Loading...
12. T-Mobile appeal CITY OF 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 m Community Development Department CUPERTINO SUMMARY AGENDA NO.~ AGENDA DATE July 17, 2007 Application: Applicant: Property Owner: Property Location: DIR-2006-07 William Stephens/Dayna L. Aguirre (for T-Mobile) . Stevens Creek Office Center Associates 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard SUBJECT: Consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to deny Application No. DIR-2006-07, a Director's Minor Modification to inStall a wireless telecommunication facility at an existing office center (Stevens Creek Office Center) RECOMMENDATION: The City Council may take either of the following actions: 1. Uphold the appeal of DIR-20Q6-07 and approve (or modify) the applicant's request for a Director's Minor Modification to allow a wireless telecommunication facility. See recommended conditions of approval in the draft Planniri.g Commission resolution of approval found in exhibit B-1; 2. Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's decision to deny the application for a wireless telecommunication facility. BACKGROUND:. File No. DIR-2006-07 is a Director's Minor Modification to allow a wireless teleconutmnications facility on the roof of an existing office building located at 20833 Stevens Creek Blvd. It was referred to the Planning Conunission because it was the Director's intent to deny the application, which the municipal code does not allow him to do. He must refer minor modifications he intends to deny to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. On June 12, 2007, on a 4-0-1 vote (Giefer absent), the Planning Commission denied the application (Exhibits A-I, B-1 and D1). The decision was subsequently appealed by the applicant (Exhibit C-1) who could not attend the public hearing because of "scheduling conflicts." 12 - 1 DIR-2006-07 Appeal Page 2 July 17, 2007 DISCUSSION: Commission Comments: The Planning Commissioners had no questions for staff nor did they offer any comments before taking a vote on the project. Public Comments: No member of the public spoke against or in support of the project. Staff did not receive any public comments prior to the hearing. Staff Comments The antenna heights comply with the wireless communications facilities ordinance, and the proposed antennas could be fully screened from public view with a combination of existing landscaping and rooftop equipment screens, but does not comply with CMC section 19.108.070 which states: "The primary objective is to blend the design of the aerial into the surrounding environment, or site the aerial in such a manner to minimize the visual intrusiveness of the structure... 11 From staff's viewpoint, the screens are not architecturally integrated with the design of the building as required and are thus not compatible with their surroundings (see photos). Staff recommends a full perimeter roof screen, which would integrate better with the appearance of the building and have the added benefit of better screening existing rooftop equipment, rather than the" pop-up" chimney design approach. The applicant's engineering analysis argues that the full perimeter roof screen is not structurally feasible because of wind loads and obstructions posed by existing rooftop equipment that limit how the screens can be braced. The roof screen can be made of a light weight material with louvers to allow air flow. Enclosures: Exhibit A-1: Planning Commission Resolution No. 6460 Exhibit B-1: Planning Commission Staff Report dated June 12, 2007 Exhibit C-1: Appeal Letter Exhibit D-1: Planning Commission June 12, 2007 meeting minutes Prepared by: Colin Jung, Senior Planner Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development G:planning/ pdreport/ appeaIs/DIR-2006-07 appeal Approved by: ~app City Manager 12 - 2 DIR-2006-07 . OTY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 Exhibh A - 1. DENIAL "RESOLUTION NO. 6460 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A DIVERTED DIRECTOR'S MINOR MODIFICATION TO ALLOW TIIE CONSTRUCTION OF A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT AN EXISTING OFFICE CENTER (STEVENS CREEK OFFICE CENTER) LOCATED AT 20833 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City. of Cupertino received a diverted. application for Director's Minor Modification, 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 ot Cupertino, and the Planning Commission has held one or more public hearings on tIus matter; and WHEREAS, the project's roof screens, designed to visually screen the antennas, does not architecturally integrate with the appearance of the office building and is thus not compatible with the surroundings and at variance with the adopted. siting and design guidelines and 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 diverted application for Director's Minor Modification 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 concerning. Application No. DIR-2006- 07 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12, 2007, are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Property Owner: Location: DIR-2006-07 Erik Corkery (for T-Mobile) Stevens Creek Office Center Associates 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard 12 - 3 Denial Resolution No. 6460 June 12, 2007 Page 2 PASSED. AND DENIED this 12th day of June 2007, at a Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOPS: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Vice Chair Chien, Miller, Wong, Kaneda COMMISSIONERS: none COMMISSIONERS: none COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Giefer ATTEST: APPROVED: / s / Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki . Director of Community Development / s / Cary Chien Cary Chien, Vice ChaIr Cupertino Planning Commission H:/GROUPS on CUPntjPlanning/PDREPORT IRes/ 2007 IDIR-2006-07 denial res.doc 12 - 4 Exhibit B - J. CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: DIR-2006-07 Agenda Date: June 12, 2007 Applicant: Erik Corkery (for T-Mobile) Property Owner: Stevens Creek Office Center Associates Property Location: 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard Height of Antennas (abpve grade): 37 feet Height of Antennas (above parapet): .5 feet Environmental Review: Categorically Exempt, Section 15303, Oass 3e Application Summary: ~irector's Minor Modification of 13-U-79, (File No. DIR-2006-07) to install a wireless telecommunication facility at an existing office center (Stevens Creek Office Center) . RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission deny DIR-200M>7 in accordance with the model resolution. BACKGROUND: The applicant Erik Corkery, representing T-Mobile, is requesting the establishment of a wireless telecommunications facility on th~ roof of an existing two-story office builcliIi.g with below-grade parking located at 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard (see location aerial photo below). Six 4.5 feet tall panel . antennas will be mounted in pairs in the equipment well of the building roof, along with four associated equipment cabinets. Two pairs of the antennas are oriented toward Stevens Creek Boulevard and the third pair toward the rear of the building. The surrounding land uses are all commercial uses and the Union Church across Stevens Creek Boulevard. The distance to the closest residential property on Bianchi Way (across Stevens Creek Boulevard) is 395 feet, and 435 feet to the pastor's residence on the Abundant Life Church property. 12 - 5 DIR-2006-07 June 12. 2007 Page :2 I Propos~d Location of T -Mobile Cell Site DISCUSSION: The antenna heights comply with the City's wireless communications facilities ordinance requirements for roof-mounted antennas. The equipment cabinets are completely screened from public view by the equipment well, and the antennas will be visually screened with a combination of existing landscaping and rooftop equipment screens. Note that the plan elevations depict fewer roof screens than what is shown in the photosirnulations. While the antennas can be fully screened, the screens are not architecturally integrated with the design of the building and is thus not compatible with its surroundings (See photo). From a design standpoint, staff prefers a full perimeter roof sc~ee~ which would integrate better with the appearance of the building, rather than the "pop_up chimney" approach. The applicant states that a full perimeter roof screen is not structurally feasible because of the wind loads and the obstructions posed by other equipment already on the roof that limits how the screens can be braced (See exhibit A). Staff had suggested that the equipmelit screens be perforated to reduce the wind load, but the structural engineer said it would not help enough and the cell antennas would be visible through the screen perforations. 12 - 6 2 DIR.-2006-07 June 12, 2007 Page 3 Front Roof Screen Locations If the Commission chooses to approye the proposal, staff recommends certain conditions that are included in the attached resolution of approval, including a condition that requires the antennas to be fully screened to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development as depicted in the photosimulations. Submitted by: Colin Jung, Senior Planner ----." Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developme~ Enclosures: Model Resolution for Denial Model Resolution for Approval Exhibit A: Letter from Delta Groups, Inc. dated July 17, 2006 Photosimulations H: Groups/PlanningjPDREPORT jDIRreports/ 2006 /DIR-2006-07 12 -i DIR-2oo6-07 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California. 95014 RESOLUTION NO. (denial) . . OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DENYING A DIVERTED DIRECTOR'S MINOR MODIFICATION TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FAOLITY AT AN EXISTING OFFICE CENTER (STEVENS CREEK OFFICE CENTER) LOCATED AT 20833 STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino received a diverted application for:. Director's Minor Modification, 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 heari,ngs on this matter; and WHEREAS, the project's roof scr~ens, designed to visually screen the antennas, does not architecturally.integrate-with the appearance of the office building and is thus not compatible with the surroundings and at variance with the adopted siting and design guidelines and 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 diverted application for Director's Minor Modification 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 concerning Application No. DIR-2006- 07 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12, 2007, are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.. SECTION II: PROmCT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Property Owner: Location: U-2006-07 . Erik Corkery (for T-Mobile) . Stevens Creek Office Center Associates 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard 12 - 8 Resolution No. June 12, 2007 Page 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 2007, 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 Lisa Giefer, C~ Cupertino Planning Commission H:jGROUPS on CUPntjPlanningjPDREPORT jRes/2007 jDIR-2006-07 denial res.doc 12 - 9 DIR-2006-07 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A DIVERTED DIREt:TOR'S MINOR MODIFICATION TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT AN EXISTING OFFICE CENTER (STEVENS CREEK OFFICE CENTER) LOCATED AT 20833 stEVENs CREEK BOULEVARD SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of. Cupertino received a diverted application for Director's Minor Modification, 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 Corrunission has held. one or more public hearings on this matter; and WHEREAS, the project's roof screens can adequately screen the antenna and are of a height, color, design that is architecturally compatible with the appearance of the office building. The project is thus consistent 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 diverted application for Director's Minor ModifiCation is hereby approved; 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. DIR-2006- 07 as set foith in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of June 12, 2007, are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II: PROTECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: Applicant: Property Owner: Location: U-2006-07 Erik Corkery (for T-Mobile) Stevens Creek Office Center Associates 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard 12 ~ 10 Resolution No. June 12,2007 Page 2 SECTION III: CONDmONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED EXHIBITS The approval is based on plan set titled: SF15041A/Stevens Creek. Office. Center/' . consisting of five sheets dated 11/09/06 and labeled 11, Al through A4, except as may . . . be amended by the conditions contained in this Resolution 2. LANDSCAPING The applicant shall plant three 36-inch box Flowering Pears (Pyrus calleriana variety Chanticleer) in the empty tree wells fronting the office building. The irrigation system shall be in operating condition. 3. EXPIRATION OF AFPROV AL The approval is valid for a period of 10 years and shall expire on June 12, 2017. 4. SCREENING OF VISIBLE ANTENNAS Antennas and mounting hardware shall be fully screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development. . 5. 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 9O-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 12-11 Resolution No. June 12, 2007 Page 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of June 2007, at a Re~ar Meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the followmg roll caIl vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMJSSIONERS: A TrEST: APPROVED: Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Lisa Giefer, Chair . Cupertino Planning Commission H:/GROUPS on CUPnt/Planning/PDREPORTjRes/2007/DIR-2006-07 approval doc 12 - 12 0. Delta Groups, Inc. Exhibit A 5627 Stoneridge Drive, Suite 314, Pleasanton, CA 94588 Tel.: (925) 468-0115 Fax: (925) 468-0355 July 17, 2q06 Attn: Mr. Bill Stephens T -Mobile 1855 Gateway Boulevard, 9th Floor Concord, .CA 94520 Subject: Parapet Extension at Project SF15041A, "Stevens Creek Office Center," located at 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard in Cupertino, California Dear Sir: Per your request, we have reviewed this project with regards to the addition of a parapet screen wall extension encompassing the perimeter ofthe existing building. In order to screen'the proposed antennas, the parapet screen wall extension would extend to at least six feet in height above the existing six foot high parapet wall. Wind-loading would become a very significant factor. The parapet screen wall extension Would need to be braced to the existing roof using 'some diagonal bracing. Also, note that there are existing HVAC units located along the south parapet wall that would prohibit bracing of a proposed parapet screen wall extension (see Attachment A). Delta Groups Engineering, Inc. has performed a Structural Evaluation to determine whether or not a proposed parapet extension would be structurally feasible. We have reviewed both the areas where diagonal bracing is feasible and where diagonal bracing is not feasible due to the existing HVAC equipment. In both cases, the existing structural capacity of the roof would be overstressed (see attached Structural Calculations). In conclusion, we have determined that a parapet screen wall extension is not feasible at this project site. Should you have any questions, please contact us. Best regards, Albert Tang President 12-13 ....:,..v J fl.. r I J I ~ '1\; if . 1; < '1 f Stevens Creek Office Center ::~s: ~ t;! -,. \ .. { } t ) 11 t1 III 20833 Stevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino I CA site # SF-15041A view from Saieh Way looking west at site ,- Proposed T-Mobi/e Installation Advance Photo SlffiLliil' - 12 - 14 Loot,'l' '<] ~ :~ ~... . ~ -f ,. :... ...., 'loo.-" ~- ;>:.. ., ;.., ". .' , ---...."" ......-.::-",. Proposrd T Mobil!' Anlt:'.'1nas (Nol Vhib/t;) " AdvanceS' f r ;:.~::1=: ?hnto S !TJ. J{: .HI Solu~ians -,' CtJfIi.t't! ."'1 12-15 Existing q; e ul\1(1)H(h site # SF-15041A Stevens Creek Office Center 20833.5tevens Creek Blvd. Cupertino. CA view from Shopping Cente! on Stevens Creek Blvd. looking Northwest at site Proposed T-MaNle inSla/lotion AdvanceSi Pho'o Slm ., nn SollJtions 12 - 16 (.,"!:.,t .,. >"'1:" SUlfO consulting 4166 Clarinbridge Circle. DubIi1. CA 94568. WlIIW .sutroconsulting .rom ~ flfr Eft L ;J-- - . Exhibh C - .1 f5)[E(G~~WlErm \J\1 JUN 1 8 2007 lW 18 June 2007 city of Cupertino Office of City Clerk 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 CUPERTINO CITY CLERK On behalf of T -Mobile, we respectfuUy request to appeal the decision made by the Planning Commission on .12 June 2007, Item # 2, Application '# DIR-2006-Q7 for the proposal of aT. Mobile wireless telecommunications facility. The proposed telecC>mmunications facility is located at 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard. Due to scheduling conflicts, a representative was unavailable to attend and provide a rebuttal to staff's recommendation. Please accept this letter and the fees included to seNe as an official request to be heard by the City Council. . Please contact me at 925.548.7671 should you require anything further. Thank you for your assistance. . Sincerely I ~~-5 Dayna l. Aguirre, Planning Consultant. Authorized Agent for T-Mobile sutro. consulting, lie: Dayna L. Aguirre Planning Specialist 1011 23rd Street. Suite 3 San Francisco, CA 94107 . www.sutroconsulting.com M: 925.548]671 F: 415.282.5660 daguirre@sutroconsulting.com 12-17 15041: N Stelling/Appeal Request Letter_18June2DD7 Cupertino Planning Commission 2 June 12, 2007 , consid a way to do it around the trees if they are full grown tret . Urged the PI Commission to keep that in mind whether the de industrial ot commercIa. Exhibit 0 ~ 1.. CONSEJ.\'T CALENDAR: 1. CP-2007..o2 (EA-2007..o4) City of CupertiD.o Citywide Location Review of the FI ear Capital Ifnprovements Proiram (FY2007-08 to 2012-13 onformity to the City of Cupertino's General Plan. Tent . June 19, 2007 Motion: Motion by Com.. Wong, second by Com. Miller, to approve Application PUBLIC HEARING 2. DIR-2006-07 William. Stephens (T-Mobile) 20833 Stevens Creek Blvd. Director's Minor Modification to install a Wireless telecOmmunication facility at an existing office center (Stevens Creek Office CeJ;lter) Continued from the May 8, 2007 Planning Commission meeting; Planning Commission decision final unless appealed. Colin Jung, Senior Plann~r, presented the staff report: . Reviewed the application for Director's Mfuor Modification for a cell site on an existing office . center located at 20833 Stevens Creek Boulevard located between the Whole Foods building and reets Cciffee/Panera Bread, as outlined in the staff report. . . \.. . He reviewed the photo simulations of the proposed placement ofthe antennas on the structure. . Staff recommends denial of the applicatipn as they feel the. roof screens do not architecturally integrate with the appearance of the office building and are not compatible with the surroundings and at variance with the adopted siting and design guidelines and are inconsistent with the City's Wireless Facilities Master Plan. . If the Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposal, staff recommends conditions included in the attached resolution of approval, that require the antennas to be fully screened to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development as depicted in the photo simulations. . The applicant was not pi-"esent. Vice Chair Chien opened the public hearing. As there was no input from the public, the public hearing was closed. Staff answered Commissioners' questions relative to the application. Motion: Motion by Com. Miller, second by Com. Wong, to deny Application DIR~2007~07. (Vote: 4..0-0; Chair Giefer absent) Terry Brown (Hu an Properties, 10026 and 10038 Orange A venne development into three parcels. Planning Commission unless appealed. 12 - 18 ~. D o Appeal of DIR-2006-07 ppeal of Planning Commission Decision deny a '-Vireless telecommunication acility on the roof of an existing office enter (Stevens Creek Office Center) ocation: 20833 Stevens Creek Blvd. pplicant: Dayne Aguirre~ Sutro Consulting for T-:Mobile i~ 11: ~ ; - u ~ II II 183 II II- II 183 -.IL II IJ 183 " II ::JC. 183 183 II II G) -n- I -.IL - -lI- II -- --- J - APN: 326-32-050 F"ROP'ERTY LINE (APPROX_ l&b'-IO") - FX~TI~ c;!iDFHAl K - - STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD ~ r- I I I i Ii If II II I! Ii II Ii II n II Ii II i \II ::; I o 0- <1 ~ DELTA. GIt.OU_ I'S .JIWI. ~....:=; ~---...--.._~... ~QO-- ~oa:(.&,,~~I'S .......~_..__. <i> - -- ~ ~ . !Z . g Ei-4 !i>! ~ :;iI",~ :JQ88.3 SII:'o'EMS CNED< ElCUL!:"'_ ~~='~TY SFI~'''' SI~S. 'i..-....I'U... u;-.~- ca.l:n1'I' SHeCT -..-..L -~.~.- I!'~~""-'~ A3 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ !!~' C=~~_~~HI ....! ~! " ;i 11'Kj:j:j,C~ .!:. F / / ~- ----- __0000-_- , ~ I __ bb",=~ ~T.t-'OoOe>LE~~- ~r~~c...-....._T'!. ~reP 00<-.... ~ ~TBl_ Pl.....7FoORH = .._r.>~ - -_._._.~._--_. H ELEVATION ~ l'".~~____~i2l"t!1'l!lr.l:.T.::R.-rv-_ 3~TOII"l!';orDTN.J~~.~TRi"o-T~~ ~ '"'!'to c.oNC.EALE'P eeHIN:) ~-= ~~~~iP..-.rtE'OJIJoIC)rE>OURf':D"TO EJ(!S"r-...s-~~ _n_______ Tap~~~1 ------------------ ,.,......POI"'..~T ---_._-~._-- ---------- f'..I<l~r'_..~Lvtt.I6~ u_ __ _~_ I DInL.1oE OF 1E'.:o:!STIt6 ___________1 ~T~~I'TYP... l '-=...~OF.........~~I_u-...r-h~ ELEVATION 2 -------------------~ .:~Ift f"5i:OF"05eD1"~~L"""'~'5-a~ ~~~~~ .~~~_" "r 1"GF"~"" J 1"""~1. --- - ---- E><l50""'lN;5o .....:-~G.AL f:~WT - r;;.o.I6~~""'LOIl!"iGo ~ J---- t------ ~~~......~~ E'YR- (............~ I T-----:;.~ 1> b~~~ -- --,. ----- ---. ~ ..... ....~__oo._ _.--.:::E' (OI~_---el'" .-..... ~ ----- _-':T_ _. ci>~ ::;::: E .,C) iiiii' OJ''' ~~~ ~~= . EB !Z . g Ei-t i~ o .. ~~ .I!t!Df>-ESS. 2Ol'!o!I:J 5--'L~ CIl:U2IC 9OJl~~ -CUPER"'-""Cl. CA s,Aln... Q..A5i... cu..oTY -sn:.tl..,JI\ 'S'-UCVEN"" CRI;l.'l fjPf'CE -ct_'tE1It ,.A,4 2 r..<!SI'!106-o-r~l!GU~ - 'O~T'-'.-..._[~-o. ~--- L________________ ELEVATION -.-.--- --~~~ /-~=~ ............1'f'I;>Qt<...f"R.ClF'05El:> s~"'-.....~ / ~.?!:~~~-- ~- -~--~-:;.~--~--~- I I II I I I I II I I I I II I I ~''''~,~ ! I L_______________________ ,LEVATION ~ ;" " .. .. ... ___ _ _ __ _ _ ___ ___-1 otosimulatio ,f.\~y~.ns,~cS,~.~ ~ Plannil'1g Commission Hearing No public testimony. Per staff~ antenna screening does not comply ~ith ClV1C 19.108.070: ~~The primary objective is to blend the design of the aerial into the surrounding environment~ or site the aerial in such a manner to minimize the visual intrusiveness of the structure .,., . . . Applicant states that the staff-preferred full perimeter roof screen is structurally infeasible because of ~ind loads and rooftop obstructions. Planning Commission denied proj ect on a 4-0- 1 vote. Screening il-r1ulated Stevens Creek Blvd.. (one building side) Options COl.1-11Cil Upllold the appeal and appl~ove tl'1e vvi1-eless facility site.. Condition the approval: I. Plant 3~ 36~~ box Flo'-V"ering Pears in the empty tree vvells. 2. ]\Ifin. 10-year term of approval (state lavv) 3. Antennas and mounting hardvvare shall be screened '-V"ith a full perimeter roof screen subject to staff approval. or1" s :Del'1Y the appeal and Llpl'101d the Con'ITlissi decision to deny the applicatiol'..