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY


DATE:							August 26, 2004

SET TIME:							10:15 a.m.

BOARD MEETING DATE:							September 14, 2004

TO:			Honorable Board of Supervisors

FROM:			Marcia Raines, Director of Environmental Services

SUBJECT:			Consideration of a use permit, pursuant to Section 6500 of the County Zoning Regulations, to allow the placement of nine panel antennas onto the upper roof of an existing 2-story building and up to seven associated equipment cabinets at ground level in the parking lot that serves the existing building located at 3603 Alameda de las Pulgas, in the unincorporated West Menlo Park area of San Mateo County. (Appeal from decision of the Planning Commission approving the use permit.)

			County File Number:			PLN 2002-00267 (Verizon/Godfrey)

RECOMMENDATION

Deny the appeal and approve Use Permit, County File No. PLN 2002-00267, by adopting the required findings and conditions of approval listed in Attachment A.

PROPOSAL

The applicant is proposing to mount nine panel antennas to the upper roof of an existing 2-story commercial building and locate up to seven associated equipment cabinets in the parking lot area that serves the commercial building.

BACKGROUND

Report Prepared By: Olivia Sun Boo, Project Planner, Telephone 650/363-1852

Appellant: MaryEllen Yli-Sikkila

Applicant: Verizon Wireless

Owner: Leonard Robinson

Location: 3603 Alameda de las Pulgas, West Menlo Park

APN: 074-082-160

Parcel Size: 26,000 sq. ft.

Existing Zoning: C-1/WMP (Neighborhood Commercial District/West Menlo Park) and P (Parking District)

General Plan Designation: Neighborhood

Existing Land Use: Commercial/Office Building and Parking Lot

Water Supply: West Menlo Park Municipal Water District

Sewage Disposal: West Bay Sanitary District

Flood Zone: Flood Zone C; Panel No. 060311 0265B; Effective date July 5, 1984

Environmental Evaluation: Categorically exempt pursuant to Class 3, Section 15303 of the California Environmental Quality Act, construction of new small structures.

Setting: The proposed project is located on a 26,000 sq. ft. parcel, on the east corner of Alameda de las Pulgas and Avy Avenue. The property slopes upward in the east direction and is improved with a 2-story commercial building and parking area. Cingular Wireless operates a cellular facility on the site, which is also located on the rooftop, southwest of the proposed Verizon Wireless facility. The commercial building houses various businesses including shops and a café at the ground level, and legal nonconforming apartments on the second level. Adjacent land uses include the other retail businesses, a coffee shop, a gasoline station to the west and single-family residential uses to the east and south.

Chronology:

Date					Action

April 10, 1996				-	Cingular Wireless facility approved (USE 95-0027).

February 15, 2001				-	Metricom’s cellular facility proposal approved by the Zoning Hearing Officer (County File Number PLN 2000-00374). Never constructed.

May 14, 2002				-	Received subject use permit application by Verizon Wireless.

November 20, 2003				-	Zoning Hearing Officer public hearing; project was continued to December 18, 2003.

December 18, 2003				-	Zoning Hearing Officer public hearing; the project was continued again to January 15, 2004.

January 15, 2004				-	Zoning Hearing Officer approved Verizon’s cellular facility proposal with redesign conditions per the Zoning Hearing Officer’s direction.

February 4, 2004				-	Zoning Hearing Officer’s approval appealed to the Planning Commission.

April 28, 2004				-	Planning Commission public hearing; the project was continued to June 9, 2004.

June 9, 2004				-	Planning Commission public hearing; the project was continued again to June 23, 2004.

June 23, 2004				-	Planning Commission upheld the Zoning Hearing Officer’s decision with the redesign.

July 13, 2004				-	Planning Commission’s approval appealed to the Board of Supervisors.

September 14, 2004				-	Board of Supervisor public hearing.

DISCUSSION

A.	PREVIOUS ACTION

	At the November 20, 2003 Zoning Hearing Officer public hearing, the neighbors expressed strong opposition to the proposed site and requested that the applicant be required to submit evidence stating why the subject property was chosen and why other properties in the vicinity could not meet Verizon’s requirements. The item was continued to December 18, 2003, in order to allow time for the applicant to hold at least one meeting with the residential neighbors who spoke in opposition to the proposal.

	On December 18, 2003, the appellant brought to both staff’s and the Zoning Hearing Officer’s attention that the EMF (Electromagnetic Frequency) report did not accurately reflect the site description. The Zoning Hearing Officer requested a continuance to January 15, 2004, in order for the applicant to submit a revised EMF report that reconciles with the full project description.

	On January 15, 2004, the Zoning Hearing Officer approved the project proposal subject to the additional conditions of approval: (1) the equipment cabinet maintains at least a 10-foot setback from the nearest residentially zoned property line; and (2) the roof-mounted antennas are relocated at least 5 feet to the west (in the direction of Alameda de las Pulgas), providing equipment performance is not compromised, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.

	The Zoning Hearing Officer’s approval was appealed to the Planning Commission.

	On April 28, 2004, the project was presented before the Planning Commission. Neighbors expressed strong opposition to the proposed site and again requested evidence to explain why the subject property was chosen and why other properties in the vicinity could not meet Verizon’s requirements. The Planning Commission continued the project to June 9, 2004, in order to allow time for the applicant to research and present alternate sites for the cabinets, and alternate types of cabinet enclosures that would redirect noise produced by the cabinets.

	On June 9, 2004, the appellant requested continuance due to a personal request to attend a memorial service for a friend. The Planning Commission took comments from both the concerned neighbors and experts from Verizon Wireless who were present and then continued the matter.

	On June 23, 2004, the Planning Commission denied the appeal and upheld the Zoning Hearing Officer’s decision as conditioned.

B.	KEY ISSUES OF THE APPEAL

	The appellant is objecting to the use permit approval. The objections are listed below, each followed by staff’s response.

	1.	“Actual Impact of Antennas and Equipment Unknown.”

		“Six of the nine antennas and four of the seven equipment cabinets being proposed have not yet been designed or developed, because their development is dependent on the licenses the FCC may grant to Verizon for new frequencies. As a result, the parameters of these antennas and equipment cabinets are not known at this time. This lack of information invalidates the reports submitted by Verizon in order to obtain this use permit.”

		“The conclusions of the EMF report are based on antennas that are thought to be similar to the ones they may develop. However, these antennas are not developed and the specific parameters are unknown at this time.”

		Staff’s Response: Approval of the subject Verizon Wireless use permit requires the decision maker to make the following finding:

		“The establishment, maintenance and/or conducting of the use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in said neighborhood.”

		The Electromagnetic Frequency (EMF) report submitted by Hammett and Edison, Verizon Wireless’s appointed consultants, states the cumulative ambient RF level of both facilities is 0.46% of the public exposure limit (see page 2 of the report).

		All cell facility installations are required to comply with all Federal Communications Commission (FCC) criteria related to electromagnetic output and interference with existing wireless installations and mechanical devices in the area. To the best of knowledge, the report applies recognized methodology used to measure or estimate EMF levels. Additionally, under the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA), local governments cannot regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions if the facilities comply with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) standards. According to the Hammett and Edison report, the proposed project meets FCC standards.

	2.	“Noise Levels Exceed Performance Standards.”

		“Based on the Noise Emission report considered by the Zoning Hearing Officer, the acceptable noise levels defined in this section are exceeded.”

		Staff’s Response: Verizon Wireless retained Brown Buntin Associates, Inc., (BBA) as their noise analysis experts. The analysis (see Attachment O) concluded that the noise produced by the proposed facility would comply and not exceed the noise standards of San Mateo County. BBA analysis recommends installation of an absorptive treatment to the inside faces of the enclosures prior to installing the second set of modular cell units (the future cabinets).

		Staff consulted with the Environmental Health Division to review the submitted noise analysis. The Environmental Health Division confirmed that Verizon Wireless’s facility, as proposed, is well below the allowed County noise standards. The Environmental Health Division compares noise levels to a range of 50-60 dBA, which would be described as a normal conversation between people (see Attachment Q). Table III in the noise study (see page 5) indicates the site is very much in compliance.

		Staff also recommends a condition that requires administrative review each year after the facility is in operation to verify Verizon’s compliance with the conditions of approval. The administrative site visit shall also include a site visit by the Environmental Health Division to ensure the site complies with the County’s noise standards.

	3.	“Building Height Exceeds Development Standards.”

		“The rooftop screening is desirable for reducing the visual impact, but does not take into account the impact it has on the daylight requirement of the adjacent property which will be directly and adversely affected by the screening.”

		“This section as written was improperly relied on in this situation. The screening does not come under this section. It is not a necessary mechanical appurtenance and does not fall in one of the other categories, gable, spire, scenery loft, etc. Therefore, the screening must come under Section 6254.4 and must not exceed 30 feet.”

		Staff’s Response: The C-1/WMP Zoning District does not include daylight plane restrictions; therefore, staff has concluded the proposed facility is not in violation of any daylight plane requirements.

		Section 6405 of the San Mateo County Zoning Regulations states that upon securing a use permit, radio towers, similar structures and necessary mechanical appurtenances may be built and used to a greater height than the limit established for the district in which the building or structure is located, provided that the structure shall not cover more than fifteen (15) percent in area of the total lot nor have a base greater than 16,000 sq. ft. No building or structure in any district shall ever exceed a maximum height of one hundred fifty (150) feet. The proposed antennas and wall screen would be constructed to a height of approximately 32 ft. 4 in.

		Staff believes the wall screen is a necessary mechanical appurtenance and, therefore, the screening structure is permitted to extend to the 32 ft. 4 in. height, beyond the C-1/WMP Zoning District’s 30-foot maximum height limit.

		Additionally, a neighbor requested the screen wall to be constructed the same height as the antenna equipment so the equipment would not be visible.

	4.	“Property Values Reduced as a Direct Result of Cellular Facility.”

		“Whether the injury caused by the cellular facilities is real or simply perceived, this neighborhood has to deal with the public perception that such a facility is injurious. This perception results in reduction of property values and our ability to rent units to tenants as the units become available.”

		Staff’s Response: Although the Planning Division has no resources to assess if cellular facilities affect property value, staff believes there will be minimal, if any, impact to the property value of the nearby residential neighborhood. The Planning and Building Division have records of numerous existing and proposed cellular facilities located on and/or nearby existing residences within the unincorporated San Mateo County. Staff has yet to receive evidence supporting this statement.

		Additionally, a federal court has ruled that, under the TCA, local governments cannot deny a wireless application based upon concern over a decrease in property values if the decrease is due to potential health effects from emissions from the wireless facility (AT&T Wireless Services of California v. City of Carlsbad (S.D. Cal. 2003) 308 F. Supp. 2d 1148).

C.	COMPLIANCE WITH COUNTY REGULATIONS AND POLICIES

	1.	Conformance with the General Plan

		Staff has evaluated the project for compliance with all applicable General Plan policies, with specific discussion of the following:

		Policy 4.20, Visual Quality (Utility Structures), requires minimization of adverse visual impacts as a result of the construction of utility structures. The proposed nine panel antennas will be mounted to a maximum height of 32 ft. 4 in., as measured from the ground level. The height of the antennas is necessary to enable Verizon’s antennas to provide adequate cellular coverage to the Alameda de las Pulgas’ right-of-way. The antenna equipment will be camouflaged by a parapet wall enclosure, also 32 ft. 4 in. in height above ground, to properly conceal the equipment.

		On June 23, 2004, the Planning Commission upheld the Zoning Hearing Officer’s approval with the two added conditions that: (a) the antennas on the rooftop to be relocated 5 feet west, approximately 47 feet from the Alameda de las Pulgas right-of-way, and (b) the proposed 243 sq. ft. equipment cabinet to be located at least 10 feet from the nearest residentially zoned property line.

		The equipment cabinet will include seven cabinets (four of which are future cabinets that may be added to the site as needed by a building permit). The cabinets will be enclosed by an 8-foot tall cement block wall on the back and sides, and a chain link fence will secure the front side of the enclosure (which faces the parking lot). The equipment enclosure’s cement block wall shall also be painted an earth-tone color. In addition, the cyclone fence shall be black vinyl coated to prevent shiny reflections and include wood fence slats painted to match the cement wall.

		Staff believes that the visual impact of this project, as proposed and conditioned, is minimized because the subject utility equipment will be screened to blend with the existing building, an earth-tone color.

		Policy 7.16, General Land Use (Land Use Objectives for Urban Areas), discusses revitalizing existing developed areas and discouraging urban sprawl. The proposed cellular facility will be collocating with one other existing carrier, Cingular Wireless. Staff encourages collocation in existing developed areas.

	2.	Compliance with Zoning Regulations

		The project is located in the Neighborhood Commercial/West Menlo Park Zoning District. Section 6500(b) of the San Mateo County Zoning Regulations states that a use permit may be issued within any zoning district for the location of public service uses when found to be necessary for the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has established that cellular transmitting facilities serve national interests and directly and indirectly benefit the public. Therefore, this proposed use qualifies as a public service use and a use permit may be granted upon the making of certain findings in this C-1/WMP Zoning District. The project complies with all development standards for this zoning district except for the maximum height of structures. This issue is discussed above, under Section B.3.

	3.	Conformance with the Use Permit Regulations and Required Findings

		Under the provisions of Section 6500 (Use Permits), wireless communication facilities are permitted in any zoning district after issuance of a use permit. Two findings have to be made for issuance of the use permit.

		a.	Find that the establishment, maintenance and/or conducting of the use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in said neighborhood.

			Staff believes this finding can be made and that the impacts from this project will be minimal. As with other types of communications broadcasts, such as radio and television, cellular telephone facilities emit extremely low levels of electromagnetic impulses and are classified as “non-ionizing.” Household appliances such as microwave ovens, televisions, radios or computer equipment do not experience any type of interference from wireless communications. All cellular telecommunication installations are required to comply with all FCC criteria related to electromagnetic output and interference with existing wireless installations and mechanical devices in the area. As previously mentioned under Section B.1, the report applies recognized methodology used to measure or estimate EMF levels. Additionally, under the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 (TCA), local governments cannot regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions if the facilities comply with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) standards. According to the Hammett and Edison report, the proposed project meets FCC standards. Because the facility will be unmanned, it will not create additional traffic or noise.

			Since the nine panel antennas are to be mounted on the existing commercial building rooftop, they will not be accessible to the general public, thus no mitigation measures are necessary to comply with the FCC public exposure guidelines. To prevent occupational exposures in excess of the FCC guidelines, no access within 3 feet in front of the antennas themselves should be allowed while the site is in operation, unless other measures can be demonstrated by the cellular operator to ensure that occupational protection requirements are met. Posting explanatory warning signs on the equipment screening such that signs would be readily visible from any angle of approach to persons who might need to work within that distance, would be sufficient to meet FCC-adopted guidelines. A condition of approval is recommended to require such signage.

			According to the Radio Frequency (RF) engineering study by Hammett and Edison, Inc., the maximum ambient RF level anywhere at ground level due to the proposed Verizon cellular and PCS operation by themselves is calculated to be 0.0092 mW/cm2, which is 1.4% of the applicable public exposure limit. The maximum calculated cumulative level at ground for the simultaneous operation of both Verizon and Cingular is 1.4% of the public exposure limit. The maximum calculated cumulative level on the second floor off the roof of the subject building for the simultaneous operation of both Verizon and Cingular is 0.46% of the public exposure limit: the maximum calculated level at the second floor elevation of any of the nearby homes is 1.8% of the public exposure limit. It should be noted that these results include severe “worst-case” assumptions and, therefore, is expected to overstate actual power density levels.

			As mentioned above in Section C, radio towers are allowed a maximum height of 150 feet per Section 6405 of the San Mateo County Zoning Regulations. The proposed antenna height of 32 ft. 4 in. is the minimum height feasible in order to meet Verizon’s cellular coverage goals. This height is well below the allowed 150 feet and, therefore, staff believes the site, as proposed, will not be detrimental to the public welfare.

		b.	Find that the proposed project is necessary for the public health, safety, and convenience or welfare.

			Staff believes that this project will increase clarity, range and capacity of its existing cellular facility and network and continue to enhance service for the public in general. Due to the antenna location (setback from Alameda de las Pulgas), the proposed antennas are mounted higher in order to provide the same seamless coverage north and south of this site for the areas’ distressed vehicles and emergency response. Staff believes this finding can be made too.

D.	ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW

	The project is considered categorically exempt, pursuant to Class 3, Section 15303 of the California Environmental Quality Act, which refers to new construction of small structures.

E.	PUBLIC COMMENT REVIEW

	Several owners, who also reside in the same neighborhood as the appellant’s, echo the same concerns as the appellant, and voiced additional concerns for the health impact the cellular facility may have on their children and children who are students of nearby schools. Staff believes that those concerns are generally represented in the appellant’s issues, to which staff has responded.

F.	REVIEWING AGENCIES

Reviewing Agencies	Approve	Conditions
Building Inspection Section	N/A	Yes
Department of Public Works	N/A	N/A
Environmental Health Division	N/A	N/A
Menlo Park Fire Protection District	N/A	Yes


VISION ALIGNMENT

This cellular facility proposal keeps the commitment of ensuring basic health and safety for all and redesigning our urban environment to increase vitality, expand variety and reduce congestion and goal numbers 7 and 12. Goal number 7: maintain and enhance the public safety of all residents and visitors. Goal number 12: land use decisions consider transportation and other infrastructure needs as well as impacts on the environment and on surrounding communities. Through thorough analysis of the General Plan Policies and Zoning Ordinance, infrastructure needs as well as impacts on the environment and on surrounding communities are assessed.

ATTACHMENTS

A.	Recommended Findings and Conditions of Approval
B.	Parcel Map Noting C-1/WMP and P Zoning Districts
C.	Site Plan
D.	Equipment Cabinet Plan
E.	Equipment Cabinet Site Plan: Proposed and Future
F.	Antenna Plan
G.	Northeast Elevation/Southwest Elevation
H.	Southeast Elevation/Northwest Elevation
I.	Site Photo: Southeast View of Project Site from Alameda de las Pulgas
J.	Site Photo: View Looking North at Project Site from Alameda de las Pulgas
K.	Site Photo: View Southwest from Lucky Avenue
L.	Site Photo: Looking East, View from Parking Lot
M.	Electromagnetic Frequency (EMF) Report (Received April 13, 2004)
N.	Noise Analysis (Received January 15, 2004)
O.	San Mateo County Noise Ordinance
P.	Sound Diagram, Bruel & Kjaer
Q.	Appeal Application and Letter of Opposition (Dated July 13, 2004)


Attachment A

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AGENCY

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Permit or Project File Number:				Board Meeting Date: September 14, 2004
		PLN 2002-00267

Prepared By: Olivia Sun Boo					For Adoption By: Board of Supervisors


RECOMMENDED FINDINGS

For the Use Permit, Find:

1.	That the establishment, maintenance and/or conducting of the use, as conditioned, will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood.

2.	That the proposed project, as conditioned, is necessary for the public health, safety, and convenience or welfare.

For the Environmental Review, Find:

3.	That the project is categorically exempt pursuant to Class 3, Section 15303 of the California Environmental Quality Act, which refers to construction of a small structure.

RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

Planning Division

1.	This approval applies only to the proposal, documents and plans described in this report as revised, conditioned and approved by the Planning Commission on June 23, 2004. Minor adjustments to the project in the course of applying for building permits may be approved by the Planning Director if they are consistent with the intent of and in substantial conformance with this approval.

2.	The project plans shall be revised such that:

	a.		The equipment cabinet maintains at least a 10-foot setback from the nearest residentially zoned property line, and

	b.		The roof-mounted antennas shall be located at least 5 feet to the west (in the direction of Alameda de las Pulgas), providing the equipment can perform adequately, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.

3.	The applicant shall submit plans and obtain a building permit within one year from the date of this approval.

4.	This use permit shall be valid for a 5-year period and shall expire on September 14, 2009. The applicant shall file for a renewal of this permit six months prior to the expiration with the County Planning and Building Division, if continuation of this use is desired.

5.	This use permit shall be subject to an initial administrative review one year after the facility is in operation. The purpose of the administrative review is to assure full compliance with the conditions of approval. Future administrative review shall occur ever two years thereafter.

6.	The applicant shall apply for a use permit amendment and building permit prior to any changes to the proposed facility. Amendment to this use permit may require an application for amendment, payment of applicable fees, and consideration at a public hearing.

7.	The applicant shall receive and maintain approval from the FCC and the CPUC with regard to the operation of the project at this site prior to building permit issuance. Upon receipt of each of these approvals, the applicant shall supply the Planning Division with proof of approval. If these approvals are ever revoked, the applicant shall inform the Planning Division of the revocation.

8.	The applicant shall apply for and be issued a building permit prior to the start of construction and develop in accordance with the approved plans.

9.	The applicant shall monitor the noise level at the site so that the proposed construction activity will not exceed the 80-dBA level at any one moment. All construction activity is limited to the construction hours of the County including 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturday. Construction is prohibited on Sunday or any national holiday.

10.	The parapet wall height shall match the height of all rooftop-mounted antennas and equipment to completely screen all equipment from view.

11.	Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit color samples for the antennas. The antennas and screening shall be painted a tan beige color that matches the existing building rooftop.

12.	The equipment cabinets and enclosure shall comply with the following conditions:

	a.		The equipment cabinets shall be painted a dark green color to blend in with the vegetation.

	b.		The concrete block wall shall be split face finish and painted an earth-tone color.

	c.		The fence shall be a black plastic coated chain link (fencing and poles) and shall include dark green painted or stained opaque wood slats (plastic is not permitted) to screen the equipment cabinets.

	d.		The heat exchanger fans in the equipment cabinets shall be aimed away from adjacent residentially zoned properties.

13.	The rooftop screening shall have the same architectural features and color to match the existing building, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. This information and detailing shall be indicated on the building permit set of plans.

14.	Placement of the equipment cabinet enclosure in the parking lot shall not reduce the number of existing parking spaces on the property. Up to 25% of the parking spaces may be configured as compact parking spaces (8 ft. x 16 ft.).

15.	This installation shall be removed in its entirety at that time when this technology becomes obsolete or this facility is no longer needed.

16.	If any of the additional future four equipment cabinets are required by the applicant, a building permit shall be issued prior to construction. The cabinets shall be painted to match the other existing cabinets.

17.	Any necessary utilities leading to the facility shall be placed underground, which shall be indicated on the building plans.

18.	The applicant shall erect a sign clearly posted and readable adjacent to the antennas stating that workers performing maintenance on the antennas shall not do such work within 3 feet of the cellular antennas while the cellular facility is in operation. Any work performed contrary to this shall occur only with the permission and under the direction of the cellular facility operator. The sign shall be placed and confirmed prior to the final inspection approval of the building permit for the new antennas.

Building Inspection Section

19.	Prior to any construction, the applicant shall obtain a building permit and develop in accordance with the approved plans, and the requirements of the Building Inspection Section.

Menlo Park Fire District

20.	The applicant shall post a corrosive NFPA 704 Placard at the entrance to the outside equipment location.

21.	The applicant shall maintain a 2-hour separation between the trash enclosure and equipment location.