| ||
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: |
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: 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.) | |
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 requests a use permit to install nine panel antennas onto the upper roof of an existing 2-story existing building and locate up to seven associated equipment cabinets in the parking lot that serves the existing building, located in the C-1/WMP Zoning District of unincorporated West Menlo Park area of San Mateo County. | ||
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION | ||
The Planning Commission considered the proposed project on June 23, 2004, and voted 5-0 to deny the appeal of the project and upheld the Zoning Hearing Officer’s approval of the proposed development. | ||
SUMMARY | ||
The Planning Commission denied the appeal and upheld the Zoning Hearing Officer’s decision and approved the project, pursuant to all applicable San Mateo County Zoning Regulations. An appeal was filed and the appellant is objecting to the approval of the use permit based on the following: (a) insufficient analysis of the electromagnetic frequency report, (b) that the noise levels exceed performance standards, (c) that the facility exceeds height development standards, and (d) that the property values of the neighborhood are reduced as a direct result of the cellular facility. | ||
The appellant believes approval of the cellular facility will negatively impact her property and neighboring properties in the immediate area. | ||
Staff has reviewed the project and determined that it complies with the applicable regulations and policies. | ||
