The URL can be used to link to this page

PC Summary 05-23-06 City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 (408) 777-3308 To: Mayor and City Council Members From: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Development Subj: May 30, 2006 REPORT OF PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS MADE May 23, 2006 Date: Chapter 19.32 of the Cupertino Municipal code provides for a eaI of decisions made b the Plannin Commission 1. Application EXC-2006-04; Wayne Okubo (Wahoo Fish Taco), 19626 Stevens Creek Blvd Description Approving a Sign Exception to allow exposed neon on two wall signs at Market Place Shopping Center Action The Planning Commission approved the application on a 5 - 0 vote. The fourteen-calendar day appeal will expire on June 5, 2006. Enclosures: Planning Commission Report of May 23, 2006 Planning Commission Resolution No. 6391 Approved Plan Set 2. Application U-2006-05, EXC-2006-03; Jim Mattison (Union Pacific Railroad), McClellan Road & railroad tracks Description Denying a Use Permit to allow the construction of a multi-user personal wireless service facility consisting of a 65 foot tall tree pole and ancillary equipment cabinets and a height Exception to allow a 65 foot tree pole Action The Planning Commission denied the application on a 3-1-1 vote. The fourteen-calendar day appeal will expire on June 5, 2006. Enclosures: Planning Commission Report of May 23, 2006 Planning Commission Resolution No. 6389 & 6390 Denied Plan Set :planning/Post Hearing/summary to cc052306 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: Applicant: Property Owner: Property Location: EXC-2006-04 Agenda Date: May 23, 2006 Wayne Okubo (Wahoo's Fish Taco) Evershine VI, LP 19626 Stevens Creek Boulevard Application Summary: Sign exception to allow exposed neon on two wall signs at the Marketplace shopping center. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve EXC-2006-04 subject to the model resolution. BACKGROUND: On April 6, 2002, the Design Review Commission approved a master sign program for the Marketplace Shopping Center. The location, design and size of Wahoo's signs were approved as part of the master program. The applicant is now requesting approval to allow for neon accents around the logo on the signs. The use of exposed neon requires a sign exception from the Planning Commission to ensure that the neon is used tastefully. The most recent cases of the City allowing the use of neon was with BJ's Restaurant in September of 2002 and Elephant Bar Restaurant in September of 2004. DISCUSSION: The intent of the Sign Ordinance is to: · Provide architectural and aesthetic harmony of signs as they relate to building design. · Allow for good visibility for the public and the needs of the business. · Provide regulations that will be compatible with the building, siting, and the land uses. The applicant is proposing to accent the fish logo on the both of the wall signs with a thin white strip of neon to help delineate the shape of the fish. The proposed neon is not excessive or distracting to the public and is harmonious with the building design and the rest of the shopping center. In addition, the accent neon will help improve the individual identification of the business. The rest of the sign will not have any exposed neon. Staff supports the proposed neon trim. 1 ~-1 Submitted by: Gary Chao, Associate Planner <Ç V , Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developmentc>~ /tL~Æ ( ~ Enclosures: Model Resolution Sign Plan 2 c1-:2 EXC-2006-04 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO FOR A SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW EXPOSED NEON ON TWO WALL SIGNS AT MARKETPLACE SHOPTING CENTER SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: EXC-2006-04 Wayne Okubo (Wahoo's Fish Taco) 19626 Stevens Creek Boulevard SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an exception to the Sign Code, as described in this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the following with regards to this application: a) That the literal enforcement of the provIsIons of this title will not result in restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title, in that the exposed neon accent trim does improve the identification of the business and is harmonious with the design of the building! signs; b) That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is not detrimental to public health, safety and welfare; and c) That the exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose in that the exposed neon accent is only around the fish logo on the wall signs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the exception to the sign ordinance for an exposed neon ground sign border is hereby approved subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution; and d-'O Resolution No. Page 2 EXC-2006-04 May 23, 2006 SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on a plan set titled: "Wahoo's Fish Taco, 19626 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, CA" dated July 25, 2005, consisting of five pages, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution. 2. EXPIRATION DATE OF APPROVAL This sign exception approval shall be valid for only one (1) year from the date of approval. 2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application EXC-2006-04, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23, 2006 and are incorporated by reference herein. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Marty Miller, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission d-,f Q ~ co :=.~ ç,j - r~~ '-j: ~ \-; Ü cr. :~ ~ ~ ~ Í -' ; III .! S if' & / \ :;=¡ ¡....~- >1.. i : 0 I : 1:11:: '__u__ 11:11:: <I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~ ~ ~ . ;; :::: Ê : _ ""': 00 ::: .. ... .... c:> ~ .:: ~ :::: .~ """"..... co"".... .. :~~:;~;;~ :; ~ æ -: --: : <=> .....c .. ... .. .... CO ...... ... :::; .. . ;¡ ~ D .. ~ . ~ ~ .. .. " ~ .c .... .c .. " .. s ¡ ,!! ] ¡!! j . j æj'" . >! Hf5:j:Îõ!~ "I~ ~JJ!!ii!!-l j tl Hi H. lJ' ··t 1¡· tf dJ H¡ "I a. . W I!!;.t .... I!! H,d:LUJ1 t ",,: iH ld! ï ~ II. _ · jj · c Õ z II: !! - .. · II ¡¡¡ '" - .II ~ ... " ¡¡ :. ;0;- w 1j ~ ~ ¡;; } 1'1 . ~ i O! ~ t - :t " ~ :¡ " ! . .¡,¡ ; !ii ~ I ¡¡¡ .!! U ~ I ~ i ~ I ~. ~ . ! E ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ i 1! I ~ '" . I . ~ . îii 0 ¡¡¡ ¡¡¡ " ¡¡¡ ~ ¡ > ,. ~ ,. Ë II: ¡¡ .. '" " \!! '" :;: Q ~ .. ~ .. .. .. . .¡: E II ! ~ " " " 2 j ¡¡¡ ~ i 1- ~ ~ .. II: ~ M .. ~ . . ii¡ ! I ... õ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ¡;¡ § ~ I ~ õ .. ¡ õ j ~ '!! ~ ~ ~ ~ I· ,I ;¡ ~ J z I..-J L I: ,II !1 j ~ ~ ! ¡;; ¡;; " ¡;; !MI..I,,·. "' ,,8 ,.l tBUIB3,,(hf.: "H ~'5 == , -J~ì' ~ .~a: c::I i! ¡ ;¡; e ~ ~ < ~ . ..--", ... .. _ _..... .e :-"":., : :: ~:: :. oCoC~...::-;;; -= ...... -= "': .- þ ~~.:;; ~;; ~ -~:""-~ .... _ ... ,.; . J< .... ... ..0: . ... þ ..... co .... ... ~ þ ;¡ j ¡] ~ - . -" 0'" II >! ;;_ .r~-...._~ ~í~Jile&::~ =.!"~'§1~!_ 1 1 ~ ~ 4 4 I t1H 1 t . !'IHH ~ J -"- .3 '" I . - ~ n Hj H. q' >·t 1¡· 1:1 dJ W HI iI . :; . ... ¡¡¡ t " ~ I f I ¡ i ~ i!i i!i i!i ,. i!i ~ ~ II: .. !! b ~ " " - ; .. i! f ~ .. .. -ª 6 2 ~ 2 r . " .. .. j iii .. ì!. i i 1- i i " ¡¡ II: ~ ~ ~ !;', !i¡ I I Æ' III ~ ~ ~ ~ Æ ¡¡¡ ~ ~ ) i i .. I i . I-JL \: I· ·1 ~ . ¡ ~ '8 ~ í ,. 1.1 g 1! 1MJ,~/"·l ~ J!! ~ æ æ æ æ :i! .. ,l 19U1QB::I"lh£ ,l-'& ¡ . .. ~:h.HifJJ ~ " ~ M ;; ¡j ~ i 01 ~ ~ i ~ .Ii !! I g ¿ ~ iI! ~ j .~ . ,¡ U J m U ¡ i i ~ I ¡ ~ j d. ~¿, == !~: <I ~ ~ ~ . .:; Ê ~.::::: ~ -.....;. ... .:: ~:: ~ 000 ;; ~ 0 : ~ ,.; ... .; . - . ;§ ~ Î ~ JO¡: ) ¡!! j '" . >! ·8=f5::t~~~ ¡~....~.§]~~ I ... -¡ "i .. d! Id~ . . ! I -~ ~ = ..! :: ~ - . ~ . ~ ~ - = ¡.¡ .. .. ¡ .I!!...ji.8>.!!oi :!::I58J11&&æ tl Hi U. lJ' ··t I¡· f:1 dJ Hi Ht :z -/1 == ~: E . CV> ~ . :;; :: ..... .. .. _.... _ .Ê :.....;: .:: ~..;.. _:. ......... ."'- :-~~::;;:. _ :; _ :; ;; Ë ....:; "" .. _ ....:: .ê . ¡þ _ co ... ~ ~ : <I 9 ;- · ~ " " I> . ;][" to ,. .~ ~J I ¡ i -..., II: !! - .. ~ · iii - .. · ,. " 1,þ1f L '/,\ '-=-_ :.1 ,..1 ,¡~ ~~ ;b- :§ b!<:' -'I'" "'~ ~ ,''"' J~ ~ ! R ,2 ~] ¡!! :¡¡ Ii '" j :::!;, i ~ :læi~~'i::;;~ =-=_",.:.o!!1~8 ... oC'O~ J " ,.,hHffJJ J ¡; j J J " Î · pj J . . ] J . J ~nn - . . 1 ! ¡ H. I "i ïi .3 ....... co... ,," ;~ c; ,¡¡. ,i. ~~¡¥ :''; 7'" :~ }!~ ."¡~ ~!~ i EO .~., '. . ,.: '. " h-¡j ~ II c-<.~' ! ¡ I ~. .;/': l' ",.. ---1' . ' ! . b .. N H Hj H. lJ' ..¡ l¡· t1 dJ Hi HI ~ 'I' ~:~ o " s " ~ 'I ¡ n II: · :;:: .. ~ · iii - .. · III J~~ == ¡-~····'.o , ; . l1li. . . l1li c:I . ~ :I! S ¡ i ~ Ho; Ii j .å~t5:;;;-;:=~ :I~ð~J1~2 o"'~ 1 j: ) ! J I ihH IJ'~p ~ ~-"~ J I ... - "'" .. ~ = ~ o ~ ~ .;;::.... ...0..... .... :::::::~ ..con'"..... _.... . '" 0- :ö ~:= ~ .... ....~....""'... ::: .. . .... ... eo :: j :: .... .; .... CI ..... .... ..... :: j i! :Ii .. .. ..ii ¡; ¡; i .. â!..;f;f1!!J EB "r. ri ..;"~~~' :l\~~~~::~r %- , ,- ~,''' 'Y~f,iWÇ" . ..~~~~~~ , .~"" ,.: n' - %wßNT0'Þ-' '" :' ,.,' . ~.\-' @i;~~~F¿¡~, /:~' y, .' ; "., .''-...'. . $' C<5<~'j~, ~C:V:' --::T '~~~.~'F-t~' -+;~. ¡:;,.~/ .1 I ;J~:~?;!:¿-::" I J.r.,'\~. i." ¡;?':'~Lj ¡ @ .. -----=--=-~-3=-:::- - ..;;~~ "\\ .."' .""._ ..~. ' ~"- ...~¡,_:.. .. I' ill i )"1' " I ': I I ! !l ill H. lr ··t 1¡· 1=1 dJ n: HI 9 ;- ~ . jj ø II: .. ¡: .. - ¡¡; j,q EXC-2006-04 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6391 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO FOR A SIGN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW EXPOSED NEON ON TWO WALL SIGNS AT MARKETPLACE SHOPTING CENTER SECTION I: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: EXC-2006-04 Wayne Okubo (Wahoo's Fish Taco) 19626 Stevens Creek Boulevard SECTION II: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for an exception to the Sign Code, as described in this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the following with regards to this application: a) That the literal enforcement of the provIsIons of this title will not result in restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title, in that the exposed neon accent trim does improve the identification of the business and is harmonious with the design of the building! signs; b) That the granting of the exception will not result in a condition which is not detrimental to public health, safety and welfare; and c) That the exception to be granted is one that will require the least modification of the prescribed regulations and the minimum variance that will accomplish the purpose in that the exposed neon accent is only around the fish logo on the wall signs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the exception to the sign ordinance for an exposed neon ground sign border is hereby approved subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution; and Resolution No. 6391 Page 2 EXC-2006-04 May 23, 2006 SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on a plan set titled: "Wahoo's Fish Taco, 19626 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, CA" dated July 25, 2005, consisting of five pages, except as may be amended by conditions in this resolution. 2. EXPIRATION DATE OF APPROVAL This sign exception approval shall be valid for only one (1) year from the date of approval. 2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record concerning Application EXC-2006-04, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23, 2006 and are incorporated by reference herein. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Miller, Vice Chair Giefer, Saadati, Wong Chien COMMISSIONERS: none COMMISSIONERS: none COMMISSIONERS: none AYES: ATTEST: APPROVED: I s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Is/Marty Miller Marty Miller, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission Q ~ ((') > , \ \ \ - ....,.J': \ ~ \ ~ Ü IY \ \ ~ (L \ <.( ~ \ \ \ \ \ \ \.l ;¡ ~ "1 '" j~ } æ j '" I ~ j~f5:;;¡~õ!~ ~~....::::'§Ie;!.... ~ - * E 11 ::: ~ . ~ . .:;=~ Ê. '".........co : ;: ~ :; ... :. ..c..c ~ CO> 0-';;; .... '-' c:o......... II :].~~ª ~ ........ .. ,.¡ . II c:o .. .... .. .. .. .... 0 .... .... ::; .. I t ",,: Hi 11 · II !d i II ¡ ¡.¡ .. .. ï Hd:UfU ~ :: .. .. ~ D ~ ~ D .. " ~ .c .... .c .. " .. )1 i1i H. lr ··t I¡· f'l dJ Hi ..I m . ~ B .~ \ í ~!:; \ ... ~ c Z . , 'i' ~:I . J ':<; ". ... :...., ..... !! - .. ~ II iii " - ... - ... " ¡; .. ~ ;; ~ ¡ !;; . 0 i !l i "5J ~ m~ i - ~ . ~ ~ ~ ! ¡ ~ i !Ii " H ~ I ~ 1§ ~ ~ ~. ïì i 1 E ~ U " ~ " .¡¡ ¡ ¡¡; ¿ ~ 1!! I ~ ! ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ '" 1j ~ ~ ¡¡ > '" ro '" .. I b .. .. t " :;:: E ~ .. ~ .. .. .. ~ ~ E i 11 .. .. > 2 II . i i i iii E 1 ~¡ .. Ii 2 ~ I .. ~ ~ .. . ~ . . ... õ! ?iJ ?iJ ?iJ ~ « ¡¡¡ ~ . ~ I ~ . " J . . ~ ji! 1 ·1 I 1!! ~ " ~ ~ ~ i I----J L I: ,II ¡¡ ~ ¡j ~ 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1MI.9It'·l .., ,l 1QUQe:;I,.o-.& ,l-,t ~ ~ o ~ . -~~ ~ : ~:;; ~ . ... ... .:0 ... .:ë: ~ ~....; i -=...... c ~ ~ ¡; . :~~:;~;;~ ! ..... ~ :: '^ ... ~ ......... 0 .c . . i< ~.; ã": ~ ~ : . s ;Ii .. .d j ~!'" I >! ì;<:I5::;¡';Õ!~ :I!!:z~1¡æ;!.... "I = ¡,¡ I I ~:hHJj;!J i 1 1 ~ ~ i i I f 'ïit .. ....:I 1.1 ~ H if::: ~ .~. 'ð ~. \ ~. ~ tl Hi 11. lJ' ··f 1¡· f=l dJ - Ut¡- .. a .'---'---. ':J I: .. ;: .. 'a iñ " '- · · ~ M · ij w i! i !'i . 0 i J< ~ ~ :!! ~ :Ii j ¡ ~ ~ . ~~ · m I '" U i ~ ¡¡¡ i ¡ i ~ . i s u ,¡¡ ~ " ,¡J § m " ¡; " ~ i I f I . .. . i!! i!! '" ~ J! > '" ~ i!! II ~ !! 2- " f ... - E .. ~ .. .. ~ · ~ t 5 2 .. ~ .. .. ~ s ~ ·S ~ iii I i i ·0 1 h z .!! .. ! ~ ~ ~ . · ~¡ ì! I ~ III )!! )!! )!! iñ "' .. ~ :;¡ j t · .. i j " . ~ I· i E I " I-J L I: ·1 ¡ . ~ ~ .. 0 g " IM),S!S'·Z II '" " ~ æ æ æ æ 8 " ,S .Z; :¡aIJQ£:),,O-,& ,l-£ E ~ ~ : ~ i ... ~ ; co ... Ë ::: . ! J "I ~ .I'" j -"", >! ~jf-_·L;_~ .1= ~Jife~.... ;I!: ~JI~~ ~ - . ~ - -- : :: ~ -- -~ .;; -~::; . . :;: ~ j .ë - ~ ~ . . ~ . " .. HgHiiJ ~ f t i J .Ih I }I H ] ¡¡ 11 !! I .. d 1 tl i1. H. lJ' ··t I¡. f=l dJ Hi hi HI ". ¡----.. -- , , I , , I ! ~. ~ ~. ~. \ , ~ ~. ~ , ~ l{) I , ¡ í . ..'--'~'~~.~-~_. . . 11 " g _n_~_'~'____ ~- , "-- ~ I ---. -- .'-'-' 1;1 ~ ~ ~. . 'i," d::} \ ;' ... ~ '-.): -,...' ' ~ I I ! , , I ,_. - ¡ E ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ;:= co c-'- c.Ê .. ... ..; :: - .:: ~..;... .". ~'-'~~~~.¡;; .........01'00..... c: .......... .... .. .. on .... .. ",:;;¡ c: ...... c:o .....: ,.¡ . .. ....0_'::::: :. ~ " S ö " ~ _~U__~ ".--_. '1 II: !! - .. ~ . iii ,",ª ,: ;~ ~ \'lei -: "",.",,.-LA I: I bl~ I ~i~ ~ 9i~ b'~ ~ ~ ;¡ ¡ ¡] 1 11'" j ,_,;IIt'i >! .Jæ ~:¡...;::::~ :I~,-,~Jj~8 w o~-l HgUitJJ ~ .. H ,PHj ~ ~Hh E . ,p~nn ., - ... ... . H ... - .... '" ... :t «< 'i' 1fª :3 :~ =I..~...I l .., -f ~ N tl ii. U. lJ' M I" f:l dJ Hi hi m ~ \,!~ b, '" " " s . jj ~ .. !! - .. .. . iii - II> .. ... ~ E · ~ ~ - . ~ - :: :: ::; . - ~ .. ~..... - ~ .... -~::; ~ . . .......... :; ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ · :: ~ ..;~ ~ - :; : ~ . .ë .. " . · , LL 1-~~'_k~~: >0""'--1 Jr. . ",.~'" I' , ~:..:H" ---\~~ -".\;Ù~ .~tr.', '';¡,?~~ :E "~!.'.>":.'! -"..- ¡- -~-~~--, :Wf.~? ~".(- . - .,",...c~t=. ì\'7~~~~~~i -- - ...:.-cl) ~J"II!íi11 _£'"~ r, '~j,"_, ¡:~~;~:'J:'\,> ~..,,- <; ':.~ 1·;~\.1;Y ~~" '- t-/~·~\".",.' "'~ \j'lffiì1'j1H , . ..>?"<i,;!'"........, ,-::' " "·,;,~.:)~L.~~¡¿' : -#p ,~-t·~~,~:::.· --f= .~¡ ~"¡7' ~. <>0':'-' . i''>'' x: ,/"":,.../: " \\¡ ).::..~'~1~,<\.. H'~~:~>/~~!jj;;;;: ..... }, ~.__\. .., .,._. ~~, ;/,;.:.-~~1:. \,;:~~::: '. M \~.. ~",'/- ,\\'\. ...., /,",'.' i: ,\\ \.,.)-,( . \.'~ '\ '1,." .' . "<::'<,¡,.. ,/ \. \~><// 'hl ".. -....'\ p' ··<'·>",_._,¡'~~_I_~~,,-,_,_",,,,")e:':" ."",.-.. ~,., ./P¡''''F·~~ ;! I] - " ~! "'. i J5t~:¡...~ ;I!:....~Jj~ " . " HgH j æ j ~ ~ ! J,¡dh U) lldn; ] ¡ ... J! I .9 a.l..._ _ ¡,¡ ï ffU r---- -. . ~ ~ ~ \, ~. ~ EB @ 1_- -.-..- .-.-..-~._~ ..~'.~- ~ ~-~~.~ toot _:1.~~' !o.tk' I r~ .- I _J-rt:.~:i·' I , .~. ,-..--0 I \ J~"" .,-...,'" (",,' ® !l Hj H. lJ' ··t I¡· I"l dJ IIi HI 5' ~ fq , \() -~. ;; .. ~ - ,,~_.._,~...' .~- (',f II: .. ¡: . - ¡¡; CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: Applicant (s): Property Owner: Property Location: U-2006-05, EXC-2006-03 Agenda Date: May 23, 2006 Jim Mattison (for AAT Communications Corp.) Union Pacific Railroad Approximately 600 feet southerly of McClellan Road along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor APPLICATION SUMMARY 1) Use permit to erect a telecommunication facility consisting of a 65-foot monopole (treepole) and ground equipment. 2) Height Exception for a 65-foot monopole (treepole) for a telecommunications facility to exceed 55 feet in height. RECOMMENDATION 1) Discuss the applications and continue them to a future public hearing to allow the applicant time to redesign the proposal to improve the visual screening, or 2) If the continuance is unacceptable to the applicant, deny the applications, per the model resolution. PROJECT DATA General Plan Land Use DesigrIation: Zoning: Existing Land Use: Maximum Height of Antennas: Distance to Nearest Residential Property: Required Setback to Residential: Environmental Determination: Transportation BQ- Quasi-Public Building Railroad right-of-way 65 feet 65+ feet 65 feet Categorical Exemption, Section 15303: New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures BACKGROUND: Proiect: The applicant, Jim Mattison, representing AAT Communications Corp., is proposing to construct a 110' long by 15' wide multi-user personal wireless service facility, consisting of a 65-foot tall treepole and a base equipment pad enclosed by an 8- foot tall chain link fence in the Union Pacific Railroad right-of-way (formerly Southern Pacific Transportation Company). The northerly end of the facility is located about 600 feet southerly of McClellan Road and would be accessed by an unimproved gravel access driveway from McClellan Road. A Santa Clara Valley Water District 15-foot 5-1 File No. U-2006-05, EXC-2006-03 Page 2 May 23, 2006 water pipeline easement parallels the proposed facility. The concrete pad and antenna base are outside of the easement area, but the chain link fence encroaches on the easement at grade and the antennas encroach on the easement 33 to 65 feet above grade. The proposed treepole that would carry the panel antennas is located on the southern side of the facility, easterly of a grove of Redwood trees located on Santa Clara Valley Water District property. The plan set shows a pole that could accommodate four racks of antennas. The facility is proposed for Cingular Wireless, which has a pending application to locate on the treepole if it is approved and built. The applicant believes other wireless communications carriers will be interested in the site and has shown an enlarged equipment pad to indicate its potential for at least four carriers. The surrounding land uses are: a two-story apartment complex to the east; single-family residential and the railroad corridor to the south; a Santa Clara Valley Water District groundwater recharge (pond) facility to the west; and light industrial uses and the railroad corridor to the north. Neighborhood Meeting: The applicant hosted a neighborhood meeting on May 3, 2006 with noticing going out to a 1000-foot radius. Eleven residents attended the evening meeting. The residents had numerous questions about the project, including who organized the meeting and who the notices went to; the exact location of the proposed facility on the property and its distance from nearby residences; which carrier(s) were going to occupy the facility and how many; the safety of radio frequency radiation and how much would be cumulatively generated by the carrier(s); where existing wireless facilities were and who operated them; Attendees were provided with copies of the radio frequency radiation assessment, photosimulations, facility plarIS and location maps of existing facilities. DISCUSSION Location The proposed multi-user treepole is located about 710 feet southerly of McClellan Road. Based on the drawings showing hypothetical antenna arrangements, the lower antennas on the treepole are about 65 feet away from the property line of the 2-story apartment building on the east. The uppermost set of antenna should be mounted closer to the pole to achieve a residential setback at least equal to the height of the antennas. The aerial photograph below shows other measured distances to residential properties, all within the ordinance setback standards of 50 feet or the height of the antennas, whichever is greater. 5~;;( File No. U-2006-05, EXC-2006-03 Page 3 May 23, 2006 I. Approximate Location of Treepole Visual Screening Base Equipment. As depicted the base equipment will be visible on the equipment pad. If the use permit application is approved, a condition should be added to the resolution requiring a vegetative green color opaque mesh to be mounted to the fencing in order to screen the base equipment. Treepole. The applicant is proposing a treepole like the one erected at 3860 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA. Staff took several pictures of this treepole that are attached as Exhibit A. The applicant has provided three photosimulations to depict how the treepole would appear at the proposed location (Exhibit B). The vantage points selected are: 1) the intersection of McClellan Road and the UPRR corridor; 2) common area within the apartment complex; and 3) a west side trail next to the percolation pond on Water District property. 5~3 File No. U-2006-05, EXC-2006-03 Page 4 May 23, 2006 Because of the heavy onsite landscaping on the Water District property, the project site has very limited visibility from Bubb Road. As can be seen in the simulations, the treepole is visible in all three perspectives, although the existing trees in the foreground or background reduce the visibility of the pole. This is not considered satisfactory screening in accordance with the Siting and Design Guidelines of the City's Wireless Master Plan. Staff's preference is to shift the treepole southerly along the railroad corridor until the existing, tall redwoods act as an effective visual foreground or background to the treepole. This has been simulated by staff by shifting the treepole image in the applicant's photosimulations (Exhibit C) to demonstrate the additional level of screening that can be achieved. The applicant is open to this idea of shifting the treepole to a less visible vantage point, but lacked sufficient time to re-survey the site and modify the drawings before the hearing. The plans also depict additional landscape screening on the east side of the railroad corridor between the treepole and apartment complex. Staff is recommending the planting of 48" box coastal redwoods or other similar fast-growing, evergreen tree in the landscape gaps with needed irrigation until the trees have become established. Staff would also recommend additional large trees on the north and south sides of the project site at the edge of the railroad corridor to screen views from those directions. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission discuss the applications and continue it with directions to the applicant as to screening and location preference. Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR) Assessment A cumulative RFR assessment was prepared by Hammett & Edison, Inc. (Exhibit D ) based on a hypothetical antenna build out of the treepole. A corrected Figure 3 is included with this report that was not available at the neighborhood meeting. In addition, an answer to a technical question asked at the neighborhood hearing is included in the back of the report. Based on the report assumptions, the maximum ground-level RF exposure due to multiple sets of antennas at different heights is estimated to be 0.021 mW! cm2 ,which is 2.5% of the applicable public exposure limit. The maximum calculated level at the second floor elevation of any nearby building is 3.4% of the applicable exposure limit. Federal law prohibits local governments from making decisions on personal wireless service facilities based on RF considerations if the RF levels are below Federal 5,'-f File No. U-2006-05, EXC-2006-03 Page 5 May 23, 2006 Communications Commission safety standards. Since the type and number of antennas, the power output and mounting height may vary from this study, each company seeking to locate on this proposed treepole should prepare an individual RF study, taking into account project, approved and background RF levels. Staff recommends adding such a condition if this project is approved. Equipment Noise Although no base equipment has been proposed with this application, such equipment has the potential to generate noise in excess of City standards. A condition should be added to any use permit approval, requiring each carrier interested in locating on this monopole to provide a noise assessment of project and ambient noise with mitigations, if needed, to bring noise levels in conformance with the City noise ordinance. De AnzafUnion Pacific Trail The Land Usef Community Design Element of the General Plan envisions a regional trail along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor, extending from Cupertino all the way to Los Gatos. Acquisition of right-of-way or pedestrian easements is anticipated. As Union Pacific is consenting to a new land use and improvements to its property, not connected to its railroad transportation activities, staff recommends that any use permit approval be conditioned with a requirement to provide an improved trail from McClellan Road to Rainbow Drive with the granting of an easement for pedestrian and bicyclist public access. Submitted by: Colin Jung, Senior Planner Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developme~ ENCLOSURES Use Permit and Height Exception Model Resolutions of Denial Draft Use Permit and Height Exception Model Resolutions of Approval Exhibit A: Palo Alto Treepole piciures Exhibit B: 3 photosimulations prepared by Previsualisis Exhibit C: 2 modified photosimuIations, showing treepole location shift Exhibit D: RFR Study prepared by Hammett & Edison, Inc. da1ed February 9, 2006 Plan Set G: \ Planning \ PDREPORT\ pcUsereports \ U-2006-05.doc 5-5 Exhibit: A Palo Alto Treepole 3860 Middlefield Road 5~0 U-2006-0S CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. (denial) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-USER PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY CONSISTING OF A 65-FOOT TALL TREEPOLE AND ANCILLARY EQUIPMENT CABINETS LOCATED IN A FENCED ENCLOSURE 600 FEET SOUTHERLY OF MCCLELLAN ROAD ALONG THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CORRIDOR, APN 362-01-025 SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the project's treepole is inadequately screened and blended with natural landscaping in accordance with adopted siting and design guidelines and is considered visually obtrusive in its environmental context. The project is thus inconsistent with the City's Wireless Facilities Master Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Use Permit is not approved; and That the subconcIusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. U-2006-05 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23, 2006 and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Property Owner: Location: U-2006-05 Jim Mattison (for AAT Communications Corp.) Union Pacific Railroad 600 feet southerly of McClellan Road along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor 5 ;7 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Marty Miller, Chair Cupertino Planning Commission g:1 planningl pdreportl res IU-2006-05 deniaI.doc 5--ß EXC-2006-03 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, Califomia 95014 RESOLUTION NO. (denial) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A HEIGHT EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A 65-FOOT TALL TREEPOLE AT A LOCA TION APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET SOUTHERLY OF MCCLELLAN ROAD ALONG THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CORRIDOR SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: EXC-2006-03 Jim Mattison (for AAT Communications Corp.) about 600 feet southerly of McClellan Road along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTION WHEREAS, in order to provide height flexibility in situations when collocation of personal wireless service antennas is desirable from a design and visual standpoint, an applicant for development may file an exception request to seek approval to deviate from the standards; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the following with regards to the Height Exception for this application: 1. That the siting and visual screening of the treepo1e are inadequate and create obtrusive visual impacts that are aggravated by the extra height of the treepole proposed under this height exception. 2. That the proposed project will be injurious to property or improvements in the area and be materially detrimental to the public welfare in that the treepole is inadequately screened in accordance with the siting and design guidelines of the City's Wireless Facilities Master Plan, and would degrade the visual environment ofthe area. 3. The proposed development will not create a hazardous condition for pedestrian or vehicular traffic because it is not sited within the travel ways or sight lines of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, application no. EXC-2006-03 is hereby denied; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record conceming Application EXC-2006-03, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23,2006, and are incorporated by reference herein. sß) Resolution No. Page 2 EXC-2006-03 May 23, 2006 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTA1N: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Marty Miller, Chair Planning Commission g:/planning/pdreport/res/EXC-2006-03 res. doc 6 _/D U-2006-0S CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-USER PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY CONSISTING OF A TREEPOLE FOR ANTENNA MOUNTING AND ANCILLARY EQUIPMENT CABINETS LOCATED IN A FENCED ENCLOSURE AT A LOCATION APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET SOUTHERLY OF MCCLELLAN ROAD ALONG THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CORRIDOR APN 362-01-025 SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and has satisfied the following requirements: 1) The proposed use, at the proposed location, will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general weIfare, or convenience; 2) The proposed use will be located and conducted in a marIner in accord with the Cupertino Wireless Facilities Master Plan, Comprehensive General Plan and the purpose of this title. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Use Permit is hereby approved, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. U-2006-05 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23, 2006 and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. 5 ~/I DRAFT SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Property Owner: Location: U-2006-05 Jim Mattison (for AAT Communications Corp.) Union Pacific Railroad 600 feet southerly of McClellan Road along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on Exhibits titled: " as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. , except 2. CO-LOCATION OF ANTENNA The applicant shall make its mast available to other wireless COmInunications carriers for antenna co-location subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development under Cupertino Municipal Code Section 19.132. 3. ABANDONMENT If after installation, the aerial is not used for its permitted purpose for a continuous period of 18 months, said antennas and associated facilities shall be removed. The applicant shall bear the entire cost of demolition and removal. 4. EXPIRATION DATE This use permit shall expire five (5) years after the effective date of the permit. The applicant may apply for a renewal of the use permit at which time the Planning Commission may review the state of wireless communication and camouflage technologies to determine if the visual impact of the personal wireless facility can be reduced. 5. TREE POLE APPEARANCE AND MAINTENANCE The applicant shall use a sufficient number of artificial branches to obscure the appearance of the panel antennas and any associated mounting framework. The mast and any panel antenna mounted close to the mast shall be painted brown to mimic a tree trunk. The applicant shall perform regular maintenance of the permitted tree pole to maintain its appearance and obscure the panel antenna from public view. 7. LANDSCAPE SCREEN MAINTENANCE The applicant shall provide for the watering and maintenance of the landscape screen areas for a period of two years. A covenant shall be recorded on the property identifying this landscaping as necessary for the visual screening of the personal wireless service facility and the trees shall not be removed without City approval. 5 -/;2, DRAFT 8. NOISE LEVEL OF THE EOUlPMENT CABINETS The equipment cabinets shall conform to the City's Noise Ordinance. Each applicant seeking a personal wireless service facility shall submit a noise assessment indicating its equipment's compliance with the City's noise ordinance. 9. RADIO FREOUENCY RADIATION ASSESSMENTS Each applicant seeking a personal wireless service facility shall submit a radio frequency radiation assessment, indicating estimated ground floor and second floor radio frequency emission exposure levels in relation to Federal safety standards. 10. BASE EQUIPMENT SCREENING A vegetative green color opaque mesh shall be mounted to the fencing in order to screen the base equipment. 11. DE ANZA!UNION PACIFIC TRAIL AND EASEMENT The applicant shall provide an improved asphalt trail from McClellan Road to Rainbow Drive along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor with the granting of an easement for pedestrian and bicyclist public access. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Marty Miller, Chair Cupertino Planning Commission g:jp1anningjpdreportjresjU-2006-05 res approvaI.doc 5~/3 DRAFT EXC-2006-03 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, Califomia 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A HEIGHT EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A 65-FOOT TALL TREEPOLE AT A LOCATION APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET SOUTHERLY OF MCCLELLAN ROAD ALONG THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CORRIDOR SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: EXC-2006-03 Jim Mattison (for AAT Communications Corp.) about 600 feet southerly of McClellan Road along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTION WHEREAS, in order to provide height flexibility in situations when collocation of personal wireless service antennas is desirable from a design and visual standpoint, an applicant for development may file an exception request to seek approval to deviate from the standards; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the following with regards to the Height Exception for this application: I. That the literal enforcement of the provlSlons of this title will result in restrictions inconsistent with the spirit and intent of this title in that the extra antenna height above the ordinance maximum is needed to accommodate the collocation of multiple wireless carrier antennas in an area that has proven difficult to serve with wireless communications because of the lack of adequate and suitable sites for personal wireless service facilities that do not create unacceptable visual impacts. 2. That the proposed project will not be injurious to property or improvements in the area nor be materially detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare in that the wireless technology produces radiation below federal exposure standards on an individual and cumulative level. The treepo1e will have minimal visual impact as the pole is adequately screen with existing and proposed landscaping. 3. The proposed development will not create a hazardous condition for pedestrian or vehicular traffic because it is not sited within the travel ways or sight lines of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, application no. EXC-2006-03 is hereby approved; and 5/jt-( Resolution No. Page 2 EXC-2006-03 May 23, 2006 That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record conceming Application EXC-2006-03, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23,2006, and are incorporated by reference herein. SECTION ill: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. I. APPROVED EXHIBITS Approval is based on Exhibits titled: " except as may be amended by the conditions contained in this resolution. 2. NOTICE OF FEES. DEDICATIONS. RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Govemment Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice ofa statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Govemment Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred ITom later challenging such exactions. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Marty Miller, Chair Planning Commission g:/planning/pdreport/res/EXC-2006-03 res. doc 5~/5 8 .. " ~ ~ !g ~ . 'g ca o II: C ca - - G) - (,) ø == .. ca CJ) c .- In In o .. ø 'g ca o .. - .- ! G) .c .. i , .t..- l_ t-... (C -t:: ~ ,- < .-:::;¡ t:ç.\ I .!! o Q. i Iii 'E 11 õ!. :; e ¡ ¡ ~ · c o .. · , (Y J c · i · ~ ë ~ ],- "Ii ~ '~ ~ c o " ~ ~ E o .. ... .c .. :J o In CJ) C .- ~ o o - c o ';¡ .. E .. S o -&. · '5 'õ ~ j J e " ... ." ~ G) .- > õ c o .- .. ca - :J E .- In o .. o .c A. '" :5 '" ..: ~ ~ ~ . r:: .!!! >C G) - a. E 0 Co) < >< .. >::¡ L¡.: C 01 G) u; it E ¡n. 0' .. >-1 .. §?I I'll ~ S'i a. ~! I'll >t .a .. ftJ G) C G) ð J: ~ .. .~ E !i 0 " 0 c ~ .. '"- ... ~ . .. ~ II) I G) 1; ~ ¡ G) ~ :s c .Q " ! D) c 8- .- 0 .IIIIi "II 0 ~ ~ 0 c 0 "~ - .ø 0 ~ .5 ¡¡ G) 0 .- ~ > :¡¡ ... 0 C 0 .- .. ftJ - :s E ~ .- II) ~ 0 j¡j 0 .. 1 0 J: '^ ~ ~ .¡¡, "< ¡;: ð @ .. g .. t.: - ~ " " ~ . " ca o IE: .a .a ::I III :I: O· ... en ::I .- ¡v) '--' ål r- ø ;±: '>" IJ:.\ a G) ~ ca - G) .c ... en en o .. = E 2 ... ... en ca G) G) ::s " aI s: .. ~ o o - . < o '0 ID , C1 ~ ß 1: ~ [ 1> ~ '~ ~ < o '0 ~ ,g ,5 < o ~ , i .!! o a. 1 .~ ~ -è :; E 'I = a. ~ .~ j¡ ~ .. s 1! ~ . :g õ 1;- ~ :( ,; ~ ~ . to ~ G) .. > ... o s: o .. 'Ii - ::I E .. en o ... o .c Do 5~/S '" 8 .. ,.; - ~ .. " " . ~ ~ G) - CL E o u .. c G) E .. .. II CL II >- .a .. II G) C G) .c .. E o .. ... .. en G) ~ G) :J " ØI C .. ~ o o - '" q -...;;: gVJ C cv ,~ o c:., ct"'-- ~ '-- c\> 1- ,-:0> ~fu 1: 'j _.2 ~ V) ~ G) .. > ... o c o .. .. II - :J E .. en o .. o .c a. @ 6~lq t::'i~ì\P',-h C.(2} '8. t '8. ¡ MUK'f tf. HØ(J Photoslmulatlon of view looking due east from across the lake. just off Bubb Road. /InIpO..,~...."..,-.... A-1+-erf\J-¡'y'¿; 'PrTJ pOStL1 51vowl~ Tf'€Lp1Jk SAlt- ~(, U ...,''''.................,............I<r......',.......~tO-.:-Iul."muj~,..._I.......Whff:.':).....((M CupertIno .-:a..u.n It""" CupNfna,ÇA AAT --- ~~'Þ 5-,;(0 t'l\\ìbì1-: D AAT Communications· Proposed Base Station Southern Pacific Railroad and McClellan Road· Cupertino, California Statement of Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers The firm of Hammett & Edison, Inc., Consulting Engineers, has been retained on behalf of AAT Communications, to evaluate the communications tower proposed to be located at Southern Pacific Railroad and McClellan Road in Cupertino, California, for compliance with appropriate guidelines limiting human exposure to radio fTequency ("RF') electromagnetic fields. Prevailing Exposure Standards The U.S. Congress requires that the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") evaluate its actions for possible significant impact on the environment. In Docket 93-62, effective October 15, I 997, the FCC adopted the human exposure limits for field strength and power density recommended in Report No. 86, "Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields," published in 1986 by the Congressionally chartered National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements ("NCRP"). Separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure conditions, with the latter limits generally five times more restrictive. The more recent Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ("IEEE") Standard C95 .1-1999, "Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz," includes nearly identical exposure limits. A summary of the FCC's exposure limits is shown in Figure 1. These limits apply for continuous exposures and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. The most restrictive limit for exposures of unlimited duration to radio fTequency energy for several personal wireless services are as follows: Personal Wireless Service Personal Communication ("PCS") Cellular Telephone Specialized Mobile Radio [most restrictive fTequency range] AODrox. Freauencv 1,950 MHz 870 855 30-300 Occuoational Limit 5.00 mW/cm2 2.90 2.85 1.00 Public Limit 1.00 mW/cm2 0.58 0.57 0.20 General Facility Requirements Base stations typically consist of two distinct parts: the electronic transceivers (also called "radios" or "channels") that are connected to the traditional wired telephone lines, and the passive antennas that send the wireless signals created by the radios out to be received by individual subscriber units. The transceivers are often located at ground level and are connected to the antennas by coaxial cables about 1 inch thick. Because of the short wavelength of the frequencies assigned by the FCC for wireless services, the antennas require line-of-sight paths for their signals to propagate well and so are installed at some height above ground. The antennas are designed to concentrate their energy toward HE HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SAN FRANa5CO AA TCupertin0596 Page 1 00 5 -;2./ AAT Communications· Proposed Base Station Southern Pacific Railroad and McClellan Road· Cupertino, California the horizon, with very little energy wasted toward the sky or the ground. Along with the low power of such facilities, this means that it is generally not possible for exposure conditions to approach the maximum permissible exposure limits without being physically very near the antennas. Computer Modeling Method The FCC provides direction for determining compliance in its Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65, "Evaluating Compliance with FCC-Specified Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation," dated August 1997. Figure 2 attached describes the calculation methodologies, reflecting the facts that a directional antenna's radiation pattern is not fully formed at locations very close by (the "near-field" effect) and that the power level from an energy source decreases with the square of the distance from it (the "inverse square law"). The conservative nature of this method for evaluating exposure conditions has been verified by numerous field tests. Site and Facility Description Based upon information provided by AAT Communications, including drawings by URS Corporation, dated January 10,2006, it is proposed to install a new communications tower to be located south ofthe intersection of the Southern Pacific Railroad and McClellan Road in Cupertino. Proposed to be installed on the tower are antennas for use by up to three wireless telecommunications carriers although specific carriers and facilities have not been identified. It is assumed that each carrier would install the number of antennas necessary to provide acceptable service in all directions using a standard "three-sector" approach. Therefore for the limited purpose of this study, hypothetical transmitting facilities for the tower are assumed to be as follows: Sprint Nextel SMR Antenna Model (12) Kathrein 742-264 (6) Ante1 BXA80063-4 (6) Antel BXA185060-8 (9) Decibel DB844H65 Antenna Hei.ht 65 ft 55 55 45 Maximum ERP Carrier Cingular Wireless Verizon Wireless 1500 watts 1500 1500 1500 Study Results HE For a person anywhere at ground, the maximum ambient RF exposure level due to the various described operations is calculated to be 0.021 mW/cm2, which is 2.5% of the applicable public exposure limit. The maximum calculated level at the second-floor elevation of any nearby building is 3.4% of the public exposure limit. A visual representation of the calculated exposure due to the hypothetical operations is provided in Figure 3. These results are based upon the hypothetical build- out of wireless communications facilities noted above at the proposed site in order to demonstrate that HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCO AA TCupertin0596 Page 2 00 5--.{J. AA T Communications· Proposed Base Station Southern Pacific Railroad and McClellan Road· Cupertino, California operation of the facility can comply with FCC guidelines for exposure to radio frequency exposure. These results should not be used to represent actual exposure conditions at the site after construction. A complete calculation or measurement analysis of all facilities, once final specifications have been established, should be performed in order to assess compliance with FCC public and occupational exposure guidelines. No Recommended Mitigation Measures Due to their mounting locations, the antennas would not be accessible to the general public, and so no mitigation measures are expected to be necessary to comply with the FCC public exposure guidelines. It is presumed that the several carriers would, as FCC licensees, take adequate steps to ensure that their employees or contractors comply with FCC occupational exposure guidelines whenever work is required near the antennas themselves. Conclusion Based on the information and analysis above, it is the undersigned's professional opinion that the new communications tower proposed by AAT Communications at Southern Pacific Railroad and McClellan Road in Cupertino, California, can comply with the prevailing standards for limiting public exposure to radio frequency energy and, therefore, need not for this reason cause a significant impact on the environment. The highest calculated level in publicly accessible areas is much less than the prevailing standards allow for exposures of unlimited duration. This finding is consistent with measurements of actual exposure conditions taken at other operating base stations. Authorship The undersigned author of this statement is a qualified Professional Engineer, holding California Registration No. E-16747, which expires on September 30, 2007. This work has been carried out by him or under his direction, and all statements are true and correct of his own knowledge except, where noted, when data has been supplied by others, which data he believes to be correct. February 9, 2006 y Mark D. Neumann, P.E. HE HAMMETI &: EDISON, INC. CONSULTING ENGINEERS SAN FRANasco AA TCupertin0596 Page 3 of3 S<~3 FCC Radio Frequency Protection Guide The U.S. Congress required (1996 Telecom Act) the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC') to adopt a nationwide human exposure standard to ensure that its licensees do not, cumulatively, have a significant impact on the environment. The FCC adopted the limits from Report No. 86, "Biological Effects and Exposure Criteria for Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields," published in 1986 by the Congressionally chartered National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, which are nearly identical to the more recent Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standard C95.1-l999, "Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz." These limits apply for continuous exposures from all sources and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. As shown in the table and chart below, separate limits apply for occupational and public exposure conditions, with the latter limits (in italics and/or dashed) up to five times more restrictive: Freauencv Applicable Range (MHz) 0.3 - 1.34 1.34 - 3.0 3.0 - 30 30 - 300 300 - 1,500 1,500 - 100,000 1000 100 '" ....Þe; 10 (1) ..... () ~ i!j ~ &8~ 1 ~ 0.1 Electromagnetic Fields (fis freauencv of emission in MHz) Electric Magnetic Equivalent Far-Field Field Strength Field Strength Power Density (Vim) (Nm) (mW/cm2) 614 614 1.63 /.63 100 /00 614 823.8/f 1.63 2./9/f 100 /80/1 1842/f 823.8/f 4.89/f 2./9/f 900/t' /80/1 61.4 27.5 0.163 0.0729 1.0 0.2 3.54Vr /.59V.r Vr/106 "'¡¡/238 f/300 17/500 137 6/.4 0.364 0./63 5.0 /.0 ./ Occupational Exposure / PCS ____I - Public Ex osure 0.1 I 10 100 103 Frequency (MHz) 104 105 Higher levels are allowed for short periods of time, such that total exposure levels averaged over six or thirty minutes, for occupational or public settings, respectively, do not exceed the limits, and higher levels also are allowed for exposures to small areas, such that the spatially averaged levels do not exceed the limits. However, neither of these allowances is incorporated in the conservative calculation formulas in the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65 (Augnst 1997) for projecting field levels. Hammett & Edison has built those formulas into a proprietary program that calculates, at each location on an arbitrary rectangular grid, the total expected power density from any number of individual radio sources. The program allows for the description of buildings and uneven terrain, if required to obtain more accurate projections. HE HAMMETf & EDISON, INC. CONSULTING EN"GINEERS SAN FRANOSCO FCC Guidslines Fignre I 5 'dif TM RFRCALC Calculation Methodology Assessment by Calculation of Compliance with FCC Exposure Guidelines The U.S. Congress required (1996 Telecom Act) the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to adopt a nationwide human exposure standard to ensure that its licensees do not, cumulatively, have a significant impact on the environment. The maximum permissible exposure limits adopted by the FCC (see Figure 1) apply for continuous exposures trom all sources and are intended to provide a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size, or health. Higher levels are allowed for short periods of time, such that total exposure levels averaged over six or thirty minutes, for occupational or public settings, respectively, do not exceed the limits. Near Field. Prediction methods have been developed for the near field zone of panel (directional) and whip (omnidirectional) antennas, typical at wireless telecommunications cell sites. The near field zone is defined by the distance, D, trom an antenna beyond which the manufacturer's published, far field antenna patterns will be fully formed; the near field may exist for increasing D until some or all of three conditions have been met: l)D>~ 2)D>5h 3)D>1.6ì.. where h = aperture height of the antenna, in meters, and ì.. = wavelength of the transmitted signal, in meters. The FCC Office of Engineering and Technology Bulletin No. 65 (August 1997) gives this formula for calculating power density in the near field zone about an individual RF source: . S - 180 0.1 x Pnet '. mW 2 power density - IJBW x It x D x h' In /cm, where ßBW = half-power beamwidth of antenna, in degrees, and P net = net power input to the antenna, in watts. The factor of 0.1 in the numerator converts to the desired units of power density. This formula has been built into a proprietary program that calculates distances to FCC public and occupational limits. Far Field. OET-65 gives this formula for calculating power density in the far field of an individual RF source: d . S 2.56 x 1.64 x 100 x RFF2 x ERP Power enslty = 2 in mW/cm2 4 x 1t X D ' , where ERP = total ERP (all polarizations), in kilowatts, RFF = relative field factor at the direction to the actual point of calculation, and D = distance trom the center of radiation to the point of calculation, in meters. The factor of 2.56 accounts for the increase in power density due to ground reflection, assuming a reflection coefficient of 1.6 (1.6 x 1.6 = 2.56). The factor of 1.64 is the gain of a half-wave dipole relative to an isotropic radiator. The factor of 100 in the numerator converts to the desired units of power density. This formula has been built into a proprietary program that calculates, at each location on an arbitrary rectangular grid, the total expected power density trom any number of individual radiation sources. The program also allows for the description of uneven terrain in the vicinity, to obtain more accurate projections. HE HAMMETT & EDISON, INC. CONSUlTD\JG ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCO Methodology Figurs 2 5~5 AAT Communications· Proposed Base Station Southern Pacific Railroad and McClellan Road· Cupertino, California Calculated NIER Exposure levels Within 1,000 Feet of Proposed Site For Simultaneous Operation of Three Hypothetical Carriers Aerial photo from Terraserver Legend blank -less than 1 % of FCC public limit (i.e., more than 100 times below) ,mmp,!, - 1 % and above near ground level (highest level is 2.5%) 'mmm, - 1% and above at 2nd floor level (highest level is 3.4%) Calculated using fonnulas in FCC Office of Engineering Technology Bulletin No. 65 (1997), considering telTain variat ions within 1,000 feet of site. See text for further infonnalion. HE HAMMETT &: EDISON, INC. ffiNSULTING ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCD AATCupertino596 Figure 3.1 5/;2 ? ,Ÿi~=----- i' SUR_:;;,_._ ''. -- '$-1T_~;~,,_ '". _ ·_"r~_:",_:- -in" _ -¡;Wf~.1~'1V_~- ~--_"----------- --\0£G~-~~ .fi'j!( ~...' ~"i!!~~~~~'¡¡¡~~,",~;0~~~ð,,"ð¡;¡¡¡¡ ,,~ ",;;~4ø~Y!}jZt~f§i1I.Q0~~~~~",__5'iii'!__"___",,,,_~~~3]____~_~~___ To: imattisontâ1sbcalobal.net Sent: Friday, May 12, 2006 3:14 PM Subject: UPRR/Cupertino Cell Tower Jim, Attached is a revised Figure 3 with the corrected base map of IOOO-foot radius.? We apologize for the scaling error on the photograph.? Please note that there is no change in the RF exposure levels at ground or on the second floor, stilI calculated to be well below the applicable public limit.?? In our calculations of power density, we used actual directional antenna patterns ITom the antenna manufacturers with the maximum effective radiated power in any direction, ?not some lesser power with?an omnidirectional antenna pattern.? The resulting arrangement of the black and red dots on Figure 3 is a clear indicator of the fact that a directional antenna pattern was used.?? Please let me know if you have any other questions. Thanks, Raj Hammett & Edison, Inc. 707/996-5200 voice 707/996-5280 fax f)/;J1 '- U-2006-05 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6389 (denial) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A USE PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-USER PERSONAL WIRELESS SERVICE FACILITY CONSISTING OF A 65-FOOT TALL TREEPOLE AND ANCILLARY EQUIPMENT CABINETS LOCATED IN A FENCED ENCLOSURE 600 FEET SOUTHERLY OF MCCLELLAN ROAD ALONG THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CORRIDOR, APN 362-01-025 SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received an application for a Use Permit, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the necessary public notices have been given in accordance with the Procedural Ordinance of the City of Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the project's treepole is inadequately screened and blended with natural landscaping in accordance with adopted siting and design guidelines of the Wireless Facilities Master Plan and is considered visually obtrusive in its environmental context. The project is thus inconsistent with the City's Wireless Facilities Master Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, the application for Use Permit is not approved; and That the subconcIusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application No. U-2006-05 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23, 2006 and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Property Owner: Location: U-2006-05 Jim Mattison (for AAT Communications Corp.) Union Pacific Railroad 600 feet southerly of McClellan Road along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor - PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Miller, Chien, Wong COMMISSIONERS: Saadati COMMISSIONERS: none COMMISSIONERS: Giefer ATTEST: APPROVED: / s/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development / s/Marty Miller Marty Miller, Chair Cupertino Planning Commission g:/ planning/ pdreport/ res /U-2006-05 deniaI.doc EXC-2006-03 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6390 (denial) OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A HEIGHT EXCEPTION TO ALLOW A 65-FOOT TALL TREEPOLE AT A LOCATION APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET SOUTHERLY OF MCCLELLAN ROAD ALONG THE UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD CORRIDOR SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Location: EXC-2006-03 Jim Mattison (for AAT Communications Corp.) about 600 feet southerly of McClellan Road along the Union Pacific Railroad corridor SECTION II: FINDINGS FOR EXCEPTION WHEREAS, in order to provide height flexibility in situations when collocation of personal wireless service antennas is desirable from a design and visual standpoint, an applicant for development may file an exception request to seek approval to deviate from the standards; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds the following with regards to the Height Exception for this application: 1. That the siting and visual screening of the treepole are inadequate and create obtrusive visual impacts that are aggravated by the extra height of the treepole proposed under this height exception. 2. That the proposed project will be injurious to property or improvements in the area and be materially detrimental to the public welfare in that the treepole is inadequately screened in accordance with the siting and design guidelines of the City's Wireless Facilities Master Plan, and would degrade the visual environment of the area. 3. The proposed development will not create a hazardous condition for pedestrian or vehicular traffic because it is not sited within the travel ways or sight lines of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidence submitted in this matter, application no. EXC-2006-03 is hereby denied; and That the subconc1usions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this Resolution are based and contained in the Public Hearing record conceming Application EXC-2006-03, as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of May 23,2006, and are incorporated by reference herein. Resolution No.6390 Page 2 EXC-2006-03 ~ May 23, 2006 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 23rd day of May 2006, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Miller, Chien, Wong COMMISSIONERS: Saadati COMMISSIONERS: none COMMISSIONERS: Giefer ATTEST: APPROVED: IslSteve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development IslMartv Miller Marty Miller, Chair Planning Commission g:/planning/pdreport/res/EXC-2006-03denial res. doc ~ ~ :8 ~ . , I G å N , 15 \1 I~ i ~ I~ ~ "- ~ ~ s~ I f s~ . a 2~ a 2§ ~ m ~ ¡¡ ~ . < m 0 - z RECETVED MAR 2 9 2006 BY: ~ ~ t.J~ tI)o! ~ ¡¡~8~ ,.... ",--. ~ :s::l7 t ¡.; ~g¡¡¡¡¡¡ ~I-ui''-'''' U~8M ~ it... x ~ Iti,J~ ~~ 8 h ~ SITE MULTI-USER (SITE NAME) CUPERTINO (FID NUMBER) TBD ~ ~ 20 iI!;~ fÑJ.~ :i!cagg¡ ~ðø;o;- ~~~ ~~!i!!i! ; ,J~ G ~ (ZONING DRAWING) SHEET INDEX TITLE SHEET AND PROJECT INFORMATION SITE SURVEY SITE PlAN ELEVATIONS T-1 C-1 A-1 A-2 PROJECT SUMMARY ~cCLELlAN STREET UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD R/W CUPERTINO, CA UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD 1400 DOUGLAS STREET. t.fAIL STOP 0640, OÞAAHA, HE 6B 179 SITE ADDRESS: OWNER: PROPERlY CONSULTANT CMI F'NGINEER' CONTACT: SOHAlL SHAH, P.E. (PROJECT MANAGER) URS CORPORATION 1615 MURRAY CANYON RD., SUITE 1000 SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 TEL NO.: (619) 294-9400 FAX NO.: (619) 293-7920 t .... > ¡ ~ ~ CRœ< AAT COhAÞ.iUNICATlONS CORP. CINGULAR PRIMARY LEASE TO: SECONDARV LEASE TO: i! ï . ..- CUPERTtlO ..- """-El.1N<STREET UNlQrt PACIFIC RAILROAD R/W CUPERTlNO.CA dg..y¡,i.ut. at -~fP¥; - ()3 Ai'f'RI;)<'.í/lI,;._ U -<?Çfþ -05 ,..4,~~"",r4..~ I i ¡ AAT COMMUNICATIONS CORP. ATIN: ALLEN BULLARD 6.325 HARRISON DRIVE, SUITE #3 LAS VEGAS, NV 89120 TEL NO. (702) 892-9100 X 225 362-01-025 APPUCANT: SITF nFVFl OPFR' CONTACT: JIM MATTISON 785 ORCHARD DRIVE FOLSOM. CA 95630 TEL NO.: (925) 698-1590 DE AN'" cou.EGl PROJECT ~TE ~Y~??4 I¡~¡': ~ -_.~ . - :çu-,:~;,:Jìl :::j 3:" ,. "" ':...<:" n-~ ;;~ UGHT INDUSTR~ - M1 RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY / TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILlTY NUMBER: PARCEL CURRENT ZONING: CURRENT USE: PRoposm USE: ASSESSOR'S APPROVAL SIGN OFF RD W<CLEU.AN VICINITY MAP " ~ ~, - TITLE SHEET AND PROJECT INFORMATION ~~gr:alW'~ 'Nr<w.S ZONING 11flW..S: OF DAl< DAl< -- 58-lxn 11003.01 -.. R GISRIEl. -.. - s. SHAH - T-1 10-19-2005 - '" NOm> PROJECT DESCRIPTION MT IS PROPOSING TO MAINTAIN AN UNMANNED WIRELESS TELECOMMJNlCATION FACILlTY CONSISTING OF A NEW 65'-0· HIGH MONOPINE WITH (4) FUTURE EOUIPMENT PADS WITHIN THE 1650 SOFT FENCED lEASE AREA. 'NITIAlS CONSTRUCTION LEASING INITIAlS: THE FACILrlY WILL ENHANCE THE GENERAL HEALTH, SAFElY AND WELFARE aF THE CnY BY PROVIDING MORE REUABLE COMMUNICATION AT THIS LOCATION. DAl< DAl< 'Nr<w.S ....DI.ORD DAl< DAl< SfTE TECH INITIAlS: TAKE 1-5 NORTH. MERGE ONTO CA-152 WEST TOWARD GILROY / HOWSTER/SAN JOSE. TURN LEFT ONTO PACHECO PASS HWY /CA-152. MERGE ONTO US-101 N TOWARD SAN JOSE/WATSONVIllE. MERGE ONTO CA-85 N VIA. EXIT 377A TOWARD CUPERTINO/MTN VIEW, TAKE THE STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD EXIT. TURN LEFT ONTO STEVENS CREEK BLVD. TURN LEfT ONTO BUBS RD. TURN LEFT ONTO MCCLELlAN RD. THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ACCESSED VIA. t.4cCLEUAND RD. SITE DIRECTIONS 14'J6' E COMPOUND DETAIL - ~ 0 50 100 Scale: 1- SO' SYMBOL LEGEND + - Spot ElIMItion ~ -.... . - Manhole R/W - R~t-of-Way "- - Cent.tlne . -Iron Pin Mt œ - he .......... - Fence Une ...........,..... - U I- I ! ~ I 1% ~ 4 ~ 11' ~ ~ hl~tu ~ ¡;¡ t: ~ ~ w ~ .. 5 ffi z ~~ ~º~~8~E 6 !;;: 0 01 ~¡?: 8 ffi t5 ~ ð ~g¡ e- - a. 0 0<'>1<"';'1 ~ tï t5~~~~~ W I;) <!!:! <Ø (D ~. !:: (I) I;) CI =')('" :I: c:::> z.s~ ~ =>~:?j ~~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :.. ~ ~§ ::::f12 fI2~ ~~ ~~ ~~ :Sê; ~e.. ~Jc C) ~~ It:: ~ f ~ C ~ ~ ~ :::::i ~ c ~ ~ ~ I I ¡¡¡¡r-- c- \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ McCLELLAN ROAD - - ì - r-;=- ~ _ 48'PuiiiI:,.IIlgIIt-of.Way -/:.-- - -, - - I I I \ I I I \ I t -"~\ I I I I I I 'ß \ I I ~\ I I I ~\ I I ~ ~~\ I \ ~ I I I ~. : I I + I I I I I I I ~ I I~ 1~lt I¡~ 1=1= I~I~ I . "5 I I> : I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I r I I I I I I I I SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE I. __ IlL MeHIIIJr, II ~................, LoIId!Uw)iw. UonI No. 51111. ....., -.at III ~ IJIIIIudI ... ........ .... fer.. __".. .. Á_...d ... _ __".... +/-1!1IIt1larllDdolJl ....1hII:..~...........1I --.to"'+/-.3I11t~ ttCIIZQfW.M1UIt ..... LAnIIE m8'4UO" -- ,.........,. \ER'II:M. DAut MA'WI . ~EI.fV.IMS[Œ1OØ·D1M1!i1. [;f. t -:l. oo/r; --0,3 ¿.{ ~ ;J,¡;o/ç --05 ^,..~.:,;.,.!l...I'''''3.l-ff 5 -,13-D~ -.-- ;~;, -~- .... -"'" flrlllld..blfØfof-..,..,..,1nc. dJ.~ +¡;~-'8..5..l AL j5i'" MILLMAN SURVEYING, INC. CORPORATE HEADOUARTERS 1742 Georgetown Road. Suite H ludson. Ohio 44236 (800) 520-1010 'surveyingomeriço,çom MSI JOB No. 7347 ~ I , ;, ~ e., 3igr.:':~li\~ ð > o o o . ErinWy - IOrwinLn r.r;~:.';:l,..g REFERENCE O£CORD Of SUMY 1I0OI< ... PAGE 34 SITE BENCH MARK TOP RIM Of' IIINKX.E LOCATED APPROXIMA1El.Y eo.o FEET SOU"JH OF 1t£ SOU1HWEST CORNER OF' LEASE Nf£A AS SHOIN HEREC»l £LEVATION: 331.40 FEET A.M.S.L. BASIS OF BEARING 1I£1IERIIWIRll:AU.~""lÐIBIIlSlI£ŒJI1EIIJI:Œ"ROMt.'" AS 8EIC N fJ1f'XtrJf' E. AS....1IEaIID IUMYBOOK _ PAGE at Œ UM't'S 1111£ IIEaIIIER'S CJfJŒ ŒSMTA a.MA CCUf1Y. CItF1IIIA. LI';ASE PREMISES DESCRIPTION ;j it -" , ....cazar".. 0 Dolores".. I - Me CIeI"nRd r . I P>9SidiODr l ElmC! - -fyannispc>:1Dr .. ~ " " ~ 0 il 0 , . . ~ < RosarioAv C EcIwa><lWy ColumbuS "v , VICINITY MAP -----:¡¡¡;:- 8 ~ ~ 0 j , ~ 0 * .!. h~ ¡¡ l q~ !i :s~ ~ S~ ~ a ~~ iii ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <f; m 0 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 11 EXISTING ACCESS ROAD : . . I PROPOSED 12'-0· WIDE ACCESS GATE . ---,.. -03 5 é~c..-d, U -;;/00(,- AC';'¡'¡''''4I1N~",wl ..wwd. ·Þ.frr9t/M.. \ I SCALE NOTE: IF DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON PLAN DO NOT SCALE CORRECTL~ CHECK FOR REDUCTION OR ENLARGEMENT FROM ORIGINAL PLANS. \ II 1\ \ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ :2; ~~8~ S !i:i7T ¡...; ~~~¡¡ ~ I~!! Ii':: ;~~~ :;H ~ª 8 ...- ClI'ERIlNO ...- MoCI.WNI STREET UNION PIOFIC RAllRCW) R/W CUPER1lfO. CA ~ ~ 21< :lIg:¡:'ao II)OClt,.. ,¡:¡~,J, i!°A~ ~~~ ~~~ i~ii ~ ~~ 2 ~ § SITE PLAN -~ 58-00111003.01 -.. R. G.\8REl -.. - s. SHAH - Ä-1 10-19-2005 - .. NOIID 15'-0" LEASE AREA FACILITY LAYOUT - SCALE: 1/S· -0" ~ ~ - 5'-0· I 1-+ I 12 3/4" : WATER PIPE I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I !¡II :JI~ ~z ¡¡:I~ "'~ ~ .. 0'-0· II II II II II II II II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I wi ~II- ~I~ ë:[3 i5~ !:¡ .. ----, I I -j I I __J I ---l I I I -j I I I I _J -z.::_ 1\ . 1"_-_'1} . , . ~ .<Jf ---I I I -j I I I ==~I I -j I I I I __-.J PROPOSED PAD-MOUNTED METER PEDESTAL FUTURE 5'-0· X 10'-0· EQUIPMENT PAD PROPOSED 8'-0· HIGH CHAlNUNK FENCE (rIP-ALL AROUND) FUTURE 10'-0· X 20' -0· EQUIPMENT SHELTER FUTURE a'-o" x 12'-0" EQUIPMENT PAD FUTURE 8'-0" X 12'-0· EQUIPMENT PAD FUTURE ANTENNAS MOUNTED ON A 65'-0~ HIGH MONOPINE ~ I '" · o I õo 1:> , N · o , " N 10 I ¡.. · .. I ¡.. '. o · o I ¡.. 1:> I "'. 1:> I N · " I '" .~ 'T~ ~! ,,' -, '" -.1(2 -/I ,.' ;1,1:;).1 ftV c;.1 .c;~ - C:1;;'~'¡¡' \ II ~ EXISTING CHAlN- \..../.., UNK FENCE (lYP) \ \ \ \ \ . \ \ \ \ \ '-' : Si"n: fIr;: I I \ ~ \ I I \ I \~ I I I c. 'b ~ -<) "ß "" 1> t;,' 1" "ß ö o o o I 0 o I 0 ~~I o 0 o o , I \~ I I I . I \\1 I I I I I \1\ \ t GRAPHIC SCALE 8 4 0 8 18 (SCAI.£: '/8" ·-01 20 GRAPHIC SCALE o 10 - - (SCALE: ," - 10'-01 10 SITE PLAN SCALE:'" 0'-0" ,..,.. ~ 8 8 0 ! ~ * ~ ' " - , , " 2 :: = ~ I ~ ~~ !! b ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~~ ~ d s ~~ ~ iå ~ ~ d . m z o - -- CUPERßNO -- IkQfllAN STREET UNON PAClFK: IW.RCWI R/W CUPERTINO."" -- 58-00111003.01 -.. R. "'..,,1. -.. - ~ SHAH - A-2 1G-19-2005 - lIS N01ID ~ 8~ <:I)~ ~ ~~8~ S ~fJ7¡ ¡..; ~g~g ~ ~a:~E Uls= "" ~ " ~ ti~~ ~~ ~- 8 ~ ~ 8~ ~a;~ :ÑJ..J, ~m1:1: ~ð~ §g~ ~~!i!!i! ~ ~~ 2 ~ ~ - ELEVATIONS , . r I I I ; I EAST ELEVATION SCALE: ,. "" 8'-0· SCALE NOTE: F DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON PI..AN DO NOT SCALE CORRECTlY, Ct-£CK FOR REDlICT10N OR ENLARGEMENT FROtoI ORIGiNAl Pl.ANS. $ TOP OF WOHOPlNE £LEV. 65'-0· $ CENTER OF ANT£NNAS ElEV. 63'-0- $ CENTER OF ANŒNNAS ELEV. 53'-0" $ CENTER OF ANTENNAS ELEV.o43'-o" $ CENTER OF ANTENNAS ELEV. 33'-0· $GROUNDLEYEL ELEV. 0 -0 (330 -0 AMSl) GRAPHIC SCALE 8 . 0 8 18 - - (SCALf: 1" _ 8'-0") ~ ~ TOP OF IIONOPlHE ELEV. 65'-0· CENTER OF ANTENNAS ELEV. 8J'-O· CENTER OF ANTENNAS ELEV.53'-O· FUTURE PANEl CEN1[R OF NlTENNAS ANTENNAS BY OI1<ERS ELEV.4J'-O· CENTER Of ANTEHfW> ELEV.3,3'-O· PROPOSED MT 65'-0"- HIGH WONOPINE í PROPOSED PAD-WOUNTÐJ (DESIGN BY OTHERS) eooA, toIETER PEDESTAL WITH (.)-2OOA SINGLE PHASE BRfAKERS. I PROPOSED HOfFIW PROPOSED 8'-0· HIGH TELCO ENClOSURE CfWNUNK FENCE ON 'f' FlWIE (TYP-AIJ. AROUND) r GROUND L.E'ÆL - - ELEV. 0'-0· (3.30'-0· N.lSl) PROPOSED 12'-0· WIDE DOUBLE lEÞF ACCESS GATE NORTH ELEVATION SCAlE: 1· "" 8'-0· PROPOSED HOfFIW TElCO ENCLOSURE ON "H" FRAME 6y:.t-,J,c£"{v03 L DJ.2...::..P5. þ: "'..¡.¡.......;-!' cllAùu¿ ~ PROPOSED PAO-WOUNTm 80M MEÆR PEDESTAL WITH (4)-2OOA SINGLE PHASE BREAKERS. _II!!I~I-I' PROPOS£O S' -0" HIGH CHAlNUNK FENCE (TYP-AI.l AROUND) FUT1..IRE PANEl ANTENNAS BY On£RS PROPOSED MT ð5'-o~ HIGH MONOPINE (DESIGN BY OTHERS) 0-' I