From: Planning Public Comment
To: Planning Public Comment
Subject: Automatic reply: Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree or an alternative 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church Date: Monday, December 2, 2024 9:40:37 AM
Auto Reply: Your email has been received in the Planning Public Comment email box.
Code Enforcement complaints
should be
submitted
via MySantaClara located on the City’s website
or by downloading the MySantaClara App from your mobile device.
For more information on services provided by the Planning Division please visit the City of Santa Clara Planning Division webpage. COVID-19 Updates are also available on the City’s website.
Thank you for your patience and cooperation. We wish you a happy holiday season! Thank you,
City of Santa Clara
Community Development Department
Planning Division
PMM
PC Meeting 12/04/24
RTC 24-1194
Item 2
From: Planning Public Comment
To: Planning Public Comment; Lesley Xavier; Elizabeth Elliott Cc: Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biagini; Priya Cherukuru; Qian Huang; Lance Saleme; Mario Bouza; Yashraj Bhatnagar; [email protected];
Subject: RE: Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree or an alternative 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church Date: Monday, December 2, 2024 9:40:33 AM
Attachments: AT&T cell tower rejection signatures_ 11_26_2024.pdf image001.png
image003.png
Good Morning,
Your email has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.
Thank you for taking the time to provide your input.
Regards,
ELIZABETH ELLIOTT | Staff Aide II
Community Development Department | Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue | Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.615.2450 Direct : 408.615.2474
From: Yongli Wen
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 2:17 AM
To:
Planning Public Comment <[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Elizabeth Elliott <[email protected]> Cc: Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]>; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>; Yashraj Bhatnagar <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Sudharani Ravi Subject: Re: Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree or an alternative 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church Dear Sir/Madam,
I'm Yongli Wen, the immediate neighbor of Santa Clara First Baptist Church. I'm writing regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree or an alternative 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church.
Almost all of the neighbors and I strongly oppose the above two cell tower installation plans, our comment is a BIG NO. We stated our comments, the reasons for the objection and the suggestions in the attached letter. So far 29 neighbors signed the letter. We hope you can consider the neighbor's opinions seriously.
Sincerely,
Yongli Wen
Cc: First Baptist Church and AT&T
From: Planning Public Comment
To: Planning Public Comment; Lesley Xavier
Subject: RE: AT&T tower proposed for 3111 Benton Street, Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Dec. 4, 2024; another suggested alternative location
Date: Monday, December 2, 2024 9:42:15 AM
Attachments: AT&T monotree, 3111 Benton Street , Ken Kratz letter to Planning Commision, suggestions; alternative locations for the tower, Salvation Army site.doc
image001.png
image003.png
Good Morning,
Your email has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.
Thank you for taking the time to provide your input.
Regards,
ELIZABETH ELLIOTT | Staff Aide II
Community Development Department | Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue | Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.615.2450 Direct : 408.615.2474
From: Ken Kratz
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 9:12 AM
To:
Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Subject: AT&T tower proposed for 3111 Benton Street, Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Dec. 4, 2024; another suggested alternative location
Dear Planning Department,
Please find attached my letter regarding the AT&T tower project proposed for 3111 Benton Street. Please forward the attachment to the Planning Commission for their meeting scheduled for Dec. 4, 2024.
Thank you,
Ken Kratz
No
vember 25, 2024
3283 Benton Street
Santa Clara, California 95051
L
eslie Xavier
Planning Manager
Community Development Department
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
[email protected]
R
e: PLN23-00148, APN 290-27-006
3111 Benton Street (project address),
AT&T telecommunication facility, proposed 60' tall monotree or alternative Planning Commission Hearing; December 4, 2024 (meeting body & date) D
ear Ms. Leslie Xavier,
Ple
ase consider relocating the proposed tower for 3111 Benton Street to the Salvation Army located at 3090 Homestead Road. I also submitted to you in an earlier email sent to you on November 25 many other lsuggested alternative locations to site the tower(s).
I
believe my suggested locations, rather than the 3111 Benton Avenue site, are more compatible with the neighborhood, particularly neighborhood aesthetics, and will provide the signal coverage desired by AT&T. I don't' like AT&T's currently proposed alternative to the monotree, the three towers proposed along the frontage of the church at 3111 Benton street will be ugly.
Ple
ase forward this suggested alternative to AT&T for their consideration and discussion prior to the next Planning Commission meeting hearing on this project scheduled for December 4.
I c
onsulted the AT&T coverage maps (“Existing Sites...Coverage” and “Existing Sites +... Coverage”) provided by AT&T that were included in the attachments for Planning Commission meeting held on October 23. I used those maps to find compatible locations for the monotree in the dark purple and yellow colored areas on the “Existing Sites... ” map where indoor coverage is lacking or less reliable in the neighborhood. The Homestead location is on the border of purple and yellow areas.
Ple
ase consider all my suggested alternative locations for the installation of the telecommunications facility proposed by AT&T.
Th
ank you for considering my alternatives.
Si
ncerely,
Ken Kratz
From: Planning Public Comment
To: Planning Public Comment; Lesley Xavier
Subject: RE: AT&T tower proposed for 3111 Benton Street, Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Dec. 4, 2024 Date: Monday, December 2, 2024 9:43:04 AM
Attachments: AT&T tower, 3111 Benton Street, Ken Kratz letter to City Plan Dept. 11-27-2024.doc image001.png
image003.png
Good Morning,
Your email has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.
Thank you for taking the time to provide your input.
Regards,
ELIZABETH ELLIOTT | Staff Aide II
Community Development Department | Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue | Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.615.2450 Direct : 408.615.2474
From: Ken Kratz
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 9:41 AM
To:
Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Subject: AT&T tower proposed for 3111 Benton Street, Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Dec. 4, 2024
Dear Planning Department,
Please find attached my letter regarding the AT&T tower project proposed for 3111 Benton Street. Please forward the attachment to the Planning Commission for their meeting scheduled for Dec. 4, 2024.
Thank you,
Ken Kratz
November 27, 2024
3283 Benton Street
Santa Clara, California 95051
Les
lie Xavier
Planning Manager
Community Development Department
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
[email protected]
R
e: PLN23-00148
APN 290-27-006
Address: 3111 Benton Street
Subject: Conditional Use Permit for unmanned AT&T telecommunication facility Meeting: Planning Commission Hearing Date: December 4, 2024 D
ear Ms. Leslie Xavier,
I
object to the above-named project for the following reasons, as explained in my earlier email to you dated October 23, 2024, and request the project be continued to another time until all my concerns below are addressed:
1 . P
roper public notice not provided.
My c
omplex where I live, Pomeroy Green located directly west of the project location, still did not receive notice of the project. he City Planning Commission's “Notice of Public Hearing” was not mailed to all of the townhouse units in Pomeroy Green nor was the Pomeroy Green Board of Directors nor the Pomeroy Green Property Manager notified of the proposed tower project.
P
omeroy Green Cooperative has a parcel map filed with the County Assessor’s Office (Book 290, page 69; attached) as well as water/sewer. Solar system bills; therefore, the City should have mailed the notice to all the townhouses in the complex as well as the Pomeroy Green Cooperative Corporation, not just those residents within 500' of the project. The people in this area should have been provided with proper notice in order to consider the ramifications of such a serious project. 2 . A
esthetic concerns that may subject the project to environmental review.
T
he tower project will cause aesthetic damage to our complex and neighborhood. The 60-foot structures as well as the alternative towers proposed for he front of the church site are much higher
than all the houses and most trees in the neighborhood and therefore will detract from the overall aesthetic qualities of the complex and neighborhood.
A
t Pomeroy Green all our utilities are placed underground to create a beautiful environment for our residents. If the tower(s) is/are constructed it will be an eyesore that will be visible from all locations within Pomeroy Green. It will aesthetically impact not only Pomeroy Green but also all the surrounding homes too, those to the north and east of the project.
Th
e Pomeroy Green Cooperative housing complex is registered in the National Register of Historic Places (the NRHP) and, therefore, the tower project may be required to be reviewed for environmental impacts, including aesthetic impacts, by local and higher government agencies. The tower project may require a permit from the FCC, making the project subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
T
he range of environmental impacts may extend to another nearby multifamily complex, Pomeroy West (potentially historic) and the City's Earl Carmichael Park. Those residents and the City's Parks and Recreation Department should be provided with the notice of public hearing so that those residents and the public can comment on the project.
W
e request the city provide those notices of public hearings and also have the project reviewed under the City's Architectural Review process.
3 . R
adiation danger
R
adiation and cancer danger to all persons within 500-foot radius of the aforementioned 60 foot telecommunication towers, and all residents of Pomeroy Green, where we live, which has 78 housing units that stand to be impacted by this project. This is a very serious issue because the installation of this tower will generate continuous radiation exposure which will impact health in a negative way according to many medical sources conducted by government agencies, such as Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) & World Health Organization (WHO), and others.
T
hese tall telecommunication towers will be irradiating us 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. AT&T, as well as the Baptist Church, must not take economic advantage, for economic purpose, while endangering the health and well-being of so many residents.
D
uring my conversation with the manager of the adjacent Baptist Church, he mentioned that AT&T came to them offering monthly compensation for allowing this project. AT&T wants to use the church property; the personnel at AT&T, as well as the most members of the Baptist Church, likely do not live in this area and are only exposed to the radiation a few hours a week.
It
is very well known in scientific literature by institutions such as National Cancer Institute (NCI), International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) & Federal Drug Administration (FDA) that radiation is a health hazard, that exposure to RF energy can have harmful effects. We know that we are subject to some radiation, but this project will expose us to 24 hours a day of powerful radiation. We don’t want future clusters of cancer in this neighborhood, especially since there are other areas in Santa Clara where this tower can be placed. For instance, Santa Clara Central Park & open areas not near to residential areas where this project would be such a threat to harm people 4 . A
ttractive nuisance
Th
e proposed tower will create an attractive nuisance. Young people including preteens from our neighborhood and schools nearby (Santa Clara High School. Pomeroy Elementary, Strafford Schools) may find the tower a challenge to climb. Pomeroy Green has problems with young people and children crossing our property and entering our pool area that is surrounded by a 6’ high cyclone fence.
5 . P
roject could be located elsewhere in the city
Th
e project could easily be placed in another location in the city that will solve most of the problems we have enumerated above. I provided many alternative locations for the tower(s) in earlier emails to you.
Th
ank you for considering my concerns and please continue/postpone the project to a alter date so that my concerns can be explored and addressed.
Si
ncerely,
K
en Kratz
From: Planning Public Comment
To: Planning Public Comment; Lesley Xavier; Elizabeth Elliott Cc: Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biagini; Priya Cherukuru; Qian Huang; Lance Saleme; Mario Bouza; Yashraj Bhatnagar; [email protected];
Subject: RE: Lee Benton"s letter, Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree or an alternative 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church Date: Monday, December 2, 2024 9:41:28 AM
Attachments: image001.png
Lee"s letter.pdf
image002.png
Good Morning,
Your email has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.
Thank you for taking the time to provide your input.
Regards,
ELIZABETH ELLIOTT | Staff Aide II
Community Development Department | Planning Division
1500 Warburton Avenue | Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 408.615.2450 Direct : 408.615.2474
From: Yongli Wen
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 2:27 AM
To:
Planning Public Comment <[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]>; Elizabeth Elliott <[email protected]> Cc: Eric Crutchlow <[email protected]>; Nancy Biagini <[email protected]>; Priya Cherukuru <[email protected]>; Qian Huang <[email protected]>; Lance Saleme <[email protected]>; Mario Bouza <[email protected]>; Yashraj Bhatnagar <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Sudharani Ravi Subject: Re: Lee Benton's letter, Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree or an alternative 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church Dear Sir/Madam,
I'm Yongli Wen, the immediate neighbor of Santa Clara First Baptist Church. I'm sending you a letter on behave of my neighbor Lee and Laura Benton. Because somehow they can't deliver their letter to you by email.
Their letter is regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree or an alternative 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church. Please see the attached letter. As almost all of the neighbors, they strongly oppose the two cell tower installation plans.
Sincerely,
Yongli Wen
Cc: First Baptist Church and AT&T
Lesley Xavier
From:
Sent:
To:
Correspondence
12 t 4 I 24 Planning Commission Meeting
3111 BentonStreet
RTC24-1194
Sudharani Ravi
Saturday, November 23,2024 6:46 PM
Planning Public Comment; [email protected]; Lesley Xavier; Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biagini; Priya Cherukuru; Qian Huang; Lance Saleme; Mario Bouza; Yashraj Bhatnagar; [email protected]; Elizabeth Elliott
Rajiv Pendyala; Sudharani Ravi
Re: PLN23-00148 ("Proposed installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church
Cc:
Subject:
Some people who received this message don't often get email from Learn whv this is imoortant From: Neighborhood Residents
To: Santa Clara Planning Commission Board Members and to the Church board members:
This letter is regarding the installation of a 60-foot-monotree, or an alternative design with 3 shorter shorted cell towers located in the parking lot by AT&T on the premises of Santa Clara First Baptist Church at 31 11 Benton Street.
On the 10t23t2024 meeting, we all knew the proposal of the installation of a 60-foot-monotree had been denied by the planning commissioners, and we already stated our objections and the reasons for the objections.
Our neighborhood community hereby formally submits our letter with signatures opposing this new proposed plan which is the alternative design with 3 shorter shorted cell towers located in the parking lot prior to the meeting which is scheduled for Wednesday, December 41h,2024.
We are still strongly opposed to the Proposed New lnstallation as we believe this plan is not in the best interest of our community. Our response to the Proposed New lnstallation is a big NS.
1. There are two parking lots on the premises of the church, not sure which parking lot it will be located in.
But on the Google Map, we can see the cell towers will be still less than 500 feet away from the backyard fence of nearby houses no matter which parking lot it will be.
Meanwhile many municipalities, including in California, have strict requirements for erecting cell towers near residential areas. The following municipalities, districts, or zones have a MINIMUM of 500 feet setback requirement to 1,000 feet or more from residential properties and/or property line:
Los Altos, CA
Fremont, CA
Pleasanton, CA
Laguna Beach, CA
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
t
a
a
a
a
West Los Angeles, CA
a
t
a
a
2020 - Virginia:
Entire cell tower caught fire overnight. The cause was believed to be equipment malfunction related to a transformer.
2019 - California:
Cell tower in Sonoma County caught fire, potentially due to an electricalfault. 2018 - New Jersey:
A fire at a cell tower was attributed to arson. Local authorities investigated the incident due lo suspicious circumstances.
2017 - Texas:
Cell tower fire occurred, likely due to equipment malfunction, as heavy winds and storms were present.
2016 - Florida:
Cell tower caught fire after being struck by lightning
2015 - lllinois:
Cell tower fire was reported, attributed to equipment failure. The fire spread to nearby vegetation.
2014 - North Carolina:
A fire was caused by an electrical issue related to the cell tower's lighting equipment.
2012 - Michigan:
Cell tower fire occurred, believed to be caused by an equipment malfunction 2011 - Alabama:
Cell tower fire occurred due to a lightning strike, causing significant damage to the structure.
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
I
a
a
a
a
a
a
t
a
a
a
,
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
3 2009 - Georgia
3. Putting the monotree at said location would present
4. serious aesthetic problems.
b. The 60 foot structure or the lower 3 towers planned are much higher and most trees in the neighborhood will detract from the overall aesthetic qualities of the complex and neighborhood. At Pomeroy Green, all our utilities are placed underground to create
6. a beautiful environment for our residents.
7. B.
9. 10. Whether it's the 60 foot monotree or 3 shorter monotrees, it will be an eyesore, and will be visible 1 1. not only to all residents of Pomeroy Green but nearby houses in the surrounding areas.
12. 13.
14. 15. lt will be inconsistent with the development in the neighborhood. Pomeroy Green. The Pomeroy Green
16. Cooperative housing complex is registered in the National Register of
17. Historic Places (THE NRHPI
18. and therefore the tower project may be required to be reviewed for environmental
19. impacts, including aesthetic, by localand higher
20. government agencies.
Zt. the tower project may require a permit from the FCC, making the project subject
22. to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The range of
23. environmental impacts
24, may extend to another nearby multifamily complex, Pomeroy West (potentially historic) and the city's EariCarmichael Park. Those residents and the City's Parks and Recreation Department should be
25. provided with the notice of public hearing
26. so that those residents and the public can comment on the project.
27. 28.
29. 30. The Project could easily be
31. located elsewhere in the CitY
32. aLa location that will solve most of the problems we have enumerated above, as stated
33. in more detail in our letter of November 14,2024, also on file and is part of
34. the public record in this item. AT&T has provided no evidence that they have done due diligence in examining other more suitable locations.
35. lf AT&T really needs to install a new tower in this area, why don't they choose a location that is not so close to someone's backyard?
We respectfully uige you to honor the wishes of this community and reject this plan from AT&T, and let them seek out alternate sites.
Sincerely,
Sudharani Pendyala and Rajiv Pendyala
On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 6:34 PM Sudharani Ravi
From :
Sudharani Pendyala
Rajiv Pendyala
5 wrote
Leslev Xavier
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Sudharani Ravi
Friday, November 22, 2024 6;34 PM
Planning Public Comment; [email protected]; Lesley Xavier; Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biagini; Priya Cherukuru; Qian Huang; Lance Saleme; Mario Bouza; Yashraj Bhatnagar; [email protected]; Elizabeth Elliott
Rajiv Pendyala; Sudharani Ravi
PLN23-00'148 ("Proposed installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church
Some people who received this message don't often get email from From :
Learn whv this is imoortant
Sudharani Pendyala
Rajiv Pendyala
Dear Vls, Xavier and VIs. Elliot
This is an addendum to our letter o{'October 22,2024 and our letter of November 14,2024, both of which are already on file and part of the public record on this itern. We reiterate that we strongly object to the location of the proposed 60 foot tall monotree, or any monotree on the 3l I I llenton Street site, at the Santa Clara llaptist Church or either of the parking lots or buildings which are adjacent to it or anywhere on that site.
As stated in our letter o{'October 22,2024, we object for the fbllowing reasons I . lnstallation of the monotree at said location is a health hazard to the people living in our horne and many homes nearby. Nobody should be subjected to being radiated 24 hours a day fbr 7 days a week.
This is an unacceptable risk to us and many other people living in homes so close to the location of the monotree.
2. Putting the monotree at said location would present serious aesthetic problcms. The 60 fbot structure planned is much higher and most trees in the neighborhood will detract frorn the overall aesthetic qualities of the complex and neighborhood. .At Pomeroy Green, all our utilities are placed underground to create a beautiful environment fbr our residents.
3. Whether it's the 60 fbot monotree or 3 shorter monotrees, it will be an eyesore, and will be visible not only to all residents of Pomeroy Green but nearby houses in the surrounding areas.
4. It will be inconsistent with the development in the neighborhood---Porneroy Green. The Porneroy Green Cooperative housing complex is registered in the National Register of tlistoric Places (TtIE NRIIPI and therefbre the tower project may be required to be reviewed fur environmental impacts, including aesthetic, by local and higher government agencies. The tower project may require a pennit frorn the FCC, rnaking the project subject to Section 106 of the National flistoric Preservation Act. The range of environmental impacts may extend to another nearby rnultifarnily complex, Pomeroy West (potentially historic) and the city's tjarl Cannichael Park. Those residents and I
Lesley Xavier
Sent:
From:
Subject:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Xiaoling Wang
Friday, November 22,2024 3'.59 PM
Planning Public Comment; Lesley Xavier; Lesley Xavier; Elizabeth Elliott Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biagini; Priya Cherukuru; Qian Huang; Lance Saleme; Mario Bouza, Yashraj Bhatnagar; office@scf bc.org
Fw: Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church
Follow up
Flagged
to:
Cc:
You don't often get email from Learn whv this is imoortant 3190 Humbolt Ave
Santa Clara, California 95051
Leslie Xavier, Planning Manager
Elizabeth Elliot, Staff Aide ii
Community Development Department
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Re: PLN23-00148, APN 290-27-008
3111 Benton Street
AT&T telecommunication facility, lnstallation of 60 foot tall monotree Planning Commission Hearing: October 23,2024(past) & December 4,2924(pending) I
Dear Ms. Xavier and Ms. Elliot
Lesley Xavier
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Xiaoling Wang
Sunday, November 24,2024 2:55 AM
Planning Public Comment; Lesley Xavier; Elizabeth Elliott Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biagini; Priya Cherukuru; Qian Huang; Lance Saleme; Mario Bouza; Yashraj Bhatnagar; [email protected]
Re: Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church
Subject:
3190 Humbolt Ave.
Santa Clara, California 95051
Leslie Xavier, Planning Manager
Elizabeth Elliot, Staff Aide ii
Community Development Department
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Re: PLN23-00148, APN 290-27-008,3111 Benton Street, AT&T telecommunication facility, lnstallation of 60 foot tall monotree, or an alternative design with 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot Planning Commission Hearing: October 23,2024(past) & December 4,2924(pending) Dear Ms. Xavier and Ms. Elliot
This Email is regarding the installation of a 60-foot-monotree, or an alternative design with 3 shorter shorted cell towers located in the parking lot by AT&T on the premises of Santa Clara First Baptist Church at 3l I I Benton Street.
On the 1012312024 meeting, we all knew the proposal of the installation of a 60-foot- monotree had been denied by the planning commissioners, and we already stated our objections and the reasons for the objections.
I
2. There are already more than FIVE "wireless cell phone base stations" from Verizon at the roof of the main church building, which sits just -80 feet away from the new AT&T location and is already of major concern.
Therefore, with 3 lower cell towers, there witl be more than EIGHT wireless base stations on the same premises on the church property, also 3 lower towers sitting together will make the radiation energy to the nearby residences even more strong, thereby further increasing the potential health risks to the surrounding residents.
3. We, the neighborhood community, have the flollowings concerns:
A. The negative health effects caused bv wireless radiation from the towerq. There has NOT been a clear conclusion that cell towers are not harmful to health.
This is a serious enough issue that the International Association of Fire Fighters has opposed the installation of cell towers at fire stations, where its fire fighters live.
Further reading can be done on their website Cell Tower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
CellTower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
CellTower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
B. Risk of fire. There is a risk of fire, potentially from a malfunction in equipmento weather related such as a lightning strike, or arson and will be devastating for the neighboring houses should one occur.
Cell towers can catch fire due to the electrical infrastructure required for wireless facilities. Wiring faults can create electrical arcs that reach 3 . 2006 - Ohio: Cel[ tower caught fire due to a malfunction in the power supply system.
o 2005 - New York: A fire was linked to an electrical issue at a cell tower site.
. 2004 - Louisiana: Cell tower fire was attributed to a lightning strike.
o 2003 - Maryland: A fire occurred at a cell tower site due to suspected electricaI malfunctions.
o 2002 - Florida: Cell tower fire was reported, believed to be caused by equipment overheating during extreme weather conditions. o 2001 - Texas: A fire at a cell tower was linked to an arson investigation, where the tower was set on tire deliberately.
C. Property Values. Even with three lower cell towers, we believe they still can be seen from the backyards or the dindows of nearby houses.
Someday, if we decide to sell our houses, we will need to disclose to the buyer that our homes are right under two wireless companies' EIGHT cell phone towers, not to mention that the towers will be extremely conspicuous.
Many real estate professionals agree that potential buyers will not consider purchasing homes in the nearby vicinity of a cell phone tower.
As such, the Proposed Installation could negatively impact property values in the neighborhood.
4. Serious aesthetic problems to nearby Pomeroy Green Community l) Putting the monotree at said location would present serious aesthetic problems. The 60 foot stmcture or the lower 3 towers planned are much higher and most trees in the neighborhood and will detract from the overall aesthetic qualities of the complex and neighborhood. At Pomeroy Green, all our utilities are placed underground to create a beautiful environment for our residents.
2) Whether it's the 60 foot monotree or 3 shorter monotrees, it will be an eyesore, and will be visible not only to all residents of Pomeroy Green but nearby houses in the surrounding areas.
3) It will be inconsistent with the development in the neighborhood. Pomeroy Green. The Pomeroy Green Cooperative housing complex is registered in the National 5 Lesley Xavier
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
YongliWen
Sunday, November 24,2024 2',46 AM
Planning Public Comment; Lesley Xavier; Elizabeth Elliott Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biagini; Priya Cherukuru; Qian Huang; Lance Saleme, Mario Bouza; Yashraj Bhatnagar; office@scf bc.org
Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree or an alternative 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church Subject:
November 24,2024
3190 Hurnbolt Ave,
Santa Clara, California 95051
Leslie Xavier, Planning Manager
Elizabeth Elliot, Staff Aide ii
Cornrnunity Development Departrnent
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Re: PLN23-00148, APN 290-27-008, 3 I I I Benton Street, AT&T telecommunication facility, Installation of 60 foot tall rnonotree, or an alternative design with 3 lower cell towers in the parking lot.
Planning Commission Hearing:October 23,2024(past) & December 4,2924(pending) Dear Ms. Xavier and Ms. Elliot:
This Email is regarding the installation of a 60-foot-monotree, or an alternative design with 3 shorter shorted cell towers located in the parking lot by AT&T on the premises of Santa Clara First Baptist Church at 3l I I Benton Street. 1 o Pahn Springs, CA
2. There are already more than FIVE "wireless cell phone base stations" from Verizon at the roof of the main church building, which sits just -80 feet away from the new AT&T location and is already of major concern.
Therefore, with 3 lower cell towers, there will be more than EIGHT wireless base stations on the same premises on the church property, also 3 lower towers sitting together will make the radiation energy to the nearby residences even more strong, thereby fiuther increasing the potential health risks to the surrounding residents.
3. We, the neighborhood community, have the followings concerns:
A. The nepative health effects caused bv wireless radiation from the towers. There has NOT been a clear conclusion that cell towers are not harmful to health.
This is a serious enough issue that the International Association of Fire Fighters has opposed the installation of cell towers at fire stations, where its fire fighters live.
Further reading can be done on their website CellTower Racliation Health Efl'ects - IAFF
CellTower Radiation Health Effects - IAFF
B. Risk of fire. There is a risk of fire, potentially from a malfunction in equipment, lveather related such as a lightning strike, or arson and lvill be devastating for the neighboring houses should one occur.
Cell towers can catch fire due to the electrical infrastructure required for wireless facilities. Wiring faults can create electrical arcs that reach temperatures up to 35,000 degrees fahrenheit, which is hotter than the surface of the sun, and is often referred to as an "arc flash." Malfunctions in transmitters, antennas, or wiring can lead to electrical fires. Lightning strikes could also potentially cause a fire. Due to unpredictable weather patterns in recent years, lightning strikes are also 3 o 2004 - Louisiana: Cell tower fire was attributed to a lightning strike.
o 2003 - Maryland: A fire occurred at a cell tower site due to suspected electrical malfunctions.
o 2A02 - Florida: Cell tower fire was reported, believed to be caused by equipment overheating during extreme weather conditions. . 2001 - Texas: A fire at a cell tor,ver was linked to an arson investigation, where the tower was set on fire deliberately.
C. Propertv Values. Even with three lower cell towers, we believe they still can be seen from the backyards or the dindows of nearby houses.
Someday, if we decide to sell our houses, we will need to disclose to the buyer that our homes are right under two wireless companies' EIGHT cell phone tolvers, not to mention that the towers will be extremely conspicuous.
Many real estate professionals agree that potential buyers will not consider purchasing homes in the nearby vicinity of a cell phone tower.
As sucho the Proposed Installation could negatively impact property values in the neighborhood.
4. Serious aesthetic problems to nearby Pomeroy Green Community 1) Putting the monotree at said location would present serious aesthetic problems. The 60 foot structure or the lower 3 towers planned are much higher and most trees in the neighborhood and will detract from the overall aesthetic qualities of the complex and neighborhood. At Pomeroy Green, all our utilities are placed underground to create a beautiful environment for our residents.
2) Whether it's the 60 foot monotree or 3 shorter monotrees, it will be an eyesore, and will be visible not only to all residents of Pomeroy Green but nearby houses in the surrounding areas.
3) It will be inconsistent with the development in the neighborhood. Pomeroy Green. The Pomeroy Green Cooperative housing complex is registered in the National Register of Historic Places (THE NRHP] and therefore the tower project may be required to be reviewed for environmental impacts, including aesthetic, by local and higher government agencies, The tower project may require a permit from the FCC, making the project subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. The range of environmental impacts may extend to another nearby multifamily complex, Pomeroy West (potentially historic) and the city's Earl Carmichael Park. Those 5 Lesley Xavier
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Yongli We rrtr; I rrtlrl
Friday, November 22,2024 3:55 PM
Planning Public Comment; Lesley Xavier; Elizabeth Elliott Eric Crutchlow; Nancy Biagini; Priya Cherukuru; Qian Huang; Lance Saleme; Mario Bouza; Yash raj Bhatnagar; [email protected]
Re: Regarding PLN23-00148, installation of a 60-foot-monotree by AT&T in Santa Clara First Baptist Church
Follow up
Flagged
Novernber 22,2024
3190 Hurnbolt Ave.
Santa Clara, California 95051
Leslie Xavier, Planning Manager
Elizabeth Elliot, Staff Aide ii
Cornrnunity Developrnent Depaftrnent
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Re: PLN23-00148, APN 290-27-008
3lll BentonStreet
AT&T telecommunication facility,Installation of 60 foot tall monotree Planning Cornmission Hearing: october 23,2024(past) & Decernber 4,2924(pending) 1 Dear Ms. Xavier and Ms. Elliot
From:
To:
Subjec:
Date:
Attachments:
PlanninoCommission
-
PlanhinoCommission; Lesley xavier
RE=AF6Sea-Ower at 3111 Benton St. - Meeting 4Decz024
Tuesday, November 26,2024 9:52:00 AM
imaoeO01.pno
imaoe003.ono
Good Morning,
Your email has been received in the Planning Division and will be part of the public record on this item.
Thank you for taking the time to provide you input.
Regards,
ELIZABETH ELLIOTT I Staff Aide ll
Community Development Department I Planning Division
1"500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
O : 4O8.61"5.2450 Direct : 408.615.247 4
From:
Sent: Tuesday, November 26,20241:00 AM
To: PlanningCommission <PLANN I NGCOM M ISSION @santaclaraca.gov> Subject: Consent Calendar ltem #24-1194 - Proposed tower at 31-11 Benton St. - Meeting 4Dec2O24 Dear Planning Commission,
As I've communicated before, my husband and I live in the historic (Federal & State) complex next to the church and continue to be concerned about the location of this cell tower. lt looks like it'll be right up against our complex and a major eyesore. lf it must be done, please consider all the alternative locations suggested by Ken Kratz and Nick Rossi. Those other locations don't directly overlook residences.
I'm also concerned about cancer-causing radiation, but I've been told that the city doesn't care about that. We have no cell phones, no smart appliances, no wifi of any kind in our house, so we're doing the best we can.
Thanks!
Sincerely,
Diane Harrison
3283 Benton St.
Santa Clara, CA 95051
and of the Ohlone and Muwekma Ohlone people)
County Green Party County Council
P.S. lf AT&T is paying anyone for this tower, the money should be divided up among everyone impacted. That, in fact, is a good argument for putting it at the high school since I expect they could use the money.
From: Planning Public Comment
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2024 9:36 AM
To: Ken Kratz Planning Public Comment
<[email protected]>; Lesley Xavier <[email protected]> Subject: RE: AT&T tower proposed for 3l-l"l- Benton Street, Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Dec. 4,2024; suggested alternative locations
Thankyouforyouremail. lthasbeenreceivedinthePlanningDivisionandwillbepartofthepublic record on this item.
Thank you,
Elizabeth Elliott I Staff Aide II
Community Development Department I Planning Division
L500 Warburton Avenue I Santa Clara, CA 95050
O: 408,615.2450 | D: 408.615.247 4
www.Sa ntaCla raCA.sov
From: Ken Kratz
Sent: Monday, November 25,2024 3:42 PM
To: Planning Public Comment <[email protected]> Subject: AT&T tower proposed for 3111 Benton Street, Planning Commission meeting scheduled for Dec. 4, 2024; suggested alternative locations
Dear Planning Department,
Please find attached my letter and attachment regarding the AT&T tower project proposed for 3l 1 I Benton Street. Please forward the attachments to the Planning Commission for their meeting scheduled for Dec. 4,2024.
Please download (not preview) the PDF file of the map in order to see all the information Thank you,
Ken Kratz
November 25,2024
3283 Benton Street
Santa Ctara, Catifornia 95051
Lestie Xavier
Pl.anning Manager
Community Devetopment Department
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Ctara, CA 95050
Pta n ni ngPu bticCo m ment@)Sa ntacta raCA. gov
Re: PLN23-00148, APN 290-27-006
3111 Benton Street (project address),
AT&T tetecom mu n ication faci tity, proposed 60' ta tt mon otree or a lternative Ptanning Commission Hearing; December 4,2024 (meeting body & date) Dear Ms. Lestie Xavier,
ptease find and forward to the Ptaining Commission this tetter and my suggestions for atternative sites (map attached; ptease downtoad map to see att the information) for the instattation of the tetecommunications monotree facitity proposed by AT&T at the 31 1 1 Benton Street site. My recommendations are in substantiat agreement with ones provided to you by the Rossi famity in their emait to you recentty.
I betieve my suggested locations, rather than the 31 1 1 Benton Avenue site, are more compatibte with the neighborhood, particutarty neighborhood aesthetics, and witt provide the signat coverage desired by AT&T. I don't' [ike the proposed atternative to the monotree; the three towers proposed atong the frontage of the church at 31 1 1 Benton street witt be ugty. ptease forward my suggested atternatives to AT&T for their consideration and discussion prior to the next ptanning Commission meeting hearing on this project scheduted for December 4.
I consutted the AT&T coverage maps ("Existing Sites...Coverage" and "Existing Sites +..' Coverage") provided by AT&T that were inctuded in the attachments for Ptanning commission meeting hetd on October 23. I used those maps to find compatibte locations for the monotree in the dark purpte and yettow cotored areas on the "Existing Sites..." map where indoor coverage is tacking or less retiabte in the neighborhood.
The fottowing are my suggested atternatives for the tower in the dark purpte areas of the AT&T coverage map (areas of no coverage to date) that shoutd provide equaI or better coverage than the 31 1 1 Benton site; these tocations are indicated by N dots on the attached map):
1. EartCarmichael Park,3445 Benton Street, rear of park
2. stratford Schoot, 890 Pomeroy Avenue near school or rear parking lot ("Gopd Laeatipn")
3. Curtis Fietd, 890 PomeroyAvenue, fietd near Stratford Schoot parking tot
4. Homesteaders 4-H Ranch, 3450 Brookdate Drive, parking tot
5. The Church of Jesus of Latter Day Saints, 875 Quince Avenue, rear parking tot
6. Church in Santa Ctara, 3550 Benton Street, parking tot or fietd next door
7. Church of Christ of Santa Ctara, 850 Pomeroy Avenue, north parking tot, in soil area f6est Location* , monotree will complete a row of existingtrees)
8. Neighborhood Christian Center,887 PomeroyAvenue, parking lot or lawn in front
9. (not numbered) Santa Ctara High Schoot, west side in back of schoot) The fottowing atternatives for the tower are tocated in the yettow colored areas of the AT&T map (areas of less retiabte coverage) that shoutd provide enhanced coverage than the 31 1 1 Benton site; these locations are indicated by yettow cotored dots on the attached map:
1 . CentraI Park, 909 Kiety Btvd.,especiatty the area near the basebatt field ("goodLocaIion*)
2. Pomeroy Etementary Schoot, 1250 Pomeroy Avenue, north side of site or fietd in back
3. Kiety Plaza,1052-1092 Kiety Btvd. southwest corner of intersection with Benton St.
4. Benton shopping center, 3565 Benton st., [andscaped areas in f ront of the matt Ptease consider att the above sites for the instattation of the tetecommunications facitity proposed by AT&T. I highty recommend the parking tot or fietd behind Stratford Schoot, 890 Pomeroy Avenue, or the Church of Christ of Santa Clara, 850 Pomeroy Avenue, or Santa Ctara CentraI Park, especiatty near the basebatt fietd.
Thank you for considering my atternatives.
Sincerety,
Ken Kratz
att: map of suggested atternative locations
o
Alteranative location for the monotree.
a'---- -- -- -'--- --
6 ilfr,$6ffiO-Hr C#l6tddx @ey*saom,x OcrydsiecLox zt-w-c@$&px jQeoosteu"r x 6bdol&d6.x + v o6* .t1285E1,-12198g2?92.75tvde=l3ml:1e3?ehtry:su&g-.P=€9c'!A{DIOMIE*ND*lg * H.
Itx
9.{,o*=
o
o
<--ra
n
.n
E p Typ€hectosa.ch
8 3
d Pharm*iG(D Thingi to do !E M6sum3 E TreroitIt Rdtalrant.search G69leM€ps qo I
Leslie Xavier, Planning Manager
Elizabeth Elliot, Staff Aide ii
Community Development Department
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Re: PLN23-00148 , APN 290-27-008
3111 Benton Street
November 20, 2024
1091 Pomeroy Ave.
Santa Clara, California 95051
(408) 892-0621
AT&T telecommunication facility, Installation of 60 foot tall monotree R:ECEIVED
NOV 22 2024
PLANNING DIVISION
Planning Commission Hearing : October 23, 2024(past) & December 4, 2924(pending) Dear Ms. Xavier and Ms. Elliot:
This is an addendum to our letter of October 22, 2024 and our letter of November 14, 2024, both of which are already on file and part of the public record on this item . We reiterate that we strongly object to the location of the proposed 60 foot tall monotree, or any monotree on the 3111 Benton Street site, at the Santa Clara Baptist Church or either of the parking lots or buildings which are adjacent to it or anywhere on that site.
As stated in our letter of October 22, 2024, we object for the following reasons:
1. Installation of the monotree at said location is a health hazard to the people living in our home and many homes nearby. Nobody should be subjected to being radiated 24 hours a day for 7 days a week. This is an unacceptable risk to us any many other people living in homes so close to the location of the monotree .
2. Putting the monotree at said location would present serious aesthetic problems. The 60 foot structure planned are much higher and most trees in the neighborhood and will detract from the overall aesthetic qualities of the complex and neighborhood. At Pomeroy Green, all our utilities are placed underground to create a beautiful environment for our residents.
3. Whether it's the 60 foot monotree or 3 shorter monotrees, it will be an eyesore, and will be visible not only to all residents of Pomeroy Green but nearby houses in the surrounding areas.
4. It will be inconsistent with the development in the neighborhood. Pomeroy Green. The Pomeroy Green Cooperative housing complex is registered in the National Register of Historic Places {THE NRHP] and therefore the tower project may be required to be reviewed for environmental impacts, including aesthetic, by local and higher government agencies. The tower project may require a permit from the FCC, making the project subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Ther range of environmental Impacts may extend to another nearby multifamily complex, Pomeroy West (potentially historic) and the city's Earl Carmichael Park. Those residents and the City's Parks and Recreation Department should be provided with the notice of public hearing so that those residents and the public can comment on the project .
5. The Project could easily be located elsehere in the City at a location that will solve most of the problems we have enumerated above, as stated in more detail in our letter of November 14, 2024, also on file and is part of the public record in this item. AT&T has provided no evidence that they have done due diligence in examining other more suitable locations.
Sincerely {J $ 71 : :-;3• ~-a.A ti~ ( ~ ~ s ~
N~~a RitfiaRoss
Cc: First Baptist Church and AT&T