CITY OF MERCED
SITE PLAN REVIEW COMMITTEE
RESOLUTION #544
AT&T Mobility
Construct a 55’ stealth monopine
wireless communication tower and an
8x8 walk in closet.
APPLICANT PROJECT
605 Coolidege Dr. Ste 100 1717 E. Olive Ave
ADDR
ESS PROJECT SITE
Folsom, CA 95630 008-060-057
CITY/STATE/ZIP APN
(916) 798-2275 R-1-6
PHONE
ZONING
In accordance with Chapter 20.68 of the Merced City Zoning Ordinance, the Merced City Site Plan Review Committee considered and approved Site Plan Review Application #544 on April 25, 2024, submitted by AT&T Mobility, on behalf of the Church of the Nararene of Merced, California, property owner, to construct a 55-foot-tall stealth monopine wireless communication tower at 1717 E. Olive Ave. within a R-1-6 Zone. Said property being more particularly described as Adjusted Parcel D as shown on that map “Record of Survey for the Church of the Nazarene” recorded in Book 6, Page 21 of Merced County Records; also known as Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 008-060-057.
WHEREAS, the proposal is exempt from the
California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), and is in accordance with Section 15301 (a) (Exhibit D); and, WHEREAS, the Merced City Site Plan Review Committee makes the following Findings:
A) The proposal complies w
ith the General Plan designation of Low Density (LD)
and the Zoning classification of R-1-6.
B) The wireless communication tower would be disguised as a pine tree (55-foot- tall stealth monopine) located on the northern portion of the parcel. Ancillary cabinet ground equipment would be enclosed by a 6-foot-tall fence. Height is necessary to provide coverage to service the area.
C) Location is adjacent to single-family hom es on Vickie Court, visible from the homes on Teak Ave., Pa
rsons Ave., and Evette Court including the south side
of East Olive Ave. The homes on Vickie Court will have the most impact because of visibility in the backyard. Only three (3) other trees are on this property, so the antenna will be higher, visible, and taller than others in the area.
DRAFT
ATTACHMENT 6
Site Plan Approval #544
April 25, 2024
D) Based on elevations provided, the large cellmax antennas located on the site plan protrudes out 4 feet more than the limbs of the tree/tower. There are smaller antennas that does not project out as much. In order to minimize the visibility, the antennas will need to be painted green (Condition #8).
E) Applicant has provided an alternative site analysis for co-locations; however the conclusion is that it is not viable or available (Exhibit G).
F) Applicant has provided a map of existing and proposed wireless facilities within the 3-mile radius to illustrate service fo r local area and first responders (First Net Program) also known as First Responders Network (Exhibit E).
G) Support tower is not located in an agricultural zoning district.
H) The radio frequency emission of th e proposed cell tower will meet FCC guidelines (Exhibit F).
I) The communication tower will not block any of the scenic corridors shown in General Plan Policy OS-1.3B.
J) The proposed communication tower would not create any unusual structures that are not already permitted within the R-1-6 Zone. Other structures (with similar functions, height, and designs), su ch as monopole tower for wireless communication providers, are allowed with in the R-1-6 Zone with Site Plan Permit approval.
K) According to Section 332 (-C-) (-7-) of the Federal Telecommunication Act, local governments may not (1) prohibit or effectively prohibit personal wireless service (2) unreasonably discriminat e among providers of functionally equivalent service providers, (3) regulat e personal wireless service facilities based on the environmental effects from radio frequency emission to the extent such emission meets FFC Guidelines.
L) Staff mailed a public hearing notice to pr operty owners adjacent to the subject site, and published the public hearing notice in the Merced County Times. As of the time this report was prepared (4 /18/2024), Planning Staff has received 5 emails and 5 voicemails in opposition and 1 email neutral of the project (Exhibit H).
M) Per Zoning Ordinance 20.58-2, a Site Plan Review Permit is required because the subject site is in an R1 Zone.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Merced City Site Plan Review Committee does approve Site Plan Review Ap plication #544, subject to the following conditions:
1. All applicable conditions contained in Site Plan Approval Resolution #79-1-Amended (“Standard Conditions for Site Plan Application”) shall apply.
2. All other applicable codes, ordinances, polic ies, etc., adopted by the City of Merced shall apply including, but not limited to, the California building code and fire codes.
Site Plan Approval #544
April 25, 2024
3. The site shall be constructed as show n on Exhibit B (site plan) and Exhibit C (elevation), as modified by the conditions of approval within this resolution.
4. Notwithstanding all other conditions, all c onstruction and improve ments shall be in strict accordance with Zoning, Building, and all other codes, ordinances, standards, and policies of the City of Merced.
5. In coordination with the Po lice Department and Fire De partment, a frequency/inter- modulation study shall be prepared. Se rvice may not be initiated until these departments have reviewed and have found the study to be acceptable.
6. At the time of building permit submittal, the applicant shall provide certification by a Radio Frequency Engineer, stating the RFR measurements and that they meet FCC radio frequency radiation standards.
7. The applicant shall work with the Merced Regional Airport and comply with all of their requirements for this type of structure and obtain all proper permits. Said requirements may include, but are not limited to, obtaining approval from the Airport Land Use Commission or showing proof of submitting an FAA Form 7460-1 to the FAA.
8. The private communication tower shall be a stealth monopine wireless communication facility and antennas shall be painted green to blend in.
9. The private communication tower shall be maintained at all times. At no time shall the private communication tower be faded or worn down to a state that would be considered unacceptable to City standards.
10. The private communication tower shall not have any form of steps, ladder, or pegs protruding from its side.
11. No signs, other than warning and safety signage, shall be located on a support tower or ancillary facility.
12. Other than lighting required by the FAA or other regulatory agency for the purpose of safety, lights are not permitted on the communication tower.
13. Any noise generated by the facility from the equipment or the tower shall be kept to a minimum so as not to cause a nuisance to the surrounding businesses.
14. At the time of building permit submittal, the applicant shall provide a site plan to the Engineering Department showing all easements which includes, but is not limited to, railroad righst-of-way and City easements. The project shall not encroach into any rights-of-way or easements without first obtaining proper approval to do so.
15. The premise shall remain clean and free of debris and graffiti at all times.
If there are any questions concerning thes e conditions and recommendations, please contact Jessie Lee at (209) 385-6858.
Site Plan Approval #544
April 25, 2024
April 25, 2024
DATE SIGNATURE
Development Services Technician II
TITLE
Exhibits:
A) Location Map
B) Overall Site Plan
C) Elevation
D) Categorical Exemption
E) Existing and Proposed Site Map
F) Radio Frequency Emission Compliance Report
G) Alternative Sites Analysis
H) Public Comments
Subject Site
EXHIBIT A
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT D
Existing LTE 700 Coverage
April 4, 2024
Proprietary and Confidential Business Information of AT&T >ĞŐĞŶĚ
ZĞůŝĂďůĞ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞ/ŶĚŽŽƌƐͬKƵƚĚŽŽƌƐ
ZĞůŝĂďůĞŽǀĞƌĂŐĞŝŶdƌĂŶƐŝƚ
/ŶĚŽŽƌŽǀĞƌĂŐĞ>ĞƐƐZĞůŝĂďůĞ
WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞ
džŝƐƚŝŶŐƐŝƚĞ
ZĞůŝĂďůĞŽǀĞƌĂŐĞKƵƚĚŽŽƌƐKŶůLJ
/ŶĚŽŽƌŽǀĞƌĂŐĞ>ĞƐƐZĞůŝĂďůĞ
EXHIBIT E
Proposed LTE 700 Coverage – 1717 East Olive Ave @ RC = 53 ft 1717 East Olive Ave
Proprietary and Confidential Business Information of AT&T April 4, 2024
>ĞŐĞŶĚ
ZĞůŝĂďůĞ^ĞƌǀŝĐĞ/ŶĚŽŽƌƐͬKƵƚĚŽŽƌƐ
ZĞůŝĂďůĞŽǀĞƌĂŐĞŝŶdƌĂŶƐŝƚ
/ŶĚŽŽƌŽǀĞƌĂŐĞ>ĞƐƐZĞůŝĂďůĞ
WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞ
džŝƐƚŝŶŐƐŝƚĞ
ZĞůŝĂďůĞŽǀĞƌĂŐĞKƵƚĚŽŽƌƐKŶůLJ
/ŶĚŽŽƌŽǀĞƌĂŐĞ>ĞƐƐZĞůŝĂďůĞ
Existing and proposed sites within 3-mile radius
>ĞŐĞŶĚ
WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚƐŝƚĞ
džŝƐƚŝŶŐƐŝƚĞ
April 4, 2024
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT G
From: Andrea Merg < >
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2024 8:36 AM
To: planningweb <[email protected]
>
Subject: Cell tower proposal at Olive and Parsons
Dear Planning Division,
I was notified that a cell tower is being proposed on church property at the corner of Olive and Parsons near Chenoweth Elementary School. I am writing this email to voice my concern about putting this directly in a residential neighborhood and next to an elementary school. We do not know the full effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic waves on human health. The results are inconclusive and require more time in order to understand their long-term effects. In the meantime, there have been several studies that have shown negative effects on human health. In fact, the World Health Organization (WHO) upgraded the classification of radio waves to "possibly carcinogenic to humans" in 2011 (see link and attachment). The fact that this is being proposed in the middle of a residential neighborhood and across the street from an elementary school is appalling!
These structures also lower property values. Would you or others that you know like to have a cell tower right behind their backyard? The answer for a vast majority of people is "no"! Please consider alternative locations that are not placed in residential neighborhoods and near schools, and that have good buffer space around the structure to minimize exposure to people in the surrounding area.
WHO link: https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf
Thank you,
Andrea Merg
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Merced -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
EXHIBIT H
From: planningweb
To: Lee, Jessie
Subject: FW: Site Plan Review #544
Date: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 2:02:31 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Thanks,
Kayla Abarca
Administrative Assistant II, Planning Department
City of Merced | 678 W. 18th Street | Merced, CA 95340 (209) 385-6954 Direct | (209) 385-6858 Dept Phone
[email protected] | www.cityofmerced.org
From: Bryant Rodriguez < >
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 1:53 PM
To: planningweb <[email protected]>
Subject: Site Plan Review #544
Good Afternoon,
My Name is Bryant Rodriguez and I reside at . I am attempting to make my opposition known to this proposal of a 55 ft cell tower. This would be basically in my backyard. I am opposed not only to the potential drop in my home's equity. I am wanting to bring up the potential health issues that could come up. Based on a review of studies published up until 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified RF radiation as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” This is not to mention the complete eye sore this will bring to my backyard that I will have to look at. I am in my backyard constantly whether gardening or playing with my children or just plain relaxing. I do not want to view this. I have spoken to multiple neighbors and they also do not want this. This was already attempted at the Calvary Chapel of Merced located at 1345 E Olive Ave, Merced, CA 95340. This was denied due to opposition and a compromise was that they would build a stealth tower at Rahilly park. Why is it that now they are attempting to put it at another church 1/4 of a mile down the road in another residential area where people do not want it?
Thank You,
Bryant Rodriguez
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Merced -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] From: planningweb
To: Lee, Jessie
Subject: FW: Site Plan Review #544
Date: Tuesday, April 16, 2024 1:36:59 PM
Thanks,
Kayla Abarca
Administrative Assistant II, Planning Department
City of Merced | 678 W. 18th Street | Merced, CA 95340 (209) 385-6954 Direct | (209) 385-6858 Dept Phone
[email protected] | www.cityofmerced.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Verrinder < >
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2024 9:15 PM
To: planningweb <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Site Plan Review #544
Hello,
As a property owner on I was recently notified of the intention of attempting to put in a cellphone tower on Church of the Nazarene of Merced property adjacent to my backyard. I am opposed. As a good neighbor, I wanted to notify you that I’ve decided to hold private Hardcore music parties every Sunday for hardcore music lovers. It will be loud, very loud, but during appropriate daytime hours. This will be happening every Sunday into the foreseeable future.
Best wishes,
Jason Verrinder
Sent from my iPhone
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Merced -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
I am a 20 year resident of , representing all the families in the area who will be directly affected by the construction of a cell phone tower on the property of Bear Creek Community Church, adjacent to the homes on my block.
I feel that the city of Merced, ATT, and the owners of the property on which Bear Creek Community Church is situated are all complicit in irresponsible behavior towards our community. It is well-documented and researched that cell phone towers emit dangerous radiation within their vicinity, causing a multitude of health issues. The wireless antennas on the tower emit radio frequency non-ionizing radiation. When these antennas are close to our homes and schools, the daily exposure to radio frequency radiation is increased, contributing to all sorts of maladies. To think that the city of Merced would put families and homeowners at risk is an outrage. Even more egregious is the fact that an elementary school is within very close range of the proposed cell tower. To put the 744 students and 80 staff members of Chenoweth School, directly across the street from the proposed construction site, which would then expose them to radiation on a daily basis, is truly a crime.
Children are more vulnerable to this type of radiation as they absorb it deep into their brains and bodies. A child’s developing brain and organ systems are more sensitive to environmental stressors.
Cell phone tower radiation exposures are continuous – day and night. How can the city even ponder putting such an environmental hazard so close to our homes and schools? The proposed tower will undoubtedly decrease the property values of the homes in the vicinity, in addition to presenting a host of health issues to the residents, school children, and school staff.
Rethink this issue.
Respectfully submitted,
Sheryl Wight
From: planningweb
To: Lee, Jessie
Subject: FW: Proposed Cell Tower at 1717 East Olive Avenue Date: Thursday, April 18, 2024 4:36:09 PM
Attachments: image001.png
Thanks,
Kayla Abarca
Administrative Assistant II, Planning Department
City of Merced | 678 W. 18th Street | Merced, CA 95340 (209) 385-6954 Direct | (209) 385-6858 Dept Phone
[email protected] | www.cityofmerced.org
From: Ronald Ringstrom < >
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2024 4:34 PM
To: planningweb <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed Cell Tower at 1717 East Olive Avenue
We are unequivocally opposed to the construction of a 5G cellular phone tower on the property at 1717 East Olive Avenue. The entire area is residential, including our property at . Cell towers have absolutely no place in a residential area.
The proposed site is approximately 0.4 miles (line-of-sight) from our house. There is already a cell tower next to the McKee Fire Station about 0.36 miles (line-of-sight) from our property. Putting two cell towers so close to each other makes zero sense, even if they are operated by two different companies.
It makes no difference that the tower will be camouflaged by a fake tree. It will still be an incredible eyesore that will diminish the property values of all of the residents in the area. AT&T will probably say that their proposed 5G system will not emit signals causing any significant harm to people in the area. That's sales talk. The high frequency radio waves emitted from this site may have very harmful effects to the children attending Chenoweth Elementary School, which is only about 100 feet from the site, as well as all of the residents in the area. We simply do not have enough long-term data available to be assured it will not cause harm. We do not endorse a project having the potential to cause physical harm to residents or to destroy the value of their properties.
We don't care that the church at that location wants to increase its revenue by allowing the proposed cell tower to be built on its property. Their interests are clearly contrary to the interests of residents in the area. We also don't care that AT&T is offering improved reception in the area. AT&T is a commercial enterprise solely motivated by profit.
They don't care about the welfare of the people who live here. I certainly hope the City of Merced will not place the profit-motivated interests of a huge corporation ahead of the safety and welfare of its citizens.
By the way, it is far past time for the City of Merced to increase the notification area for proposed projects. The existing notification radius is far too small. We should have been notified because this monstrosity will affect us.
Thank you for your attention to this email message.
Ron and Claudia Ringstrom