101-Staff Report.pdf
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
CITY HALL
10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255
TELEPHONE: (408) 777-3308 www.cupertino.org
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 11 Meeting Date: August 3, 2010
Subject
Appeal of an approved WiMax Antenna at West Valley Presbyterian Church
Recommended Action
Consider denial of the appeal
Description
DIR-2010-05
6191 Bollinger Road (375-41-007)
Bradley Head for Clearwire/West Valley Presbyterian Church
This is an appeal of an approved WiMax Antenna to be concealed in a cupola on the roof top of the
church
Sustainability Impact
None
Fiscal Impact
None
Background
On May 27, 2010, the Director of Community Development approved DIR-2010-05 and mailed
notices of the Director’s actions to the Planning Commission, City Council and property owners
within 1,000 feet radius (365 owners). The approval was subsequently appealed by Norman & Ione
Yuen on June 10, 2010 and heard by the Planning Commission on July 27, 2010 after a
postponement request by the appellants to accommodate their vacation plans. The Commission
reviewed the project, took public testimony and recommended (4-0-1, Giefer absent) that the
Council deny the appeal and uphold the Director’s Approval.
Project Location
The project site is the West Valley Presbyterian Church located at 6191 Bollinger Road, the northeast
corner of Bollinger Road and Miller Avenue. The site is surrounded by Hyde Middle School to the
August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 2
north and east, a shopping center to the south, duplexes and single-family residences to the west and
more single-family residences to the north. A detailed response to the appeal is provided in the staff
report (Attachment B).
Discussion
Planning Commission
Commissioners noted that federal law prohibits the City from making decisions on personal wireless
service facilities based on the health/environmental effects of radio frequency energy if it meets
federal safety standards, which it does. Review must be limited to project design issues and there are
none. One Commissioner asked if the project should be continued to provide noticing to renters and
school parents. Another asked why the noticing rules should be changed for just this project and
noted that the Commission should be acting on the project in front of them and not considering rule
changes at this time. The Commission voted 4-0-1 recommending denial of the appeal per the model
resolution with the added suggestion that the City Council consider additional, longer term radio
frequency energy monitoring for compliance with federal safety standards.
Public Comments
The primary concerns and comments expressed by the public are summarized as follows (with staff
responses in italics):
Noticing for this appeal hearing was inadequate. The City should have notified surrounding
renters, Hyde Junior High (principal) and the parents of the children that attend Hyde.
Appellants walked their neighborhood and numerous neighbors signed a petition opposing the
Clearwire wireless facility (Attachment C). Appellants had insufficient time to prepare case.
The church property owner has not been responsive to their communications and they could not
contact the HydeParents Teachers Association because school is not in session yet.
Staff response: Staff follows public noticing rules established by the City. For this particular
project, required noticing includes 1,000 foot radius noticing of property owners. Property
owners are responsible for notifying their tenants/renters. Notice of the Director’s action went
to the Cupertino Union School District office, which is the property owner of Hyde Middle
School. School District staff acknowledged receipt of the city mailing but had no comments on
the Clearwire facility proposal. School District staff noted they talked to the Hyde Middle
School principal, but principals do not make decisions on district-wide matters and the principal
will not be commenting on the proposal. It is up to the School District to decide whether it wants
to notify school parents or not. The City does not keep a mailing list of school parents.
WiMax is a new communications technology and there are concerns about locating them close to
residences and schools. Power output is more continuous. Exposure meets FCC exposure limits,
but there are worries that Clearwire can increase the power as needed to meet demand.
Staff response: According to the Federal Communications Commission the public exposure limit
for WiMax (broadband radio) and other cell phone technologies (PCS, Cellular, SMR) is the
2
same: 1.00 mW/cm. The public limit applies to continuous exposures and is intended to provide
a prudent margin of safety for all persons, regardless of age, gender, size or health. The
August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 3
Hammett & Edison report is based on several worst-case assumptions, including the assumption
that the facility is operating at full power on all channels and accounting for all other
measurable, existing sources of ambient RF emissions. The estimated ground level RF emission
2
exposure is 0.0027 mW/cm or 0.27% of the applicable public limit. The applicant’s consultant
stated that Clearwire cannot arbitrarily increase power, since it is limited by the type of
equipment cabinets and antennas used in the facility.
Can the City change its rules and only allow a DAS (Distributed Antenna System) with fiber
optics?
Staff response: The City’s master plan and ordinance for wireless communications facilities do
not prohibit DAS technology, but the City’s rules do not prohibit other communication
technologies in favor of DAS. It is not clear whether the City has a right to dictate what type of
equipment a wireless carrier uses.
Numerous concerns with the health effects of WiMax energy. Facility should be located
elsewhere, like the hills or near the freeway, not near residences or schools.
Staff response: See the response to item no. 2. Clearwire is entitling a new network of facilities
in Cupertino and the San Francisco Bay Area, much like what every other wireless carrier has
done. The City has already approved a half dozen Clearwire facilities scattered all over the
City.
Wireless communications technology is too new. Effects are not well-studied or are
inconclusive. More research should be done before City decides to approve such facilities.
Staff response: See the response to item no. 2.
Why is the City considering this application when it has denied applications near schools before?
Staff response: The City has not denied a wireless communications facility near a school when
the facility met federal safety standards and design standards. A microcell was recently
approved on North Blaney Avenue near an elementary school. A facility was approved at Monta
Vista High School before the school district decided not to pursue a land lease with the wireless
carrier. Three additional proposals have been cited in Monta Vista: one on Imperial Avenue
was approved and built and two others were withdrawn by their applicants.
Other Staff Comments
Staff requests that the City Council consider placing additional monitoring requirements on this
approval to address resident concerns. Presently, the approval requires testing of exposure levels to
radio frequency energy after construction and before full operation of the facility. The Council may
want to consider requiring additional third party RF monitoring that is paid for by the applicant for
two more years.
Prepared by Colin Jung
Reviewed by Gary Chao, Aarti Shrivastava
Approved for Submission by David W. Knapp, City Manager
Attachments
August 3, 2010 Cupertino City Council Page 2
A. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6602
B. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 27, 2010
C. Petition from Appellant
D. email from Wenjie Li, dated July 23, 2010