City of Piedmont
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
DATE: October 21, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Rosanna Bayon Moore, City Administrator
SUBJECT: Study Session for Proposed Revisions to City Code Chapter 17 and the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines related to Wireless Communication Facilities
PURPOSE
This agenda item is a study session to review proposed changes to Piedmont City Code division
17.46 Wireless Communication Facilities and to the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines.
The proposed revisions are intended to bring the code into conformance with State and Federal laws and to add standards for wireless communication facilities (WCF) to the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines. This is an informational item only.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff has drafted proposed revisions to the City’s design standards and guidelines and to the regulations for wireless communication facilities in the City Code. Recent telecommunications law at both the State and Federal levels, and the resolution of court cases necessitate review of the City’s authority at this time.
Key changes to the WCF Ordinance include:
• A permit review process with a streamlined pathway for facilities that meet specific criteria and standards.
• New definitions, revised standards, and updated language throughout the division.
The goal of the proposed changes is to provide clarity to WCF companies, the Piedmont community and staff as to what designs for WCF are most appropriate for Piedmont and to build incentives into the regulatory process to achieve such WCF designs.
Beginning in 2018, the City of Piedmont began to develop design standards for wireless communication facilities (WCF) in response to changes to telecommunications law, as well as pressure from wireless service providers wishing to locate facilities in Piedmont. Over the last several years, staff has researched telecom facilities, performed community outreach, closely followed various Federal court rulings, and collaborated with experts and advisors about WCF.
The City of Piedmont has developed a set of comprehensive design standards for WCF that are proposed in a new chapter of the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines, entitled “Chapter 8 - Wireless Communication Facilities.”
This study session follows two Planning Commission study sessions covering the same material.
Comments and direction provided by the City Council will inform a final draft of the Code changes and design standards for the Planning Commission and City Council to consider for adoption.
BACKGROUND
The City’s authority to regulate WCF has become more constrained over time, as various State and Federal regulations have been adopted, including: the Telecommunications Act of 1966 (47 USC sec332), the Middle Class Tax Relief and Jobs Creation Act of 2012 (47 USC sec 6409), 47 CFR sec 1.40001 Wireless Facility Modifications-2015, State Preemption- Public Utility Code Section 7901, and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Declaratory Ruling-2018.
These regulations:
• Limit the City from either conditioning or denying projects based on concerns stemming from the environmental effects of radio frequency (RF) emissions if the emissions are compliant with Federal RF standards,
• Require the City to approve a request to modify an eligible wireless facility if the proposed modification does not result in a “substantial change”, • Allow telephone companies to construct telephone equipment in the public right-of-way, • Establish curtailed time limits and deadlines for the review of WCF permit applications, and
• Set forth limitations on city regulations governing small cell facilities on existing or new utility poles and streetlights.
DISCUSSION
Provided below is an outline and description of the draft revisions to the Wireless Communication Facilities Code and Design Standards and Guidelines. Division 17.46 of the City Code provides a set of standards for the development and installation of wireless communications facilities. A redlined version of the edits to the current Wireless Communications Facilities Code is included as Attachment A.
Recommended Revisions to the Wireless Communications Facilities Code Staff proposes to make updates and revisions to the definitions section.
Location Preferences:
• Staff recommends that the sites in Zone B, Zone D, and in the public right-of-way continue to be the preferred locations, so long as the properties are not already used for residential purposes. If located in an alternate site or less preferred location, the facility must be located on a non-residential property.
Standards:
• Staff recommends revisions to the height limits to meet the underlying zoning district or State and Federal requirements.
Agenda Report Page 2
• The applicant shall use all reasonable means to conceal or minimize the visual impacts of the WCF through concealment.
• Requirements that facilities in the right-of-way, such as streetlights, shall follow standards outlined in the City of Piedmont Public Works Department Standard Details. • The term of a WCF permit is proposed to be an initial period of ten to twenty years.
Decision-Making Body:
• Staff recommends that WCF permit applications that meet strict design standards be reviewed for approval by staff, and that the Planning Commission be the decision-making body for WCF permit applications that do not meet the strict design standards. As proposed, the City Council would no longer be a decision-making body for WCF permit applications, but it would hear appeals of Planning Commission decisions. • The Planning Commission is proposed to be the reviewing body, with the following exceptions:
1. The Director will review small cell and distributed antenna system (DAS) facilities in the right-of-way on new or existing structures under a ministerial review process, so long as they meet preferred location and design standards outlined in the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines. If the applicant meets the standards, they may proceed to apply for a building permit and encroachment permit.
2. The Director will review eligible facilities requests that propose modifications to existing facilities under Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act of 2012 under a ministerial review process. Section 6409 refers to a Federal law that states that jurisdictions shall approve modifications to existing wireless towers or base stations that do not substantially change the physical dimensions of the structure or defeat the concealment element of the facility. If the applicant meets the standards, they may proceed to apply for a building permit and an encroachment permit (if located within the public right-of-way).
3. The Director shall review microcell towers and telecommunications facilities that propose collocation on existing structures but are not eligible for ministerial review. The Director shall review public comments as a part of the review of the proposed facility, and the Director may refer any application to the Planning Commission for review.
A table showing the proposed permit process and review body can be found on page 5 of this report.
Staff is proposing revisions to the findings and exceptions requirements to be consistent with Federal law.
Appeal Process:
• Staff proposes that applications reviewed ministerially will not be subject to an appeals process since the facilities will need to meet strict design standards to be eligible for ministerial review. Appeals of decisions made by the Director or by the Planning Commission would be considered by the City Administrator in order to meet shortened Agenda Report Page 3
shot clock requirements. Revisions to appeal provisions will need to be made in both division 17.36 (WCF) and division 17.78 (appeals).
Batch Processing:
• Under Assembly Bill 965, an applicant may submit a “batch broadband processing permit” when it receives two or more broadband permit applications for substantially similar broadband project sites, submitted at the same time, and are submitted by the same applicant. In conformance with this State law, staff is proposing a new Code section detailing the standards for an application submitted under “batch processing.” WCF Permitting Process:
• The permitting process for WCF is provided in City Code division 17.46. To supplement the Code provisions, staff recommends providing information on the permitting process in a table format as shown on the following page.
Agenda Report Page 4
Draft Proposed Permitting Process Table proposed to be included in the revised City Code division
17.36:
Location Type of WCF
Design Standards
Criteria Type of Permit Required
WCF in the
Right-of-Way
6409 Collocation
Meets the design
criteria outlined in
Design Standards and
Guidelines outlined
in Section 8.02.03
Building Permit
Encroachment Permit
Small Cell or DAS
Application
Meets the Design
Standards and
Guidelines outlined
in Section 8.02.03
Building Permit
Encroachment Permit
Does not meet the
Design Standards and
Guidelines
WCF Planning Permit, Review by
Planning Commission
Building Permit
Encroachment Permit
Collocation (not under
6409) with existing
structure
WCF Planning Permit, Review by
Director
Building Permit
Encroachment Permit
WCF On Public
or Private
Property
New structure
WCF Planning Permit, Review by
Planning Commission
Building Permit
Collocation (not under
6409) with existing
structure
WCF Planning Permit, Review by
Director
Building Permit
6409 Collocation
Meets Design
Standards and
Guidelines in Section
8.02.04 Building Permit
Agenda Report Page 5
Shot Clock:
A section on WCF application processing is also included in this new chapter to reflect the new strict timelines established by the FCC. This section shows the timelines in place for WCF applications in order to comply with State and Federal law. WCF applications fall under “shotclock” deadlines for the City to complete its review of a project. The shortest shot clock (60 days) is for new facilities in the public right-of-way and for modifications to existing facilities. For Eligible Facilities Requests and Small Cell applications, the shot clock pauses when the City of Piedmont sends an incomplete letter within 30 days of the first mandatory action for submitting an application. For Small Cell applications, if an incomplete letter is sent within the first 10 days, the shot clock will be reset. The City has the ability to send additional comments after the first incomplete letter, but the applicant is only required to address comments that are based on sections of the City Code or Design Standards and Guidelines. There is no additional pausing of the shot clock. In order to meet these processing time limits while protecting the City’s attractive and harmonious setting, staff recommends allowing ministerial review for WCF that meet certain City requirements. The longest shot clock (150 days) is for new structures outside of the right-of-way.
Due to the larger scope and timeline for these projects, staff recommends Planning Commission review for WCF that are proposed on new structures outside the right-of-way.
WCF applications must be processed within the shot clock time limits established by FCC Declaratory Ruling 09-99, FCC Declaratory Ruling 14-153, FCC Declaratory Ruling 18-133, and PUBLIC LAW 112–96 Middle Class Tax Relief and Jobs Creation Act of 2012 section 6409 (A)Additionally, section 6409(a) has created a process referred to as an Eligible Facilities Request that allows carriers to modify existing facilities by adding or replacing equipment and antennas (within a limit based off of specific criteria).
Recommended Design Standards for WCF in the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines When in 2019 the Piedmont City Council adopted a comprehensive update to the City’s Design Guidelines, Chapter 8 was included as a placeholder for standards and guidelines for wireless communication facilities (WCF) that were yet to be drafted. The purpose of the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines is to implement design and appearance policies outlined in the General Plan and Chapter 17 of the Piedmont City Code. To prepare the draft standards and guidelines for WCF included with this report, staff has conducted research on telecom facilities, engaged in community outreach, closely followed Federal court rulings, and collaborated with experts and advisors on WCF matters.
Goals and Approach:
The proposed new WCF standards incentivize seamless integration with current and future infrastructure for a minimal impact on Piedmont's built and natural environment, while enhancing the City's existing wireless network, boosting coverage and capacity.
Organization:
Chapter 8 is proposed to be formatted to be consistent with the existing Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines. Chapter 8 will provide short Statements providing direction on particular aspects of WCF construction and design. Throughout the chapter, photos are used to Agenda Report Page 6
show examples of WCF that the City has identified as successful facilities, as well as examples of WCF that would not be appropriate in Piedmont. The WCF design standards address preferred design and location standards as considerations for new WCF. The WCF design standards include sections on location and structure preferences; information on application processing; standards for WCF located within both in the public right-of-way and on properties outside the right-of-way; and submittal checklists. The intention of the proposed WCF design standards is to provide a userfriendly document for both professionals and the general public alike so that they may better understand Piedmont’s preferred design standards for WCF. The proposed content for Chapter 8 is included as Attachment B to this report and is summarized below.
Stealth Facilities:
A priority of the draft WCF design standards is to encourage the implementation of “stealth” facilities. A stealth facility refers to a concealment element to ensure that a WCF is concealed to the extent that it appears to look like something other than a WCF installation Benefits of a stealth WCF include the reduction of equipment clutter and the ability by the City to regulate aesthetic impacts of future expansion on new or existing WCF, as provided under Federal Communication Commission. Pursuant to the proposed draft WCF design standards, all WCF shall provide a concealment strategy unless located on a utility tower.
General Standards:
The proposed design standards are subdivided into sections for WCF located within the public right-of-way and for WCF located outside the right-of-way. Generally, the proposed standards establish requirements for equipment concealment (stealth design), distance standards between facilities, collocation, and access requirements for WCF in the public right-of-way. The Design Standards and Guidelines also include a summary of the permit process, checklists for application submittals, and information on the shot clock timelines.
PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSIONS FOR WCF REGULATIONS AND
STANDARDS
On July 8 and March 11, 2024, the Planning Commission held study sessions on the proposed revisions to the City Code and to the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines regarding WCF. The comments and discussions of the Planning Commission and community members informed the proposed regulations and policies provided for this study session.
During its regular meeting on September 9, 2024, the Planning Commission held a study session on the proposed amendments to Chapter 17.46 of the City Code and Chapter 8 of the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines provided for this City Council study session. No verbal or written public comments were received for the Planning Commission study session. While generally supportive of the proposed updates, the Commissioners focused their discussion on batch processing. They suggested revisions to the process to allow for sites to be removed from a batch process permit without requiring the applicant to withdraw the permit in its entirety. Staff revised the proposed Code provisions for batch processing in response. Hyperlinks to the minutes for the three Planning Commission meetings cited above are provided in the Attachments section below.
Agenda Report Page 7
CITY CHARTER
The proposed modifications to the City Code would be in conformance with the City Charter, including section 9.02, relating to zoning. No zones would be reduced or enlarged, and no zones would be reclassified. City Charter provisions are expressly referred to in City Code division
17.02.010.C.
CITY ATTORNEY REVIEW
The proposed amendments to the wireless communication facilities code have been reviewed by the City Attorney.
CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS
As noted above, the proposed updates to provisions for Wireless Communication Facilities in the City Code and Design Standards and Guidelines are a response to recent Federal and State law and are intended to provide clarity for permit requirements to applicants. The goal is to provide a streamlined process for wireless permit applications as required by State and Federal laws while also establishing strong design standards to ensure that high-quality facilities are installed in Piedmont. Staff recommends that the City Council review and provide feedback through its discussion of the proposed updates.
Comments received from the City Council and members of the public will inform final drafts of the City Code revisions and the new design standards for WCF. The final draft will be considered by the Planning Commission, which will make a recommendation to the City Council, which is the decision-making body.
Report By: Kevin Jackson, Director of Planning and Building Gopika Nair, Associate Planner
Steven Lizzarago, Associate Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
Page
A 9 - 23 Draft City Code Chapter 17.46, Planning and Land Use, With Redlines B 24 – 38 Draft Chapter 8, Design Standards and Guidelines LINKS TO RELEVANT DOCUMENTS:
Piedmont City Code Chapter 17, Planning and Land Use
Link to the Commission report regarding updates to the standards and guidelines Link to the Commission report regarding updates to City Code Chapter 17 Link to the minutes from the March 11, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Link to the minutes from the July 8, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting Link to the minutes from the September 9, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting City of Piedmont Zoning Map
Agenda Report Page 8
DIVISION 17.46 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
Sections:
17.46.010 Purpose
17.46.020 Definitions
17.46.030 Applicability; Exemptions
17.46.040 Location; City site agreement
17.46.050 Permit; Application.
17.46.060 Independent Technical Review
17.46.070 Standards
17.46.080 Hearings; Findings
17.46.090 Batch Processing
17.46.100 Appeals
17.46.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this division is to provide a comprehensive set of standards for the development and installation of wireless communication facilities. The regulations are designed to facilitate the appropriate deployment of wireless networks and improvements to existing wireless network infrastructure to provide coverage and capacity throughout the City. These standards create a clear set of design requirements and application processes that allow wireless carriers to deploy their networks effectively, while not detracting from the aesthetics of the streetscapes, buildings, light standards, utility poles, and structures inside and outside of the public right-of-way in the City of Piedmont. These requirements aim to protect public health, safety, and community welfare while balancing the benefits of robust wireless services with the community’s architectural character, aesthetics, and landscaping of the City. The purpose of these standards is not to regulate what technologies are being deployed, but to regulate the manner in which wireless equipment is deployed to ensure that such are not detrimental or injurious to the public health, safety, and general welfare; and that the aesthetic appearance shown in approved plans is continuously preserved. protect and promote public safety and community welfare, property values, and the character and aesthetic quality of the city, while at the same time not unduly restricting the development of wireless communication facilities, and not unreasonably discriminating among wireless communication service providers of functionally equivalent services, including retail and other commercial providers of wireless communication services.
This division applies to applications for approval of the installation of new or modified wireless communication facilities, including applications previously received by the city but not yet approved, disapproved or conditionally approved by a final city decision.
17.46.020 Definitions.
In this division:
Antenna means a device for transmitting and receiving radiofrequency signals. Antenna includes panel antennas, reflecting discs, microwave dishes, whip antennas, directions and non-directional antennas consisting of one or more elements, multiple antenna configurations, or other similar devices and configurations. The height of the antenna includes all array structures. Antenna includes a Distributed Antenna System (DAS), which is a network of spatially separated antenna sites connected to a common source that provides wireless service within a geographic area or Attachment A Agenda Report Page 9
structure an apparatus designed for the purpose of emitting radiofrequency (RF) signal, to be operated or operating from a fixed location pursuant to Federal Communications Commission (FCC) authorization, for the provision of personal wireless service and any commingled public information services. For purposes of this definition, the term antenna does not include an unintentional radiator, mobile station, or device authorized under part 15 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Base station means all equipment and apparatus, excluding antennas, that are components of the WCF, including any antenna support system regular and backup power supply, other associated electronics, electronic receiving and relay equipment, enclosed equipment, electrical meters, and the necessary housing and foundations an authorized wireless communications facility that connects wireless equipment and a communications network. The term does not encompass a tower as defined in this subpart or any equipment associated with a tower.
Batch processing means a type of permit submittal that consists of: (1) two or more broadband permit applications for “substantially similar broadband project sites,” (2) the applications are submitted at the same time; and (3) by the same applicant.
Collocation means multiple telecommunications service providers using the same structure, including new and existing infrastructure. A new or replacement utility pole, streetlight, or tower is not a collocation and shall be reviewed as a new facility.
Concealed means not observable. By way of example, a wireless communication facility will be considered concealed if it is contained within new or existing architectural details of a building, e.g., real or faux clock or bell tower, or on the roof of a building and concealed by parapets or screenwalls, or concealed by any other means, so long as the wireless communications facility does not substantially compromise the aesthetics of the building, and the new concealment element has been approved under a wireless communication facility permit.
Concealment means a wireless facility that is covered, blended, disguised, camouflaged, or integrated to make a wireless facility look like something other than a wireless facility (as defined by FCC Declaratory Ruling FCC-CIRC2006-003). Concealment includes incorporating stealth design (see definition below).
Camouflaged means designed to mask or blend with the surrounding environment in such a manner to render it generally unnoticeableunrecognizable as a wireless facility to the casual observer. By way of example, a wireless communication facility may be camouflaged in a faux tree, faux bush, flagpole, or otherwise designed in a manner to be compatible with the appurtenant architecture, building, or natural surroundings.
DAS means distributed antenna system. DAS is a series of antennas that are usually lower power that have a connected fiber network to provide coverage to a specific location. 6409(a) Eligible Facilities Request refers to section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Spectrum Act)., Congress provided that state and local government review may not deny, and shall approve, Eligible Facilities Requests to modify existing wireless Attachment A Agenda Report Page 10
towers or base stations that do not substantially change the physical dimensions of the structure, defeat the concealment element, nor violate certain conditions associated with the siting approval. .
Equipment cabinet means a cabinet or structure used to house equipment associated with a wireless communication facility.
FCC means Federal Communications Commission.
FCC Shot Clock or shot clock means the FCC’s presumptively reasonable time frame, accounting for any tolling or voluntary extension, or unusual circumstances justifying additional time, within which the City generally must act on a duly filed request for authorization in connection with a personal wireless service facility, as such time frame is defined by the FCC and as may be amended or superseded. For batched applications, the longest shot clock applicable to any small wireless facility in the batch shall be applicable to the entire batch (e.g., in a batch with four collocations and one new/replacement pole, the FCC Shot Clock would be 90 days for the entire batch even though the collocation applications would be 60 days if submitted on an individual basis)
FRP Fiber Reinforced Plastic means a composite material made of a polymer matrix reinforced with fibres that is used to screen one or more antenna visually, while allowing wireless signals to pass through unobstructed.
GO95 is CPUC General Order 95 which outlines rules for overhead electric line construction.
Macrocell Site means any WCF that is not a small wireless facility.
Monopole means a single free-standing pole, post, or similar structure, used to support equipment associated with a wireless communication facility.
Public right-of-way means a public highway, street, alley, sidewalk, or parkway that is subject to Public Utilities Code section 7901.
Related equipment means equipment ancillary to the transmission and reception of voice and data via radio frequencies. Related equipment may include, but is not limited to, cable, conduit and connectors.
Service provider means an authorized provider of wireless communication services, including a neutral host carrier.
Shroud is a physical barrier that encloses and conceals a WCF located atop a pole or on a structure or line. Examples include a radome.
Small Cell Facility has the same meaning as a small wireless facility, as set forth in 47 C.F.R.
1.6002(l).
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 11
Stealth Design means using concealment so that a wireless communications facility is designed to look like something other than a wireless tower or base station. Stealth design includes, but is not limited to:
a. Integrating a WCF within the architecture of an existing structure outside the public right-of-way;
b. Using a new structure built to conceal the WCF in its entirety, such as a stealth water tower or clock tower outside of the public right-of-way. c. Using a new architectural feature added to an existing structure outside of the public right-of-way to conceal the WCF; such as a faux vent, faux chimney, or faux penthouse. d. Using an architectural feature added to an existing or proposed structure in the public right-of-way to conceal the WCF in its entirety such as a protrusion on a streetlight or utility pole, new streetlight that integrates wireless equipment in its entirety, a new bus stop shelter, a faux trash can enclosure adjacent to an existing or proposed structure, or traffic signage added to a streetlight to cover and conceal WCF equipment.
Substantial change means it meets the requirements in the eligible facilities checklist, outlined in section 8.03.03 of the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines titled 6409 (a) Eligible Facilities Request Checklist
Toll, tolled, or tolling is defined as days that are not included in the calculation of the deadline for action by a jurisdiction due to incomplete application materials or voluntary agreement between the wireless service provider and the jurisdiction.
Tower means a structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting wireless communication facilities, including a monopole. This does not include a structure that was installed to replace or collocate upon an existing power pole, light standard, energy transmission tower, or building. Federal Communications Commission-licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including structures that are constructed for wireless communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul, and the associated site improvements.
Sidewalk vault is a base station for equipment in an underground facility for equipment located in a cabinet beneath the sidewalk.
Wireless communication facility means an unstaffed facility, generally consisting of antennas (including a Distributed Antenna System), an equipment cabinet or structure, and related equipment that receives and/or transmits radio frequency signals.
Wireless telecommunications facility (WCF) means any facility constructed, installed, or operated for wireless service. Wireless telecommunications facility includes, but is not limited to, antennas or other types of equipment for the transmission or receipt of such signals, telecommunications towers or similar structures supporting such equipment, related accessory equipment, equipment buildings, parking areas, and other accessory development. "Wireless telecommunications facility" does not mean any of the following:
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 12
a. A facility that qualifies as an amateur station as defined by the FCC, 47 C.F.R. Part 97, of the Commission's Rules, or its successor regulation.
b. An antenna facility that is subject to the FCC Over-The-Air-Receiving Devices rule, 47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000, or any successor regulation, including, but not limited to, direct-tohome satellite dishes that are less than one meter in diameter, TV antennas used to receive television broadcast signals and wireless cable antennas. c. Portable radios and devices including, but not limited to, hand-held, vehicular, or other portable receivers, transmitters or transceivers, cellular phones, CB radios, emergency services radio, and other similar portable devices as determined by the city manager. d. Telecommunications facilities owned and operated by any government agency. e. Telecommunications facilities owned and operated by any emergency medical care provider. f. Mobile services providing public information coverage of news events of a temporary nature.
g. Any wireless telecommunications facilities exempted from the Piedmont City Code by federal law or state law.
17.46.030 Applicability; Exemptions.
A. Applicability. This division 17.46 applies to all wireless communication facilities, except those exempted in subsection B below (though other permit requirements may apply).
B. Exemptions. The following facilities are exempt from this division:
1. Wireless communication facility for which a federal or state statute or regulation exempts the facility from the imposition of the permit requirements of this division but only to the extent of such exemption.
2. Satellite dish antenna, less than one meter in diameter for receiving radio or television stations by the property owners, occupants or guests.
3. City-owned or operated communication facilities.
4. Communication equipment located completely inside a structure, not visible from the outside, whose purpose is solely to provide wireless communications within the same structure, including Wi-Fi hotspots and access points, with no alteration to the exterior of the structure.
17.46.040 Location; City site agreement.
A. Priority for location.
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 13
1. Preference for Zone B, publicly-owned propertyZone D, and public right of way sites. In order of preference, wireless communication facilities should be located (i) on publicly-owned property outside of the public right of way, in Zone B, within the city (ii) on publicly-owned facilities in any other zone outside of the public right of wayproperty in zZone D, or (iii) public rights-of-way.
2. Alternative locations. Any location for a wireless site outside of Zone B, not on publicly-owned property, or not with a public right of way will be considered according to the following priority:
a. The applicant must first attempt to locate a site in Zone D, the commercial zone, that is not used for residential purposes.
b. If it is infeasible to locate in Zone D, the applicant must attempt to locate at a non-residential property in Zone A, C or E.
3. General. In all cases, the preference, in order, is to locate on or in an existing structure which the wireless communication facility can be concealed; or to collocate on an existing wireless communication facility with a stealth design; or to locate on a new structure that can be incorporated in an inconspicuous or compatiblea stealth manner compatible with the surrounding area.
4. Prohibit. Wireless communication facilities are prohibited on properties that contain a residential use, regardless of zone.
B. City site agreement.
1. Consideration by staff. If the applicant wishes to locate on city-owned property or facilities, the applicant must discuss its desired location(s) with staff (Public Works Director and Planning & Building Director, as appropriate) before the submittal of an application. If the location appears to be generally feasible, city staff will negotiate the principal terms for a proposed site agreement with the applicant, spelling out in detail the specific facilities to be located on city property or facilities, the term of the agreement, the compensation to be provided the city, and other terms.
2. Consideration by City Council. When the principal terms for a proposed agreement have been prepared and approved by city staff, staff will scheduled the matter for hearing before the City Council. The City Council will consider the proposed agreement as part of an ordinance, required by City Charter Section 2.11(6). The City Council may defer its final decision regarding the agreement until after the wireless communication facility permit is approved.
3. Limited nature of consent. The city’s consent as property owner to process a wireless communication facility permit is not be deemed city consent to lease or license the property.
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 14
C. No wireless communication facilities on residential property. Wireless communication facilities shall not be installed on property which is used for residential purposes, irrespective of the zoning district in which such residential property is located.
17.46.050 Permit; Application.
A. Permit. A wireless communication facility permit is a type of conditional use permit specifically for wireless communication facilities and is required for each facility. If the wireless communication facility permit is approved, the owner or operator must also obtain a building permit before beginning construction.
B. Application.
1. All applications. An application for a wireless communication facility permit must include:
a. a complete application on a form provided by the city, setting forth information for the applicant to submitto the City with all relevant fields completed and all required documents attached;
b. b. evidence of a significant gap in coverage or capacity or introduction of new services or other service capability improvements, which the application seeks to address if the applicant is going on a less preferred structure or in a less preferred zone; and
c. applicable fees and/or deposits, including a deposit for independent technical review under section 17.46.060 below. If the application is to collocate a wireless communication facility at an existing wireless communication facility location, or to modify an existing wireless communication facility, the application shall address the applicability, if any, of federal or state laws governing such applications.
d. all applicable documents outlined in the submittal checklist in section
8.03.04 of the Design Standards and Guidelines titled Submittal Checklist
2. Application for location on city property. An applicant for a wireless communication facility proposed to be located on city property or in a public right-ofway must submit additional items, as set forth on the supplemental application form provided by the city, setting forth supplemental information for the applicant to submita Letter of Authorization signed by the City of Piedmont City Council and all documents listed in Chapter 8 of the Design Standards and Guidelines.
17.46.060 Independent Technical Review.
The Director is authorized in his or her discretion to retain an independent technical consultant to review materials submitted by the applicant and to provide an analysis of issues including but not limited to: whether the wireless communication facility meets the applicable radio frequency emission regulations; whether a significant gap in coverage or capacity exists and whether the Attachment A Agenda Report Page 15
proposed facilities are the least intrusive means of doing so; whether there are alternative sites and the feasibility of those sites; whether there are ways to mitigate aesthetic impacts; and any other specific technical issues designated by the Director. The applicant must pay the consultant's costs, and must increase the deposit to cover the anticipated amount as the Director may deem necessary from time-to-time.
17.46.070 Standards.
A. Development Standards. The following development standards apply.
1. Collocation. New wireless communication facilities must be collocated with existing facilities and with other planned new facilities whenever feasible. A new wireless tower must be designed and constructed to accommodate future collocation(s) unless the city determines that collocation would be infeasible because of physical or design issues specific to the site.
2. Height limits.; Screening. No wireless communication facility may exceed 35 feet in height, measured from the ground to the highest point of the wireless communication facility, unless the zoning district in which the wireless communication facility is located expressly provides a higher height limitWireless Facilities must follow height limits of the zoning district they are prourposed to be installed in, height limits of the City of Piedmont Public Works Standards Details, height limits set by the FCC, and/or height limits outlined in GO95 regulations. Ground mounted wireless communication equipment, base station, antenna, pole, or tower must be the minimum functional height, unless as variance required by federal or state law. is granted. Roof mounted equipment and antennas must be located to minimize visibility.
3. Visual impact. Wireless communication facilities must be designed to minimize visual impacts. When feasible, the fFacilities must be concealed or camouflaged to the greatest extent practicable in accordance with this Division, as determined by the Planning & Building Director. The facilities must have a non-reflective finish and be painted or otherwise treated to minimize visibility and the obstruction of views.
The facilities may not bear signs, other than certification, warning, emergency contacts, or other signage required by law or expressly required by the city.
4. Public health, peace and safety. A wireless communication facility may not adversely affect the public health, peace and safety.
5. Public right-of-way. A wireless communication facility located in the public right-of-way may not cause: (i) physical or visual obstruction, or safety hazard, to pedestrians, cyclists, or motorists; or (ii) inconvenience to the public's use of the right-ofway. Equipment, walls, and landscaping located above grade must be at least 18 inches from the front of the curbfollow the City of Piedmont Public Works Department Standard Details and not interfere with the public’s use of the right-of-way.
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 16
6. Compliance with laws. Each wireless communication facility must comply with federal and state statutes governing local agencies’ land use authority regarding the siting of wireless communication facilities, including without limitation 47 USC sections 253, 332(c)(7), 47 USC section 1455 (also known as section 6409 of the 2012 Middle Class Tax Relief and Jobs Act), California Government Code sections 50030, 65850.6 and 65964, and California Public Utilities Code sections 7901 and 7901.1. Each reference to a federal and state statutes is to the statute as it may be as amended from time-to-time and to the extent the statute remains in effect.
B. Operation and Maintenance Standards
1. Contact and site information. The owner or operator of a wireless communication facility must submit basic contact and site information to the city, and notify the city within 30 days of any changes to this information, including the transfer of ownership.
The contact and site information must include: (i) the name, address, email address, telephone number, and legal status of the owner of the facility, including official identification number and FCC certification, and, if different from the owner, the identity and legal status of the person or entity responsible for operating and maintaining the facility; and (ii) the name, address, email address, and telephone number of a local contact person for emergencies.
2. Signage. The owner and/or operator must post an identification sign at each facility, including owner/operator emergency telephone numbers. The design, materials, colors, and location of the identification signs shall be subject to review and approval by the Director. If at any time a new owner or operator provider takes over operation of an existing personal wireless service facility, the new personal wireless service provider shall notify the Director of the change in operation within 30 days and the required and approved signs shall be updated within 30 days to reflect the name and phone number of the new wireless service provider. The colors, materials and design of the updated signs shall match those of the required and approved signs. No sign shall be greater than two square feet in size.
3. FCC compliance. Each wireless communication facility must comply with FCC regulations, and avoid interfering with any city communication facilities, operations, utilities, equipment, or public safety communications. If the facility negatively impacts city facilities or equipment, the operator must comply with all FCC regulations and orders to resolve the interference. At the city’s discretion, and at the operator's expense, the city may retain an outside technical consultant to evaluate and verify compliance with FCC regulations and to determine the cause of interference for an existing facility.
4. Facility maintenance. Each wireless communication facility must be maintained in good repair, free from trash, debris, litter, graffiti, and other forms of vandalism. The operator must repair any damage as soon as reasonably possible, but no later than 90 days from the time of notification.
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 17
Landscaping elements at a wireless communication facility site must be maintained in good condition, and in compliance with the approved landscape plan. The owner or operator is responsible for replacing any damaged, dead, or decayed landscape materials and making necessary irrigation and equipment repairs as soon as reasonably possible.
5. Noise. A wireless communication facility must be operated to minimize noise that is audible as provided in Chapter 8 of the City Code
6. Removal. All wireless communication facility equipment must be removed within 30 days of the discontinuation of the use, and the site restored to its original, preconstruction condition. In addition, the service provider must provide the city with a notice of intent to vacate a site a minimum of 30 days before the vacation. For a wireless communication facility to be located on public property, this removal requirement will be included within the lease. For a facility to be located on private property, the property owner is encouraged to also include this in the lease, because the property owner will otherwise be responsible for removal.
C. Term of permit. A wireless communication facility permit is valid for an initial period of ten to twenty years as specified in the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines unless: (i) a longer period is required by state or federal law; or (ii) a shorter time is required as a condition of approval for particular circumstances set forth in the decision, particularly with respect to public safety or substantial land use reasons under California Government Code section 65964(b). The Director may administratively extend a permit upon verification of continued compliance with this division 17.46 and any conditions of approval.
However, a permit granted for a collocation or modification under section 17.46.080 D.2.b will be effective for the shorter of: (i) the term of the original permit; or (ii) a longer period if required by state or federal law.
17.46.080 Hearings; Findings.
A. Hearings.
1. Permit and Reviewing Body. The Planning Commission is the reviewing body, except that:
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 18
Location Type of WCF
Design Standards
Criteria Type of Permit Required
WCF in the Rightof-Way
6409 Collocation
Meets the design
criteria outlined in
Design Standards and
Guidelines outlined
in Section 8.02.03
Building Permit
Encroachment Permit
Small Cell or DAS
Application
Meets the Design
Standards and
Guidelines outlined
in Section 8.02.03
Building Permit
Encroachment Permit
Does not meet the
Design Standards and
Guidelines
WCF Planning Permit, Review by
Planning Commission
Building Permit
Encroachment Permit
Collocation (not under
6409) with existing
structure
WCF Planning Permit, Review by
Director
Building Permit
Encroachment Permit
WCF On Public or
Private Property
New structure
WCF Planning Permit, Review by
Planning Commission
Building Permit
Collocation (not under
6409) with existing
structure
WCF Planning Permit, Review by
Director
Building Permit
6409 Collocation
Meets Design
Standards and
Guidelines in Section
8.02.04 Building Permit
A. Reviewing body. The Planning Commission is the reviewing body, except that:
1. the City Council is the reviewing body for a facility in Zone B or on city-owned property or facilities (including collocations), following a recommendation from the Planning Commission; and
2. the Director is the reviewing body for an application for a collocation that meets the criteria set forth in section 17.46.080.D.2.b or for which the wireless communication Attachment A Agenda Report Page 19
facility will be fully concealed or camouflaged. The Director will take action on the application without public notice or public hearing, unless the Director refers the application to the Planning Commission.
B2..Planning Commission. After receiving a completed application, the city staff will schedule a noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission consistent with divisions 17.62 and
17.64. Any application submitted to be reviewed by the Director outlined in section 17.46.080.A may be referred to the Planning Commission unless otherwise stated by federal law. If the application involves city-owned property, the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council.
C. City Council. The City Council will hear each application: (i) involving a facility in Zone B or on city-owned property or facilities; or (ii) appealed from the Planning Commission.
DB.Required findings; Exceptions.
1. Findings. Before approving a wireless communication facility permit as provided in City Code section 17.46.080.A.3 and 17.46.080.A.4, the reviewing body must make the following findings:
a. The facility is necessary to close a significant gap in the operator's service coverage or capacity.
ab. The applicant has evaluated and met the priority for location standards of section 17.46.040 A above.
bc. The proposal satisfies each of the applicable development standards in section 17.46.070 above..
cd. The proposed design is consistent with the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines.
de. The proposed facility has been located and designed for concealment and collocation to the greatest extent reasonably feasible, and the applicant has submitted a statement of its willingness to allow other wireless service providers to collocate on the proposed facility.
2. Exceptions.
a. General. The decision-making body may grant an exception to any requirement of this division 17.46, including without limitation the priority for location under section 17.46.040 A, if the applicant establishes that strict compliance would violate federal or state law.
b. Modification. The Director may consider and grant, modify and grant or deny a modification to an existing wireless communications facility if the Attachment A Agenda Report Page 20
modification meets the requirements of section 6409. In determining whether to approve the requested modification the Director shall approve if the project meets the criteria outlined in section 8.03.03 of the Piedmont Design Standards and Guidelines titled 6409 (a) Eligible Facilities Request Checklist.consider the following:
i. Alterations to the width, bulk, or arrangement of a wireless communication facility that may result in a potentially significant or material impact to public access or use of any public or private right-of-way, or any potentially significant or material impact to public health, safety, or welfare;
ii. Alterations to required access, parking, or landscaping from that shown on the approved site plans;
iii. Alterations that include excavation outside the wireless telecommunications facility site, defined as the boundaries of the controlled, leased or owned property surrounding the tower and base station and any access or utility easements related to the site as shown on the approved plans; iv. An increase in the height of a freestanding tower that is less than the applicable height limit;
v. Replacement of the wireless tower or foundation;
vi. Alteration or expansion of the exterior of a facility that was originally approved as concealed or camouflaged in such a manner so that it may no longer be concealed or camouflaged; or
vii. An increase by more than ten percent of the physical dimensions or exposed surface area of any component of the tower or base station (including, but not limited to, the height, circumference, or width of the wireless tower or base station), or an increase by more than ten percent from the dimensions of any structures required to support the wireless tower or base station, such as guy wires, as approved and constructed through the discretionary permit process; provided that in no event may the height exceed the maximum height permitted under this section 17.46, the zoning district or the wireless tower or base station’s initial approval.
c. The exemptions listed in the definition of wireless communication facility in section 17.46.020.:
Any proposed modification that is not a collocation, or for which the wireless communication facility will be fully concealed or camouflaged, or that does not fall within the requirements of section 6409 shall be reviewed and considered under the same provisions and requirements as those required for the original consideration of the permit proposed for modification.
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 21
17.46.090 Batch Processing.
In accordance with Assembly Bill 965, an applicant may submit a “batch broadband processing permit” when it receives two or more broadband permit applications for substantially similar broadband project sites, submitted at the same time, and are submitted by the same applicant.
A. Requirements
1. The City will consider applications under Assembly Bill 965 for broadband batch processing as “nearly identical in terms of equipment and general design, but not location” if they meet the following criteria.
a. Require the same permits;
b. Are the same kind of facilities (for example, all the applications received are stealth facilities, are on streetlights, are on utility poles, etc.); c. Must be on the same type of property (for example, the City will not batch process an application on private property along with an application on public property);
d. Must be in the same zoning district;
e. The proposed facilities are within 5 feet of each other in height/elevation; f. The proposed facilities have similar power output and operating frequency for any proposed antenna array;
g. Use of substantially the same equipment in the same configuration on the same support structure type;
h. Have similar accessory equipment which is located in similar locations, whether above ground or below ground;
i. Use the same material for exterior finishes, including color and texture; j. Do not require illumination of the wireless facilities with the exception of security and maintenance lighting;
k. Only collocation applications can be considered substantially similar to other collocation applications; and
l. No more than 25 sites are included in a batch processing application.
B. Review Body. Applications submitted under a batch processing permit shall be subject to review by the body outlined under section 17.46.080.A.
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 22
C. Application Fee. The applicant shall pay an application fee in the amount established by City Council resolution.
D. Application Determination. Each application in a batch must meet all the requirements for a complete application, which includes without limitation the application fee for each site in the batch. If any application in a batch is incomplete, the entire batch shall be deemed incomplete. If an applicant removes more than 20% of the facilities from a batch application, the entire batch application shall be withdrawn. If any application in a batch fails to meet the required findings for approval, the entire batch shall be denied.
17.46.100 Appeals.
Pursuant to Division 17.78 of the Piedmont City Code, an appeal of a wireless communication facility application may be submitted for any application reviewed by the Director or reviewed by the Planning Commission. The appeal will be submitted to the City Administrator or the City Administrator’s designee. The appeal must be submitted within five days of a decision made by the Director or Planning Commission. Any appeal shall be conducted so that a timely written decision may be issued in accordance with applicable law.
There is not an appeal process for applications submitted under a ministerial review permit.
Attachment A Agenda Report Page 23
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
INTRODUCTION
8-1
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS
FACILITIES
8.01 INTRODUCTION
With the growth in home-based work, proliferation of smart technologies, and steady increase in cellular data usage, wireless infrastructure improvements and deployments have become vital to daily life. With Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations creating new regulations concerning how wireless facilities are reviewed and approved, the City of Piedmont establishes these design standards, guidelines, and processes with which wireless facilities are permitted.
The City of Piedmont developed these Wireless Communication Facilities (WCF) Standards with the intent to facilitate the appropriate deployment of new wireless networks and improvements to existing wireless network infrastructure to provide coverage and capacity throughout the City. These standards create a clear set of design requirements and application processes that allow wireless carriers to deploy their networks effectively, while not detracting from the aesthetics of the City of Piedmont streetscapes, buildings, light standards, utility poles, and structures inside and outside of the public right-of-way. The City of Piedmont does not regulate what technologies are being deployed, but does have the authority to regulate the time, place, and manner in which wireless equipment is deployed.
Definitions and regulations governing wireless facilities can be found in division 17.46 of the Piedmont City Code.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 24
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-2
8.02 WCF DESIGN AND SITING
8.02.01 LOCATION PREFERENCES
DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. The preferred locations for wireless facilities installations are as follows:
a. Lots in Zone B – Public Facilities
b. Lots in Zone D – Mixed Use and Commercial
c. Public Right-of-Way
2. The least preferred locations are as follows:
a. Lots in Zone A – Single Family Residential
b. Lots in Zone C - Multi-Family Residential
c. Lots in Zone E - Estates Residential
Facilities proposed on a property in the zones listed above currently being used for nonresidential uses are least preferred. Applicants applying for sites on properties on a least-preferred property must provide written justification for the location preference and coverage/capacity maps. Nonetheless, WCF are prohibited on properties that contain a residential use, regardless of zone.
8.02.02 STRUCTURE PREFERENCES
DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. The preferred structures for locating WCF installations are as follows:
a. Existing buildings in a preferred zoning location
b. City light standards
c. Metal or wood utility poles
d. New structures in a preferred zoning location
Structures are not preferred to be installed on existing or new structures within a leastpreferred zoning location. Applicants must provide written justification and coverage/capacity maps if they propose WCF in a least preferred site.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 25
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-3
8.02.03 DESIGN STANDARDS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
DESIGN STANDARDS:
Wireless Communication Facilities shall be located and designed to minimize the impact to the surrounding area and maintain the character of the neighborhood. The WCF shall be designed in such a way as to be the least intrusive possible, using stealthing, minimal necessary equipment, and collocation wherever possible.
1. A WCF in the public right-of-way shall never incommode the public in using the right-of-way.
2. The antenna(s) shall be stealth with shrouding, radome, or another form of fiber reinforced plastic stealth concealment.
3. For wood utility poles carrying power lines, replacement poles shall be the minimum height necessary to provide GO 95 mandated clearance between WCF equipment and power lines.
4. All associated “antenna skirt” shall taper to meet the top of the pole if wider than the pole.
5. Wireless providers shall have all associated equipment (radios, fans, etc.) screened, shrouded, or in stealthed cabinets. Equipment shall not face or extend toward adjacent private property or the adjacent curb line.
6. All wires, conductors, fiber, etc. will be contained inside the proposed structure wherever feasible. When not feasible to be inside the structure, it shall be in conduits or shrouds and painted to match the structure.
7. All installations shall be painted to match, color and texture, of the City Light Standard or wood/metal utility pole in addition to the screening.
8. Wireless providers shall not install wireless facilities within 500’ of their own existing facilities. No required separation from other wireless providers.
9. New structures in the right-of-way shall not be installed unless the applicant has shown that there is no other alternative to meet their coverage/capacity needs. a. New structures shall not be installed within 25’ of an existing city light standard or wood utility pole.
10. The WCF shall comply with all requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”).
11. All fiber should be brought to a proposed site with the minimum visual impact possible. (Limit the number of “snowshoes” to as few as possible when overhead fiber is required.)
12. The radios and accessory equipment shall not be placed in underground vaults in the right-of-way.
13. All sites must meet City of Piedmont Public Works Standard Details.
14. All sites must meet all State and Federal Regulations regarding wireless.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 26
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-4
Yes Yes
DESIGN COMMENTS:
B. Equipment is concealed
within the light pole and
trash can, meeting stealth
requirements.
A. Wires are enclosed by a
conduit to prevent
additional clutter, and the
antenna is concealed in a
shroud.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 27
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-5
No
Yes
DESIGN COMMENTS:
D. The equipment is tacked on,
messy, and not concealed, which does
not meet stealth requirements.
C. Antennas, cables, and radios are
concealed in shrouds and blend into
the existing pole
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 28
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-6
No
No
Yes
DESIGN COMMENTS:
E. The two images above both show
antennas without proper shroud
coverings. The example on the left
does not taper to integrate with the
pole, and the example on the right
does not conceal the cables.
F. All equipment is integrated within
the pole, and the design is
reminiscent of traditional light posts.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 29
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-7
8.02.04 DESIGN STANDARDS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY
DESIGN STANDARDS:
1. The antenna(s) shall be stealth with shrouding, radome, or another form of fiber reinforced plastic stealthed concealment.
2. Wireless providers shall have all associated equipment (radios, fans, etc) screened, shrouded, or in stealthed cabinets.
3. All wires, conductors, fiber, etc. shall be undergrounded and running through the inside of the structure. If it is not possible to go inside the structure, cables shall be run in cable trays on the side of the structure away from the right-of-way and painted to match the adjacent walls.
4. Wireless providers shall not install wireless facilities within 500’ of their own existing facilities. (No required separation from other wireless providers).
5. New Structures on private property shall not be installed unless the applicant has shown that there is no other alternative to meet their coverage/capacity needs. o No new structures or expansions shall be constructed on private property used for residential purposes.
o New structures must be designed with the ability to allow future wireless providers to collocate in a manner that does not violate the stealth or concealment design.
6. The WCF shall comply with all requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”).
7. All radios shall be installed in equipment lease areas and not on towers with the antennas.
8. All proposed backup battery units (BBU) or generators will be located in the equipment lease area and screened from public view. The generators shall meet the mechanicallygenerated sound requirements outlined in the Piedmont Building Code.
9. All sites must meet all State and Federal Regulations regarding wireless communication facilities.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 30
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-8
Yes
Yes
DESIGN COMMENTS:
A. Above, the antennas are hidden behind the
architectural screen, and the screen matches
the rest of the building materials and design.
B. The antennas in this
structure are stealthed to
appear as chimneys, and
the rest of the roofmounted equipment is set
back to not be visible from
public view.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 31
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-9
No No
DESIGN COMMENTS:
C. This WCF does not
attempt to conceal the
multiple antennas on the
roof, cluttering the space.
D. Faux trees poorly
conceal equipment and are
not encouraged.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 32
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
DESIGN AND SITING
8-10
Yes
Yes
DESIGN COMMENTS:
E. Antennas are kept flush
to the tower and the
conduits are concealed
inside. Other equipment is
concealed behind fencing.
F. Below, the antenna is
entirely concealed within
the bell tower.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 33
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
WCF PERMIT PROCESS
8-11
8.03 WCF PERMIT PROCESS
8.03.01 APPLICATION
FCC Shot Clocks
Project Type Shot Clock
Small Cell on an existing structure in ROW 60 days
Small Cell on a new structure in ROW 90 days
Macro Cell on an existing structure 90 days
Macro Cell on a new structure 150 days
Eligible Facilities Request 60 Days
WCF Backup Power Generators 60 days
WCF applications shall be processed within the shot clock time limits established by FCC 09-99, FCC 14-153, FCC 18-133, and PUBLIC LAW 112–96 section 6409 (A) as referenced in the table, above. Note that it may be amended from time to time. The shortest shot clock (60 days) is for new facilities in the public right-of-way and for modifications to existing facilities. For Eligible Facilities Requests and Small Cell applications, the shot clock pauses when the City of Piedmont sends a notice of incompleteness within 30 days of the first mandatory action for submitting an application. For Small Cell applications, if a notice of incompleteness is sent within the first 10 days, the shot clock will be reset. The City has the ability to send additional comments after the first a notice of incompleteness, but the applicant is only required to address comments that are based on sections of the City Code or Design Guidelines. There is no additional pausing of the shot clock.
WCF Permit application requirements require WCF permit applicants to schedule an appointment with Piedmont Planning & Building staff a minimum of 24 hours before WCF permit application submittal, as the state and federal shot clocks reduce staff’s ability to assist an applicant through the application process. In addition to the appointment, applicants can set up an optional preapplication meeting to review application materials with City Planning staff for initial feedback. These optional preapplication meetings requested by the applicant are not a City requirement and do not trigger the start of the shot clock.
The application fees for small cell wireless facilities shall be established by City Council and published in the City’s fee schedule.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 34
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
WCF PERMIT PROCESS
8-12
8.03.02 WCF IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY
Small Cell and DAS- Ministerial Review:
Small cell and distributed antenna system (DAS) WCF in the public right-of-way on new or existing structures that meet the criteria of the preferred location and design standards outlined in section 8.02.03 (of this chapter), or using a previously approved design, are subject to a ministerial permit process. Ministerial applications will be processed as a Department of Public Works encroachment permit application to be reviewed by Planning, Building, and Public Works staff. Projects eligible for ministerial review will be eligible for longer permit expiration time period (20 years) as an incentive to file WCF permit applications that comply with the preferred design typology.
Director Review:
Telecommunication facilities that propose collocation on existing structures in the right-of-way that are not eligible for ministerial review are subject to review by the Director and are noticed to the public. The Director shall review public comments and the decision for approval can be appealed to the Planning Commission on grounds of aesthetic and design concerns. Health concerns for any site meeting the FCC emissions exposure limits are not grounds for appeal to the Planning Commission. These proposed facilities should meet the design standards (section
8.02.03) and would have a 10-year permit expiration period.
Public Hearing:
Small cell and DAS facilities in the public right-of-way on new or existing structures that do not meet the design standards outlined in section 8.02.03 (of this chapterare subject to review by the Planning Commission. This process includes public notification and hearings. Projects are limited to 10-year permit terms.
Eligible Facilities Request (Section 6409 Review)- Ministerial Review:
Eligible facilities requests for modifying existing WCF eligible for Section 6409 review are subject to a ministerial permit process. Applications must include the eligible facilities request checklist (see section 8.03.04 of this chapter) to show that any modifications will be classified as a substantial change. Ministerial applications will be processed as a building permit application to be reviewed by Planning and Building Department staff. Projects eligible for ministerial Section 6409 review will be eligible for longer permit expiration time period (20 years) as an incentive to file eligible facilities requests and collocated with existing wireless facilities with the preferred design typology.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 35
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
WCF PERMIT PROCESS
8-13
8.03.03 MACRO SITES ON PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY
Eligible Facilities Request:
Eligible Macrocell facilities requests for collocating WCF on existing structures, such as a monopole or building, are subject to a ministerial permit process. Applications must include the eligible facilities request checklist (see section 8.03.04 of this chapter) for staff to determine if the project meets the eligible facilities request criteria. Ministerial applications will be processed as a building permit application to be reviewed by Planning and Building staff. Projects eligible for ministerial review with preferred location and design will be eligible for a longer permit expiration time period (20 years) as an incentive to file eligible facilities requests and collocated with existing wireless communication facilities.
Director Review:
Macrocell towers and telecommunications facilities that do not meet the criteria under eligible facilities request but are proposing collocation on existing structures are subject to Director review and are noticed to the public. The Director shall review public comments and the decision for approval can be appealed to the Planning Commission on grounds of aesthetic and design concerns. Health concerns for any site meeting the FCC emissions exposure limits are not grounds for appeal to the Planning Commission. These proposed facilities shall have a 10-year permit expiration period.
Public Hearing:
New Macrocell towers and telecommunications facilities that are located on new structures outside of the right-of-way are subject to review at public hearings of the Planning Commission and are noticed to the public. The application process will follow the requirements for a design review permit with Planning Commission review. These proposed facilities shall have a 10-year permit expiration period.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 36
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
WCF PERMIT PROCESS
8-14
8.03.04 6409(a) ELIGIBLE FACILITIES REQUEST CHECKLIST
1A. If the proposed wireless communication facility is outside the public right-of-way, does the proposed installation increate the height by 20’ or 10 percent, whichever is greater? 1B. If the proposed wireless communication facility is in the public right of way or on a base station, does the proposed installation increase the height by 10’ or 10 percent, whichever is greater.
2. Does the proposed wireless communications facility involve the installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not exceeding 4 cabinets? How many cabinets will be installed?
3. Does the proposed wireless communications facility include any excavation or deployment outside the current site by more than 30 feet in any direction, not including any access or utility easements?
4. Would the proposed wireless communications facility defeat the existing concealment elements of the tower or base station?
5. Does the proposed wireless communications facility comply with conditions associated with the prior approval of the tower or base station?*
*Unless non-compliance is due to an increase in height, increase in width, addition of cabinets, or new excavation that does not exceed the corresponding “substantial change” thresholds.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 37
PIEDMONT DESIGN STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES:
8. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES
WCF PERMIT PROCESS
8-15
8.03.05 WCF SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
Document Description Yes No
Project Description and
Justification
Detailed description of the proposed wireless facilities. List all new and removed equipment. The applicant shall also provide a written statement that explains in plain factual detail whether and why the proposed facility qualifies to be reviewed under a specific state or federal law.
Site Plan
Show the location of the proposed wireless facility and the surrounding features (sidewalk, street, property lines, overhead and underground utilities).
Site Survey
For any work in the right of way or on new structures, a survey, signed and stamped by a licensed engineer, is required.
Elevations
Indicate the height of the top and bottom of the support structure, antennas, and associated equipment. Include FCC warning signage.
Photo Simulations
Three photo simulations from different at least three vantage points with a map showing the shooting locations.
Radio Frequency Report Provide RF report from certified California engineer.
Noise Study
Provide a report certifying that the proposed facility will comply with the City of Piedmont's noise ordinance.
Structural Drawings and
Calculations
Structural drawings and calculations stamped and signed by a certified California engineer.
Circuit Map and Analysis
Provide a circuit map showing the route of power and fiber to the proposed wireless facility. Please call out any changes or upgrades that will be needed.
Electrical Plans Provide electrical and grounding details and diagrams.
Manufacturers
Specification Provide manufacturers specifications for all proposed equipment.
Traffic Control Plan
Plans that show traffic control to facilitate construction. Plans shall conform to the latest California MUTCD requirements.
EFR Checklist
For any Eligible Facilities Request, fill out the EFR checklist to show that the project qualifies as an EFR.
Owner Authorization Letter of Authorization from the property owner.
Carrier Authorization Letter of Authorization from the wireless carrier.
Certificates of Insurance General, Workers’ Comp, and Auto Liability.
Site Analysis
For Macro wireless facilities, 300’ Alternate Site Analysis. For Small Cells, 100’ Alternate Site Analysis. For both, confirm there is no wireless facilities from the same carrier within 500’.
Attachment B Agenda Report Page 38